■:.•■■■■.•...■.■■
Hi
.;-■;•■■■-■■
•■.•■■■..•;,'■
*'■■•■'■'■
^'i ; -- ; ■'■■■ ':
$
Hi
Hi
Silt?? 1
HHkE
BUI]
nil Km
IHI
1
•''■'■■■:
WNRm
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
PUBLICATIONS OF THE
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
EDWARD HYATT, State Engineer
Reports on State Water Plan Prepared Pursuant to
Chapter 832, Statutes of 1929
BULLETIN No. 25
REPORT
TO
LEGISLATURE OF 1931
ON
STATE WATER PLAN
1930
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LETTER OP TRANSMITTAL 8
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 9
ORGANIZATION 10
ENGINEERING ADVISORY COMMITTEES 11
FEDERAL AGENCIES COOPERATING IN WATER RESOURCES INVESTI-
GATION 12
STATE AGENCIES COOPERATING IN WATER RESOURCES INVESTIGA-
TION 15
INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS COMMITTEE 17
SPECIAL CONSULTANTS 17
CHAPTER 832, STATUTES OF 1929 18
FOREWORD 19
Chapter I
INTRODUCTION 21
Authority for investigation 21
History of water development in California 21
California's water problem 23
Previous investigations 23
Interest of State in its water problem 25
Interest of Federal government in California's water problem 29
Joint interest of Federal and State governments 29
Urgency of solution of California's water problem 30
Scope of report 31
Basic principles of a State Water Plan 32
Chapter II
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 33
Water resources 33
Water requirements 33
Ultimate major units of State Water Plan 35
Great Central Valley — Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins 36
Surplus waters in Sacramento River Basin 39
Navigation 41
San Francisco Bay Basin 41
South Pacific Coast Basin 42
North Pacific Coast, Central Pacific Coast and Great Basin 43
Initial units of State Water Plan 43
Sacramento River and San Francisco Bay Basins 43
Upper San Joaquin Valley 45
South Pacific Coast Basin 47
Summary of costs for initial units of State Water Plan 48
Economic aspects of initial units of State Water Plan 48
Water rights problems 53
Investigations in progress 54
Conclusions 55
Chapter III
WATER RESOURCES OF CALIFORNIA 58
Precipitation 58
Run-off 61
Return and ground waters 71
II
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pago
Chapter IV
WATER REQUIREMENTS 72
North Pacific Coast Basin 73
Sacramento River Basin 74 1
Control of salinity In Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 76
San Joaquin River Basin 80
Upper San Joaquin Valley 82
Lower San Joaquin Valley 84
San Francisco Bay Basin 84
Central Pacific Coast Basin 86]
South Pacific Coast Basin 86 •
Great Basin 87
Entire State 88
Chapter V
MAJOR UNITS OF ULTIMATE STATE WATER PLAN 89
Great Central Valley 90
Surface storage units 91
Conveyance systems 93
Summary 97
Underground reservoirs 98
Navigation 102
Flood control 102
Operation and accomplishments of plan 105
San Francisco Bay Basin 113
Salinity control and water service for upper bay area 117
South Pacific Coast Basin 124
Colorado River acqueduct 125
Distributary conduits 126
Conservation of flood control works in Santa Ana River Basin 127
North Pacific Coast, Central Pacific Coast and Great Basins 127
Chapter VI
INITIAL UNITS OF STATE WATER PLAN 128
Sacramento River Basin 128
Kennett Reservoir 132
Complete American River unit 135
Partial American River unit 136
San Francisco Bay region 145
Upper San Joaquin Valley 147
The Madera unit 150
The Fresno-Consolidated unit 151
The Alta unit 152
The Kaweah unit 152
The Lindsay unit 153
The Tule-Deer Creek unit 153
The Earlimart-Delano unit 153
The McFarland-Shafter unit
The Rosedale unit 155
Canal irrigated area south of Kern River 155
The Edison-Arvin unit 155
Other areas studied 156
Estimation of relative deficiencies in water supply 158
Areas requiring an imported water supply 159
The supplemental imported water supply 160
South Pacific Coast Basin 167
Conservation of local water resources 167
Santa Ana River Basin flood control and conservation works 168
Los Angeles County 170
Ventura County 170
Colorado River aqueduct 170
Summary „ 170
TABLE OP CONTENTS
Page
Chapter VII
ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF INITIAL UNITS OF STATE WATER PLAN 172
Great Central Valley project 172
Colorado River aqueduct and Santa Ana River Basin projects 176
Chapter VIII
MAJOR LEGAL ASPECTS OF STATE WATER PLAN 177
Initial units of plan 177
Changes resultant from initial units of plan 177
Stream flow regulation by means of storage 178
Exportation from watershed 179
Exchanges of water 179
Purchase of so-called San Joaquin grass land water rights 180
Underground storage and exportation therefrom 180
Report of 1928 legal committee 180
Relative to a constitutional amendment in aid of the remedy by eminent domain 182
Conclusion 183
Chapter IX
INVESTIGATIONS IN PROGRESS 184
Northeastern California 184
Napa Valley 185
Santa Clara Valley (Santa Clara County) 185
Salinas Valley 186
Santa Barbara County 186
Ventura County 186
Mojave River and Antelope valleys 187
South Coastal Basin 187
San Diego County 188
Appendix
STATUTES DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO STATE WATER RESOURCES INVES-
TIGATION 189
Introduction 190
Statutes 191
PUBLICATIONS OF THE DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 201
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Chapter IV
WATER REQUIREMENTS 72
North Pacific Coast Basin 73
Sacramento River Basin 74
Control of salinity in Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 76
San Joaquin River Basin 80
Upper San Joaquin Valley 82
Lower San Joaquin Valley 84
San Francisco Bay Basin 84
Central Pacific Coast Basin 86
South Pacific Coast Basin 86
Great Basin 87
Entire State 88
Chapter V
MAJOR UNITS OF ULTIMATE STATE WATER PLAN 89
Great Central Valley 90
Surface storage units 91
Conveyance systems 93
Summary 97
Underground reservoirs 98
Navigation 102
Flood control 102
Operation and accomplishments of plan 105
San Francisco Bay Basin 113
Salinity control and water service for upper bay area 117
South Pacific Coast Basin 124
Colorado River acqueduct 125
Distributary conduits 126
Conservation of flood control works in Santa Ana River Basin 127
North Pacific Coast, Central Pacific Coast and Great Basins 127
Chapter VI
INITIAL UNITS OF STATE WATER PLAN 128
Sacramento River Basin 128
Kennett Reservoir 132
Complete American River unit 135
Partial American River unit 136
San Francisco Bay region 145
Upper San Joaquin Valley 147
The Madera unit 150
The Fresno-Consolidated unit 151
The Alta unit 152
The Kaweah unit 152
The Lindsay unit 153
The Tule-Deer Creek unit 153
The Earlimart-Delano unit 153
The McFarland-Shafter unit 154
The Rosedale unit 155
Canal irrigated area south of Kern River 155
The Edison-Arvin unit 155
Other areas studied 156
Estimation of relative deficiencies in water supply 158
Areas requiring an imported water supply 159
The supplemental imported water supply 160
South Pacific Coast Basin 167
Conservation of local water resources 167
Santa Ana River Basin flood control and conservation works 168
Los Angeles County 170
Ventura County 170
Colorado River aqueduct 170
Summary 170
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Chapter VII
ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF INITIAL, UNITS OF STATE WATER PLAN 172
Great Central Valley project 172
Colorado River aqueduct and Santa Ana River Basin projects 176
Chapter VIII
MAJOR LEGAL ASPECTS OF STATE WATER PLAN 177
Initial units of plan 177
Changes resultant from initial units of plan 177
Stream flow regulation by means of storage 178
Exportation from watershed 179
Exchanges of water 179
Purchase of so-called San Joaquin grass land water rights 180
"Underground storage and exportation therefrom 180
Report of 1928 legal committee 180
Relative to a constitutional amendment in aid of the remedy by eminent domain 182
Conclusion 183
Chapter IX
INVESTIGATIONS IN PROGRESS 184
Northeastern California 184
Napa Valley 185
Santa Clara Valley (Santa Clara County) 185
Salinas Valley 186
Santa Barbara County 186
Ventura County 186
Mojave River and Antelope valleys 187
South Coastal Basin 187
San Diego County 188
Appendix
STATUTES DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO STATE WATER RESOURCES INVES-
TIGATION 189
Introduction 190
Statutes 191
PUBLICATIONS OF THE DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES 201
LIST OF TABLES
Table Pan
1 Geographical distribution of precipitation 39
2 Variation in total seasonal precipitation at nine United States Weather Bureau
stations 60
3 Monthly distribution of mean seasonal precipitation at nine United States
Weather Bureau stations 62
4 Indices <>f seasonal wetness tor 26 precipitation divisions 64
5 Seasonal run-off from mountain and foothill drainage areas 66
6 Average monthly distribution of seasonal run-off for typical major streams 70
7 Classification of lands on Sacramento Valley floor, excluding the Sacramento-
San Joaquin Delta 74
8 Summary of gross agricultural and net irrigable areas in Sacramento River
Basin, including the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 75
9 Ultimate seasonal water requirements of irrigable lands in Sacramento River
Basin, including the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 76
10 Classification of lands on San Joaquin Valley floor, excluding the Sacramento-
San Joaquin Delta 81
11 Summary of gross agricultural and net irrigable areas in San Joaquin River
Basin, excluding the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 82
12 Ultimate seasonal water requirements of irrigable lands in San Joaquin River
Basin, excluding Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 84
13 Ultimate annual water requirements of -San Francisco Bay Basin 86
14 Summary of ultimate gross water requirements for entire State 88
15 Water supply and requirements by basins 89
16 Ultimate major storage units of State Water Plan in Great Central Valley 94
17 Ultimate major conveyance units of State Water Plan in Great Central Valley 97
18 Summary of costs of ultimate major units of State Water Plan in Great
Central Valley 98
19 Usable underground capacity in Great Central Valley 99
20 Reservoir space required for controlling floods to certain specified flows 103
21 Flood flows in Great Central Valley with and without reservoir control 104
22 Annual water requirements and surplus in Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and
flow into Suisun Bay with major units of State Plan in Great Central Valley
operated under Method I, 1918-1929 107
23 Monthly distribution of surplus water in Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and
flow into Suisun Bay with major units of State Plan in Great Central Valley
operated under Method I, 1918-1929 108
24 Annual water requirements and surplus in Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and
How into Suisun Bay with major units "f State Plan In Great Central Valley
operated under Method II, 1918-1929 110
25 Monthly distribution of surplus water in Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and
flow into Suisun Bay with major units of State Plan in Great Central Valley
operated under Method II, 1918-1929 111
26 Surplus water in Sacramento River Basin 112
27 Capital and annual cost of a salt water barrier 114
28 Usable storage capacity in a barrier lake 117
29 Water requirements for salinity control with a barrier 119
30 Cost of regulated irrigation supplies at major units of State Plan in Sacra-
mento River Basin, with reservoirs operated primarily for irrigation 130
31 Financial comparison of Kennetl reservoir and American River unit for
various plans of operation 138
32 Annual water requirements and surplus in Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and
flow into Suisun Bay with Kennett Reservoir operated as an initial unit under
Method II, 1919-1929 141
33 Monthly distribution of surplus water in Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and
How Into Suisun Bay with Kennetl Reservoir operated as an initial unit under
Method II, 1919-1929 142
34 Annual water requirements and surplus in Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and
flow into Suisun Bay with Kennetl Reservoir operated as an initial unit under
Method III, 1919-1929 143
35 Monthly distribution of surplus water in Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and
flow into Suisun Bay with Kennett Reservoir operated as an initial unit under
Method III, 1919-1929 144
36 Change In volume of ground water in upper San Joaquin Valley by ground
water units, 1921-1929 149
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
37 Comparison of depletion of ground water storage with available local supplies
in upper San Joaquin Valley by ground water units 151
38 Factors used in estimating relative deficiencies in water supply of irrigated
areas in upper San Joaquin Valley, 1921-1929 159
39 Deficiencies in water supply in ground water units in upper San Joaquin Valley
requiring imported supplies 160
40 Utilization of flow of San Joaquin River at Friant under plan of immediate
initial development 162
41 Distribution by ground water units of water supply for an average season
obtainable from surplus and "grass land" rights of San Joaquin River,
1921-1929 164
42 Distribution by counties of water supply for an average season obtainable
from surplus and "grass land" rights of San Joaquin River, 1921-1929 1<>4
43 Cost of physical works of initial plan in San Joaquin River Basin 166
44 Cost of flood control and spreading works in Santa Ana River Basin 169
45 Cost of Colorado River aqueduct 170
46 Summary of costs of units for initial development 171
47 Capital and annual costs of immediate initial development and complete initial
development for the Great Central Valley project for various rates of interest
with 40-year and 50-year amortization periods Following page 174
48 Capital and annual costs of Santa Ana River Basin project 176
LIST OF PLATES
Plate Page
-I Geographical distribution of precipitation in California Following page 58
. II Forested areas and stream gaging stations in California Following page 62
- Ill Geographical distribution of water resources and agricultural lands in Cali-
fornia Following page 62
-IV Major units of State Plan for development of water resources of California
Following page 90
V Operation of underground reservoirs in the upper San Joaquin Valley under
plan of ultimate development south of San Joaquin River, 1889-1929 101
VI Kennett Reservoir 131
VII American River unit 133
-VIII Contra Costa County conduit Following page 146
"IX Ground water urrits and developed areas with deficient water supply in
upper San Joaquin Valley Following page 14T
'X Profile of San Joaquin conveyance system — Following page 1*2
XI Ground water conditions in absorptive areas in upper San Joaquin Valley,
with and without supplemental importation, under plan of immediate initial
development, 1921-1929 165
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
To the Members of the Legislature,
State of California,
Forty-ninth Session.
I have the honor to transmit herewith a report on the State Water
Plan, which has been prepared by the Division of Water Resources of
this Department as directed by Chapter 832, Statutes of 1929. This
report presents the results of a state-wide investigation covering a
period of sixteen months.
In transmitting this report I would be unappreciative indeed if I
did not bring to your attention and gratefully acknowledge the inval-
uable assistance rendered this investigation by the public at large.
Individuals, public and private agencies, federal and state depart-
ments and other organizations have contributed data and given freely
of their services.
Respectfully submitted.
Director of Public Works.
Siieramento, California,
January 1, 1931.
(8)
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The Water Resources Investigation, as reported in this bulletin, has
been assisted by so many individuals and public and private agencies
that it is impracticable to express but general acknowledgment and
appreciation.
Cooperating agencies of the United States have included the War
Department; Bureau of Reclamation, and Water Resources and Topo-
graphic branches of the Geological Survey, Department of Interior;
Division of Agricultural Engineering, National Forest Service and
Weather Bureau, Department of Agriculture; Coast and Geodetic
Survey, Department of Commerce ; and Federal Power Commission.
Cooperating agencies of the state have included the University of
California, State Highway Commission, Department of Natural
Resources, Department of Public Health, and State Railroad Com-
mission.
Stanford University, semiofficial committees, public utilities and a
large number of individuals have contributed materially to the investi-
gation. Special mention should be made of the engineers of California,
many of whom have served on advisory committees, giving the Depart-
ment the benefit of their wide experience and mature judgment.
The voluntary assistance of this wide group of agencies and individ-
uals has been invaluable, and has constituted public service of the
highest order.
(9)
ORGANIZATION
B. B. Meek Director of Public Works
Edward Hyatt State Engim < r
The investigation covered by this report was made under the general
direction of the State Engineer.
This bulletin was planned and prepared, and the investigation in
northern and central California was outlined and executed under the
immediate direction of
• A. 1). Edmonston
D< put u State Engim < r
Raymond Matthew
Harlow k Stafford
A. L. Trowbridge
T. B. Wadjxell
Principal Assistants
The investigation in southern California and central coast basins \v;is
under the immediate direction of
Harold Conkling
Dcpufji State Engineer
K. II. Jamison
W. P. BowB
Principal Assistants
Spencer Burroughs
At lorm ji
J. J. Haley, Jr.
Administrative Assistant
(10)
ENGINEERING ADVISORY COMMITTEES
The engineering investigation was outlined and report prepared with
the advice and in consultation with committees of consulting engineers.
The personnel of the committees for the various parts of the investi-
gation is
SACRAMENTO RIVER BASIN
B. A. Etcheverry
J. D. Galloway
F. C. Herrmann
W. L. Huber
J. B. Lippincott
F. H. TlBBETTS
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN
I. H. Althouse
W. H. Code
B. A. Etcheverry
F. C. Herrmann
H. L. Haeiil
R. V. Meikle
G. L. SWENDSEN
Paul Bailey
F. H. Fowler
L. C. Hill
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
G. S. Hinckley
C. T. Leeds
J. B. Lippincott
A. L. SONDEREGGER
H. A. Van Norman
SALT WATER BARRIER
G. A. Atherton
G. A. Elliott
B. A. Etcheverry
C. E. Grunsky
A. Kempkey
C. T. Leeds
C. D. Marx
T. H. Means
G. A. Atherton
SALINITY
H. L. Haeiil
T. H. Means
(11)
FEDERAL AGENCIES COOPERATING IN WATER RESOURCES
INVESTIGATION
WAR DEPARTMENT
Thomas M. Robins, Lieutenant Colonel, Corps of Engineers,
Division Engineer, South Pacific Division
Under the direction of Colonel Robins, the War Department has eon-
ducted an investigation as provided for by II. R. 308, 1927. This
investigation has paralleled the work of the State and has been syn-
chronized with it. Colonel Robins was a member of the California Joint
Federal-State Water Resources Commission and also has participated
in the deliberations of the state engineering advisory committers.
DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation
Elwood Mead, Commissioner
A cooperative investigation between the Bureau and the State, under
the direction of Dr. Mead, was initiated early in 1930. Dr. Mead was a
member of the California Joint Federal-State Water Resources Com-
mission.
Geological Survey, Water Resources Branch
H. D. McGlashan, District Engineer
During the investigation, many new stream gaging stations were
installed, and others were modernized. This work was executed under
the direction of Mr. McGlashan through cooperative agreement. Chemi-
cal analyses also were made by this branch of the United States Geological
Survey of the waters of many of the principal streams of the state.
Geological Survey, Topographic Branch
Thomas D. Gerdine,* Division Engineer
Through cooperative agreement, precise level lines in connection with
the investigation were run in the San Francisco Bay region under the
direction of Mr. Gerdine.
• Since deceased.
(12)
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Bureau of Public Roads, Division of Agricultural Engineering
W. W. McLaughlin, Associate Chief
Two cooperative reports were prepared by the Division, namely :
"Rainfall Penetration and Consumptive Use of Water in Santa Ana River
Valley and Coastal Plain"
by
H. F. Blaney, Irrigation Engineer, U. 8. Department of Agriculture
A. A. Young, Assistant Irrigation Engineer, U. S. Department of
Agriculture
C. A. Taylor, Assistant Irrigation Engineer, U. 8. Department of
Agriculture
and
"Cost of Irrigation Water in California"
by
H. F. Blaney, Irrigation Engineer, U. 8. Department of Agriculture
M. R. Huberty, Assistant Irrigation Engineer, Division of Irrigation
Investigations and Practice, University of California
Agricultural Experiment Station
In the latter report the College of Agriculture of the University of
California also cooperated. The first report is printed as Bulletin No.
33 and the second as Bulletin No. 36, Division of Water Resources.
Weather Bureau
E. H. Bowie, in charge of Western States
The Bureau has cooperated in furnishing unpublished precipitation
records that were invaluable in the investigation.
Bureau of Chemistry and Soils
M. H. Lapham, Inspector, District 5
The Bureau has furnished advance data on soils in certain areas.
(13)
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Coast and (icodetic Survey
Thus. J. Maiier, Inspector, San Francisco Field Station
The Survey loaned till*' gages Cor and otherwise assisted in obtaining
more complete tidal records in the San Francisco Bay region than
were heretofore available.
FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
F. E. Bonner, Executive Secretary
E. W. Kramer, Regional Engineer, National Forest Service,
representing the Commission in California
Mr. Bonner was a member of the California Joint Federal-State
Water Resources Commission, and was represented by Mr. Kramer at
its many meetings. Mr. Kramer has made a study and report on the
growth of consumption of electric energy in California and probable
value of hydroelectric energy that could be produced at several units
of the State Water Plan.
(14)
STATE AGENCIES COOPERATING IN WATER RESOURCES
INVESTIGATION
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE
C. B. Hutchison, Bean
Two cooperative reports were prepared by the College of Agriculture
on economic phases of the investigation, namely :
"Permissible Annual Charges for Irrigation Water in Upper San Joaquin
Valley"
by
Frank Adams, Professor of Irrigation Investigations and Practice
and
M. R. Huberty, Assistant Professor of Irrigation Investigations
and Practice
"Permissible Economic Rate of Irrigation Development in California"
by
David Weeks, Associate Professor of Agricultural Economics
These two reports were prepared with the advice and assistance
of the following committee appointed by the Dean of the College of
Agriculture :
Frank Adams, Chairman
Professor of Irrigation Investigations and Practice
H. E. Erdman
Professor of Agricultural Economics
R. L. Adams
Professor of Agricultural Economics
David Weeks
Associate Professor of Agricultural Economics
L. B. Smith
Assistant State Leader Agricultural Extension Service
L. W. Fluharty
Specialist in Agricultural Extension
The first report is printed as Bulletin No. 34 and the second as Bulle-
tin No. 35, Division of Water Resources. The College of Agriculture
also cooperated with the Division of Agricultural Engineering, United
States Department of Agriculture, in the preparation of Bulletin No.
