project was approved as a participating project. By the time the main report was ready for transmittal to the affected States, however, departmental review of the La Plata report indicated that the costbenefit ratio was unfavorable and the project could not be included. It is our understanding that region 4 is currently reviewing the project in an attempt to formulate a revised plan which will meet necessary requirements for participating projects. The La Plata is one of the most deserving projects within the entire basin from the standpoint of need for rehabilitation and reclamation of a project now deficient in water supply. Water shortages in that area are chronic. For this reason we urge that every effort be made to work out a revised project for the La Plata unit which can be included in the near future as a participating project. In our letter to you dated April 13, 1951, certain inconsistencies were pointed out in the position of the Department of the Interior concerning projects in New Mexico for the utilization of its share of San Juan River water. The question set forth in that letter arose from the recommendations of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs contained in paragraph (d) of Commissioner Straus' letter of transmittal. Briefly, our letter sought to determine whether the Department intended to seek authorization of an open-end Shiprock project as indicated in that paragraph, or if the Department intended to continue the course which is now under way of attempting to negotiate the question of the size of Shiprock and other competing projects. Your reply under date of May 28, 1951, while helpful, did not completely answer our query. It is noted that you did agree "that an open-ended authorization of the Shiprock project would be undesirable." You stated that every effort was being made to seek a satisfactory solution and expressed the hope that such a solution would be reached by the time the report was forwarded to the President and the Congress. However, the complexity of the problems encountered is such that there appears to be no solution to the problem possible in time for inclusion in the current report. It is necessary, therefore, for the State to comment in some detail on the recommendation contained in the Commissioner's letter. Under the provision of New Mexico's constitution, its statutes, and the decision of its courts, the water allocated in New Mexico for consumptive use by the terms of the upper Colorado River Basin compact (except as to present uses) is unappropriated water of the State of New Mexico held by the State as trustee for the benefit of the public. Because of the physical situation on the San Juan River, the several large projects which would use a major portion of New Mexico's allocated water supply under the terms of the compact are dependent upon the amount of water in the Upper San Juan River and its tributaries available above the site of the Navaho Reservoir. Several facts concerning the final determination of water supply to these projects are important: (a) A substantial Navaho-Shiprock project is a necessary feature of the program of development of the water supply in New Mexico, not only from the standpoint of taking care of the economy of the Navaho Indian but in making the best and fullest use of New Mexico's compact allocation. (b) A transmountain diversion of water from the San Juan to the Chama River is also necessary in order for New Mexico to fully utilize its allocated water supply. (c) The only substantial source of unappropriated water in the State is the San Juan River. This water is required not only to take care of the legitimate needs within the basin but to supply water to the Rio Grande Basin to assist in relieving shortages in existing irrigated areas, to provide for the growth of municipal, industrial, and military uses, and to replace those amounts of water which may be consumed in connection with programs of the Department of Agriculture for watershed rehabilitation within that basin. Because of the far-reaching effect which allocations made at this time will have upon the economic, irrigation, and industrial growth within the entire State, the selection of projects and the determination of their respective sizes in the current program must be made with the greatest of care. The record will show that the State has consistently worked for the Shiprock (Navaho) project. It would be desirable to recommend it without reservation for authorization in the initial list of participating projects if a project report had been made available for the States' prior consideration setting forth its size and other essential features demonstrating its qualifications for inclusion therein. Under the circumstances, however, it is obvious that the States cannot give unqualified approval to the blanket recommendations contained in paragraph (d) of the Commissioner's letter. For over a year the San Juan Coordinating Committee of the Department of the Interior has been working to develop the engineering data necessary for a proper determination of respective sizes of the Shiprock project, the South San Juan (white lands) project in connection therewith, and a San Juan-Chama transmountain diversion project. The committee is working under a directive in the form of a memorandum from Assistant Secretary William E. Warne, which was approved by you August 30, 1950. The directive set forth certain aims and objectives, stating, among other things: Once a feasible project is reached which will combine the San Juan-Shiprock area and the San Juan-Chama diversion, while allowing for irrigation of 20,000 acres of white lands, the entire project should be included in one report. It also directed: That the Department endeavor to complete by January 1, 1951, a mutually acceptable report on the above basis which will set out the magnitude of the recommended east slope and west slope units of the project, along with supporting economic data; and That the Department complete by January 1, 1952, feasibility reports to be used as a basis for seeking project authorization. It seems evident from the memorandum that the policy of the Department is to develop, with the aid and assistance of engineering data obtained by the Interior Coordinating Committee, a solution as to the respective sizes of the three projects which can be agreed upon at State level; and that such coordinated plan be then submitted to the Congress and authorized as a unit. The work of the Coordinating Committee has been progressing quite satisfactorily. Due to unforeseen delays, however, it has not been able to proceed as rapidly as originally anticipated. For example, the Navaho Tribal Council has entered the picture and is seeking certain information which it feels is required before the council is willing to make any commitments regarding the potential size of their project. The council is employing a private engineer to conduct an independent review of the engineering data so that the council may be fully apprised as to its adequacy. The State feels that the Navahos are entitled to full information regarding their project. There seems to have been an unfortunate tendency on the part of the several agencies involved in the early project studies to so plan their projects that they could maintain bargaining positions with respect to other projects or plans. I believe this situation has been largely rectified since the appointment of the Coordinating Committee, although there is still a tendency on the part of the Bureau of Indian Affairs to insist that it cannot recede from a certain predetermined