The Salmon Falls Division is proposed for development in the Snake River valley, south of Twin Falls, Idaho. The plan of development for the Division includes construction of a river pumping plant, relift pumping plants, canals, ground-water wells and associated facilities to provide irrigation water for 64,110 acres. Most of the area of the Division is presently in agricultural production, irrigated to the maximum possible extent by the limited ground water and surface water resources. No new water storage facilities are required for this Division. In years of above-normal runoff sufficient water will be available from surface water sources to meet the entire requirement of the Division. However, in normal years and in dry years there are little or no flows in this reach of the Snake River which are surplus to the needs of existing water right owners. New well fields in the Snake River Plain will be developed to provide up to 131,000 acre-feet of the total demand of 265,000 acre-feet. This method of operation will minimize the effect of the Division upon Snake River streamflows downstream from the point of diversion. Use of surplus Snake River flows when available will utilize waters which would otherwise be unused or destructive. Most years, however, the delivery of ground water to the lands will result in increased return flows to the river at a time when river flows are at a minimum. IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT Development of the Salmon Falls Division would create an environmental setting providing for better use of both the natural and human resources of the area. An adequate and dependable water supply will create a more stable economy with more diversified crop production and additional farming opportunities. More goods and services to care for the needs of the farms and to handle the increased volume of production will provide more job and business opportunities. The taxable base of the country and the taxable income will be expanded. Upgrading and stabilization of economic activity will provide an incentive for increasing the cultural and educational base of the area. Thus, the net impact of the Division will be to enhance the human environment. Two areas of the Division have a relatively low upland game bird population, attributable to intensive farming practices and consequent lack of cover for wildlife. A plan formulated in cooperation with State and Federal wildlife agencies provides for enhancing the wildlife habitat. Two thousand acres of nonirrigable public lands within or adjacent to the service area will be reserved for wildlife use. Some of these tracts of land will be planted in vegetation to produce both food and cover and be fenced to permit the vegetation to grow undisturbed by livestock. Several sinkholes and draws will be developed as watering holes for wildlife, and cover vegetation will be planted at these sites. The net effect of the habitat enhancement will be to increase the game bird population and hunting opportunities. ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS Existing conditions of an inadequate water supply and the interspersed farmed and idle land have resulted in a particularly high population of upland game birds in the lower portion of the Salmon Tract Unit. The idle lands have been cleared for farming, but due to shortages in water supply have reverted to a cover of seeds and cheat grass, thus providing both food and cover for the birds. With adequate water available under Division development, a shift to more intensive land use will occur with an attendant reduction in upland game population in that area. However, tracts of nonirrigable lands totalling 2,000 acres with permanent ponds, where practicable, will be set aside for wildlife use to mitigate the effects of this reduction in existing habitat. The net effect of these measures and the plan for improvement of the wildlife habitat in the other two parts of the Division will be to create benefits to the area through enhancement of its wildlife resources. The Federal Water Quality Administration has advised that the Division may affect the quality of local streams receiving irrigation return flows and the quality of the Snake River to some extent. The Administration estimates that reductions of streamflow by future projects could make the meeting of water quality standards for the Snake River more difficult and has recommended that the cumulative effects of water resource development in the Snake River be reviewed at an early date to determine the effect upon the maintenance of water quality standards, upon existing water quality, and upon existing and potential downstream uses. Cooperation with the Administration in monitoring the effects of basin development on water quality and in investigating measures for achieving compliance with water quality standards will continue. ALTERNATIVES TO PROPOSED ACTION There are no alternative means of utilizing the land and water resources which would provide equivalent economic and social benefits at comparable economic costs. Leaving the area in its present condition is not a viable alternative as it would forgo the extensive enhancement of the human and wildlife environment and constitute an inefficient use of the resources. The practical alternatives are limited to variations in the design and location of the physical works necessary to furnish the water supply. Some indications have been received that the replacement water well field proposed for development in the feasibility report (H. Doc. 359, 91st Congress) may be unacceptable to the water users of that area. There are many potential locations overlying the Snake Plain aquifer where such well fields might be located. One such alternative plan was investigated in detail to establish the