36, "Cost of Irrigation Water in California."
(15)
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
C. II. Ptjbcell, State Highway Engineer
A report on ''Feasibility and Suitability of Combining a Highway
Crossing with a Salt Water Barrier Below Confluence of Sacramento
and San Joaquin Rivera," was prepared by the Division of Highways,
under the direction of F. J. Grumm, Engineer of Surveys and Plans.
This report is printed as Appendix 1> of Bulletin No. 28, Division of
Water Resources.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
\Y. M. Dickie, Director
A report on "Sewage and Industrial Waste Disposal and Water
Redemption with Special Reference to a Salt Water Barrier Below
Confluence of Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers," was prepared by
the Bureau of Sanitary Engineering, under the direction of C. G.
Gillespie, Chief. This report is printed as Appendix E of Bulletin
Xo. 28, Division of Water Resources.
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
F. G. Stevenot, Director
A report on "The Fishing Industry with Special Reference to a Salt
Water Barrier Below Confluence of Sacramento and San Joaquin
Rivers," was prepared by the Division of Fish and Game, under the
direction of N. B. Scofield, in charge of the Bureau of Commercial
Fisheries. This report is printed as Appendix F of Bulletin Xo. 28,
Division of Water Resources.
STATE RAILROAD COMMISSION
Under the direction of A. (!. Mott, Chief Engineer, the Commission
has made studies on the economics of railroad relocations for certain
reservoir sites included in the State Water Plan.
1
(1C)
INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS COMMITTEE
A special report entitled "Industrial Survey of Upper San
Francisco Bay Area with Special Reference to a Salt Water Barrier
Below Confluence of Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers," printed as
Appendix A to Bulletin No. 28, was prepared by George W. Dowrie,
Professor of Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, assisted
by Oscar A. Anderson, Graduate Fellow, Stanford University, under the
supervision and direction of the following committee :
Willard E. Hotchkiss, Chairman
Dean of Graduate School of Business, Stanford University
Henry F. Grady
Dean of College of Commerce, University of California
A. D. Schindler
Consulting Engineer, San Francisco
SPECIAL CONSULTANTS
The following engineers and geologists rendered reports on special
features of the investigation :
Paul Bailey, Consulting Engineer.
Harry Barnes, Consulting Engineer,
Hyde Forbes, Consulting Engineer-Geologist.
S. T. Harding, Consulting Engineer.
C. H. Holley, Consulting Engineer.
C. H. Lee, Consulting Engineer.
G. D. Louderback, Consulting Geologist.
F. L. Ransome, Consulting Geologist.
L. S. Ready, Consulting Engineer.
C. F. Tolman, Consulting Geologist.
2—80993
(17)
CHAPTER 832, STATUTES OF 1929
An act making an appropriation for work of exploration, investigation
and preliminary plans in furtln ranee of a coordinated plan for the
conservation, development, and utilization of the water resources of
California including the Santa Ana river, Mojave river, and at!
ivater resources of southern California.
[I object to the item of $450,000.00 in section 1 and reduce the amount to $390,-
000.00. With this reduction I approve the bill. Dated June 17, 1929. C. C. Young,
Governor.]
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Section 1. Out of any money in the state treasury not otherwise
appropriated, the sura of four hundred fifty thousand dollars, or so
ranch thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated to be
expended by the state department of public works in accordance with
law in conducting work of exploration, investigation and preliminary
plans in furtherance of a coordinated plan for the conservation, develop-
ment and utilization of the water resources of California including the
Santa Ana river and its tributaries, the Mojave river and its tributa-
ries, and all other water resources of southern California.
Sec. 2. The department of public works, subject to the other pro-
visions of this act, is empowered to expend any portion of the appro-
priation herein provided for the purposes of this act, in cooperation
with the government of the United States of America or in cooperation
with political subdivisions of the State of California ; and for the pur-
pose of such cooperation is hereby authorized to draw its claim upon
said appropriation in favor of the United States of America, or the
appropriate agency thereof for the payment of the cost of such portion
of said cooperative work as may be determined by the department of
public works.
Sec. 3. Upon the sale of any bonds of this state hereafter author-
ized to be issued to be expended for any one or more of the purposes for
which any part of the appropriation herein provided may have been
expended, the amount so expended from the appropriation herein pro-
vided shall be returned into the general fund of the state treasury out
of the proceeds first derived from the sale of said bonds.
(18)
FOREWORD
This report is one of a series of bulletins on the State Water Plan
issued by the Division of Water Resources pursuant to Chapter 832,
Statutes of 1929, directing further investigations of the water resources
of California.
Prior to the studies carried out under this act, the water resources
investigation had been in progress more or less continuously since 1921
under several statutory enactments. The results of the earlier work
have been published as Bulletin Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 19 and
20 of the former Division of Engineering and Irrigation, Nos. 5, 6 and 7
of the former Division of Water Rights, and Nos. 22 and 24 of the
Division of Water Resources.
The full
832, twelve
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
series of water resources reports prepared under Chapter
in number, are :
No. 25— "Report to Legislature of 1931 on State Water
Plan."
No. 26 — "Sacramento River Basin."
No. 27 — ' ' Variation and Control of Salinity in Sacramento-
San Joaquin Delta and Upper San Francisco
Bay."
No. 28 — "Economic Aspects of a Salt Water Barrier Below
Confluence of Sacramento and San Joaquin
Rivers. ' '
No. 29 — "San Joaquin River Basin."
No. 30— "Pacific Slope of Southern California."
No. 31 — "Santa Ana River Basin."
No. 32— "South Coastal Basin."
No. 33 — "Rainfall Penetration and Consumptive Use of
Water in Santa Ana River Valley and Coastal
Plain."
No. 34 — ' ' Permissible Annual Charges for Irrigation Water
in Upper San Joaquin Valley."
No. 35 — "Permissible Economic Rate of Irrigation Develop-
ment in California. ' '
No. 36 — "Cost of Irrigation Water in California."
Each bulletin is printed under the caption "Reports on State Water
Plan prepared pursuant to Chapter 832, Statutes of 1929." Bulletin
No. 25 is the report to the Legislature presenting the accomplishments
under the foregoing act. It summarizes the contents of other bulletins
of the series, sets forth the progress of investigations not reported
therein and covers legal, economic and other phases of certain features
of the State Water Plan.
(19)
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
California, embracing an area of one hundred million acres, has
within its borders many million acres of agricultural lands under
intensive cultivation and also extensive commercial and industrial activi-
ties contributing to the prosperity of its inhabitants, its political subdi-
visions, and of the United States as a whole.
During the past decade, California has increased in population at a
rate greater than any other state in the Union. It now has more than
5,600,000 people living within its borders, about one-third of whom
have come here from other states and foreign countries during the past
ten years. With this great influx of population, the taxable wealth of
the state has grown to more than ten billion dollars in 1930, 107 per
cent larger than in 1920.
In order that California may be prepared to meet the continuance
of this remarkable growth, it should look forward and plan for the
conservation and orderly development, for all beneficial uses, of that
most essential natural resource — water.
Authority for Investigation.
This investigation was authorized by Chapter 832, Statutes of 1929,
appropriating $390,000 to be expended by the Department of Public
Works, "in conducting work of exploration, investigation and prelimi-
nary plans in furtherance of a coordinated plan for the conservation,
development and utilization of the water resources of California includ-
ing the Santa Ana river and its tributaries, the Mojave river and its
tributaries, and all other water resources of southern California."
The investigation was assigned to the Division of Water Resources
of the Department of Public Works and was commenced on August 14,
1929, when the funds became available.
History of Water Development in California.
The first water development of record in California goes back to the
early Spanish missionaries who practiced irrigation to a small extent in
the valleys of southern California in the latter part of the eighteenth
century. Following the gold rush in 1849, ditches were constructed in
the Sierra Nevada for placer, quartz and hydraulic mining. Some of
these ditches later were utilized for irrigation and power. Dry farming
was practiced, with irrigation on limited areas, until 1885 when dry
farming reached its peak. Since then there has been a marked trend
toward irrigation, resulting in greater production and profits.
Irrigation ditches were constructed in the valleys as early as the
fifties. At first, irrigation developed gradually under private initiative
and financing, using the natural stream flow on local areas. This was
followed by community enterprises, irrigation districts, public utilities
and municipal projects. Large modern storage and distribution works
have been constructed by many of the irrigation projects so that the
farmer may have an adequate and dependable water supply. Nearly
three million acres are in organized irrigation districts at present, with
outstanding bonds totaling $96,000,000.
(21)
22 DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES
Paralleling the irrigation activities has been the development of the
water resources of the state for power and municipal purposes. Since
the completion in 1803 of the first polyphase hydroelectric plant in the
Btate, there have been added 1,700,000 kilovolt amperes of installed
capacity, producing in 1929, 6,400,000,000 kilowatt hours, or 18 per
cent of the total hydroelectric energy produced in the United States,
The great metropolitan centers have expended large sums for works
of great magnitude to bring water into their areas. The cities of Los
Angeles and San Francisco, and the East Bay Municipal Utility Dis-
trict have gone to the Sierra Nevada for a water supply. The Metro-
politan Water District of Southern California, comprising eleven cities*
in southern California, now is preparing plans to import a supply from
the Colorado River.
In addition to developments for water supply, extensive works have
been constructed for the reclamation of swamp and overflow land and
control of floods. The greater part of this has occurred in the Sacra-
mento and San Joaquin valleys, where an area of more than 1,000,000
acres has been reclaimed with an expenditure of over $100,000,000.
The earliest works of reclamation were started in the fifties and, as in
the case of the early irrigation developments, were largely the result of
individual effort on a small scale. However, the magnitude of the
works required for reclamation and flood control soon became so great
that it became necessary to form cooperative organizations to finance
and carry out construction work. These organizations took the form
of swamp land and reclamation districts organized under various laws
passed by the State Legislature. This method of development sufficed
for the reclamation of individual tracts of land. However, the more
difficult and expensive works necessary for flood control have required
combined agencies of the federal and state governments and interested
landowners.
The plans for and construction of flood control works in the Sacra-
mento and San Joaquin valleys have been carried out largely by private
agencies and reclamation and levee districts with supervision and finan-
cial aid in recent years by the federal and state governments acting
through their respective agencies, the California Debris Commission,
and the Reclamation Board, the latter acting as trustee for the inter-
ested landowners organized under the Sacramento-San Joaquin Drain-
age District. The total estimated cost of flood control works, to be
divided equally among the federal and state governments and the
landowners, will amount to about $50,000,000. In other portions of the
state extensive works for the control of floods have been constructed,
notably in Los Angeles, Riverside and Imperial counties.
The first California Legislature in 1850 adopted the "Common Law
of England" as the rule of decisions in the courts of the state, which
adoption has been held by the courts to include the doctrine of
riparian rights. This doctrine eventually came into conflict with the
theory of appropriation originated by the gold miners, who "located"
water for use in their mining operations in the same manner in which
they acquired the mining claims. The controversy between these two
opposing types of water rights has been long and bitter and is still
extant. It adds to the uncertainty and cost of any water development
* On September 1. 1930.
STATE WATER PLAN 23
in the state and is a serious obstacle in the way of a major State Plan
of development.
In 1887, the Legislature passed the Wright Irrigation District Act, a
model for all subsequent irrigation district legislation in this and other
states of the arid west. After many revisions, it was definitely desig-
nated by the Legislature in 1917 as the ' ' California Irrigation District
Act." Ninety-four irrigation districts organized under this act are
now in operation.
In 1914, the State Water Commission, later incorporated into the
State Department of Public Works, was created to administer water
rights, to clarify the complex water-right situation and to safeguard
the state's limited water supply as far as possible. It has functioned
successfully although handicapped by constitutional and judicial limi-
tations.
California's Water Problem.
California's water problem is two-fold, involving first the conserva-
tion and utilization of its water resources, and second, the control of
floods. There are large inequalities in both the geographic and
seasonal distribution of the state's water resources, as related to the
demands for various purposes. The most complete conservation and
utilization of the water resources, therefore, involves construction of
storage reservoirs and utilization of underground basins for full devel-
opment of water supplies, and also conveyance conduits to carry the
supplies from areas of surplus waters to areas with insufficient local
water supplies to meet their demands.
The problem of flood control is important in all portions of the state.
It involves construction of various combinations of flood control works,
such as detention reservoirs, levees, revetments and by-pass flood chan-
nels. Conservation and flood control works can be combined in many-
instances. Separate and distinct works are usually required in addi-
tion for complete solution of each phase of the problem.
The works required for solution of the state's water problem are of
such great magnitude and of such far reaching scope that proper solu-
tion calls for a coordination and unification of the interests of not only
the entire state, but the federal government as well, in the planning and
execution of a complete program of development.
Many obstacles — financial, legal and political — lie in the path of a
program of complete relief and development. Although the past
development of the state's water resources for irrigation, municipal,
hydroelectric power and other uses has been successfully carried out
by private and public agencies under existing laws, the greater magni-
tude of the problems arising in the planning and execution of works for
complete coordination and utilization of the state's water resources
calls for an entity of wider scope and greater powers than has hereto-
fore been necessary. The magnitude and cost of the works involved are
so great that it is questionable whether local interests would have the
financial capacity to carry out the development required.
Previous Investigations.
Investigation of California's water resources with the view of formu-
lating a plan for their comprehensive development is by no means new.
As early as 1873, an investigation and report, under the direction of
24 DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES
the War Department, Avere made on the water resources of the Great
Central Valley. The report* outlined a plan for utilizing the water
supply of the Sierra Nevada streams to greatest advantage for irriga-
tion purposes and directed attention to the duty of government, both
state and national, to lay out a "comprehensive system of irrigation"
and enforce laws for proper development of the two u r reat interior
valleys.
The first effort of the state to Launch a comprehensive investigation
of its water resources and offer a solution of the problem concerning
water utilization, was made in 1878 and resulted in "an act to provide
8 system of irrigation, promote rapid drainage and improve navigation
on the Sacramento and San Joaquin River." Under this act, investi-
gations were carried out by the State Engineer, William Ham. Hall.
He, like the Army engineers in 1873, suggested that the water of the
Great Central Valley be developed in a systematic manner. Several
reports t and maps were published by the State Engineer l>«-tween 1880
and 1888.
A federal investigation was made in 1900 under the auspices of the
United States Department of Agriculture, Experiment Station Office.
In its report ± there was a recommendation that the laws of the state
pertaining to the appropriation and use of water be revised and that
the state itself exercise full control over all streams so that irrigation
development could proceed unhampered and water supplies be con-
served. This was the forerunner of the movement to establish a state
office for administering water rights.
In 1911 the state sponsored an investigation through a special board
known as the "Conservation Commission." This commission§ found
that the waters of the state were the only natural resources left to the
public for development, and criticized the practice then prevalent of
failing to prosecute work after posting notice of appropriation.
This report was followed in 1912 by another federal investigation*
by the United States Department of Agriculture and a bulletin dealing
with the irrigation resources of the state and their utilization** was
issued.
\n 1921, the studies known as "The California Water Resources
Investigations" were initiated under legislative authority in Chapter
889, Statutes of 1921. Further investigations were authorized in 1925
by legislative enactment. These investigations were carried out under
the direction of the State Engineer. A reporttt containing a complete
inventory of all water within the state's boundaries, an estimate of
the gross agricultural area, and of the average amount of water that
should be applied for irrigation, and a general preliminary compre-
hensive plan for "converting the waters of California to their greatest
service in this generation and for all posterity," was filed with the
* House Executive Document, No. 290, Forty-third Congress, First Session, "Irri-
gation of the San Joaquin, Tulare and Sacramento Valleys, California," by B. S.
Alexander, C. H. Mendell and George Davidson.
t Reports of William Ham. Hall. State Kngineer. 1878-1888.
t Bulletin No. 100, U. S. Department of Agriculture, "Report of Irrigation Investi-
gations In California," 1901.
f Report of Conservation Commission of California, 1912.
•• Bulletin No. 254, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Office of Experiment Station,
"Irrigation Resources <>f California and Their Utilisation."
tt Bulletin No. 4, "Water Resources of Calif orina," a report to the Legislature of
r.tL'3, also the following appendices: Bulletin No. 5. "Flow In Caifornia Streams,"
and Bulletin No. 6. "Irrigation Requirements of California Lands," Division of
Engineering and Irrigation, State Department of Public Works, 1923.
STATE WATER PLAN 25
1923 Legislature. It was found in this investigation that the principal
constructive features of a plan for obtaining maximum use of the
state's water must revolve about its distribution for the greatly pre-
ponderant use in agriculture.
In the report * to the Legislature of 1927, a plan was advanced 'for
importation of water to the upper San Joaquin Valley from the Sacra-
mento River Basin to supplement the deficient water supplies in the
upper San Joaquin area. Cost estimates of the major physical units
were incorporated. No definite plan was included in that report for
obtaining a complete supplemental supply for southern California.
However, the Colorado River was suggested as a possible source as it is
stated in the report,
"Although it is not apparent from what source the required large volume of
new water can be obtained for the full development of the Pacific slope (south-
ern Calijomia) , nevertheless, present attention should be directed towards secur-
ing those new supplies that are available on the Colorado River and elsewhere
and in coordinating their use to obtain the greatest benefit from their limited
amounts."
This report, due to the lack of sufficient funds, was incomplete in
certain particulars, and covered only engineering phases. The final
recommendation of the report is,
"In view of the intricate nature of these problems and their momentous bear-
ing upon the future of California, the Division and its advisors earnestly recom-
mend that a committee representative of all those concerned in the development
of the water resources of California, including national and state offices, be
appointed solely for the purpose of determining first, the practicability of carry-
ing out this plan, and second, if found to be practicable, to recommend a method
of procedure."
Interest of State in Its Water Problem.
That the state is vitally concerned in the economic, systematic and
equitable solution of its water problem, is evidenced by the past legis-
lative enactments appropriating funds for flood protection and investi-
gational work ; by the recognition of the importance of the problem by
the large commercial interests of Los Angeles and San Francisco in
advancing $94,125 in 1924 for the study of a particular area in distress
in the upper San Joaquin Valley; by the appointment of committees
from the 1927 and 1929 Legislatures to study the water problem of the
state and report to the Legislature ; by legislative authorization of a
commission appointed by the Governor in 1929 to confer and cooperate
with a federal commission and a Joint Legislative Water Committee ;
by formation of county committees whose function has been to assist in
the solution of the problem; and by the appointment of special com-
mittees of chambers of commerce and of other organizations of the
larger cities.
The state has cooperated with the federal government and the bene-
fited landowners on the Sacramento Flood Control Project, by pledging
itself to participate in the ultimate financing of the project to the
extent of approximately $17,000,000. Appropriations are being made
by each Legislature to carry on the state's share of this work. In
Los Angeles County it has participated financially to the extent of
$3,000,000 in the flood control work now under construction.
* Bulletin No. 12, "Summary Report on the Water Resources of California and a
Coordinated Plan for their Development," Division of Engineering and Irrigation, 1927.
26 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
The Legislature also has been liberal in making appropriations for
investigational work on water resources. The following appropriations
have been made since 1921 :
Chapter 889. Statutes of 1921 J200.000
Chapter 180, Statutes <>r L926 B4.126
Chapter 47i;, Statutes of 1925 25,000
Chapter 477. Statutes of 1925 150.000
Chapter 79, Statutes of 1927 15,000
Chapter 809, Statutes <>f l!i27 40,000
Chapter 78, Statutes of 19U9 10,000
Chapter 561, Statutes of 1929 25,000
Chapter 656, Statutes <>f 1929 15,000
Chapter 832, Statutes of 1929 390,000
$964,125
Three legislative committees have been appointed by the State Legis-
lature to investigate and study California's water problem. The first
committee appointed by the Legislature of 1927, while in session pur-
suant to Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 16, consisted of eight
members, four from the Senate and four from the Assembly. It was
directed, "to make a further study of the records of the State Engineer,
pertaining to the subject of this resolution and to report its findings
and submit its recommendations to this Legislature at the forty-seventh
session thereof not later than the first week in March, 1927." This
committee had available for its consideration and deliberations, the
following federal and state reports pertaining to the water problem:
House Executive Document No. 290, Forty-third Congress, First Session, "Irri-
gation of the San Joaquin, Tulare and Sacramento Valleys."
Reports of William Ham. Hall, State Engineer, 1878-1888.
Bulletin No. 100, "Report of Irrigation Investigations in California," U. S.
Department of Agriculture, Office of Experiment Station, 19 01.
Report of Conservation Commission of California, 1912.
Bulletin No. 254, "Irrigation Resources of California and Their Utilization,"
U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1912.
Report, State Water Problems Conference, 1916.
