I want to comment upon just a few of the things you have said. Hopefully, we are going to see some diversification when a project of this kind take place, both in crops and other activities related to crop production. It has been my experience to observe this in the Western States where these projects have been created by the Bureau of Reclamation and other agencies of Government. We have many of these in California, many of which the Bureau of Reclamation does not have anything to do with. They were built by private enterprise or by local governments. Some of them were financed by irrigation districts and there were others where the Bureau participated.

We will see approximately 77,000 acres of irrigable land obtain a water supply from this project. This is all served from Norden Dam and Reservoir. It is inevitable that there be an inundation where the reservoir is formed; a good many thousands of acres-perhaps 15,000 acres, overall.

Also, it is quite evident, that there is a drop in the ground water levels providing the only available supply, and the water users are rightly concerned about that. There will possibly be a quality problem in some of these pumping areas, too.

You state this river would be a trickle. I see entering the river below the dam many tributary streams. The natural runoff from those streams and the increase due to return flows from supplemental water service supply will augment this flow instead of depleting it. This river will be self-built, as many of them are. We just returned from a visit to the Snake River, and it is quite evident that your situation here is similar, to a certain extent. That is, the tributaries that run into the main river furnish much of the inflow water being generated as the stream goes along prior to the time it enters the Missouri River.

I am certain that the drainage will continue to run in the Niobrara, and as they irrigate more areas you will see more of it.

And, as has been stated here, believe it or not, there is a great portion of that which will be diverted will come back onto the main stream.

I think the river will be thoroughly self-sufficient a few miles below the dam.

Now, you stated that not many people voted in an election that has been previously held concerning the development. That was explained to us while we were at the field hearings. This was brought to light and the Bureau of Reclamation is now assured that the attitude of the voters actually comprising the district is much more acceptable. I want to assure you of this. There will be no project built unless that election is successful, because someone has to agree to underwrite the repayment portion of this investment. Someone has to underwrite the separable cost and the operation and maintenance costs of recreation and fish and wildlife facilities. That is thoroughly understood by everyone who is concerned with the project at the present time.

Certainly, the Appropriations Committee will give very little consideration, even though we were to authorize this, unless there are contracts signed by a legal entity of the government in Nebraska to repay for the irrigation in the future.

I do not think we have too much to worry about there, because there will be a successful election of the project is built; there will have to be.

Mr. HOLCOMB: The one thing that I must say again is that there will not be 77,000 acres of land that will be irrigated.

Mr. JOHNSON. I can only go by the classification of the land here. These lands did not include the reservoir. These were outside the reservoir.

Mr. HOLCOMB. I know.

Mr. JOHNSON. As to the reservoir, we all realize, there is going to be inundation of about 15,000 acres within the reservoir site, even for the reservoir itself.

Mr. HOLCOMB. What I am trying to say, sir, is there will not be more than 60,000 acres of land left to be irrigated, because it has already been irrigated by central-pivot irrigators.

Mr. JOHNSON. This will be in part, a supplemental supply. There will be a new supply to some new land and a supplemental supply to the balance. There is not enough water now to produce crops on the land which grow there in certain years. This is where the farmer is having his tough problem. When he has a lean water year, he loses a portion of his crop. He cannot produce on all of his land. He is in pretty serious trouble, for the simple reason it takes a larger outlay, in order to make a go of it. He must have an adequate water supply and land suitable for irrigation.

Mr. HOLCOMB. Then, it would cost more. I believe I would be correct in saying they would have to increase and change the program, where the canals are going and the laterals, which would require

reevaluation.

Mr. JOHNSON. We have a map showing the canal systems going into the areas to be served. One area is north and the other area is south of the river.

We can only go by what is in the report, as far as acreage is concerned. Maybe I read it wrong. If I have, I want to stand corrected, but that is what they say here.

There is a certain amount of acreage within those areas that will come out for canals and laterals. You have listed those, and those will have to come out.