feasibility of developing other well fields if it becomes necessary. The alternative plan would use the Snake River channel as a conveyance facility for delivering the pumped ground water. It would enhance water quality and the environment for the affected reaches of Snake River. This factor will be considered further in the ultimate selection of the replacement well field, based upon more detailed preconstruction investigations. RELATIONSHIP OF SHORT-TERM USES VERSUS LONG-TERM NEEDS The objective of the proposed development is to provide a satisfactory shortterm and long-term water supply to the Salmon Falls Division. A common relationship exists between the short-term uses of the environment and the need to maintain and enhance its long-term productivity to satisfy human needs. IRREVERSIBLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES Commitment of the water resources for irrigation purposes constitutes its highest use at this time. Should human needs dictate, these resources could be dedicated to other uses in the future. This, however, would involve a deterioration in, or abandonment of, irrigation service. Mr. JOHNSON. Now, our first witness this morning will be the author himself, your Congressman, Orval Hansen. You may proceed, Orval. STATEMENT OF HON. ORVAL HANSEN, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE FIRST CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Mr. HANSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. My comments here will be very brief in order that more time will be available for those who are here to testify and who will be unable to come later to Washington, D.C., at such time as the Washington hearings are scheduled. Let me say that the hearings and the fact of their scheduling at this time represent a major milestone in the realization of dreams and hopes that extend over more than half a century. There will be witnesses here this morning who have lived in this area for a very long time who have lived with the problem which is the subject of this legislation, and who can describe for you in some detail and very dramatically the problems encountered by reason of a chronic water shortage and a dwindling water supply in parts of the area. Notwithstanding that the committee happens to come here at a time that we have more water than at any time in perhaps more than a half century, if not in history, I can attest, having been on the tract many times over the last few years, that this is an unusual circumstance this year and that the farmers who have attempted to operate farms in this area have faced a continuing difficulty of short water. Salmon tract farmers have set some records on the value that can be squeezed out of the limited water supply, but even they cannot do the impossible. And that is the real beauty of this project. It provides an assurance of a dependable, predictable and adequate water supply in the future. I would make one further comment in relating this piece of legislation to an important and high priority national goal. We have heard increasingly, and as recently as the President's message to Congress within the last few days, of the importance of stemming the migration from the rural areas to the cities and of the importance of strengthening the economies of rural areas. Indeed, my colleagues will recall that in the House of Representatives very recently we approved a rural development bill designed to further that objective. If we are to achieve that objective, it is important that we enlarge agriculture. If we are to provide opportunities for people who prefer and maintain the economic opportunities for people who live and would prefer to live in the rural areas. The area here is agricultural. As far as we can see in the future, the economy will be based on to stay and live in this area and not be forced to go to the large cities, it boils down to increasing economic opportunity and that means increasing income. That is one of the direct and obvious benefits of this project. It will help to increase the income of the area, to strengthen and stabilize the agricultural economy, create greater opportunities for the people that are here, and, therefore, serve not only to utilize much more efficiently the resources that are in this area but also to serve the needs of the people and also advance a very important national goal. (Mr. Hansen's written statement follows:) STATEMENT OF HON. ORVAL HANSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IDAHO H.R. 2474, which Representative James McClure and I co-sponsored, is an identical bill to S-432, which passed the Senate on June 28, 1971. I know that the many able witnesses who will appear before you today will make a very compelling presentation in support of the project, and their testimony will undoubtedly be of greater value than my own because they are personally acquainted with the hardships posed to this area because of a short and undependable water supply. The proposal before us today is the product of years of painstaking effort and planning on their part, and on the part of Senators Church and Jordan who provided great leadership in the development of this legislation. The case for the passage of this bill is clear and compelling, and the fact that this legislation enjoys strong and broad support in Idaho is evidence of its merit and the need it will fill. The merit is further evidenced by a favorable cost-benefit ratio. When completed, much needed water would be supplied to 49,380 acres of irrigated land in Southern Idaho and 14,730 acres of dry land would additionally be brought under irrigation. The plan of development involves the construction of a pumping plant, relift pumping stations, a 17-mile canal, wells, and associated works to provide the vital surface water. Basically, this network