Bulletin No. 3, "Water Resources of Tulare County and Their Utilization,"
Division of Engineering and Irrigation, 1922.
Bulletin No. 4, "Water Resources of California," Division of Engineering and
Irrigation, 1923.
Bulletin No. 5, "Flow in California Streams," Division of Engineering and Irri-
gation, 1923.
Bulletin No. 6, "Irrigation Requirements of California Lands," Division of Engi-
neering and Irrigation, 1923.
Bulletin No. 9, "Supplemental Report on Water Resources of California," Divi-
sion of Engineering and Irrigation, 1925.
Bulletin No. 11, "Ground Water Resources of Southern San Joaquin Valley,"
Divisions of Engineering and Irrigation and of Water Rights,
1927.
Bulletin No. 12, "Summary Report on the Water Resources of California ami a
Coordinated Plan for their Development," Division of Engiii'
Ing and Irrigation, 1927.
Bulletin No. 5. "San Gabriel Investigation," 1923-1926, Division of Water
Rights.
The committee reported back to the Second Session of the 1927 Legis-
lature. The conclusions of its report were that it would take months
of intensive study and public hearings before the committee would feel
justified in making any recommendation upon which the Legislature
could act as to the practicability of the plan contained in Bulletin No.
12, that the plan should be executed in progressive steps in harmony
with existing and future local projects and that adequate legislative
machinery should be provided for the execution and operation of the
plan.
STATE WATER PLAN 27
The committee quoted and endorsed the following recommendations
from the State Engineer 's report : *
"So extensive is the area, so many and varied are the interests, and so great
are the expenditures involved in this plan that the usual method of procedure
is impracticable. The economic, financial, legal and political problems relating
to its execution are so complex and far reaching that they should be the subject
of careful deliberation. The broad values and public advantages of the plan
should be weighed with the costs and difficulties. Methods of execution, of
operation and of financing should be considered along with the extent to which
costs should be distributed."
The general conclusion of the committee was —
"that this is a matter in which, urgent as some of the needs are, the only safe
policy is to make haste slowly. Any policy or plan precipitated without the
most painstaking consideration is sure to result in disaster."
It recommended —
"That a legislative committee of four members of the Assembly and four
members of the Senate be appointed as a permanent committee during the next
two years, to continue this intensive study, to confer with the proper federal
authorities, and to hold hearings of all those concerned in the development or
use of the water resources of the State, with the view to making a final report
to the forty-eighth session of the Legislature."
Following out the recommendation of the legislative committee,
another committee, composed of four members each from the Senate
and Assembly, was appointed to make a further investigation of the
entire matter and report back to the forty-eighth session of the Legis-
lature in 1929. The personnel of this committee was:
Senate Members
Ralph E. Swing, Vice Chairman, San Bernardino
Edwin A. Mueller, El Cajon
H. C. Nelson, Eureka
Will R. Sharkey, Martinez
Assembly Members
B. S. Crittenden, Chairman, Tracy
E. G. Adams, Secretary, Livingston
Van Bernard, Butte City
F. W. Mixter, Exeter
This committee, under the leadership of B. S. Crittenden, pursued
the subject vigorously from July, 1927, to December, 1928. More than
twenty public hearings were held in all parts of the state.
Additional reports on specific features were furnished the committee
for its consideration. A legal advisory board of nine eminent attorneys,
particularly well versed in water law, prepared an excellent report.
The Industrial Water Users Association of Contra Costa County sub-
mitted a report in connection with a salt water barrier below the con-
fluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers. The State Engineer
had prepared a special report of financing by electric power revenue
which might be anticipated in connection with the Kennett reservoir
on the Sacramento River. The committee presented a preliminary
report to the 1929 Legislature in January of that year, and a final
report in the following April. The reports dealt with the subject in a
* Bulletin No. 12, "Summary Report on the Water Resources of California and a
Coordinated Plan for their Development," Division of Engineering and Irrigation,
28 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
comprehensive manner and while the conclusions are too extensive to
reprint in this volume, the final report recommended submission to the
electorate of a bond issue to construct units of the plan totaling
$109,000,000.
In addition to the legislative committee's report, the Legislature of
1929 had available for consideration the following additional reports
prepared by the Division of Engineering and Irrigation and Division
of Water Rights :
Reports of Division of Engineering and Irrigation :
Bulletin No. 13, "The Development of the Upper Sacramento River," contain-
ing cooperative report on Iron Canyon Project by U. S. Bureau
of Reclamation, 1928.
Bulletin No. 14, "The Control of Floods by Reservoirs," 1928.
Bulletin No. 19, "Santa Ana Investigation, Flood Control and Conservation,"
1928.
Bulletin No. 20, "Kennett Reservoir Development, an Analysis of Methods and
Extent of Financing by Elecric Power Revenue," 1929.
Bulletin No. 22, "Report on Salt Water Harrier Below Confluence of Sacra-
mento and San Joaquin Rivers," 1929.
Reports of the Division of Water Rights :
Bulletin No. 6, "San Gabriel Investigation," 1926-1928.
Bulletin No. 7, "San Gabriel Investigation — Analysis and Conclusions," 1929.
After receipt by the Legislature of the report of the Joint Legisla-
tive Committee, two constitutional amendments were introduced, one
providing for construction of units of the plan totaling $109,000,000,
amended to $124,000,000, and the other construction of units totaling
$30,000,000. Both measures, after lengthy discussion and consideration,
failed of adoption by the Legislature. It was apparent that it would
be inadvisable to enter upon such a large program without complete
data on all phases of the subject — engineering, economic, financial and
legal. Three laws were enacted by that Legislature, providing for fur-
ther studies and a report to the forty-ninth session. The first provided
for a continuation of the studies by a legislative committee, the second
for appointment of a commission by the Governor to cooperate and
confer with a similar commission to be appointed by the President of
the United States and to cooperate and confer with the Joint Legisla-
tive Committee, and the third for a further appropriation to the Depart-
ment of Public Works. These acts were signed by the Governor and
became effective August 14, 1929.
The following members of the Legislature were appointed to serve
on the Joint Legislative Committee, with one exception the same as
for the 1927 committee :
Senate Members
Ralph E. Swing, Vice Chairman, San Bernardino
Edwin A. Mueller, El Cajon
H. C. Nelson, Eureka
Will R. Sharkey, Martinez
Assembly Members
B. S. Crittenden, Chairman, Tracy
Van Bernard, Butte City
Robert P. Easley, Antioch
F. W. Mixter, Exeter
STATE WATER PLAN 29
This committee was directed by the Legislature to make an investi-
gation of the water problem of the state (a) including the desirability
for, and location of, a salt water barrier at or near Carquinez Strait;
(b) the water problem of those counties not included in the Big Basin
(Great Central Valley of California) ; and (c) to recommend to the
Legislature at the forty-ninth session a state-wide policy for the conser-
vation and use of the waters of the state.
The precedent for the state 's participation in a program for the com-
plete development and utilization of its water resources has already
been established by its active participation with the federal govern-
ment and other agencies in planning and financing certain works for
the control of floods. The complete development and utilization of the
state's water resources involve not only flood control, but also storage
and distribution of available supplies for agricultural, municipal, hydro-
electric, industrial, navigation and other uses. The extension of the
scope of participation and activities of the state to include both phases
of the state's water problem appears to be a logical step from the
precedent established in dealing with a part of the problem.
Interest of Federal Government in California's Water Problem.
The interest of the federal government in California 's water problem
is evidenced by its past and present activities in studying several
phases thereof. Investigations, as heretofore stated, began as early as
1873, followed by other investigations in 1900 and 1912. Further
investigations now are in progress by the War Department, the Depart-
ments of the Interior and Agriculture, and by the Federal Power Com-
mission. The study being made by the Department of the Interior,
through the Bureau of Reclamation, is in cooperation with the state.
The federal government also has participated in the solution of the
flood problems. In the Sacramento Flood Control Project it has pledged
itself to contribute up to a maximum of $17,600,000. It has financed
the Boulder Canyon Project in the amount of $165,000,000. Upon
completion, this latter project will solve the flood control problem of
Imperial Valley and also make available a water supply for the irriga-
tion of additional lands in the area tributary to the Colorado River and
for importation to southern California for domestic purposes. In addi-
tion to these activities the federal government has been making contri-
butions toward the collection of stream flow data on California streams
since 1895.
The precedent established by the above described activities and par-
ticipation of the federal government in the state's water problem,
together with established policies relating to navigation, flood control
and reclamation, would appear to offer a logical basis for extension of
federal participation in construction of works required for conserva-
tion and utilization of the state's water resources.
Joint Interest of Federal and State Governments.
The combined interest of federal and state governments in the water
problem of California is manifested by creation in 1929 of the Federal-
State Water Resources Commission to investigate and report on the
problem. Under authority of Chapter 561, Statutes of 1929, the Gov-
ernor appointed a commission of seven members which conferred with
30 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
one composed of three members appointed by the President. The
membership of the commission was:
United Slates Members
Ehvood Mead, Commissioner, U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Depart-
ment of the Interior
Thomas M. Robins, Lieutenant Colonel, Corps of Engineers, U. S.
Army
Prank E. Bonner, Executive Secretary, Federal Power Commission.
California Members
George C. Pardee, Chairman, Oakland.
William Durbrow, Grass Valley.
B. A. Etcheverry, Berkeley.
Alfred Harrell, Bakersfield.
W. B. Mathews, Los Angeles.
Warren Olney, Jr., San Francisco.
Frank E. Weymouth, Los Angeles.
The following sat with the commission as representatives of the state
in their official capacities:
B. B. Meek, Director of Public Works.
W. J. Carr, member of the State Railroad Commission.
Matt I. Sullivan sat with the commission, at its request, in the later
meetings as the representative of Governor-elect Rolph.
Edward Hyatt, State Engineer, acted as secretary of the commission.
The first meeting of the commission was held on January 13, 1930.
In all, sixteen meetings were held. Most of these meetings were joint
sessions with the Legislative Water Committee, five of which were
devoted to public hearings. A report was rendered to the President
of the United States and to the Governor of California on December
27, 1930.
Urgency of Solution of California's Water Problem.
While many sections of the state have water problems, there are
three large and important areas where the problem of water shortage
has become acute and requires immediate action for its solution. These
are upper San Francisco Bay, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and
Sacramento Valley; upper San Joaquin Valley;* and Pacific slope of
southern California.
In the delta of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers and upper
San Francisco Bay area, the water supplies of agriculture and industry
are menaced by the invasion of saline water. This salinity condition
has become aggravated during the last few years of subnormal run-off.
In the delta is an area of more than 400,000 acres of the richest agri-
( ultural lands in the state, of which about 350,000 acres are now under
cultivation. The taxable wealth of this area is approximately
$'45,000,000 and the value of its agricultural products in 1929 was about
$30,000,000. The industries located along the shores of Suisun Bay
♦That portion of the San Joaquin Valley extending southerly from Chowchilla
River.
STATE WATER PLAN 31
are an important part of the industrial structure in California. The
capital investment of these industries is approximately $43,000,000,
their taxable wealth approximately $15,000,000, their annual payrolls
approximately $13,000,000, and the annual value of their products
approximately $112,000,000. Accompanying this situation in the delta
and upper San Francisco Bay area there have been irrigation and
navigation problems in the Sacramento River above the delta. Con-
tinued irrigation diversions, particularly in the summer months in
years of subnormal run-off, have reduced the stream flow of the river
to the extent that navigation has been greatly impaired. This condi-
tion has resulted in warnings being sent out by the federal government
to irrigators to curtail their diversions and during several of the sub-
normal run-off years, such as 1920 and 1924, the lands served from the
Sacramento River have been furnished with a deficient irrigation
supply. Pumping costs in supplying these lands also were increased
during these years due to the lower water levels in the stream. All
of the foregoing problems resulting from deficient stream flow are
closely interrelated and remedial measures for their solution are urgent.
In the upper San Joaquin Valley, due to an overdraft on its mean
annual water supply, a gross area of some 400,000 acres of developed
land is in need of a supplemental supply. The average annual value
of its agricultural products is over $30,000,000. If retrogression is
allowed to proceed on these farmed lands its effect will be felt in the
urban areas in the immediate vicinity and also to some extent in the
large metropolitan areas — Los Angeles and San Francisco.
In the Santa Ana River Basin of southern California, 60 per cent of
the land under irrigation is overdrawing its available local water
supply. While salvage of present local wastes will take care of a part
of this overdraft, there is urgent need for an imported supply to care
for the remainder and for increasing development. In some other parts
of the South Coastal Basin, there also is an overdraft on local water
supplies. The city of Los Angeles has voted a bond issue to bring in
an additional supply from Mono Basin and the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California, consisting of eleven cities,* including
Los Angeles, is taking steps to bring in water from the Colorado River.
In San Diego County the city of San Diego likewise is planning to bring
a supply from the Colorado River. The water problem in all of these
areas is acute and immediate consideration must be given to its early
solution.
Scope of Report.
This report sets forth for the main hydrographic divisions of the state,
the available water supply, the water requirements for all purposes,
the major units of an engineering plan for the ultimate development of
the water resources in the principal areas of the state, the units of the
plan which should be built first to relieve stress in the highly-developed
areas deficient in local supplies, investigations in progress in minor
but important areas, legal problems that confront the execution of the
State Plan together with suggestions for remedial measures, and
economic and financial aspects of initial units of the plan that
♦On September 1, 1930.
:iL>
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
would aid in the solution of California's water problem. These sub-
jects are rammarized in Chapter II of this report and are dealt with
in greater detail in succeeding chapters.
There have been certain limitations in evolving a plan for the entire
state. Funds and time have given opportunity for presenting only the
major units of a plan for the principal hydrographic divisions. Other
minor units not presented are important and necessary and ultimately
will have to be built to give complete service. There are other impor-
tant areas for which studies are now in progress.
In this report, the engineering, economic and legal aspects of the plan
are discussed. Conclusions are reached as to the engineering feasibility
of certain units and the extent to which revenues from the sale of water
and power could carry the costs, but no evaluation is made of benefits
which would accrue to certain interests indirectly and which would play
an important part in determining the economic soundness of any project.
Conclusions are given as to the units which should be constructed first to
afford relief to the regions of water shortage, but no recommendations
are made relative to methods of financing.
Basic Principles of a State Water Plan.
In the formulation of the engineering plan, as set forth in this report,
the following economic principles are recognized as fundamental :
1. It should be formulated with a long time viewpoint.
2. It should be a progressive development with the various units con-
structed only as necessity demands.
3. It should be in consonance with present rights and interests as far
as practicable so as to result in the least possible interference with
existing agencies and their operations.
4. The water requirements of all interests must be given consideration.
5. Accruing benefits must far outweigh the damages which might
result from the execution of the plan.
6. The fullest practicable utilization of both local and imported
waters should be made, particularly in areas of deficient water
supply.
7. The initial units constructed for the rehabilitation of agriculture
should now be extended only to developed areas of deficient local
water supply.
8. Units of initial development should be so planned that they can
be enlarged and extended at the minimum expense to allow for
expansion as economics dictate and that they are in accord with an
ultimate plan of development.
9. The plan should be so formulated and carried out that the greatest
benefit will be obtained at the least cost.
STATE WATER PLAN
33
CHAPTER II
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The investigation of the water resources of the state in evolving
the State Water Plan has required many detailed studies, a full under-
standing of which makes necessary, even in this summary report, a
presentation of considerable length and detail. The purpose of this
chapter is to present, in a concise form, the results and conclusions of
the investigation and primary features of the plan. These, together
with the bases of the studies, are set forth in more detail in the suc-
ceeding chapters.
Water Resources.
The water supply of the state, by basins, is set forth in the following
tabulation. These figures do not include contributions to the surface
run-off and ground water replenishment from rainfall on valley floors.
In some localities this may constitute a considerable portion of the avail-
able water supply. Because of the lack of definite information on this
subject, the supply from this source has not been included in the
following estimates, which contain only the run-off from the mountain
and foothill areas:
Water Supply
Area of
drainage
basin in
square miles
Seasonal run-off in acre-feet
(Season, October 1 to September 30)
Basin 1
Mean for
40-year period
1889-1929
Mean for
20-vear period
1909-1929
Mean for
10-year period
1919-1929
Mean for
5-year period
1924-1929
North Pacific Coast ..
16,543
21,369
18,178
2,219
9,488
6,079
8,876
28,797,000
24,801,000
11,980,000
824,000
2,248,000
1,114,000
3,624,000
23,659,000
20,593,000
10,160,000
634,000
1,927,000
1,146,000
2,956,000
21,906,000
17,920,000
8,547,000
526,000
1,228,000
894,000
2,463,000
25,034,000
Sacramento River
19 027 000
San Joaquin River
San Francisco Bay.
8,137,000
600 000
Central Pacific Coast . ._ ._
l,166,OC0
South Pacific Coast. .
709,000
Great Basin
2,395,000
Total
82,752
71,388,000
61,075,000
53,484,000
57,068,000
1 See Plate III, following page 62, for location of basins.
The run-off from the North Pacific Coast and Central Pacific Coast
basins is largely physically unavailable for use in the state as a whole
and a portion of the run-off from the Great Basin now is used outside
of the state.
In addition to the run-off from streams within the state, water will
be available for southern California from the Colorado River in accord-
ance with the terms of the Boulder Canyon Project Act, passed by
Congress on_December 21, 1928, and later approved by the President.
Water Requirements.
The water requirements in the seven basins are based on the aggre-
gate needs for domestic, municipal, irrigation, industrial, salinity
control and navigation purposes. In each basin there will be a need
for water for one or more, or even all, of these uses. In some basins,
3—80993
34
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
one use predominates and controls the requirements. In the Sacra-
mento River. San Joaquin River, North Pacific Coast, Central Pacific
('nasi ami (iical Basins, irrigation use is the controlling factor. In
the San Francisco Bay and South Pacific Coasl basins, domestic, munic-
ipal and industrial uses play an important part in determining the
water requirements. In these two latter areas, water, in addition to
thai required for irrigation of lands in the same basin, is needed to
meet the larger demands of industry and densely populated centers.
The following table gives, by basins, gross and net water service areas
which ultimately will require a water supply, if they are developed.
Water Service Areas
Basin
Gross
area in
acres
Net
area in
acres
North Pacific
421.000
6,435,000
8,219,000
998,000
770.000
2,400,000
3,600,000
337,000
Sacramento Iliver (including Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta).-
4.266.000
fan Joaquin River. .
5,704,000
Han Francisco Bay
870,000
Central Pacific Coast
616.000
South Pacific Coast
2.000,000
Great Basin
2,880,000
Total for state
22,843,000
16,673,000
Water requirements, for any particular area, vary not only in amount
with the use to which the water is put, and in monthly demand, but
also with the point at which the water is measured. The geographic
position of the source of supply in relation to point of use, methods of
conveyance, the extent of the area and the opportunity afforded for
reuse of water, which is controlled by topographic, geographic and geo-
logic conditions, are factors that have an important bearing on watei
requirements. For these reasons, variations in treatment of the prob-
lems for the different areas necessitated the use of different terms of use
as follows :
"Gross allowance" designates the amount of water diverted at
source of supply.
''Net allowance" designates the amount of water actually delivered
to the area served.
"Consumptive use" designates the amount of water actually con-
sumed through evaporation, transpiration by plant growth and other
processes.
"Net use" designates the sum of the consumptive use from artificial
supplies and irrecoverable losses.
In the North Pacific Coasl Basin, the water requirements are based
on gross allowance for irrigation of 80 per cent of the gross agricultural
area. Additional water would be required for other purposes, but the
amount would be relatively small. For the Sacramento Valley, lower
San Joaquin Valley, loot hill areas of the Sacramento and San Joaquin
river basins. Central Pacific Coast and the Great Basin, the require-
ments are estimated on the basis of gross irrigation allowance on net
irrigable areas. A substantial part of this water in some of these basins
would be available for reuse. The requirements for the Sacramento-
San Joaquin Delta are based on consumptive use for irrigation and
STATE WATER PLAN 35
unavoidable evaporation and transpiration losses on the entire area.
In the upper San Joaquin Valley, the total water requirements are
estimated on the basis of net use on net irrigable areas. For the San
Francisco Bay Basin, both gross and net allowance are used in estimat-
ing the requirements for the various areas within the region for
municipal, industrial and agricultural purposes. In the South Pacific
Coast Basin, the requirements are estimated on the basis of gross
allowance for irrigation on net irrigable areas- and for municipal use
in urban areas. In addition to the foregoing uses, water would be
required for navigation on the Sacramento River and for controlling
salinity in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and upper San Francisco
Bay region.
On the foregoing basis, the ultimate gross annual water requirements,
by basins, are as follows :
Water Requirements
Basin
North Pacific Coast
Sacramento River (including Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta) .
San Joaquin River
San Francisco Bay
Central Pacific Coast
South Pacific Coast
Great Basin
Total for state-
Gross annual
water
requirements
in acre-feet'
1,011,000
»15,864,000
13,326,000
1,735,000
1,540,000
3,340,000
10,000,000
46,816,000
.