size of the Navaho-Shiprock project. The State feels that it is necessary for all agencies to work wholeheartedly in presenting complete data regarding the proposed projects. In this connection, it is evident that region V of the Bureau should collect and present at the earliest possible time a report showing the needs of the east slope for domestic, municipal, and supplemental water. Such data would be used, together with potential power possibilities, in preparing a transmountain project report. In the San Juan Basin, it is evident that additional data are required to complete the project report on the Shiprock project. Preliminary examination by engineers of the State indicate the need for more detailed study of such features of the project as (1) the question of inclusion of scattered tracts of good land where the distribution costs may be excessive, (2) the question of drainage of many areas on the project, where topography and soil conditions are such that drainage is expensive and difficult, and (3) other project features which might well be reviewed. A study of these matters could have a material effect on the ultimate area which should be recommended for inclusion within the project. A complete report on the South San Juan project is necessary to determine its feasibility and economic size for inclusion as a unit of the larger Navaho Reservoir project. The above problems were brought to the attention of the Governor and a number of representatives of the areas of the State involved and were carefully considered by them. It was agreed that, since you have recommended the Shiprock project for current authorization, the State's other legitimate needs can be guaranteed and your directive of August 30, 1950, can be effectuated only by inclusion of the other two competing projects in the report for concurrent authorization. Accordingly, New Mexico recommends and strongly urges the inclusion in your recommendations to the President and the Congress of the following: (1) The South San Juan and San JuanChama projects, as well as the Shiprock project, be included in the subject report for authorization as participating projects as a unit; and (2) there be no appropriations for, or construction of, any of the three projects until there has been made available to all of the affected States and approved by the Congress project reports, comparable to reports already prepared for the other participating projects, which demonstrate their feasibility, their favorable qualifications as participating projects, and their compatibility with each other. On pages 6 and 7 of the regional director's report is set forth his proposed construction schedule for the storage project reservoirs. He recommends therein that the Whitewater, Echo Park, and Glen Canyon units be constructed immediately, followed by the Navaho and Flaming Gorge units. New Mexico, respectfully calls the Secretary's attention to the fact that the Navaho Reservoir is an essential initial phase of the construction of the Shiprock, the South San Juan, or the San Juan-Chama diversion projects since all three are dependent upon equating the flow of the San Juan River at or near that reservoir site. Further, due consideration should be given to the use of presently unappropriated waters of the San Juan for power purposes while such surplus power sources are available. The State, therefore, recommends and urges that you revise the construction schedule so that the Navaho Reservoir is included as one of the initial units of the storage plan, thereby permitting development in this State to proceed on an even basis with that in other States of the upper basin. Because there will be sufficient credit in a basin account when and as approved by the Congress, and because of the continuing need for project investigations and reports as development of the upper basin progresses, it is recommended that investigational funds adequate for the purpose be authorized from this account in addition to those provided by the Colorado River development fund, Reclamation funds and subparagraph (j) of the Commissioner's letter of December 22, 1950. Washington, D. C.: Reference Fish and Wildlife Service program for protection, development and utilization of fish and wildlife resources in upper Colorado River Basin, this program affects New Mexico only as far as Navaho Reservoir is concerned and in that case meets with our approval and is in accordance with our policies. ELLIOTT S. BARKER, State Game Warden, State of New Mexico. COMMENTS, UTAH STATE ENGINEER OFFICE OF STATE ENGINEER, Re Colorado River storage project and participating projects-views and comments Mr. OSCAR L. CHAPMAN, Secretary of the Interior, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. SECRETARY: Receipt of your letter of transmittal dated January 30, 1951, together with copies of the Colorado River Storage Project and Participating Projects, Upper Colorado River Basin, dated December 1950, as prepared by the Bureau of Reclamation, is acknowledged. It is understood that said reports were submitted to the State of Utah on behalf of the Secretary of the Interior in compliance with the provisions of section 1 (c) of the Flood Control Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 887). Included in each report was the Commissioner's letter to the Secretary of the Interior under date of December 22, 1950. Under authority of Utah's Governor, the Hon. J. Bracken Lee, it becomes my responsibility to submit official views and recommendations on the reports for the State of Utah. We wish to commend the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Reclamation, and their staffs on the painstaking investigations that have made the reports possible. The basic principles underlying the reports are sound. The reports are comprehensive, well prepared, and the many details of preparation are well done. Region IV of the Bureau of Reclamation is to be particularly commended. Utah appreciates the complete cooperation and congenial working relationship that has existed continuously between the State and the Bureau of Reclamation during the period of report preparation. Full compliance with the spirit and purpose of section 1 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 has been exemplified. Conferences have been held with State officials; the Utah Water and Power Board; the Utah Water Users Association; the Colorado River Development Association, representing 21 affected counties within the State; chambers of commerce and their water resources committees; the Utah Fish and Game Commission; the Utah State Agricultural College and Agricultural Experiment Station; the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City; various consulting engineers; and many water users and other citizens of this State. In these conferences, the basic principles and details of the Colorado River storage project and participating projects in the upper Colorado River Basin have been explained and discussed. All of the above-mentioned organizations and individuals have officially endorsed and approved the project plan. Two exceptions, however, have been made relative to the details of distribution and construction as it relates to the central Utah project. These exceptions are discussed under the central Utah project. The State of Utah is in accord with and fully endorses: (a) The proposed plan of development. We believe that such plan will be of invaluable assistance in permitting the upper division States-first, to fulfill their obligations for deliveries at Lee Ferry; and second, to achieve their full measure of develop |