of facilities is designed to use surplus Snake River flows in those years when they are available. In dry years, when all of the Snake River waters would be fully appropriated by present users, ground water would be pumped from the Snake River aquifer either directly into the river or to presently irrigated lands in exchange for their Snake River water supply. The water released by this exchange would then be pumped to the Salmon Falls Project lands. The irrigation benefits which would flow from the proposed project are estimated by the Bureau of Reclamation at $5.2 million annually, $3.1 million of which represents increased net income to farmers. Following a five-year development period, the bulk of the cost of constructing this $46 million project will, over a 50-year period, be repaid to the Government. Realistically, if, in addition to that portion of the cost that will be directly repaid by the users, one considers the increased economic return to the area, a portion of which will every year be returned to the Federal Government by way of personal income tax, then the project should result in a profit to the Government. In addition to the vast economic benefits which this project would bring to this dry area of the Salmon Tract, $233,000 of the total cost of the project has been designated for fish and wildlife enhancement. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, it is not often that the Federal Government is presented with an opportunity to make possible such an important project, which will-in the long run-cost the taxpayer so little. All of the available evidence points favorably in support of the need for construction of the Salmon Falls Division Project. And I urge favorable and early approval of this bill by the Subcommittee. Thank you for granting me the privilege of submitting my views in support of this vital project. Mr. JOHNSON. Well, we want to thank you, Congressman Hansen, for appearing here giving us your thoughts to start with prior to us going into the actual schematic plan that will be explained here by the Bureau of Reclamation. I think all of us who are here agree that rural America needs help and I think with developing the resources and especially the water resources, it is going to help to bring a new economy or an increased economy. We agree with you. What we have seen of this project so far would tell us that, I am sure. I do hope that if this bill is passed by the Congress that the President will sign it and he will also ask for the necessary funds to get the preconstruction planning and engineering going so you can get in business before your next drought. It looks pretty good out there now but that might very well happen before we get the project built and you will have a few more lean years to be confronted with. The gentleman from Wyoming, Mr. Roncalio. Mr. RONCALIO. I have no questions, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. MCCLURE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have no questions but I would like to take the opportunity at this time to extend my congratulations to my colleague in the Congress for having gotten thus far with out project and getting it to this point of hearing. I would like, also, to take the opportunity to assure the people of this area of Orval's very great service in getting us to this point, because I could not have done it alone, although I am a member of the subcommittee. The fact that we do have the Office of Management and Budget clearance for this report is a tribute to his steadfast efforts in your behalf. He is doing a tremendous job back there and I am very proud to serve with him in the Congress. Mr. HANSEN. Let me say I appreciate those comments. Without unduly pursuing the point I think I would be less than honest if I did not make the people here aware that the single factor that was most responsible for moving this bill on the committee schedule was the presence and the stature of my colleague, Congressman Jim McClure, on the committee, and the diligence with which he has pursued it. This comes from those on both sides of the political aisle. That kind of respect and that kind of dedication to the work of the committee I am confident was a large factor in moving this project on schedule. We are grateful to you for it. Mr. MCCLURE. I think you know, as I do, we have got it on the track but it is still going to have to be pushed down the track. We are not there yet. Mr. RONCALIO. Mr. Chairman Mr. JOHNSON. The gentleman from Wyoming. Mr. RONCALIO. Will the gentleman from Idaho yield? Mr. McCLURE. Yes, I will be happy to yield. Mr. RONCALIO. It is not the practice of Democrats from Wyoming to come to Idaho and speak for Republicans [laughter] but I must admit in the year and a half I have been working with Jim McClure on this committee I have developed a profound respect for his expertise in handling the delicate, difficult problems of national recreation areas; of how do you create a wilderness area; what do you do with the conflicts of grazing or mining claims; and how do you treat people fairly. I come here with a great respect for your expertise and your contribution to good government. I hope you do not use those words next September and October. [Laughter.] Yesterday we had a bill move through one of our subcommittees because it was at the insistence of Senator Mansfield that it be moved. It involves a part of the country called the Lincoln Back Wilderness of Montana and the reason it was there is because they had the influence to move it that fast. I am happy to see that other bills in the Congress can move at a good pace like this. This is the time to strike. Mr. JOHNSON. Our next witness will be Mr. E. F. Sullivan, the Regional Director of the Bureau of Reclamation, in Boise. 75-914-72-pt. 1- -2 |