1 Actual use is much less than gross allowance. A considerable portion would be available for reuse in some basins.
1 Includes requirements for salinity control (see pages 79 and 80).
Itimate Major Units of State Water Plan.
A comparison of .water supply and requirements indicates a
large excess of water over the needs in the North Pacific Coast Basin,
some excess in the Sacramento River Basin and a deficiency in supply
in the other basins if each is considered as a unit. To provide an
adequate and dependable supply for these areas, a plan must be
formulated not only to overcome the unequal geographic distribution
with respect to the needs, but also to regulate the seasonal distribution
so that the availability of supply will be in consonance with the demand.
Such a plan has been formulated for the larger and more important
divisions of the state. Under this plan, the basins favored with water
in excess of their needs would be furnished a regulated supply in
accordance with the requirements of their ultimate development.
Waters in excess of these requirements would be conveyed to areas of
deficiency and there used to supplement local waters and afford those
areas supplies adequate to meet their future ultimate requirements.
The primary physical features of this plan are storage reservoirs, both
surface and underground, which would be used for regulating the
available run-off, and conduits for conveying the supply from points
of origin to areas of use. In conjunction with the surface reservoirs,
hydroelectric power plants would be utilized in some cases to generate
electric energy incidental to the primary use of the reservoir. In some
instances the reservoirs also would be utilized to reduce flood flows,
36 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
improve navigation and control salinity. The plan* set forth in this
report includes only the major units for the principal geographic
divisions of the stale. Other storage and conveyance units, both con-
structed and to be constructed, are necessary and essential parts of any
comprehensive plan for the development of the state's waters. Addi-
tional reservoir sites exist, which it' developed would increase the degree
of control and perfect utilization of these waters. Many distributory
conduits and other accessory works not shown in this report also will be
necessary. A plan has not been presented for the entire state. How-
ever, the one that is presented provides a system of physical works
which would make available a water supply for the benefit of 75 per
cent of the agricultural area, 90 per cent of the taxable wealth and 90
per cent of the population of the state. Certain portions of the area
a fleeted by this plan and other areas of the state still are under
investigation.
(heat Central Valley — Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins —
The plan for the development of the Great Central Valley comprises
surface storage reservoirs and conveyance systems, operated in con-
junction with underground reservoirs. In the Sacramento Valley, only
major surface storage reservoirs are included in the plan, it being
considered that the distribution system is a feature for local develop-
ment. In the lower San Joaquin Valleyt, major surface reservoirs also
are proposed for the storage and regulation of excess run-off. For the
development of the upper San Joaquin Valleyt, both surface reservoirs
and underground storage are considered part of the plan. In the lower
San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys, however, the underground storage
capacity is not utilized, although in the future it may play an important
part in the ultimate utilization of the water resources. Major convey-
ance units also are included for the transportation of supplemental sup-
plies. The plan for conveying supplemental supplies to the upper San
Joaquin Valley involves the pumping of water from the Sacramento-
San Joaquin Delta up the San Joaquin River and exchanging it at
Mendota for San Joaquin River water, which would be diverted at
Friant reservoir, for a supplemental supply for the eastern side of the
upper San Joaquin Valley. For the western side of the upper San
Joaquin Valley, the full supply would be pumped to the area. Most of
the latter supply also would come from the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta.
The available and utilizable underground storage capacity in the
upper San Joaquin Valley would be operated to obtain the fullest
practicable beneficial use of the local and imported supplies. The
operation of the underground reservoirs in a specified manner similar
to that of a surface reservoir would be required to accomplish the
desired results.
The plan of diverting water from the delta for exportation to the San
Joaquin Valley would have the great advantage of interfering least
with present rights and interests, and of being capable of utilizing the
* See Plate IV, following pape 90.
t "Lower San Joaquin Valley" Is defined as that portion of the valley extending
northerly from the Chowchllla River and a line from Mendota westerly to Oro Loma,
"ill Hi. "upper San Joaquin Valley" as that portion extending southerly from these
lines.
STATE WATER PLAN 37
waters derived from the entire catchment area after they have flowed
past all upstream users and after all upstream requirements have been
met.
A summary of the major features and costs of the plan in the Great
Central Valley (including Trinity River diversion) is as follows:
Surface storage units —
Number of reservoirs 24 (two constructed)
Number of reservoirs with power features — 13 (two constructed)
Aggregate storage capacity 17,817,000 acre-feet
Capital cost (exclusive of two constructed) —
Excluding power plants $492,200,000
Including power plants 595,900,000
Conveyance units in San Joaquin Valley —
Number 6
Capital cost $88,000,000
An analysis of the major units, both storage and conveyance, in
conjunction with the underground reservoirs in the upper San Joaquin
Valley, operated for the several purposes, through the eleven-year
period 1918-1929, shows that a water supply could have been made
available for all ultimate uses in the Great Central Valley. This period
is one of subnormal run-off and includes the season 1923-24, the driest
of record. The method of operation and the accomplishments are as
follows :
1. The amount of water utilizable for storage and regulation in the
major reservoir units was obtained by deducting from the full
natural run-off of the streams entering the Great Central Valley,
the net use of 2,283,000 acre-feet per season for an adequate and
dependable irrigation supply for 1,439,000 acres, being the
net irrigable mountain valley and foothill lands lying at eleva-
tions too high to be irrigated by gravity from the major reservoir
units, thus providing for the ultimate needs of these areas, and
also deducting from the flow of the Tuolumne River 448,000 acre-
feet per year for the water supply of the city of San Francisco.
An additional amount of 224,000 acre-feet per year also was fur-
nished the San Francisco Bay Basin from Pardee Reservoir on the
Mokelumne River.
2. Space in the principal reservoirs would have been reserved for
. flood control. This space, operated in a specified manner, would
materially reduce flood flows on the major streams, resulting in an
increased degree of protection to areas subject to overflow in both
the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys and a decrease in poten-
tial annual flood damages in these areas. The sizes of floods which
probably would be exceeded on the average of once in 100 years
38 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
(except as noted), without and with the space reserved, at several
of the principal points in the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys
are as follows :
Flood flow in second-foot
exceeded once in 100 years
on the average
Location
Without With
reservoir reservoir
control control
Sacramento Kiver at -Hod Bluff '303.C00 -187,000
Sacramento Kiver at Red Bluff (flow exceeded once in 14 years on the average) '218,000 : 1 25,000
Sacramento River at Colusa 370,000 250,000
Sacramento River at Colusa (flow exceeded once in 14 years on the average) 254,000 170,000
Sacramento Kiver below citv of Sacramento 670,000 535,000
Feather Kiver Mow confluence with Yuba River 400,000 201,000
Feather Kiver below confluence with Bear River 430,000 226,000
San Joaquin River belcw confluence with Merced River 70,000 50,000
San Joaquin Rivw below confluence with Tuolumne River 103,000 84,000
San Joaquin Kiver below confluence with Stanislaus River 133,000 82,000
Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers at confluence 780,000 596,000
1 Mean daily flow on day of crest of flood.
: Mean daily flow on day of crest of flood. Floods would be controlled to 125,000 second-feet maximum flow ex-
ceeded once in 100 years, except when this amount is exceeded by the uncontrolled run-off between Kennett reservoir and
Red Bluff. Flows greater than 125,000 second-feet would continue for only s short time.
3. Stored water would have been released from the major reservoir
units in a manner so as to supplement unregulated flows and return
waters to make water supplies available for the following purposes :
a. A supply of 9,033,000 acre-feet per season, gross allowance,
without deficiency, available in the principal streams for the
irrigation of all of the net area of irrigable lands of all
classes — 2,640,000 acres — on the Sacramento Valley floor.
b. A supply of 1,200,000 acre-feet per season, without deficiency,
for the irrigation of all the net area of 392,000 acres of irri-
gable lands, and for unavoidable losses in the Sacramento-
San Joaquin Delta.
c. A flow maintained in the Sacramento River sufficient to
provide required depths for navigation as far upstream as
Chico Landing, with improvement in present depths upstream
to Red Bluff.
d. A fresh water flow of not less than 3300 second-feet past
Antioch into Suisun Bay, which would have controlled salin-
ity to the lower end of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
e. A surface supply of 5,342,000 acre-feet per season, gr
allowance, with a maximum seasonal deficiency of 35 per cent,
for the irrigation of all the net area of 1,810,000 acres of
irrigable land of all classes in the lower San Joaquin Valley,
including 134,000 acres of foothills below the major reservoirs
on the eastern aide of the valley. The deficiency could have
been reduced by the utilization of the available underground
storage capacity.
f. A supply of 4,700,000 acre-feet per season, without deficiency,
for the irrigation of a net area of 2,350,000 acres of class 1
and 2 lands on the eastern and southern slopes of the upper
San Joaquin Valley. This would have been accomplished by
utilization of underground storage capacity in conjunction
with the major reservoir and conveyance units proposed.
STATE WATER PLAN 39
g. A supply of 1,570,000 acre-feet per season, with a maximum
seasonal deficiency of 35 per cent, for the irrigation of all
the net irrigable area of 785,000 acres of class 1 and 2
lands on the western slope of the upper San Joaquin Valley.
h. A water supply and channel depth in the San Joaquin River
sufficient to provide a navigable depth of six feet as far
upstream as Salt Slough, nine miles above the Merced River.
i. A supply of 403,000 acre-feet per season, with a maximum
seasonal deficiency of 35 per cent in that portion of this
supply — 323,000 acre-feet — for irrigated lands only, in 1924,
available in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta for use in the
San Francisco Bay Basin. This amount, together with full
practical development of local resources and annual importa-
tions of 224,000 acre-feet from the Mokelumne River and
448,000 acre-feet from the Tuolumne River and an importa-
tion from the Eel River, would have given an adequate and
dependable supply for the ultimate development of this basin.
j. The generation of more than five billion kilowatt hours of
electric energy annually, on the average.
With all of the Great Central Valley units operated for the foregoing
purposes, substantial amounts of water over and above the require-
ments would have wasted into Suisun Bay during the eleven-year
period 1918-1929, as follows :
Year Amount in acre-feet Year Amount in acre-feet
1918 3,885,000 1924 1,002,000
1919 4,112,000 1925 2,860,000
1920 2,288,000 1926 2,925,000
1921 8,071,000 1927 9,469,000
1922 8,434,000 1928 7,49 8,000
1923 2,934,000 ■
Average 4,862,000
Although there would have been a large surplus in each year, most
of it would have occurred in the winter months from unregulated
run-off. During the summer months, water would have been released
from the reservoirs sufficient only to care for all needs. The average
monthly distribution of waste water for the period 1918-1929 would
have been as follows :
Month Amount in acre-feet
January : 722,000
February 1,320,000
March 1,4 86,000
April 167,000
May 219,000
June 113,000
July
August
September i
October 33,000
November 328,000
December 474,000
Total 4,S62,000
Surplus Waters in Sacramento River Basin — The same analysis from
which the foregoing results were obtained shows that by the utilization
of the physical works proposed herein for the Sacramento River Basin,
including the Trinity River diversion, regulated supplies, without
deficiency in amount and dependable in time, could have been made
available in the principal streams to irrigate all of the net irrigable
40
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
lands — 2,640,000 acres — in the Sacramento Valley, after allowing a
gross diversion of .'5.241,000 acre-feet, with a net use of 1,945,000 acre-
feet per year, for the irrigation of a net irrigable area of 1,234,000
acres of foothill and mountain valley hinds in the Sacramento River
Basin. The analysis also shows that there would have been a large
surplus of water in every year, over and above these needs, in the
basin above the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Some of this surplus
water would have been contributed directly by releases and spill from
the reservoirs and the remainder would have been that returning to the
streams from water applied for irrigation on the valley floor, or foot-
hills at elevations higher than the reservoirs but draining directly to
the valley floor. The portion of this surplus water not used in or
diverted from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta would have wasted
into the ocean. A large part of this surplus, however, could have been
put to beneficial use in all years, except in winter months when a por-
tion would have wasted. The following tabulation gives the amounts
of water contributed by the reservoirs and the surplus available in the
delta for the maximum and minimum years and the average annual
for the eleven-year period 1918-1929.
Surplus Water in Sacramento River Basin
Releases and spill from major reservoir units..
Gross requirements for lands on Sacramento Valley floor
Surplus from releases and spill
Return water — from valley floor..
Return water — from foothills above reservoirs
Total surplus available in delta
Amount of water in aere-feet
Maximum
year, 1927
19.837.C00
9,033,000
10.804,000
3,843.000
341,000
14,988,000
Minimum
year, IBM
10.608,000
9,033,000
1,575,000
3,843,000
341,000
5,759,000
Average
annual
for period
1918-1929
15,141,000
9,033,000
6,108,000
3,843,000
341,000
10,292,000
The ultimate average annual requirements for the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta and salinity control would amount to 3,590,000 acre-
feet. A portion of this would be contributed by water from the San
Joaquin Valley streams, but if the entire amount had been obtained
from Sacramento Valley waters during the eleven-year period 1918-
1929, there still would have been surpluses in the maximum and mini-
mum years of 11,399,000 and 2,164,000 acre-feet respectively, and an
average annual surplus for the period of 6,702,000 acre-feet.
In the accomplishments with the foregoing method of operation, the
Sacramento Valley would have received an irrigation supply without
deficiency. Another study was made for the same eleven-year period
with a method of operation which would be the same as the foregoing,
except that an additional supply of 1,500,000 acre-feet annually would
be made available in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in accord with
a uniform demand. This additional supply would have resulted,
however, in some additional deficiencies and less wasted surplus and
would have been 35 per cent deficient itself in 1924. It would have
been obtained with a maximum deficiency of 22 per cent in the supply
STATE WATER PLAN 41
to the Sacramento Valley and with the same maximum deficiencies in
the supplies for the areas in the San Joaquin Valley and San Francisco
Bay Basin.
Navigation — Navigation would be improved and extended on the Sac-
ramento and San Joaquin rivers by the operation of the major reser-
voir units. In the low water season, navigation is greatly impaired
above the city of Sacramento. With the reservoirs of the plan, particu-
larly Kennett, in operation, a satisfactory navigable depth of five to six
feet could be maintained from Sacramento to Chico Landing, 138 miles,
and the river depth could be improved from the latter point to Red
Bluff, an additional distance of 52 miles. On the San Joaquin River
above Stockton, navigation has been practically abandoned. It could
be restored to a navigable depth of six feet from the Stockton Ship Canal
to Salt Slough, nine miles above the Merced River, a total distance of
95 miles, by the utilization of the ponds which would be formed by dams
of the San Joaquin River pumping system. To do this would require
the installation of a lock at each dam. If it should be desirable to extend
navigation from Salt Slough to Mendota, the benefits that would accrue
from such extension might justify altering the location of the proposed
pumping system for irrigation by following the river to the latter point.
San Francisco Bay Basin— The principal unit located in the San
Francisco Bay Basin, and included in previous reports to the Legis-
lature in the plan for the maximum utilization and conservation of
the state's water, is a salt water barrier below the confluence of the
Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers. The desired primary func-
tions of a barrier would be to prevent the invasion of saline water
into upper San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta,
act as a diversion dam for the exportation of water to the upper San
Joaquin Valley and, by the creation of a fresh water lake, provide a
means of diversion of fresh water supplies for the industrial, metro-
politan and agricultural areas of the upper San Francisco Bay region.
A study has been made of alternate plans of controlling the invasion
of saline water and making available an adequate and dependable
source of water supply for the upper bay and delta area. One plan
would utilize a physical barrier below the confluence of the Sacramento
and San Joaquin rivers and the other would utilize fresh water releases
from storage in mountain reservoirs, without a barrier. The conclusions
of the study are as follows :
It would be physically feasible to construct a barrier at sites in Car-
quinez Strait and at Point San Pablo at a capital cost of $50,000,000
and $75,000,000, and an annual cost of $3,900,000 and $5,600,000,
respectively. Foundation conditions are not so favorable at Chipps
Island site. The estimated capital and annual costs of a barrier at that
site, based upon preliminary designs and estimates, are $40,000,000 and
$3,300,000, respectively. The combination of a highway crossing with
a barrier is not economically warranted. The furnishing of an ade-
quate and dependable cheap fresh water supply for industrial use would
no doubt prove an attraction to heavy users of industrial water and
probably would stimulate industrial growth in the upper bay area. If
this were accomplished by the assistance of a barrier with a fresh water
lake maintained by adequate water supplies furnished from mountain
42 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
storage reservoirs, the attraction might be still further enhanced. How-
ever, the large expenditures required for a barrier might result in these
benefits being entirely offset by the burden in additional taxes that the
local industrial area might have to assume as its share of a barrier cost.
Moreover, other competing industrial areas naturally would offer coun-
ter attractions, such as comparable water rates, and hence it can not be
expected that there would be any rapid influx of industries to locate
on a barrier lake. Therefore, in so far as fresh water supply is a factor
in industrial development, the essential requirement would be the fur-
nishing of adequate fresh water supplies by the consummation of the
most practicable plan which can be devised. Control of salinity and a
dependable supply of fresh water for the upper bay area could be pro-
vided with equal certainty without a barrier by releasing water from
mountain storage reservoirs. The cost of water that might be
saved as a maximum in any year in controlling salinity with a barrier
would considerably exceed the cost of development of an equal amount
in mountain storage reservoirs.
With salinity controlled by fresh water releases without a barrier,
a dependable fresh water supply could be made available in the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, from which supply the bay area could
be feasibly and satisfactorily served by conduits. A barrier is not
essential for the exportation of water to the San Joaquin Valley or for
the reclamation of marsh lands adjoining Suisun and San Pablo bays.
A plan of development with salinity control without a barrier, provid-
ing conduits from the delta to serve the bay area, additional works of
channel enlargement between the Sacramento River and the San
Joaquin Delta and works for the reclamation of bay marsh lands, could
be consummated at a capital and annual cost of less than half that
required for a development with a barrier.
It is finally concluded that a salt water barrier is not necessary or
economically justified as a unit in the State Water Plan.
South Pacific Coast Basin — The plan of obtaining additional water
supplies for this basin, as presented in this report, is the conservation
of as large a part as possible of the supplies originating within the basin
and the importation of water from the Colorado River and other outside
sources such as Mono Basin. For ultimate development, the deficiency
in local supplies after deduction of the estimated utilizable yield from
local resources is 1,800,000 acre-feet per year. At present, a part
of this deficiency is made up by an average annual importation of
160,000 acre-feet from Owens River by the city of Los Angeles and by
the utilization of return water in the form of sewage from several urban
areas in the South Coastal Basin. Added supplies amounting to an
average of 240.000 acre-feet annually probably can be obtained from
Owens River and Mono Basin, requiring the enlargement of the present
Los Angeles aqueduct. Also, a considerable portion of the return
Sewage water from urban areas wasted into the ocean might be
reclaimed for reuse, thereby reducing the importation requirements to
that extent.
STATE WATER PLAN 43
The Colorado River aqueduct, as planned by the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California, would deliver, according to the esti-
mates of that district, about 990,000 acre-feet per year into terminal
storage on the Pacific slope after deducting aqueduct losses and
approximately 900,000 acre-feet net delivery from terminal storage.
The capital cost of the complete aqueduct to deliver this amount of
water is estimated by the Engineering Board of Review for the Metro-
politan Water District to be $199,618,000. This estimated cost does
not include interest during construction, nor the cost of terminal
storage reservoirs and distributary conduits.
Ultimate development of the 2,000,000 acres of net habitable area in
the South Pacific Coast Basin would require distributary conduits to
San Diego and Orange counties and to the heads of the San Gabriel and
San Bernardino basins and possibly into Ventura County if the defi-
ciencies in local supplies for ultimate development were to be met by
supplies from the Colorado River aqueduct. Routes for these conduits
have been reconnoitered, but cost estimates have not been prepared.
North Pacific Coast, Central Pacific Coast and Great Basins — No units
of a State Plan are presented herein for the development of the water
resources of these basins. Investigations in progress in these basins
are described in Chapter IX.
Initial Units of State Water Plan.
Three important regions in the state have water problems which
have become acute and which require immediate attention. These
are the upper San Francisco Bay, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and
Sacramento Valley; upper San Joaquin Valley; and Pacific slope of
southern California. In the first area, the water shortage exists in
the summer and fall months of nearly every year, with a large surplus
naturally tributary and available to the affected area in other months.
To correct this condition, the only requirement is proper control,
regulation and distribution of the tributary water. In the upper
San Joaquin Valley and in southern California, there are highly
developed areas overdrawing the average water supplies naturally and
legally available to them. There are no nearby sources which can be
developed to obtain a sufficient yield. The only relief is to obtain
supplies from outside sources. Plans are presented for meeting the
immediate future needs in these areas.
Sacramento River and San Francisco Bay Basins — The water prob-
lem in the Sacramento River Basin is that of invasion of saline water
into the upper San Francisco Bay and delta region. Attendant with
this situation, the flow in the river during the summer months of sub-
normal years has been so low that navigation has been greatly hampered
and distance of navigability has been much reduced. During several
of the past dry years, particularly in 1920 and 1924, the irrigators
drawing their supply from the Sacramento River were forced to accept
a deficient supply. Increased pumping costs also resulted from the low
discharge in the stream. All of these problems — salinity in the delta
and upper San Francisco Bay region, navigation and deficiency in
irrigation supply along the Sacramento River — are closely allied.
