Mr. BOTTORFF. Well, that is involved in our concept, yes, sir. However, there is so much confusion

Senator ANDERSON. Well, just let me say now that the testimony has been made here that it would be constructed jointly by the Federal Government and the State with a million acre-feet to be used by the Bureau of Reclamation and 1,000,001 acre-feet to be used by the State.

You say you recommend the construction by the State of the dam and reservoir. Do you recommend that it be exclusively by the State? Mr. BOTTORFF. The construction agency so far as our concept would be concerned would be the State. The participation insofar as the rights to use of that reservoir and the canal would be established by the contract, and irrevocably.

Senator ANDERSON. Is there any significance to your use of the words "by the State"?

"Primarily we support the earliest possible construction by the State."

Mr. BOTTORFF. I think that there is, because the concept that we have under review and have so had from since September throughout the State of California has indicated the desire on the part of the majority of its citizens insofar as the Feather River project is concerned, which includes the whole alinement, including the San Luis Reservoir, that it shall be a part of the State unit, and that the full integrity of the State project shall thereby be maintained.

However, our position, as I will explain later, is that there should be a working relationship between the United States and the State whereby, through a contract, this would be definitely established. There would be costs involved for both the United States and the State which would be assigned to each in true and fair proportion to the rights to use of facilities that would be thereby agreed upon. And, so, that is the way we have approached it.

Senator KUCHEL. Mr. Bottorff, just so this record may be clear, I did not introduce this bill until the State had asked me to. Mr. BOTTORFF. I understand that, sir.

Senator KUCHEL. And I would not want you to say that what you recommend here represents the general thinking of the people in the State; because there would be great grounds to disagree upon that.

I think that there are people who approve of the point of view that you are going to outline here, but it is going to remain for this committee to sit in judgment on this thing.

Mr. BOTTORFF. Perhaps that was an opinion. But it was really because of the fact that we saw such tremendous interest in it. Senator KUCHEL. All right.

Mr. BOTTORFF. Which indicated to us

Senator ANDERSON. You are testifying for yourself and the Kern County group and the California Federation of Farm Bureaus.

Mr. BOTTORFF. There will be many others testifying before you,

too.

Senator ANDERSON. Well, I am just saying to Senator Kuchel that you do not represent this to be a majority viewpoint; this is your viewpoint; and your organization's viewpoint; and the California Farm Bureau Federation's viewpoint; and it is the hope it may be the viewpoint of the State.

But go ahead.

Mr. BOTTORFF. The Feather River project, when constructed, will develop waters originating in the State of California and is intended to provide flood relief and supplemental water to many areas and water for many people of the State where needed now, and in the future. We recognize that the San Luis Dam and Reservoir is an essential part of any portion of the Feather River project intended to provide service to many parts of the State south of the northern boundary of Fresno County; and that it should be constructed and remain as an integral part of the Feather River project of the California water plan.

However, it becomes evident upon closely examining the Bureau's San Luis unit report, that several major features of the proposed Federal San Luis unit, of specific usefulness to the San Luis unit service area, could be advantageously authorized for construction by the United States, as a part of the Federal Central Valley project. Also it has become evident and generally recognized that such authorization could advantageously include provisions for a contract between the United States and the State to permit the coordinated joint use of certain respective facilities of each, but particularly of the State's San Luis works, for service by the United States proposed San Luis

unit.

Mr. BOTTORFF. I should clarify that in our thinking, so far as our amendments are concerned, that we are taking the liberty to offer for consideration, that we classify-that we use the term "State San Luis Works" as the joint use features of the Feather River project in true alinement with the general alinement of that project and in true perspective as to their place in the usefulness to the San Luis unit.

Senator KUCHEL. With storage capacity, as I think you used the word, irrevocably committed to both the State and the Federal Government, Mr. Bottorff?

Mr. BOTTORFF. I think that I used the term with respect to the contract; that the contract would be made that would be used for all times, as far as we are concerned.

Senator KUCHEL. So that I understand: The contract, then, would purport to divide the storage capacity of the reservoir itself, irrevocably allocating part of that storage to the Federal Government and part to the State?