I do not know how they expect to irrigate all of the lands. But the main system will be canals and laterals.

Mr. HOLCOMB. The other point I would like to leave with you is: If, indeed, all of these lands remain irrigable and believe me, we are not opposed to irrigation. I think solid irrigation practices are wonderful. But if these lands are all irrigated up in that area, what happens, with this kind of information about nitrate hazards in well water?

I believe in your 1970 hearing record, when you were in O'Neill, the mayor of O'Neill said, even in the town of O'Neill, there was a well that they could not use off and on because it had too much nitrate in it. I know a well driller up there who lives at Bassett, Nebr., who puts in several new wells a year for domestic purpose simply because these people cannot use their well any longer. It has so much nitrate in it, they cannot use it, and their cattle cannot use it.

If many more new lands are continuously irrigated, by any method-whether it be by the current system they are using or the additional method-I think we have to face the realities where very poor soils like the Holt County area especially are having more problems of contamination of the wells.

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I would say we are going to help the situation by bringing in the supplemental supply of good quality water as compared to the present supply from the wells being used.

Mr. HOLCOMB. But this water simply percolates down through the soil no matter whether it comes from the lateral canal or water underneath the ground.

Mr. JOHNSON. I fully realize you are bringing a supplemental supply of water, an additional supply of higher quality water out of the reservoir. This water comes from the headwaters of Niobrara, and I imagine the best water in the basin.

I do not doubt your facts and figures, and they will have to be dealt with by the proper people. But the study that was made by the Bureau of Reclamation, in cooperation with the other agencies of Federal Government, State agencies, and the local people have put together a feasibility report that shows feasibility, and it is up to us to take a careful look at this.

Within its organization the Bureau has some very good experts. I do not say they are perfect. It has, however, been our experience on the projects that have been brought into being, they have been beneficial and they have been feasible. Rarely does a Bureau of Reclamation project prove to be infeasible after it has been built. I do not know of any that have failed completely. There might be one or two in trouble but, basically, the projects are well thought out.

When we come to the surplus crop situation, God help us that we have surplus food, because if we did not we would be in very poor shape. The growing population and the needs of the world require better distribution and proper handling, both in this country and the rest of the world. When we achieve this, there wlll not be too much in the way of surplus. People have made these studies around the world and within our own country, which show that when everyone receives an adequate food supply there will not be any surplus. That is why we have to go beyond mother nature and do something in the way of developing our resources so that we can keep up with these needs. And, as you say, technology puts aside business, but not for long. I think we need all of the technology we can get.

The horse and plow and the man did it a few years back. Then went to the tractor and what-have-you, and now we see some very sophisticated equipment to carry on our farming. We need only study my own State and my colleague's State here to see these trends. If it was not for our technology and advancement in the field of agribusiness in our State, we would not be able to produce what we do. We are the No. 1 agricultural State. We are the greatest populated State in the Union, and we overproduce our needs so far it is not even funny. We must move that production to other areas of the United States and throughout the world if we expect to maintain our economy in California. And while some of the other research is being completed, we have to look for agribusiness for

a living in our town. I think the economy has to come from the soil. Mr. HOLCOMB. I do, too, but I do not want to see it destroyed. Mr. JOHNSON. I do not, either.

Mr. HOLCOMB. As a taxpayer and representing many, many taxpayers in the State of Nebraska, I am telling you we do not want this project, because we think it is going to hurt world economy. We are dependent upon world economy in that State to make it viable. We do not want to see rural America hurt.

Mr. JOHNSON. The record is completely clear, the people of Nebraska, as a whole, represented by State and local governments, are in support of this project. Your legislature passed the resolution we just put in the record. They represent Omaha.

Mr. HOLCOMB. And I know how that resolution was passed, sir. I know when it was passed and how it was passed.

Mr. JOHNSON. It passed a legislative body. Just while we have been running back and forth and have not had too much discussion we passed four measures here. We voted on, them and we know what we voted on. I am sure any vote that comes out of the Nebraska Legislature would have the signature of the Governor, insofar as it takes his approval. I do not think they just put these things through without anybody knowing anything about it. They have to have a procedure like we have. Most people follow us very closely on what we do here.