44 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
The plan proposed for the immediate relief of these areas is the
construction of the Kenmtt reservoir and Contra Costa County conduit.
The dam for the Kennetl reservoir would be 420 feet high, creating a
reservoir of 2,940,000 acre-feet capacity. The estimated cost, including
;m afterbay and power plants, is $84,000,000. This is the most favor-
able and economic initial unit of the State Water Plan in the Sacra-
mento River Basin adjudged feasible of construction when considera-
tion is given to the extent of the benefits that would result from its
operation.
The reservoir could be operated to attain the following accomplish-
ments :
1. Control floods in Sacramento River to 125,000 second-feet mean
daily flow on day of flood crest, measured at Red Bluff, exceeded
once in fourteen years on the average. The controlled flow
exceeded once in 100 years on the average would be 187,000 second-
feet, due to the uncontrolled run-off between Kennett reservoir and
Red Bluff. Flood flows in excess of 125,000 second-feet would be
of short duration.
2. Maintain a navigable depth in the Sacramento River of five to six
feet from the city of Sacramento to Chico Landing, with a sub-
stantial increase in depth from the latter point to Red Bluff.
3. Furnish in the Sacramento River an irrigation supply for the
lands above Sacramento, without deficiency, up to 6000 second feet
in July, thus furnishing a supply in all years to all lands under
irrigation along the Sacramento River above the delta. There
would have been over 700,000 acre-feet more water available for
these lands in 1924.
4. Furnish an irrigation supply, without deficiency, for the present
requirements of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
5. Control salinity to the lower end of the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta by release of water to maintain a fresh water flow past
Antioch into Suisun Bay of not less than 3300 second-feet.
6. Make available in the delta a water supply, without deficiency,
for the developed industrial and agricultural area along the south
shore of Suisun Bay in Contra Costa County.
7. Make available an irrigation supply, without deficiency, in the
delta sufficient in amount to fully supply the "crop lands"
now being served from the San Joaquin River above the mouth
of the Merced River. This would be conveyed to these lands by
the San Joaquin River pumping system and would make possible
the exportation of all the available supply in the San Joaquin
River at Friant. This is not believed essential as an immediate
step.
8. Generate 1,581,100,000 kilowatt hours of hydroelectric energy per
year on the average incidental to other uses, the sale of which
would help defray the cost of the unit.
The Contra Costa County conduit would serve the industrial and
agricultural areas along the south shore of Suisun Bay. It would have
a point of diversion near Knightsen, at the westerly end of Rock Slough
in the San Joaquin Delta, and, with a succession of pumping plants,
would extend westerly above all the existing industries into Clayton
STATE WATER PLAN 45
and Ygnacio valleys, a total length of 50 miles. The conduit would
have a capacity of 120 second-feet at the head and decrease in successive
steps to a minimum capacity of 20 second-feet at the lower end. A
feeder pipe line with a capacity of five second-feet would serve the
industries in Martinez and vicinity. These conduits would be capable
of furnishing the industries a fresh water supply of 22 million gallons
per day and an adequate supplemental supply to the developed agri-
cultural areas. The estimated cost is $2,500,000.
Upper San Joaquin Valley — The upper San Joaquin Valley is that part
of the valley extending southerly from the Chowchilla River and a line
extending from Mendota to Oro Loma. On the eastern side of the
valley there are about 400,000 acres of highly developed lands deficient
in water supply available from combined surface and underground
sources to meet their immediate needs. The deficiency in water supply
for the period 1921-1929 averaged about 387,000 acre-feet annually.
In addition to these lands, there are irrigated areas lying north of the
lower Kings River and westward of the trough of the valley that are
in need of a supplemental fresh water supply to blend with the ground
water supply", which has a considerable mineral content.
The water supply considered available for an initial step is that
which could be developed by utilization of surplus water of the San
Joaquin River and that available by purchase under rights devoted
to inferior use on "grass lands'' for pasture, now being served by diver-
sions from this river above the mouth of the Merced River. It is pro-
posed to acquire these waters with due consideration for all existing
rights that may be invaded in the process. Sufficient water to meet the
present deficiency could be obtained from these sources at a cost less
than that from any other source. Until this water supply is com-
pletely used and additional water is required for new lands, construc-
tion of the San Joaquin River pumping system, to import water from
the Sacramento River Basin, could be deferred, unless there should be
a series of years with smaller stream flows than have been experienced
in the past.
In the operation of the physical works, an adequate water supply
would be allowed to pass the Friant dam to meet the demands of the
"crop lands" (lands devoted to growing of crops now served from the
San Joaquin River above the mouth of the Merced River).
The physical works proposed for furnishing a supplemental water
supply to these areas are :
1. Friant reservoir with a gross capacity of 400,000 acre-feet and
a usable capacity of 270,000 acre-feet above elevation 467 feet,
diversion elevation of San Joaquin River-Kern County canal.
2. San Joaquin River-Kern County canal to Kern River with a
maximum diversion capacity of 3000 second-feet.
3. Madera canal with a maximum capacity of 1500 second-feet.
4. Magunden-Edison pumping system with a capacity of 20 second-
feet.
5. San Joaquin River pumping system, maximum capacity 3000
second-feet (construction deferred).
6. Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta cross channel (construction
deferred).
46 DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES
The amounts of water that could have been obtained from the fore-
going sources, with the above described works (items 1 to 4, inclusive)
during the forty-year period 1889-1929, including an allowance for
i he Madera area of 180,000 acre-feel annually, on the average, through
1h is period, are as follows:
Average annual amount
l'i Hod in at 1 1 -/< • t
1889-1929 1,032,000
1 909- 1 !<2'.i 838,000
lit 17-1929 _• 602,000
1919-1929 593.000
1921 1929 em, 000
1924-1929 500,000
Taking into consideration all factors — extent of irrigation develop-
ment, water supply, present and probable future condition of the
underground reservoirs and irrigation methods now practiced in these
areas — it is believed the supply which could be obtained from the sur-
plus waters and "grass land" rights in the San Joaquin River above
the mouth of the Merced River, based upon the modified stream flow
records for the period 1921-1929, would be adequate to fully supple-
ment the deficiencies in the available local supplies for. maintaining
present development and to a certain extent replenish the underground
reservoirs.
It further is believed that an equitable distribution of these waters
among the counties in which the developed areas of deficient supply
are located would be as follows :
Average exportable water supply
at Friant reservoir, 1921-1929,
Conn l.n in acre-feet
Madera 108,000
Fresno 50,000
Tulare 318,000
Kern ___• 125,000
Total 601,000
If it should prove desirable and necessary to furnish a direct surface
supply from imported water from the San Joaquin River to lands lying
in and east of Tulare Lake in Kings County, now used chiefly for the
growing of annual crops and now having a variable water supply,
water would be available for this purpose, however, with a reduction
of supply to the other counties. It is estimated that 90,000 acre-feet
seasonally would be adequate for the irrigation of the lands now
cropped.
The capital cost of the physical works of the initial plan for the upper
San Joaquin Valley, exclusive of the cost of water rights and general
expense, are:
Friant clam, reservoir and power plant $15,500,000
San Joaquin River-Kern County canal 27,300,000
Madera canal 2,500,000
Magunden-Edison pumping system 100,000
San Joaquin River pumping system (construction deferred) 15,000,000
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta cross channel
(construction deferred) 4,000,000
Total $6 4,400,000
The cost of the Friant reservoir unit includes $1,500,000 for a 30,000
kilovolt ampere power plant at the dam. This plant would be operated
with waters allowed to pass the dam to meet the "crop land" rights.
It is assumed that at the end of a ten-year period these waters would
STATE WATER PLAN 47
be diverted for use in the upper San Joaquin Valley and therefore be
unavailable for the generation of power in the plant. The cost of this
plant would therefore be amortized in this period and a new plant of
10,000 kilovolt ampere capacity would be constructed on the Madera
canal, at a cost of $500,000, to utilize the power drop at the dam into
that canal.
South Pacific Coast Basin — The immediate problem on the Pacific
slope of southern California is to obtain additional supplies from local
resources by greater conservation efforts and from sources outside of
the basin so that the deficiency now being supplied by overdraft on
certain of the underground reservoirs may be met. The units for initial
development are the Colorado River aqueduct and the Santa Ana River
flood control and conservation works.
The initial development of the Colorado River aqueduct, as recom-
mended by the Engineering Board of Review of the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California, would have a delivery capacity of 800
second-feet, or about 580,000 acre-feet per year. The tunnels and sur-
face conduits would be constructed to the full capacity of 1500 second-
feet, but pressure siphons and pumping plants would be constructed for
only 800 second-feet. The Parker dam and its appurtenances would be
deferred. Clarification works, however, would be installed at the intake
on the Colorado River in lieu of the Parker reservoir. Provision would
be made for terminal storage near the lower end of the aqueduct on the
Pacific slope in the amount of 100,000 acre-feet. Suitable locations for
reservoirs to provide this capacity are available along the aqueduct line
in the Cajalco Canyon and Puente Hills district. The total cost for the
initial development, including terminal storage, is estimated by the
Engineering Board of Review to be $198,572,000. This does not include
interest during construction.
Since as much of the supply from local sources as can be practicably
conserved will be necessary, in addition to imported water, and since
several years will be required to secure an additional supply from
Mono Basin and the Colorado River, attention must be given to the
conservation of these local supplies. This can be accomplished in part
by the regulation of floods so that these waters may be sunk into the
underground basins by the employment of flood control and spreading
works. The plan for the Santa Ana River Basin comprehends construc-
tion of works on the main stream and on its principal tributaries. In
the upper Santa Ana Valley, the works would consist of improvement
of flood channels, construction of debris dams and spreading works on
the main stream and tributaries and utilization of mountain gravel
storage. In the lower Santa Ana River Basin, the plans include a
large reservoir in the lower Santa Ana Canyon, improvement and acqui-
sition of the channel on the Santa Ana River below the reservoir, and
reservoirs on Santiago Creek. The estimated cost of these works is
$16,200,000. It is believed construction and operation of these physical
works in the Santa Ana River Basin would save about 90 per cent of
the flood waters of this basin now wasting into the ocean and would
control larger floods on the main stream and its tributaries than any
yet recorded.
48 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
Swnunary of Costs for Initial Units of State Water Plan — The esti-
mated costs of the units for initial development are as follows:
Item Cost
Great Central Valley—
Kennett rrstrvoir $84,000,000
Sacramento-Sap Joaquin Delta cross channel (construction deferred) 4,000,000
Sin Joaquin River pumping system (construction deferred) 15,000,000
Friant rc-^rvoir 15,500,000
I pper San Joaquin Valley conduits 29,900,000
Rights of way, water rights and general expense 1 8,000,000
Subtotal, Great Central Valley $156,400,000
San Francisco Bay Basin—
Ci intra Costa County conduit 2,500,000
South Pacific Coast Basin
Colorado River aqueduct '198,600,000
Santa Ana River liasin flood control and conservation works '16,200,000
Subtotal, South Pacific Coast Basin 214,800,000
Total $373,700,000
' Estimate of Engineering Board of Review for Metropolitan Water District. Does not include interest during con-
struction. Estimate rounded to nearest $100,000.
• Estimate rounded to nearest $100,000.
Economic Aspects of Initial Units of State Water Plan.
A fundamental prerequisite to the execution of a plan for any unit
of the State Water Plan must be a consideration of its economic sound-
ness. This involves a comparison of annual costs of units and derived
benefit values, comprising revenues from sale of water and power and
other benefits, which would be gained by federal, state, county and
city governments, public and privately owned utilities, industrial and
commercial interests and individuals. The annual costs for all the
units for initial development and the anticipated revenues from the
Bale of water and electric energy only for the units of the Great Central
Valley and San Francisco Bay Basin are presented herein. No attempt
is made to evaluate the other benefits.
The capital and gross annual costs of the units for both immediate
and complete initial development in the Great Central Valley and the
upper San Francisco Bay region are presented in the following tabula-
tions. The annual costs include operation and maintenance charges,
interest at 44 per cent per annum, amortization on a forty-year sink-
ing fund basis at four per cent, and depreciation on a four per cent
sinking fund basis with different lengths of service for the various
elements of the unit. The annual revenues are based upon the sale of
water for industrial and agricultural use in Contra Costa County and
for agricultural use in the upper San Joaquin Valley, and electric
energy generated at the power plants at Kennett and Friant reservoirs.
These revenues, especially from the sale of water for irrigation and
industrial uses, are estimated as the total amounts which would be
realized when the supplies provided are fully utilized and sold at the
unit prices indicated. There may be a considerable period of time after
completion of any unit before the water supplies provided are fully
utilized. However, it is anticipated thai the revenues from sale of
electric energy probably would be realized within a relatively short
period. Any excess deficiency arising as between revenues and annual
cost dining the period of development would have to be provided by
s"ine other means.
STATE WATER PLAN 49
The following tabulations summarize the estimated capital and annual
costs and anticipated revenues for the immediate and complete initial
developments for the Great Central Valley and upper San Francisco
Bay region :
Immediate Initial Development
Gross
Item Capital cost annual cost
CAPITAL AND ANNUAL COST—
Kennett reservoir - - $84,000,000 $5,297,000
Contra Costa County conduit. .__ 2,500,000 300,000
Friant reservoir '15,500,000 1,062,000
Madera canal 2,500,000 213.000
San Joaquin River- Kern County canal . . _ - - 27,300,000 2,225,000
Magunden-Edison pumping system 100,000 18,000
Rights of way, water rights and general expense 7,000,000 389,000
Total -.- $138,900,000 $9,504,000 $9,504,000
ANNUAL REVENUES—
Electric energv sales:
1,591,800,000 kilowatt hours at $0.00265 $4,218,000
105,000,000 kilowatt hours at $0.0035. 367,000
Total electric energy sales $4,585,000
Water sales:
600,000 acre-feet for upper San Joaquin Valley, based on average
for twelve-year period 1917-1929, at $3 per acre-foot $1,800,000
43,500 acre-feet for Contra Costa County conduit at $6.90 per acre-
foot... 300,000
Total water sales $2,100,000
Total revenues, electric energy and water $6,685,000 $6,685,000
NET ANNUAL COST IN EXCESS OF REVENUES.... $2,819,000
1 Includes $1,500,000 for cost of 30,000 kilovolt ampeie power plant, the amortization of which, in a ten-year period,
is included in the annual cost.
Complete Initial Development
Gross
Item Capital cost annual cost
CAPITAL AND ANNUAL COST—
Kennett reservoir $84,000,000 $5,297,000
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta cross channel 4,000,000 300,000
Contra Costa County conduit 2,500,000 300,000
San Joaquin River pumping system. 15,000,000 2,500,000
Friant reservoir "14,500,000 885,000
Madera canal 2,500,000 213,000
San Joaquin River-Kern County canal 27,300,000 2,225,000
Magunden-Edison pumping system 100,000 18,000
Rights of way, water rights and general expense. 8,000,000 444,000
Total $157,900,000 $12,182,000 $12,182,000
ANNUAL REVENUES—
Electric energv sales:
1,581,100,000 kilowatt hours at $0.00242 _ $3,826,000
23,000,000 kilowatt hours at $0.0035. _ 80,000
Total electric energy sales $3,906,000
Water sales:
1,720,000 acre-feet for upper San Joaquin Valley, based on average
for lorty-year period 1889-1929. at $3 per acre-foot $5,160,000
43,500 acre-feet for Contra Costa County conduit at $6.90 per acre-
foot 300,000
Total water sales $5,460,000
Total revenues, electric energy and water. $9,3C6,000 $9,366,000
NET ANNUAL COST IN EXCESS OF REVENUES - $2,816,000
1 Does not include the cost of the 30,000 kilovolt ampere power plant of the immediate initial development, which
would not be operated under the complete initial development, but does include a new 10,000 kilovolt ampere plant cost-
ing $500,000 on the Madera canal, the amortization of which in a forty-year period is included in the annual cost.
4 — 80993
50 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
The foregoing estimates are based on financing the development at
an interest rate of four and one-half per cent per annum and on an
amortization period of forty years. To illustrate the added cost for
both capita] and annual costs with a higher rate of interest and the
decreased cost with a lower rate of interest and for a fifty-year period
of amort i/.at ion, the tables on pages 5] and 52 are presented. The rates of
interest vary from six per cent to interest free money. For all annual
costs with interest, amortization is estimated on a four per cent sinking
fund basis. With interest free money, it is estimated on a straight
line basis for a forty-year period.
The Engineering Hoard of Review for the Metropolitan Water Dis-
trict of Southern California has prepared an estimate of the annual
cost of the complete aqueduct, which follows:
Interest at 4| per cent on $200,000,000 $9,500,000
Taxes and insurance 250,000
Electric energy for pumping 3,367,000
Operation, maintenance, repairs and renewals 2,217,000
Storage in Boulder Canyon reservoir 272,000
Total annual charges $15,606,000
This annual cost is based on a diversion of 1500 second-feet, which
would amount to some 1,086,000 acre-feet per year, or, according to
the estimates of the Metropolitan Water District, about 990,000 acre-
feet per year delivered into terminal storage on the Pacific slope after
deducting aqueduct losses, and 900,000 acre-feet net delivery from ter-
minal storage. The foregoing estimate of annual cost does not include
bond redemption.
The estimated capital cost of the physical works for the Santa Ana
River project, designed both for the salvage of flood wastes and flood
protection, is shown in the second table on page 52 for several rates of
interest during the period of construction. Annual costs, including
interest, depreciation, amortization, operation and maintenance, also
are shown. These costs are shown with amortization on both a forty-
year and fifty-year, four per cent, sinking fund basis, with interest at
the same rates as those used for the construction period. The annual
cost also is shown for the project constructed without interest. This
cost includes depreciation, operation and maintenance, and amortiza-
tion on a forty-year straight line basis, but no interest on bonds.
Many interests, other than those actually receiving w r ater in the
upper San Joaquin Valley, would be greatly benefited. In the
Sacramento Valley there would be many beneficiaries. The reduction of
floods on the Sacramento River would furnish an additional degree
of protection to the overflow lands in the Sacramento Flood Control
Project, resulting in a reduction of potential annual flood damages.
The federal and state governments, the various districts and individual
landowners would be interested in this feature. The improvement of
navigation on the Sacramento River for 190 miles above the city of
Sacramento is a feature in which the federal government would be
interested and is a basis upon which it might be expected to participate
STATE WATER PLAN
51
w
J
J
<
15
z
U
o
I
z
w
5
a-
o
J
>
u
Q
O
w
H
co
O
U
J
<
D
Z
z
<
Q
Z
<
<
<
3 S
H .2
z s
g
§s
s
©
© ©
©
©
r^io
oo
o
© 00
■•r
r- co
OS
o
rf CO
©
CD CD
o
o©
o
o
©©
o
©©
©
©
©©
o
©©
©
o
CM IC
r~
r- to
oo
©
Ol 00
o
©oo
CO
■**
CO
•ft
^- CO
c*Tco
us
CO ©
co©
#
o
©©
o
©©
©
©
©©
o
© ©
©
©
©©
o
©©
©
©
•— in
CO
oo iO
CO
X
o
lo oo
CD
^- 00
CO
©
CJ5 CO
CM
•*f CO
t--
CO
©
CO
t^cO
~
|CcO
-«-■>
M
c
CU
©
© ©
o
©©
©
©
o©
o
©©
©
©
©c
o
©©
©
a
©
CO io
OS lO
■^
©
*— oo
CO
I--O0
OS
CU
>*
^
r*» co
o
f-l ©
-^
C3
(C
oo ©
cm
CO CO
*-
CO
•ft
S3
Ih
cu
a
©
©o
o
© ©
©
©
©©
o
© ©
©
©
©o
o
©©
©
©
f IQ
o>
© >o
•c
3!
©
© oo
COOO
t^-
°1
iO to
00
OS ©
Cl
■*
00
OS ©
CM
00 ©
CM
CO
tf*
©
©©
o
©©
©
©
© ©
o
©©
©
©
©©
o
©©
©
©
CO iO
t— *o
CM
©
© oo
CM
iQ 00
t--
»o
*<r
CO to
CO
t^ CO
©^
©
© CO
CD
CJS CO
CO
Tf«
&$
©
©©
o
©©
©
©
©©
o
©©
©
©
© ©
o
©©
©
©
i^. m
CM
*n io
CD
©
•*r oo
CO
oooo
©
CO
CO
OS CO
CM
CO CD
t-
CO
^H CO
U3
1-H CO
TP
■^
Ift
"e" '
"2" !
o
o
OT I
*^ 1
■*-" 1
C3 ,
(S3 ,
e3 i
'■3 1
"■3 1
a> ■
»- 1
»- 1
E3 '
o ,
s ■
■^3 '
03 1
C3 |
xj ;
t3 '
13 i
bp ,
§ !
e ■
3 '
'cS '
1- I
«** '
03 ,
a
= 1
i— i
•3 <
C '
• — I-
-
1 J
0!
c
3
cu ,
>» 1
4a
CO
o
eu
4) &
C3
c
cu
g &
CP
>
CU
>
cu
o
r.'o
(-
Z~v
u.
o-a
CO
o
•—
o
gi
CO
cu
o
"" M
GO
cu
'-*3 ^
cu
*g
.£
6.2
o
X
cu
S.S
.s
cu
p-
c
8
o
-Si
cu
>
cu
o
*3 CU
8 «
9
_ cu
8"3
o
"rt
o ■
"c5
CU -
"c3
0>
3
o
3
^- «w
3
43
s
"3 2
G
■« 3
e
73 a
c
3 c
=
3 c
c
03 i_
a
S
a S
C3 i_
a
•a
cu
cu
CU
S"rt
2;
873
^
s2*c3
55
"o.