Mr. BOTTORFF. I would say that that would be true. And that would be a matter of the engineering determinations and the work between the Bureau and the Department, and things of that sort.

But the contract would express that.

Senator KUCHEL. And so far as you are concerned, in suggesting that that be a contractual obligation, there is no intention on your part to subordinate the validity and binding terms of that irrevocable allocation below any statutory provisions?

Mr. BOTTORFF. Absolutely not.

As far as the rights are concerned, they would be there; and they would be useful just as a property right.

I cannot see it any other way.

I would like to deviate a moment

Senator KUCHEL. Let me just add first, though, because I read this comment on the California Farm Bureau resolutions, that when on page 2, as Senator Anderson has pointed out, the comment is made that one of the objections to the bill that Senator Knowland and I

have introduced here is that the United States shall have unrestricted use of such capacity and the work of the San Luis units, and so forththe "and so forth" meaning that part of the capacity which would be dedicated to the Federal project, I must say I cannot differentiate between what is said here and what is said in your concept.

Mr. BOTTORFF. Well, I think they are speaking to the S. 1887 exactly as it is introduced in the original form, in that first set of

Senator KUCHEL. But in its original form the concept is that part of the use of the reservoir storage capacity would be committed to the Federal Government, and the balance to the State.

Mr. BOTTORFF. The point they might have there relates to the combination of that language with the remainder of the paragraph, I would assume.

Senator ANDERSON. You had better help me out now.

What is the difference between the original form and this form? Mr. BOTTORFF. I believe that is the only form that has ever been published.

Senator ANDERSON. Why do you say "the original form" then?

Mr. BOTTORFF. Because there has been these amendments floating around the State of California.

Senator ANDERSON. I can't be bothered with those.

Mr. BOTTORFF. Well

Senator ANDERSON. You say "the original form." I only know about the one that is dated April 16, 1957.

Mr. BOTTORFF. Well, actually, anything I say will be addressed to the original form. And anything-any amendments that might be suggested here will be to the original form.

Senator ANDERSON. I do not like the word "original."

Isn't this the only form?

Mr. BOTTORFF. S. 1887; that is correct.

Well, we have had some indication that amendments would be considered from time to time.

Senator ANDERSON. I have seen proposed amendments to the Ten Commandments, but they still stand.

All right. Go ahead.

Mr. BOTTORFF. What I was going to deviate a moment on was the fact that so far as what constitutes the major works of the San Luis unit-and when I speak of the San Luis unit now I am talking about the Federal proposal-there has been a great deal of misunderstanding, I think. And while I think it may not be so here at all, we have prepared in times gone by an analysis which, for your information, I will submit a copy of; and I will say that the whole manual there has to do with factual items.

Some of those works that are listed-we have prepared this, but we have prepared it from authentic material. And we have not heard anything that indicates that it is out of line.

And I am not trying to bring in this except to point out that when we discussed this subject of major works, we confined it to the mainline canal, the reservoir, the forebay and the afterbay. And the San Luis unit constitutes all the things that are listed in that schedule.

So, there are a great many items that go far beyond these main items, insofar as cost is concerned, which we consider major items that are particularly identified with the requirements of the Federal San

Luis project that are not in conflict and are particularly useful to the Federal San Luis unit and which we associate with the Central Valley project in our thinking.

Mr. BOTTORFF. Fundamentally, it is our position that any such authorizing legislation, and any agreement thereunder, shall recognize the right of the State to construct, operate, and control the mainline facilities of the State project; and that the State shall exercise control with respect to determination and administration of the right to the use of water. The United States would control the works of the Federal San Luis unit in accordance with reclamation law.

Because of the urgency of the water problem in several areas affected, and these include our own areas, and because of our desire to offer a proposal which might reduce controversy respecting the subject in our State, there was developed under our auspices following extensive investigation and consultation with our water authorities in California, the statement of purpose and concept offered for your consideration today. This has been equally true with respect to legislative language which has been substantially utilized in the present draft of our suggested amendments to S. 1887.

Conferences have continued and we have likewise done our utmost to adjust differences.