The gentleman from California.

Mr. CLAUSEN. I want to make sure I have the proper name.

Your name is Larry Holcomb?

Mr. HOLCOMB. Yes.

Mr. CLAUSEN. You are here representing the Quality Environment Council of Nebraska and western Iowa?

Mr. HOLCOMB. Yes, sir.

Mr. CLAUSEN. And Omaha.

How many people does this represent?

Mr. HOLCOMB. We have 400 dues-paying members.

Mr. CLAUSEN. Are you a paid professional executive officer of the organization? Or what is your occupation, sir?

Mr. HOLCOMB. No. I am a biologist and ecologist at Creighton University in Omaha.

Mr. CLAUSEN. I see. I do want to pay a compliment, first of all, for coming to the committee and for the very in-depth research that you have not only committed yourself to but have been able to articulate in a very forthright manner before the committee. You obviously have done a lot of work on this.

I would like to ask a question, and this would relate to the improvement or the degradation of the quality of the water as a result of it being in place.

Is it true your concern seems to be centered around the question of nitrate in the well water?

Mr. HOLCOMB. That would be one concern.

Mr. CLAUSEN. As a biologist, would this supplemental water supply improve or degrade the quality of the water that would be used as a part of the total distribution system?

Mr. HOLCOMB. If you are talking about the water that is used for irrigation, it will make no difference whether it comes from under

ground like they are doing it there now, or whether it comes from the Norden Reservoir.

Mr. CLAUSEN. Why is this?

Mr. HOLCOMB. Because the water, if brought up from the reservoir or simply brought in by lateral canal and gradually fed onto the land, is going to percolate down through the soil. The nitrates come from two or three different sources. They are natural nitrates in the soil.

Mr. CLAUSEN. This is not the question I was asking you. We are assuming now the creation of the reservoir, you will have a new supply of water. Now, what is the quality of water as compared to the quality of the water in wells?

Mr. HOLCOMB. The quality of the water in the wells is probably some of the best in the world, if it is not contaminated. It is very good.

Mr. CLAUSEN. Contaminated with what?

Mr. HOLCOMB. With nitrates.

Mr. CLAUSEN. The nitrates come as a result of the return flow or the percolation from irrigation and the fertilizer or is it just a natural condition of the soil?

Mr. HOLCOMB. Some is natural; some is from percolation from fertilizers, and others from feed blocks. So, there are at least three sources. But the quality of that water that is coming from the reservoir would be no better and probably no worse, because it is relatively clean water coming down. It has some silt in it but it is relatively clean water.

Mr. CLAUSEN. Would the source of water coming into the reservoir be at a higher elevation?

Mr. HOLCOMB. Yes. Not much higher, because it is a little higher because it is simply flowing-that would be

Mr. CLAUSEN. Is that apparently unmolested or untainted water or untreated water that would be coming into the reservoir?

Mr. HOLCOMB. Not altogether. There are some small pollutant effects from places like the city of Valentine, from the river that flows into the Niobrara from Valentine, which has some sewage treatment. I would not say it is a severe problem, but they are getting some pollutants from that.

They are getting some from the Snake River drainage. I would suspect, although I would have to look at the maps again, meanwhile I assume, some of the drainage from the Ainesworth project comes back into the Niobrara system.

Mr. CLAUSEN. So, then, your testimony is

Mr. HOLCOMB. I could be wrong on that. I would have to check.

Mr. CLAUSEN (continuing). Your testimony is that the quality of the water coming from the reservoir would be essentially identical to the quality of the water that is now being used in agricultural irrigation lands?

Mr. HOLCOMB. Yes, I would say so.

Mr. CLAUSEN. This being the case, how are you going to get some purer water out there if there is no difference in the quality of the water?

I mean, how are you going to get cleaner water?