O ■*->
o *^
o ■**
S3
•- o
»- o
i- o
O
OH
CH
CtH
52
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
u
J
J
<
a
H
Z
m
u
H
<
a
o
!
w
H
Z
u
2 S
a. 2
O I
CD
u a
Q |
3 I
ri
X
:s
i
— to
8
at e
r. -^
r— to
i -
o
r~co
-r
o o-.
r. Bl
'-.
*-"
to oo cc
co en to
H ooeo
ado>
r. f
c© cc
co'oC
i
Sj
x
8
CO co
£ S
C^ CO
§a*ts
C- cc cc
58
: £
SOI CO
00 CO
CO CO CO
— lO CO
oo *ceo
O CM CO
Q -«c0
CO -"^CO
cT cfcT
8
8
00 CO
o to
©CO
CO CO
C* OS
o oo
o oo
o oo
c f <*t «>
T CO CO
co_ coco
S
o
I
-a
e
3
c
'to S
v 9
S.CS
■a
>.
*s _ c
*ii ! '{;•& 8
£ g
> ,aj t> ■»* ^
, _ s. „ _
.2 _
t H
S3
—
1
>
■
« «
_
8 "
«
3
c
H
■« 3
e
IS =
a
3 ?
c
S ?
=
C>
eS
n
■
C3 C
* £
II
z
z
! a
■-
>-
Ch
CH
5
c
-•
8
85
© — o
K — C
115 — ' —
-'
s
r -.
— S
c c
=." y
o cr «
cr- n —
5
§00 4C
CO* ~ — "
8
o — —
3
.2.5
5
s,
a
O
tfftl
^?J2 i
B = —
c c —
.J-
&RI
•^"* to
Mr,
car,
ear
££S
1 ■* *o *»*
_ 0.2
9f*J
g.H.3.9
«
SEE E
8<<<
STATE WATER PLAN 53
financially. The furnishing of a full supply to the lands under irriga-
tion along the Sacramento River and in the Sacramento-San Joa-
quin Delta would be of great benefit to the lands above the city of
Sacramento in their being assured an adequate supply in all years
without being curtailed in their diversions because of navigation
requirements or the possibility of being enjoined by the water users
below the city of Sacramento. Some of the lands above Sacramento
also would be benefited in all years, and particularly in dry years, by
decreased pumping charges due to higher water levels in the Sacra-
mento River channel. This would be a substantial sum in dry years.
The city of Sacramento would be benefited as to the quality of its water
supply which it obtains from the Sacramento River. In all years, a
flow of not less than 5000 second-feet would be passing the intake of
its pumping plant. In 1920, the mean flow during one 24-hour
period in July was as low as 440 second-feet. On this day there was
a reversal of flow upstream amounting to a maximum of 2300 second-
feet.
Control of salinity to the lower end of the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta would relieve the salt water menace in that area and would fur-
nish the irrigated lands a fresh water supply at all times. The fur-
nishing of an adequate and suitable water supply to the industrial and
agricultural areas along Suisun Bay not only would benefit the imme-
diate area, but also the metropolitan areas of Oakland and San
Francisco.
The relief afforded the upper San Joaquin Valley by the consumma-
tion of this plan would prevent the retrogression of a large area of
agricultural land. The maintenance of these lands in production
would prevent a loss of taxable wealth in the southern valley coun-
ties, help to restore agricultural credit, maintain and increase busi-
ness in communities of the affected areas and between these areas and
the large metropolitan centers, and assist in the protection of public
utility and banking investments in these areas.
Water Right Problems.
A plan for the utilization of the water resources of the state, through
their conservation and conveyance from areas of surplus to those of
deficient supplies, would disturb the regimen of many of the streams,
necessitating adjustments with existing water rights. The major
problems and proposed remedial measures are briefly outlined as
follows :
The storages, equalizations of flow, exportations, importations, and
exchanges of water involved would effect changes in existing conditions
under which the riparian owner has the right of maintenance as
against nonriparian usage.
Stream flow regulation by storage and exportations from points
above riparian ownership in themselves are violative of the riparian
right, but not of the appropriative right of nonriparian landowners
within the watershed. Exchanges of water are probably permissible,
even against riparian objection. Riparian rights may be purchased
and the vendors thereby eliminated as objectors and the place of Use
of appropriative rights held by such vendors may be changed, sub-
.">4 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
jecl to no injury to others. Water may be stored underground and
later pumped for exportation Prom the basin wherein it was Btored.
Dependence upon eminenl domain offers the only certain exped-
iriit in dealing with the riparian objector. Dependence upon the police
power of the state is inadvisable in view of existing decisions; the
doctrine exempting flood and freshet water Prom riparian ownership
is very limited in its applicability; dedication to public use and pre-
scription are ineffectual against timely objection; and the extent of
state authority over navigable waters is uncertain.
Under existing procedure a pro jecl mighl be long delayed pending
injunction suits by many claimants in many courts and condemnation
suits in many courts before many juries. Excessive awards might
make such a project exceedingly expensive.
A constitutional amendment providing a revised law of eminent
domain relative to water projects adminislere 1 by a properly consti-
tuted and empowered agency having state-wide jurisdiction, should
afford fair compensation to the riparian owner without undue delay
or expense in the prosecution of a plan.
Such an amendment should vesi jurisdiction over suits to enjoin
a plan and for damage-; in the eminent domain agency; provide for
a conversion of such suits into condemnation proceedings and mute
actions pertaining to interrelated rights; provide for condemnation
of all or a portion of a righl ; provide for conclusive findings as to
damages, offsetting benefits and compensation; provide for awards
either in money or substituted benefits or physical adjustments; pro-
vide for the offset of any benefits reasonably certain to accrue, such
as flood protection, salinity control, navigation, irrigation, ground water,
and higher stream levels and reduced pumping costs; provide for
compensation by a guarantee of specified conditions which would make
offsetting benefits certain; and also provide for a taking upon security
given without compensation first paid.
Investigations in Progress.
Investigations now are in progress in several areas of the state in
which there are insufficient data available thus far to carry out final
studies of water requirements and supplies and formulate final plans
for development and operation to serve the ultimate needs. For the
most part, these involve the more or less isolated valleys in the northern
and southern pail of the state and along the Central Coastal region,
and which lie outside of the (Jreat Central and South Pacific Coast
basins. However, important additional studies in the South Pacific
Coast Basin also are involved.
In Siskiyou. Modoc, Shasta and Las-en counties, investigations are
under way to determine water requirements, to adjudicate and dis-
tribute available water supplies and also to determine the amount
and source of supplemental water supplies necessary for the ultimate
needs. Considerable progress has been made in the adjudication
and distribution of available local supplies, and this has generally
resulted in increasing extent ami efficiency of utilization. Detail
studies with the cooperation of local interests have been under way
in the upper Pit River Basin since 1928, and substantial progn
has been made in assembly of data.
STATE WATER PLAN 55
In the San Francisco Bay and Central Pacific Coast basins, investi-
gations are in progress in Napa, Santa Clara, Salinas and Santa
Maria valleys and in Ventura County. The basic data required
involve the measurement of flow of streams and the observation of
ground water levels. Studies will be made to determine the available
supply, present use, ultimate requirements, and surplus or deficiency in
water supply. Except for Ventura County, where work was started in
1927, these investigations were begun in 1929. Considerable progress
has been made in establishing stream gaging stations and measurements
of well levels, but additional gaging stations must be established and
more extensive observations of ground water made in order to furnish
the basic data required for carrying out final studies.
Investigations in the desert region of southern California are under
way in Antelope Valley and Mojave River Basin. In the former
area, gaging stations have been established, but additional work is
required on observation of ground water levels to determine the amount
of available local water supply. In the Mojave River Basin, work, con-
sisting of stream gaging, measurements of percolation and ground water
levels and surveys of areas of transpiration and evaporation, has been
under way since the latter part of 1929.
The investigations in progress in the South Coastal Basin, compris-
ing the drainage basins of the Los Angeles, San Gabriel and Santa
Ana rivers, are being directed to an intensive study of the amount
and availability for reuse of waste water. This involves not only a
study of the salvage and reuse of sewage wastes, but also a determina-
tion, by means of extended ground water observations, of the most
advantageous operation and maximum use of the underground reservoir
capacity in order to attain the most effective and efficient utilization
and coordination of local and imported supplies. This investigation,
when completed, should furnish basic data for the determination and
allocation of benefits which will accrue from the newly developed sup-
plies made available in a final coordinated plan of utilization and
operation.
In San Diego County, the investigations under way have included
the establishment of stream gaging stations to determine the amount
of water wasted into the ocean and the portion of such wastes which
could be feasibly conserved ; and also work in connection with the inter-
national division of the water supply of the Tia Juana River.
Conclusions.
1. A large surplus of regulated water could be provided in the
Sacramento River Basin, over and above the full requirements of
all its 3,874,000 acres of net irrigable lands, by the utilization of
the physical works proposed herein for that basin, including the
Trinity River diversion.
2. The invasion of saline water in the upper San Francisco Bay
and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta could be effectively and
positively controlled to the lower end of the delta by fresh
water releases from mountain storage reservoirs.
56 DIVISION OF WATER RBSOUBCEfl
:}. A s;ih water barrier located a1 any of the throe typical sites
investigated below the confluence of the Sacramento and San
Joaquin rivers would not be necessary or economically justified
as a unit of the Slate Water Plan.
4. The industrial, municipal and agricultural developments of the
upper San Francisco Bay region could be adequately and
dependably supplied with their fresh water requirements from
the fresh water controlled channels of the Sacramento— San
Joaquin Delta at a cost of less than half that required for
equivalent service with a barrier. The proposed Contra Costa
County conduit would adequately and economically serve the
present needs.
5. The water supply in the San Joaquin River Basin is insufficient
to meet the ultimate water requirements in that basin. Impor-
tation from the Sacramento River Basin, the logical source of a
supplemental supply, would be required for full development
of 5,150,000 acres of net irritable area.
6. There are approximately 400,000 acres of highly developed
irrigated land in the upper San Joaquin Valley which are
overdrawing the water supply locally available. In order to
prevent retrogression in this region, supplemental water must
be imported from an outside source. These lands have not the
financial capacity to bring in such a supply.
7. The units proposed for immediate development in the Great
Central Valley and upper San Francisco Bay region (Kennett
and Friant reservoirs, the San Joaquin River-Kern County
canal, the Madera canal, Magunden-Edison pumping system
and the Contra Costa County conduit) would furnish adequate
water supplies for present needs in the Sacramento Valley,
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and upper San Francisco Bay
region, and upper San Joaquin Valley, would increase the
degree of flood protection and improve navigation on the
Sacramento River, and incidentally would generate an annual
average of 1,696,800,000 kilowatt hours of hydroelectric energy.
8. A complete water supply for the habitable area of 2,000,000 acres
in the South Pacific Coast Basin ultimately would require an
importation of 1,800,000 acre-feet annually, on the average, from
outside that basin, if no allowance were made for present -and
possible future use of sewage wastes.
9. Construction of the works proposed herein for the Santa Ana
River Basin would save about 90 per cent of the flood waters
now wasting into the ocean from that basin.
10. The units proposed for initial development in the Great Central
Valley could not be financed from revenues obtained from the
sale of water and electric energy. Income from other sources
must be obtained in order to finance the development.
11. Many interests would be substantially benefited through the con-
summation of the Great Central Valley and upper San Francisco
Hay project. If these benefits were assessed to those interests
benefited, sufficient income might be derived therefrom to carry
the additional financial burden not capable of being carried by
revenues from the sale of water and electric energy.
STATE WATER PLAN 57
12. The flood control and navigation benefits which would result
from the operation of the units of the initial development in
the Great Central Valley would be so substantial that financial
participation may well be expected from the federal govern-
ment.
13. The execution of a State Water Plan under the present status
of the law might be long delayed by injunction suits by many
claimants in many courts and might be made utterly burden-
some by awards of excessive compensation in condemnation
proceedings. A constitutional amendment should be drawn to
provide a revised law of eminent domain, administered by an
agency having state-wide jurisdiction and properly constituted
and empowered, so that those entitled to compensation could
be speedily and fairly provided for without undue difficulty,
delay, or expense in the prosecution of the plan.
58 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
CHAPTER III
WATER RESOURCES OF CALIFORNIA
The climate of California is characterized by two fairly distinct
seasons — the winter, or rainy season, and the summer, or dry season.
The major portion of the precipitation occurs in the shorter winter
Reason — from November to April — in the form of rain on the areas of
lower elevation and as snow in the high mountain regions. Most of
the run-off from the rain which falls on the lower areas and valleys
finds its way quickly into the stream channels, while the snow in the
higher mountain regions usually does not melt and appear as run-off
until the late spring or early summer. The latter run-off forms the
greater part of the stream flows during this period. It is estimated
that more than three-fourths of the precipitation, taking the state as
a whole, reaches the ocean within 45 days from the time of its
occurrence.
A complete inventory of the waters of the state was made in previous
investigations.* Estimates of the preciptation and of the run-off for
the various hydrographic divisions of the state have been extended from
1921 to 1929 and are presented herein. In addition to the water avail-
able from streams within the state, water may be obtained for southern
California from the Colorado River. The Boulder Canyon Project Act,
passed by Congress on December 21, 1928, and later approved by the
President, limits California's share in the allotment to the lower basin
states underR AP1UCAL DISTRIBUTION
or
WATER RESOURCES
AND
AGRICULTURAL LANDS
in
CALIFORNIA
LEGEND
Area of Bhmii In Per Cenl of Ar**n of Stale.
Agricultural l.nrnls In Per Cent of total III Stale.
Water Resources In Per Cenl of total ot Stale.
• y /jr*** j *>< (,n °
US'" ' x .
V
^
'UIN BASIN T^NS" V' \X
■B»a«B36.3y. ZJ^ ' ' V-;\ '"•' ' 7 k\''X
£? 7 — 7^iT,fr -SPA •->-.
5s
Li^OBJ .. / !I.:H ■/ ■>, » \\ **H
t&iy^Ar/ GREAT BASIN ' - .. . \ > , '. 7 \
__>^'^ ^ #/■/.' '" AREA — — 36.IX vV .< X ' Y
ff^Ikir.nelOj/.jSf ' "j~. LAND ^M™ 18.3% ' -V x, ...A
J
Barbara ■ /
... .< •
OS>
£
&&&
igr* .-' WATERS 5.1 X •* \. -
? J ^ i K #
£1 Santa. \n,( / £y '* ' ^
c9J
SOUTH PACIFIC BASIN
AREA Wt 6.8 X
LAND ■" I0.0X
WATER I I.4X
[San l)if<» ■', *■'-•
;,/ ./.; X
/ C O
_\
PIRATE 111
< EOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION
or
WATER RESOURCES
AGRICULTURAL LANDS
CALIFORNIA
LEGEND
AKA of Basin in p t r Onl of Area of Si^ii-
Agricultural l.nnds In Per Crc« of lotal In Slate.
N'aier ResourcM In PerGanl or tolnl of Slalc.
IAN
FRANCISCO BAY
BASIN
AREA
■ 2.2%
LAND
■ 2.6%
WATEF
1 12%
^
/'
CENTRAL PACIFIC BASIN
AREA M7£%
LAND ■ *.,%
WATER ■ 3.1 X
r-^W I GR EAT BASIN I - . X^'t V{\
llnkci-sllri.iy Tj/ >~. LAND ■■■^18.3% ' -/> .-.1
WATER ^ 5.1 %
*:m*<#
A jlVirl ? yT| WL_ J i ii ilJIFj uTi ill l ii 1 1 . .'J
o^~
'"jr ■■?■'.■ .'if* S '-'
f. HAS IN I \ ..'
SOUTH PACIFIC BASIN
AREA
m ea%
LAND
■■i 10.0%
WATER
lux
JUT -®" X
&i
/I
1
STATE WATER PLAN 63
the state since 1903, this work has been continued and its scope
extended to cover the flow from most of the major streams and many
of their tributaries. Many records made by other federal agencies,
municipalities, irrigation districts, and public utilities have been
reported to the United States Geological Survey for publication. In
all a total of 708 stream gaging stations, as shown on Plate II, "For-
ested Areas and Stream Gaging Stations in California," have been
established. Many of these, however, were discontinued after only a
few years of record so that on September 30, 1929, there were 300
active stations. Additional stations have been installed since that date,
bringing the total active stations to 337 on September 30, 1930. The
measurements at these stations, together with the precipitation records,
have been the basis for estimating the run-off.
Topographically, the area of the state is divided into seven basins
as shown on Plate III, "Geographical Distribution of Water Resources
and Agricultural Lands in California." The run-off from six of these
finds its way, if not intercepted, to the Pacific Ocean. This constitutes
95 per cent of the run-off. Practically all of the run-off from the
seventh, the Great Basin, has no outlet to the ocean.
A previous report * presented run-off estimates based upon all avail-
able stream flow records up to and including the season 1920-21.
For the streams on which no stream flow records were available, the
run-off was estimated from relations of seasonal precipitation and
run-off established for areas of similar characteristics. The second
method also was used to fill in periods of missing records on measured
streams.
In this investigation, study has been given to a review and extension
of these estimates up to and including the season of 1928-29. A sum-
mary of these estimates of run-off for the forty-year period 1889-1929
for each stream or stream group of each basin of the state is given in
Table 5. The mean seasonal run-off also is given for the' twenty-year
period 1909-1929; ten-year period 1919-1929; and for the five-year
period 1924-1929. For the state as a whole, the mean for the forty-
year period is 71,400,000 acre-feet, 1.6 per cent less than for the fifty-
year mean for the period 1871-1921 given in Bulletin No. 5 ; the mean
for the twenty-year period 61,100,000 acre-feet, 15.8 per cent less than
for the fifty-year mean; the mean for the ten-year period 53,500,000
acre-feet, 26.3 per cent less than for the fifty-year mean ; and the mean
for the five-year period 57,100,000 acre-feet, 21.3 per cent less than for
the fifty-year mean. The table also shows the amount and year of »
occurrence of maximum seasonal run-off for each stream and stream
group during the forty-year period ; the amount and year of occurrence
of minimum seasonal run-off and minimum average flow for the month
of August for each stream of record. The maximum seasonal run-off
for the entire state during the forty-year period is estimated at
168,000,000 acre-feet in 1889-90, and the minimum during the same
period at 19,000,000 acre-feet in 1923-24.
The average monthly distribution of seasonal run-off is given in
Table 6 for five representative streams. These figures in each instance
are based on the period of actual stream flow measurement.
* Bulletin No. 5, "Flow in California Streams," Division of Engineering and Irri-
gation, 1923.
64
I >l VISION OF WATER RESOURCES
u
J
CQ
<
Z
o
>
Q
Z
o
<
H
&
U
05
w
o<
r»
OS
o
u-
Cfl
u
Z
z
<
w
(0
U.
O
w
w
O
H
O"
w
X
c
w
o
o
CQ
Owens Valley Area
San Diego Area
Riverside-Santa Ana
Area
Los Angeles Area
Tehachapi Area-
Santa Barbara-Santa
Monica Coast \nB
Saliiuis-Santa Maria
Area..
Southwestern San
Joaquin Valley Area._.
Kern River Area
San Joaquin-Kings
River Area
Los Bancs-
Modesto Area
Monterey Bay Area_
Santa Clara-Coast
Area..
Marin-Napa- Woodland
Area
Mt. Diablo Area
Mokelumne-Merced
Area
American River Area
Tahoe-Carson Area
Yuba-Bear River Area...
Feather River Area
«i~i Central
Sacramento Area
I ppcr Kei- Russian River
Area
North Pacific Coast Area.
Klamath-Trinity Area . . .
Upper Sacramento Area..
Upper Pit-Tale Lake-
ureat Basin Aria
Season
r^ «— o* oo »ft cc cc »c - • »o
«ico»f) to 01 -o ci — ci cc »c oo © ©©coco© — oot--©©
- *c © •*< d »*o — oo oooodr-uo rv-fiuin -»tew«
tO *■ 00 "J CO OS ■ - C I t~ CO C 2^"?- SS?