We have alluded to the widespread interest and approval expressed with respect to the Kern County concept in the State of California, where it has come before many interested people for their consideration and study.

We believe it will be of interest to others, both in our State and elsewhere, where water development in California is concerned.

When the Kern County concept is fully understood, the language of our proposed amendments to S. 1887 will be fully understood.

We submit these amendments in the form of an exhibit (C) of the Knowland-Kuchel bill, S. 1887, with new language underlined and conflicting language struck; and with some rearrangement of sections. We have had some much appreciated assistance from the staff of the State department of water resources in drafting the present amendments, but the responsibility of interpretation has been ours. We will be glad to answer any questions within our capacity to explain our amendments. We also have provided written explanations in our exhibit D, attached hereto.

This completes our prepared testimony. It has been a privilege to appear before your committee. And certainly we wish to thank you very much for the opportunity that has been given us to express our views.

Senator KUCHEL. Thank you, Mr. Bottorff.

Senator ANDERSON. Did you put in all the documents that you wanted in the record?

Mr. BOTTORFF. Well, what the documents consist of are a plain statement of the complete purpose and concept, which is one copy, exhibit B Senator ANDERSON. Did you ask that that be placed in the record? Mr. BOTTORFF. I wish you would; yes.

Senator ANDERSON. You also have a revised draft of the bill. Mr. BOTTORFF. This is the latest revisions of the bill as far as the recommendations that we have made.

Senator ANDERSON. We would keep this for our own use.

23863-58-8

And then you have an explanation of your amendments.

Mr. BOTTORFF. Yes. That is attached in exhibit D, which is underneath the other items.

Senator ANDERSON. Without objection your four exhibits will be printed at this point in the record.

(Exhibits A, B, C, and D are as follows:)

EXHIBIT A

RESOLUTION OF THE KERN COUNTY FARM BUREAU, SEPTEMBER 5, 1957

Whereas the continued advancement of the best interests of the whole State of California and of those areas to be directly served or benefited by development of the Feather River project, the San Luis Dam and Reservoir and related water delivery and other facilities, requires the settlement of controversy concerning under what jurisdiction shall these features of the State's water development program proceed and function; and

Whereas upon careful examination of this issue in Kern County, there has been prepared a recommendation entitled "Statement of Purpose and Concept for Timely Development of the State Authorized Feather River Project and the Proposed Federal San Luis Unit of the Central Valley Project," which points a way to relieve this problem and thereby permit California's water development to proceed with minimum delay: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That this statement of purpose and concept (copy attached hereto) is hereby approved by the Kern County Farm Bureau as offering a basically sound, fair, and workable plan to cooperatively meet present critical water needs and anticipated increasing future needs of the areas concerned, with earliest protection to human life, greatest benefit to the general welfare, and assurance for maintaining and extending the agricultural and general economy of the State; and

That this action approving this statement of purpose and concept shall be made known to our fellow farm bureau members, to our legislators, and governmntal administrators, and to other organizations, agencies, and persons having interest in this subject; and

That copies of this resolution and the statement of purpose and concept shall be prepared and submitted for consideration with our recommendation that it be adopted as a general guide for the purposes defined in the statement; and be it further

Resolved, That this approval and recommendation shall be considered as intending to implement our previous expressions of approval of the general concept of the California water plan for full development of the State's water resources to meet the water needs of all aras; and shall in no way be considered as a limitation upon our determination to support the purposes of the California water plan.

CERTIFICATION

The above resolution was approved by the Kern County Farm Bureau board of directors at Bakersfield, Calif., September 5, 1957. Attest:

JACK G. THOMSON,

President.

J. R. NELSON,

Secretary, Kern County Farm Bureau.

EXHIBIT B

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE AND CONCEPT FOR TIMELY DEVELOPMENT OF THE STATE AUTHORIZED FEATHER RIVER PROJECT AND THE PROPOSED FEDERAL SAN LUIS UNIT OF THE CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT

FOREWORD

This concept for meeting the urgent water needs of south and west San Joaquin Valley and other California areas combines the advantages of State ownership and operation of the San Luis Dam and Reservoir and other main