-r t - oo ■*■ « - oo i~ oo oo oo
i~ d d to -« r- — »*o co »o
t . ci-r~.i~ vou5*ic or Q- — i-
cr-«i-- ^« •■»■ i~ co oo toaoicto^*
„* _ — — CI —
CI — l~0100 N^N!DC5
Co Oo CI CI 00 I-fcO»C — »l$
— CI — —
oo to *r to ic aoNtomtfi ^■in^inr. © •*»• to © ■*" ^ r~ •-• to ©
I -w: 00 Co CI ci T »« t to ^lOQOCO NM^-OOdi c © © d i~
c« 14 00 CXI CI '
ICOJWOIN ifl » — c r- t-iooowp
ci uo oo i~ -<f» osnicooi oo oo t~ r~ »o
l~- 00 — Oo 00
oo ^* © ••* ^ notoooo to ^i x e o
— i^ o to ci ^ona- u: i^ cc to —
• OCPCN uo -
oo to t*» — • oo odioonci
>d tCO^rtd to 00 t» r- to
— OO 00 00 d rtOWOiOl to Oo io r~ CO WO »« t~ »>• 00 Oo CO 00 CO <
ci to oc i^ -r co -^ i
g-r — ■ r !-■ Oo t~ 00 CO
ooooooo oo ci oo pc a>
d W OO *C d MCIOOJX « Ol iO O CI
r»r- Co CSC
f^ i— Co oo oo oo co •
CI OO GO to *C M-hi^oX 00 00 CO to d
oc -r -r ■»»• to ©ddoo^>
to to r— r^ oo conci^o
CI I- o to d to OO O CI c
d to — i^ d £o 00 00 d 00 M*M«9
'MCIN CO — -USIOiO
1I~CCI~ OONCOrtM
SS£§?i SSSS5S §o?2K:£ 338S£ Sc3Scl«
CO ^« t— OS 00 <ONO>iAC4
S03MWO OS ■*»• 5
SOI'- tC (£- •
OOOOiO^O CO <
r-» t*» r- %n +** co «
> CO CO OS CCS
-onujw
— r. - - -r
a> ao r- *c oo
£££8:2 SSSSS 88;
S — 00 CC Q
O tO 00 SN
- ir) « N W
00 I* h. tC N
s oo e« j» io •
OO^t&MtC C100CCC -
•-•Ol'-'tOCB O0 <N OS © •—
r- I * r* op 00
co r^ao as Q
i-l-l-N*
00 OO OO OO 00 oo oo 00 00 00 OO CO 00 OO 00 oo
I M I I
— ^4 fC ■** *C
i - i . i- i- r^.
C^M ^"^ C
00 OO 00 oo c
tilt
— ri :-
jr x \
x x :
Ncoao^
x x ~r - ~.
S & S Bfl
00 OO 00 oo C7S
_t CS Cs 0>
I I I
— <M C3 -r *o
OS OS 9 OS OS
OO OO 00 00 oo
STATE WATER PLAN
65
© CO *0 t— CO
N «D iO X N
OO ^ © ••* CM
CM CO *<*< CI "=J*
t— CO t-» I s - ©
ooc5 to ^ o
i-fCS ^h CM
CO © © OO ©
CO tO tO ^ CO
— CO ■*** tooo
CO t-» CO
N
© © i— ■ co r-
t- i-i tO <"* -#
tO "^ i-t 00 OO
H OO ^ Q 3)
cm eo co or ~*
O) to O T »o
© oo r- © ©
OS i-t CO CO ■**«
t— OO © © CM
co oo;
>H
05tDHO>0
CO ■— i © ^f CO
oo oo t-*- r - to
^- H rt CO tO
OO CO M< co -*v
«— • CO CO •— • CO
Cl OO t~"* ■— « ©
CO © CO to *0
CO t-- t— CO ■— "
to •-< ©
M
CM ©©00 -H
o -*r t« *o — «
CO O CO CO tO
CO r~> tO <M CM
©oo oo r— co
CO t- CM CO «
t- r*- io ■— > cm
•*r co •-< os »-t
©00 CO o>o
i— ' CO *T CO o
Tji N IO O «-•
OO CO CO
--CON
Es
© CO © -*J* CO
© co co © ©
O — < ("*■ CO CS
T O0 "-< CO i-<
-h «o CO CO iO
© CO © CI CO
HNiflOO
*-• — ■ r- oo oo
cs -»t« -- os <-h
O CO OS OS l"*-
OO CO CO
© t— t-
>
f- OO ~H QO CO
O CO tO to oo
co -*f •* oo *r
oo «-h co ^r cm
O N CO CI ^
OS 00 CO 00 ©
»-* t*- »o o ©
--H ■"-« 1^ OC 00
HC0 05 10 0S
CO 00 CO to o
— OS OS
CM CO CO
p
© fT ■— 1 CO CM
© co r*. t— ^f*
O 00 CO O CO
oo r- t- co ~*
t- CO -«t< ^ CM
r- -^ tp -^ — «
OO ■"*■ CM »-* tO
ooocorN-co
CO CO ^ CO OS
*— oo •*»» t— r^-
CM -^ CO
Ol-O
H
•-" CO OO O CM
CO 00 OO t— OS
a: t-~ l— ^ 00
i— OS CM -*f t"-
CO © T O -h
lOOt>»-"f rH
OO r- CO C- CM
i- o os to as
O 00 © © — «
Tt« |n- CO CN CM
^J* © © — < O0
OS 00 ~*
CJ OS OS
CO
lOTfMCNO
CM tO 1^ OO ^
NN»-acft
OS os C- "-" co
CO O tO CM CO
f 1 31 to C O
CO t-~- to *— < CO
OO <M OO OS CM
OS © 00 © OS
Ci OO 00 OS CO
© © ^t* <-H t>-
1-H I— t—
y- 1 t- 00
pj
t-- © C3 CM t>-
O tO OO O CO
tO -— I — • CM OO
t>- 00 OO CO -*J*
1-* *-t CO tO CM
CO OO i— ' OS CO
CO CO CO -^f CO
t*- CO CM CM CM
OO *— <-« i— i tO
OO OS OO © OS
^i-iOOON.
w o ^ r. t-
oo oo ©
©i t^oo
a
Tt«CM ©CO ©
CM © OO © CM
I--00 00 OO OS
© © © © CO
OO "*J« CS OO CO
■*ji CO •-" © CO
cm oo r- -* •>*
CO lO — i i— < ©
CM t— © CO ©
00 t— 00 t-- i—
co co r- if. co
© © Tf -* t~-
iO © ©
© © t—
M
© OS © — « CM
HIO0QHH
©OS.— o oo
© © CO © CO
O -H ^ IfJ Ol
i« t— cm © oi
© h- © 1-t Tj«
CO © OJ i-t ©
© t-- 1— © ©
OO © © !>• *-*
to CO ^ OO CO
O © -*J*OSt—
i-H CO CO
t-3
IQNNOO
© ©OO © ©
O-J -- — " © ©
CI O «5 <-i *-"
CO oo to 00 oo
CM t— -^ OO 00
CM 1^ ^ CM CM
I— oo -^ CO ©
CO © © »-< oc
1— tO OO to CM
O ^ 1-* Tf ©
00 CM OO
y-> CO tO
m
•HN^CON
— --
© tp r— cm ~^
CM i— " •** © OS
© OS t- TT ©
OS -*J« OS CI CO
OC' CC © CM ©
to 00 •— tO CS
t— © O O CM
CM © ■«* tO ©
00 © TT — ■ I -
^f CO ©
C-l oc t--
a
CNOQO OS-H
^- CO © OS CM
to »o co »o oo
© © O- ~ -H
to cm co co r—
CO OO CM © OS
00 ©iO tOCN
•-•encode
© tO © CO CO
00 © ~* tO CO
OS — - CS © •**
NCO^lNh-
CO CO h-
«o CS CO
o
t^- © OO CM CM
©CO CO «-" ©
f-CO^^N
CO © ^t" O-J *-*
CO »0 t— CM ©
(NCOtXO
CO i— ©© CO
t"» go *r co co
(C -o to 00 ©
t- © 00 rr — »
CM tO OS © t—
t— t— CO ~* I—
•^ ©CO
CO oo ©
PQ
t-00 © ©— i
© © © © ©
1111
© r- oo os ©
OS © CS © ©
00 00 00 00 CS
CM CO •f tO ©
«-" w eo i< if5
o © © © ©
© CS CS OS ©
CM CO ^« tO CO
t T I I I
CO t— CO OS ©
© © © © —
© OS CS © CVS
© © © CS ©
CO t— 00 © ©
— — ~- — « CM
© © © © CS
•— CM CO ^ *0
CM CM CI T ' 7-1
© © © © CS
r- oo ©
CM CI CM
L l I
© r- co
CM CI CM
© © ©
$
a im
c! a>
JeS
e o>
o «
IJ
Cj bD
«
OH
« 9
•3 rt
53 J- —
©X3 CS
H Oc-J
-'C©
O a> ♦-«
.2 °-A
-^ u o
tx - —
cs.S o
.5 ^ _L
= -•§
H »" c
C u fl
o 2 o
: e "^
"a 1 v
gj-o
s? ^
■sta cs
_c._2oo
° „ a.
■5-§|
_o c.o
— ■•"-«-»
«1«
il-2
^ °s
rt " fc
o <u c
£.2 s
S2 s
■fiofi
•>""■ c
^ o °
•n -^ a
— — ^
r'S
•Sill
o g
s
I
Ofc
5—80993
66
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
2S
- —
3
c< ■« lc-» !<N
■P.
■8
o o
ot
£
ri
g
3
s
s
si
§
§
-
<
•si
IS.
s
— a »>
d •— o
I 1 £
3 = b
cc = as
?
a
2
-a
a
o «5.2*7
L- OS
O *- <M
"SI'S 2
Si 1 2
S~ a 2
peM »OS
rr **• — oo
*— w c "
OOOOOOOO-VOOOOO^rOOO
0> OS OS OS OS OS OS OS — •* OS OS OS OS OS O OS OS Oft
OSOSOiOi -?;OsOOJcoOSO-OSO*OSrOOS O* O*
0000Q0CO30000OQC — ooooooooaooacoooo
c/: ~j~_ x ~x x x x * r. x » x x '/ ~ -/" /: v:
©OOOOOOOOOOOOOOQ
Ob OS OS OS Ob OS OS OS OS OS OS OS OS OS OS OS
9 3B ~. ~- ~- SB 9 ~ ~ SB A ~- 9 ~ -T- 9
X X X X X X X X X X X X X ~X ~X X.
X X X X X X XX X X X X X X X X
OOOOOOOOOOOOC
9Q995999Sfi59
- ->oooococoo:
ooo
rC -4" *J" cc op gp ~; r -' ea G> » c" ■r"-^x»o
K)V f-^" CS OS ~ <-*" O «-^CS ^of
O-NNNOrt- tm -*r o r- ^r .r rir;
I- - — ?l iC * — M - t- ^ » V W ^N
<m" of ~-" co" eo ^" od vS, d~
CM -n
OOOOOOOOOOOO^
8 59999999999
ooooooooooo<
o o o o o
o o o o o
o o -f ~ oi
s
c 5 o «
§55?
s o o o o o o <
8 OOO o o e
-hCKOK(
v o o * r. c x ifl « - » c * >fl o i- r. «
.-« oio»^oc-i;cr-o^cM os ~- co r» ~^
coco i-Teo *-*"*o rt ^
- J000000300C0
_ _;ooooooooooooooo
qqqqoo5qqqqqocqMN«
oo"os-^--^'t^ , oor^'^'os^-o"»o-*ico'--"to
■X iOO'-ONOOOMNO
QOO<N -*»• p-J^-tf" OS '•£>_'
of co" «-^eo
§ ooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooooooo
oooooooo_ooooo >L 0'^-«rr^
hCr*oso^c©osr^ii5oTt©cct^ofoo---oo~r-»
0« — OC5«^« — iO ?. M C - ?»ON OON
OiON^-NNOW'-OlOPJtDO
coco ^*co >-^»r> ^ »*
ooo o o o o o ;
sg§§
— 3B rjONI^irtCiONiOOivw OS OS. *0 CO
O0JU0»0OOO'-0C0 — — —■--©OSOSOOOCO
o^(--o5 ^oo^oo^ooiOoi_cor--co ^h
-MNC , )XMNoort»caQe«ai**
co oo co ce <— •— oi o* coco «© co
8QOOOOOOOOOOQO COO
OOOOOOOOOOOOQOOO
el o o o o o o op o co o in q o « o o
co uoo>of^^eo"»ocx>co"t>^t>^ir5ccirf— " ro
O NOrt»WOOlX"^C-jO-«MN
OS r^CO««-0 CN C» COCO iC«N
— «©
§
r,
§00000000000000 o
occcoooooooooco
ooo ooooqiflq t» c o_ c- o_ o
x ^:" t-" « * d oo oo ifl V «' ■ i r
OiOW^f f «NC»NaO^«01M
OO OS CO CM — CJ CO eo COCO ««
§000000000000000
Sooooooooccccco
OOOOO X>Ol-;0^0 000
tp — * -r — " -^r co~ oo" N 'r"c"r*M*'f pci«
iococooosic^roco'— t^-*o^-Ocr^«
co_ ^ ^* c**_ •- cc -^ O CO »o ^^ h» ^«
0»~* iO C4 CO"
NO«rt'*>0>0^N(N'fO«rt»1«O0D
CNWO-"M©Ni/3^r00CC0I^NO««>O
occeoooNCJC»^«»o cnnchdus cs^h
OJ CN OS ^ -«■ h» CO C
■i
1
Oh
o
5
o
;sis>-Oau<s-;3;
STATE WATER PLAN
67
1 t 1 I .1 IS* I
1 "tf«
—
**
^
■^
r i I i i i^TO
•«*« 1
1 — -f
f
1 • 1 1 CO • I
i i i i i ■ cm i
■ CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
1 t 1 1 i i CM O
■ CM CM
-M
1 1 1 ■ 1 iQ 1
■ OS
OS
OS
OS
OS
i i i i i . OS OS
OS i
1— «
1 OO)
~.
1 . . r 1 . !os ! !
1 I 1 1 1 l«D 1
i'o
<**•
IO
^
O
III!! !©eo
^ !
'o«
o
!co I
• ©i •
o
CO
CM
CO-*
i i i i^« i
• ■^
•««t«
-«**
■^
■^
i ! i ! \ I <<r -^
«J<
! tt -*r
<*
! i ! i ! ! ! ! loo ! !
1 CM 1
• CN
cm
CM
cM
CM
CM CM
CM i
iCM CM
n
t i i OS i i
i i ■ i I iG9 !
! CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
i ! ! i t ! CO CO
CO I
! cc co
~:
i i i l i i i ! !** ! !
i c^
cm
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM CM
CM ,
CM CM
Tl
OS
I 1 ■ I 1 i A J
;os
o
Os
OS
OS
J ; I , , \ OS OS
os ;
| OS OS
OS
00 , ,
! i t i i 'o I
!©
o
o
O
o
it'll !oo
o !
!oo
Q
i i i i i i i i !o i !
i o •
iO
o
o
O
o
o o
o >
-oo
o
> O • i
<o ■
' "^
o
©_
q
TP
©.©
O '
. t^-o^
*<*
1 1 I 1 1 I I | I Oi | |
■ !!!!!&£*!
! »o*
<nT
CM~
CO
V
! ! ! ! ! ! of co".
.-J" '
! co o
o'
! ! ! !eo ! !
o
\c<*
o
OS
-*•
iO -^
<£>
CM OS
^f
1 ^ H 1
iii ^'
CO
■<*
J 1 1 J ,CM iO
CM j
^1
OOOOOtOeOCOc
CO co
o to
oo
oo
o o
ooooooooo
OOC
O f-OO
o
oooooooooooo
OS OS OS OS OS O !— ' O C
oo©
OS©
OS OS
OS OS
OS OS
ososososososososos
OS OS c
js O OS OS
r~.
OSOSOSOSOSOSOSOSOSOSOSOS
053l35di05iOU5'C
O *0 iO
OS to
OS OS
OS OS
OS OS
O0SOO3!". oooooocooo
os osososcrsososososososos
ocxxooooo^oc
00 OOOOOOOOQiOJOiC
^ o o
ft 0Q CS
OC' o
oc' a
OC OC
OO OC
OC oo
OC oo
oo OC
OC OC
oooooooooooooooooo
OOOOOCQOOCOCOOOOCC
oo oo c
00 00 c
C O 00 oo
c -z*. OO 00
oo
00
ooooocoooooooooooooooooo
ooococooooocoooooooooooo
ooooooooc
:>©©
oo
oo
oo
oooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooo
ooooooooc
5 o o
o o
o o
o 3
ooooooooo
o o o o o o o
oooooooooooo
OO-^COOOOOC
^ O CO
o o
© f^
o o
OiOCMOst^-CMOOOS
ONC
7i O O O O
OOOOOtoosOr-OOt-
OT^^ca^ xc
M OS
Oco
CM
or^.
oo »o
tO »— 'OONOOiOOiNOM'rOCWN
eOTfOs^-.coosOcocot--*ocM
iCOiO'VOOt^-iOu
■5 00 TT
Ot^
IO ^
CM
CO ~
OSCO^CMCMOO^fOS-O
CO CM ■"
rccNio
cOCM*— OSCOtON-- «cO'«»"«--'CM
^* ^^ CO ^* ^" *"" '
■**
^H .-^
CM
CO
l-H
^ t^o.
CM
t^-OCM
— H
CM ^h ^ ^h cM i-i *0 -h
c^r
"
"<*
-<r
CM~to"
eo
cm"
ooooooooc
DO©
OO
oo
oo
oo
ooooooooo
OOC
5 O OO
o
o
oooooooooooo
ooooooooc
»oo
o o
o o
5 o
o o
ooooooooo
OOC
t O O o
D
o
oooooooooooo
cooiiflnO'-'Omti
2 CO Cn
or-
O CO
O CM
OS t^-
fOJH^NoooOin
OMr
•* O O iO o
o
ONONOWiOOiONCJO
OO « tO ^ f M tOtO C
■*NO
~h OS
co cm
CO i-«
00 CM
tO»OOS-f<iOOOiO©CO
CM CO«-
-i tO 00 OCM
r^
lOiOCO^-CO"— O CO CM CO I s - CO
t*- ^ -^cm co co*-
- I -, —
o ^
CM
CO
CO
iO i— • CO CM
CO r
H _ ~- t^. OO
CO
b-CO — tOtO>— irtHrttDH
■*»
CM
°\.
CO
t- iO
OS
^H CO
CM
oo"
ooooooooc
300
oo
OO
oo
oo
OOOOOOOOO
OOC
3000
a
o
oooooooooooo
oooooooooooo
ooooooooc
2 o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
OOOOOOOOO
OOC
3 OO O
o
o
NOHMO>aOMT
r cm o
o o
o o
O "^
CO CM
ONOCOHMOOrtOONOOaO
OS
^fcOb-CMCMCMcOOOCMOOcCtO
t"-^«eo^*'eo»-'iOcMC'
:no
— . CO
*-i CO
tO 1-"
CO CO
OiCOS^iOOO^NCO
OS CO C
> ^h CO to OS
CO
CONCCOh-OOTT'-'OOiOCO
OO ^h VNOM'
HOOH
--. —
CM
o
■^
tO ^-t *-« t^.
T»< i-i CO CM t>- OO
^
iO CM OC TT ^^ «-* »-^ •— ' O «
•a
CO
CO
^1
OO tO^
OS
*-* co
c»
IO
oo"
ooooooooc
500
OC
oo
o o
oo
ooooooooo
OOC
5000
a
—
OOOOOOOOOOOO
ooooooooc
2© o
~ —
o o
o o
o —
ooooooooo
OOC
2 o oo
—
o
oooooooooooo
OMM^NO"-Oau
so©
o o
O CO
O OC
CO 0B
NOVOKNOOiO
OCM v
- O O CO O
CO
^NOiONC-OOC* O
WTf^oo^oO'-"Ooa
3MCN
lO CM
O CO
coco
coeoos^jiioooTrcMco
OO CO y
H^ctoo
OS
c^oSiOco^rcM^rooco^roOTr
ONtH NNOM-
to to
00
OS
»o
40 H^«N
o
■« os cm r*- -^
iO
cOMO^iO'-t'-t'Hr-«o^
*-• CO
CO
iO
o
OS t^-
3
»-l t^
ro
o"
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooo
O^CC-^cOCOOtOtOOCMOcOO— O^TftOOi'-OCNNX'TOONO^OOOCO
O*c0IN*Cft00NiOt0OiO^M*OOr^*tO*cN«^O00"M©
CM CM »-h OO CO CM -^ ^-" CO *— *& o 00 OS CO r* !-• CM — r- *o •— CM iO OS O
*-l *■» <-t ^« OO OS '"I® ^ CM OO "*
*-? ^ i-Tcm"' ^T
oooooooooooo
oooooooooooo
i-i?QO«CO?l^fOC-IOXV
0>C«OH^lOOOOX'«^'-'^ , »•-'XOOXMCCO•-••-<^•CCOfO'-W*N^O^ ,
^00'H^NiHNHOO'-OO^MNSOWNOOb>N«Tficai*NO«XW
COCMCM^HCO'^'^tO^HCO lOCMCO CO CM CM *-» ihOUJ OS t-tCOcOOllO
OXOtCO-HVMX^NC-)
COt'-CMCMO'fJ'^'OOCOtOr^cM
rt CM ^-« CM CO
-l u^<:
Si
o
J2
a
-a
•M °
c5§£°
03 -SO
-Jw g -
a
a
c
c
C
r»; o OJ
c o h
C X 8
. J » o »>
OCL,o-JHoWeL,Q
fc- es «s o cj rt
O
. « >
S3 -
a o «
a
o
O
M
a.
—
> CJ
Ji fe ! a -a S
O g^'3 2.2:
- CJ r^ O C O
E.S b = l |
«
s
1X1
i
« c^
oo
o a'C
o> o -S
<^ csO
S 09
J s
^3 2
« go
C w 'rl _=
— CC
■^ - =
'■dc3i.
1- u I.
, c 5 a>
—
3
O
ego
°o.s
x
a m c
CC O "
-o a a
V o o
68
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
<
va
$
u
O
<
z
<
I
J
J
H
I
H
o
I
<
H
Z
D
O
2
"3
o-o
e t
a o
j ! i
S = £
o
■■T
"sis'
.1
lit
S3
g
© o ooo
Ca Ca C> A o*
* Ca Ca oa o>
00 00 00 OO 00
X X X X X
Q C O O O
© © © cm ©
— ^« Ca Tp Oi
»C Oi ~* CO CM
CO CM ^
£
cccoc ooo©
ci ca ca ca ca ca ca ca eft
Ca ca C- Ca Ca Ca Ci Ca Ca
X X X X 'X X X X X
■X.xx x: x x x x x
oooooocoo
8 59S995S9
^oo^oooooo
OO 00 « « «" O* N* C W
CO © I— ca io w ~- ~- ca
■— © cr> oo r-- ~ o* »o
cm cm iSoc
3 91 i SB SB c
CM
44
CI CM
SB 91
gg
■s?
?.;
98 91
3) 5
4.2 \
e i 9 r-
T X X
> — OO
O«tOt0!O<OM«(OOOOOO
»r4Hi«Mpa^|MMO>QO)0)09
»0 »C *C *C «rt »C — iO 4/^ C- Ci C- CS Ca
; = i
fH---MOHCW-CXXC'f
NQCCONOPl«tO--U30N
*-« — « CM « CO — C* C3 CC ■*• — <£> — •
<
s
o
a
u.
u.
o
I
z
p
<*
z
o
<
c/3
O L CM
- ' - - 1
o o o o o
OO ooo
po t— oc »o to
o o o o o C
o o o o o ;
-*r o <M co O i
lO!
: o :
: o :
8ooooco£co5ooo
O t- CM
*— rtT? OS
c <U O —
rt "T'ScJi
— — S-o,
o o o o o
O OO o o
« © ?•! ifl lO
goooooooo
oooooooo
-j"l-»r?iOOOOOO
gg§§g§gg;
figg
co w^wwcccci^ciicccoco
CM — ' «
s
O •- CM
*— • rt*^ ca
J=Hg
»g CM Q-Ca
§
ooooooooo
OOOOOQOOO
co qw © © © © © ©
W'-DO^t^OiOC CO
^« iO iN O h- C N N t^
E
ggggggfggggggg
§
O »- CI
>— rt-o 3>
^« (-4
i
S5£i
S O C: C:
^ c; o c-
3 OOO
^aNOOONONO»
^h -^CM OOCM CM ^
gggg?
ce-"Occc
^gggggggi
CM >-" CO CO »C fC ^*" CM CO 00 »« h» CD
CO « ^H
151
4 fill
cm t^. oo ■<*• ca cj c
C^-NtDiCOON3lCNONtO
^•OaooeMCMCococcco^r-aocM
CM«-«-^CM-^cocoeo — cocococt r»
■s
3
c
•o
c
o
00
CO
1 6 a
§i $>■* 3«
S3
-Jtl.
e«
CJ O -J c2 wj
■
-
g
■
3
i£
>.
:
-c
a
c
/.
a n S.S
'5.5*1 s
a 111
> s Gee •? cc OS
c2c2cocScoo3cS»J^co>
OS _
8 -J
STATE WATER PLAN
69
<r>oo
oi o-i 01
cs O Os
O CI iO
co ^
co co os
03 OJ ~-
QOOJ
o o o
POO
o^oo
OSOSOOSOSOSOsdlOSOOsdsdlOsdscOOsds»OCDOSOS
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOCOOOMi-'QOOOi-'OOOOO
0000000000000000000000000000000500000)0^0000
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
o^coooo^ooooooooooooooosc-a
dNcloV*0)^"dco*«^oo*oTri(NioNdo^iciod
I0O) — 0JW5WC000OStJ'SiONMO00NNiC»0Ci0t}<
t— i-H(N NNH^NaOOfClTMOHN
oooooooooooooooooooooo
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOS—^'-^OSCOCOOOOOlOOaOOCNOOCO'— 't^-CO
t-Coj" co" os o" o c<f oj" oj -^ i-T r-^" oi"eo" ^r r-T>— T ^ -^ ,_r t-C o
i— i -h ^oiNTrt^Oiiooi«05NiofOT}<oo^ooiHrH
oooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooo
or^----osi— los^-oooc^oooocooooco-rrc^
to ci" co co oT o? i-I" o oo" oo* -v os no" os -«r .-T io go" oo — "" co" of
'—•>—" TMC>H^Ni0t!j3rtO'H | Oc0O00»00!i-'^
0000000000(300000000000
oooooooooooooooooooooo
OM^r^iOOt^C > O C >t*-OOC lO^f OOOCtDWC
<CiCcoco^o^b^ow5orcsosT^co"ocoToo"^40cceoro4"
CO ~^ i0ON'J , O>X'-Ci(Di0O00OihNN03Ni-i
.-. ih^t1< WNWiH Ol CO
oooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooo
O^CO -* ^-^^O O O O OOOO-sOOOt^OOO-100
^o-fTrt^.irror^Trb^cor^oocdos^iooco^-^eoc-i'
OS <M cOOON{DiON^H--"-i-iOOrHioioeOOOOlNiH
~^ NNiO^MMWN CN CO
--*0 1 t<0S00C©00t-^0Sh-t--e0»O»-«Oc0-rJ<c0c0i— «OSOS
ONWN*00050QftD<NO-'-D»0(N*FHHrHcO
os cs co ic «-» ■** >o -^r ^< co^TriHTpic^oN^iN
43
3
o
■s
m
3
&
.2
d
«
cj
E
o
1
T3
e
%
CO
00
C3 §•§«
3 O o
es J
o So «j1
.53 cj 1 - 1 >,f-
Ss g ">g-*
oq S no WSJ
;o c
4 v o
g-s
3 V
p.
Ijlljlli
- u « Oi n >
_ g_o e o e «
!ts£>3
cua
= K
-2 fe
> u
-•J
.2 <u
c
s
ft o
£ 2
c
Q-S
o^-
1*«/
CO % a-s-|«5-
cj -3 C3 -C - 1 - ,^ cj rt
^
I
70
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
u
CQ
<
1 *
* I
3 I
z J2
O o
</3 -a
< o
u TI
o £
Z 2
2 -S
a 1,
*-< </)
H CQ
>
s
H
Z
o
S
u
O
<
u
>
<
1
9 f a
° **i
c >
22
e
a a
« F o>
o H*y
c o
«-o »
-/: 9 —
*s ""a
o *J c
o.S_
T I- o
£ v. o>
(73 a; CO
*3
~£2
3 4)
Sfca
is
•9«2§
1-36
o a*
a,
o rt
«S
a. _
SI
8,8
4) _
"a
•- a
v o
^i
gs
e ■
;§§;
r r :
i = i § i
5 t- ^" CI — (O
gggggggggggg
co O — "" t -" © c t i o ^r ci" C*3 m ■*
— C4 -*r **< n
ONf OW«S00 0>N«OO
s
§
§
s
§§8:
iggggggg g
) O O O O CI *N <M
fH C>1 M ^f lO «0 «
CC'CI— «Nt©!NCO»CMWW
O O O O © O © O © O © O
•-"OsooocoONioowoc-r
5
§
.Si
3
:ssss
to q q q q q q q <^ p oo ^ ^
QO <D N ©" cf <0 00 !C O) »C 1-^ t^"
~-aOOOC400a>»OC4tf3»-»
IHtWiiid ^
STATE WATER PLAN 71
Return and Ground Waters.
In the plan for the development of the state's water resources, a
part of the water supplies considered available for use is that water
returning to the natural stream channels and to the underground
reservoirs from irrigation applications and from other uses. In cer-
tain areas, the water, once used for irrigation, domestic or other pur-
poses, returning to the streams, either as direct surface drainage or
as inflow from the ground water basin, is available for reuse on lands
at lower elevations along the streams and may constitute a large por-
tion of their water supply. Records and measurements taken in the
Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys during recent years indicate these
return flows may range from fifteen to more than forty per cent of the
water diverted from the streams. This water does not all return to the
streams immediately and the return from irrigation water therefore is
not all available for reuse for that purpose in the same season. It is
estimated, however, that 60 to 75 per cent of this water returns to the
streams during the irrigation months with a regimen that approxi-
mately synchronizes with the irrigation demand and that the remainder
returns about uniformly throughout the other months of the year.
The suitability of this return water for reuse is an important element
in the plan, because the return water constitutes a substantial part
of the total available water supply. During the past year, the Water
Resources Branch of the United States Geological Survey chemically
analyzed samples of water taken during the low water season on many
of the principal streams of the state. Among these were analyses of
the water in the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers during the low
water season when practically the entire flow comprised return water
from irrigation. These preliminary analyses showed that the return
water in these streams under present conditions is entirely satisfactory
chemically for municipal, irrigation and industrial use and can be
classified as "good."
Another water supply which can be made available is that collected
and reregulated in the underground basins. Water from surface appli-
cation and rainfall which is not used by the growing crops or natural
vegetation, and also from seepage from stream channels, percolates into
these basins and is available for use by means of pumping unless it
drains back into the streams as return water as above described. These
basins not only collect the return water and make it available for reuse
on some other area, but also act as underground reservoirs for cyclic
storage, thereby making excess waters of one season available for use
in seasons of deficiency in surface supplies. This method of regulation
and reuse is of particular importance in the upper San Joaquin Valley,
the coastal basins of southern California, the Santa Clara Valley and
numerous smaller basins, all of which depend upon pumped ground
water for a supply.
72
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
CHAPTER IV
WATER REQUIREMENTS
The variety of uses of water in California possibly exceeds that of
any other state in the Union. These include domestic, municipal,
irrigation, salinity control, industrial, navigation, power development,
hydraulic mining and recreational uses. Recreational and naviga-
tion uses result in no actual consumption of water, and, in most
instances, do not alter the regimen of the stream. Other uses, like
power development and hydraulic mining, while altering the regimen
of the stream, also do not consume any water. The uses of water for
municipal, industrial and domestic purposes are similar, as these
uses are largely confined to the more thickly populated areas. Natur-
ally, the use of water increases per unit of area with increase in
density of population. For domestic service alone, the unit use is
practically the same within small cities as for irrigation. For indus-
trial and commercial areas, the amount of water used may be some-
what larger than the irrigation requirements of an equivalent area.
As densities of population and industrial development increase, unit
water requirements also will increase. At present only areas around
San Francisco Bay and in the metropolitan area of Los Angeles have
become so thickly populated that the water requirements are greater
than for an equivalent irrigated area. Water for irrigation is, and
probably will continue to be, the largest single use of water in the state.
At present more than 90 per cent of the water used is for irrigation
purposes. Irrigation is practiced in nearly every section of the state,
but the greatest use for this purpose is in the Great Central Valley, on
the Pacific slope of southern California and in the Imperial and Santa
Clara valleys.
There is considerable variation both as to rate and period of use of
water for various purposes. For irrigation, the period of use varies in
different parts of the state with different climatic conditions. The
greater part of the irrigation demand, especially in the Great Central
Valley, occurs during the months of March to October. However, in
certain areas, particularly in southern California, irrigation is practiced
during the entire year, and in other areas water is used to a minor extent
for irrigation during the winter months. The rate of demand for
irrigation varies from month to month during the irrigation season,
and reaches a maximum monthly demand of one-eighth to one-quarter
of the total seasonal requirements in midsummer. For municipal,
industrial and power development purposes, the period of use of water
is usually continuous throughout the year. The rate of use, however,
varies from month to month. For domestic and industrial purposes
it ranges from a minimum during the winter of about 80 per cent to a
maximum during the summer of about 125 per cent of the average
monthly use during the year. For power development, the use of
water varies considerably for different power systems, but, under exist-
ing conditions of operation, an average range is from a maximum of
about 20 per cent above to a minimum of 20 per cent below the
average monthly use during the year. For hydraulic mining, the
STATE WATER PLAN 73
period of use during the year varies with conditions of water supply
and climate, but may be continuous throughout the year with a
comparatively uniform rate of use from month to month if the above
conditions permit. In all of the foregoing uses there also are wide
variations in the rate of use from day to day during the month and at
different hours of the day.
Water requirements for any particular area vary with the use to
which the water is put, not only in total amount and in monthly demand
but also with the point at which the water is measured. The geo-
graphic position of the source of supply in relation to point of use,
methods of conveyance, the extent of the area to be supplied and the
opportunity afforded for reuse of water controlled by topographic,
geographic and geologic conditions are factors that have an important
bearing on water requirements.
For these reasons some variation in treatment of the problem of
requirement and supply for different areas has been necessary. The
variation in treatment has in turn necessitated the use of different
terms defined as follows :
' ' Gross allowance ' ' designates the amount of water diverted at source
of supply.
"Net allowance" designates the amount of water actually delivered
to the area served.
1 ' Consumptive use ' ' designates the amount of water actually consumed
through evaporation, transpiration by plant growth and other processes.
"Net use" designates the sum of the consumptive use from artificial
supplies and irrecoverable losses.
In an area as large as California, where the uses and methods of
use are so many and so varied and where the conditions — topographic,
geographic and geologic — are so varying, it is practically impossible
to place the water requirements for all areas on the same basis. In
some areas the source of supply is located at the point of use. In
this instance, the gross allowance and the net allowance are the
same. In other areas, where underground capacity is available and
reuse of water can be effectively and efficiently practiced, net use con-
trols the amount of water required. In areas where it is not possible
or practicable to practice reuse, the net allowance becomes the net use.
In the following sections of this chapter are presented the water
requirements in each of the seven basins into which the state has
been divided.
North Pacific Coast Basin.
In the North Pacific Coast Basin the precipitation and run-off are
larger per unit area than in any other basin of the state. Some irrigation
is practiced and some water also is used for domestic, municipal and
mining purposes. A large surplus in water supply, over and above
its ultimate needs, exists in this area. The area of agricultural lands
is relatively small. These lands were outlined during the investiga-
tion of 1921. No further survey has been made during the present
investigation to determine the portion of these agricultural lands
that would be feasible of irrigation. Based on the information
obtained, however, in classifying the lands in the Sacramento and
San Joaquin valleys and adjacent foothills, it is estimated that not
more than 80 per cent of the gross agricultural land embracing 421,000
74
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
aorea would ever be irrigated. This percentage is considered liberal for
this basin. Calculated upon this basis the total net area which might
ultimately require an irrigation supply would be 337,000 acres. It is
estimated that the net use in this basin would be 1.8 acre-feet per acre
and the gross allowance 3.0 aere-feet per acre. Based on these rates the
total net use of water for irrigation would be 607,000 acre-feet and the
gross allowance 1,011,000 acre-feet per season. In addition to irrigation,
water would be required for other purposes. No estimates have been
made for such uses.
Sacramento River Basin.
The uses of water in the Sacramento River Basin include all of those
mentioned at the beginning of this chapter. Of these, the use for irri-
gation purposes does and probably will continue to predominate, and
has, therefore, been used as the basis for estimating the water require-
ments of the basin. It is believed that the total requirements estimated
upon this assumption are adequate for complete future development
of the basin.
In order to determine the area of land in the basin which might
ultimately require water for irrigation, a survey was made to classify
all of the lands in the Sacramento Valley and adjacent foothills
on the basis of their adaptability for irrigation. This survey was
more comprehensive than a soil survey since it involved the ele-
ments of soil texture, presence of alkali and topography. An area
of 8,750,000 acres was examined. The standards used divide the valley
hinds into five classes. They are described briefly as follows:
( lass 1. Lands not limited in the feasibility of irrigation or in crop
yield by Die elements of soil texture, alkali or topography.
• lass 2. Lands which, because of the presence of alkali, hardpan,
roughness, heavy brush or by other factors, are limited in the feasible
extent of irrigation development.
Class 3. Lands which, because of extremely hummocky or hog-
wallow character, shallow soils and channel cut topography, in addi-
tion to the limitations in class 2, are further limited in the feasible
extent of irrigation development.
Class 4. Lands of dubious value except for pasture and gun clubs
and possibly some rice culture.
Class 5. Lands of no present or potential agricultural value.
Table 7 summarizes the lands of the entire Sacramento Valley floor by
classes in accord with the foregoing standards.
TABLE 7
CLASSIFICATION OF LANDS ON SACRAMENTO VALLEY FLOOR, EXCLUDING THE
SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA
Gross area
Oba
In acres
In per cent
of total
1
1,735.000
943,000
573.000
248,000
185,000
47 1
2 .
25.6
3 .
15 6
4 .
6.7
5..
5
Total
5,684,000
100.0
STATE WATER PLAN
75
Mountain valleys and foothill lands were not classified on strictly
the same basis as the valley floor, but the quality of the soil and top-
ography governed the percentage of irrigable land which might come
under irrigation at some future time. "Without regard to economic
feasibility, it was determined before the inclusion of any of these areas
that is was physically possible to furnish them a water supply.
Table 8 presents, by sections, the gross agricultural lands and net
irrigable areas obtained by applying factors to the gross areas. The
Delta of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers, although only about
one-third lies in the Sacramento River Basin, is included herein since
a large part of its water supply would come from this basin under the
plan for ultimate development.
TABLE 8
SUMMARY OF GROSS AGRICULTURAL AND NET IRRIGABLE AREAS IN SACRAMENTO
RIVER BASIN, INCLUDING THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA
Gross agricultural area
Net irrigable area
Section
In acres
In per cent
of total
In acres
In per cent
of total
Valley floor
3,499,000
2,099,000
416,000
"421,000
54.4
32.6
6.5
6.5
2,640,000
922,000
312,000
392,000
61.9
21.6
Mountain valley __
7 3
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
9.2
Total
6,435,000
100.0
4,266,000
100.0
ncludes 9,000 acres of land formerly reclaimed, flooded at time of survey of 1929, but subject to reclamation.
As compared with these net areas that will ultimately require water
for irrigation, it is estimated that there were 1,076,000 acres, or about
one-quarter of the total net irrigable area, irrigated in 1929. Of this
area there were 872,000 acres on the Sacramento Valley floor and in
the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, 66,000 acres in the foothill areas,
and 138,000 acres in the mountain valleys.
The ultimate water requirements for the net area of irrigable lands
on the valley floor were estimated by methods developed during the
investigation. The net areas were derived from the land classification
by applying various percentages to the gross areas of the four classes
of agricultural land. Study also was made to estimate the probable
acreage that ultimately would be planted to each kind of crop and the
probable locations of these plantings. By combining these several
calculations, the net area that ultimately would be planted to each
crop was estimated. The net allowance for each crop was obtained by
applying the unit net allowance, estimated from the best available infor-
mation, to the net irrigable area for that crop. The total net allowance
for the entire net irrigable area was obtained by totaling the net allow-
ances for the several crops. The total gross allowance was estimated by
increasing the amount of the total net allowance by 50 per cent to provide
for conveyance and application losses.
The ultimate water requirements of the net area of irrigable lands
in the foothill and mountain valleys have been estimated by using the
requirement per unit of area as determined by the investigations of
76
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
1921.* The gross allowances were based on the assumption that the
water required for the net use amounts to 60 per cent of the water
diverted, 40 per cent returning to the stream.
Since the distribution of irrigation water to the lands in the foothills
and on the valley floor would in general require long conduits, with
Large resultant conveyance losses, the water requirements for these
areas would be tin 1 gross allowance. Most of the water lost during
transportation would find its way to the stream channels and be available
for reuse on lands at lower elevation or in the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta.
Because of the method of irrigation used in the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta, it is a difficult matter to differentiate between gross
and net allowances and net use. For this reason, values for net use
only are used as the basis of the estimates of water requirements. The
value for the net use per unit of area is not given because the ultimate
total requirement of 1,200,000 acre-feet is divided among irrigation use,
evaporation from the delta channels, transpiration from tule and other
natural vegetation and evaporation from Levees and uncultivated land
surfaces. It is estimated that during the irrigation season, the ultimate
total net use of water for all demands on the entire area will average
about 2.6 acre-feet per acre, and the total net use for irrigation only
will average about 2.3 acre-feet per acre.
The total estimated allowances and uses in acre-feet and the average
in acre-feet per acre in these areas are shown, by sections, in Table 9.
TABLE 9
ULTIMATE SEASONAL WATER REQUIREMENTS OF IRRIGABLE LANDS IN SACRAMENTO
RIVER BASIN, INCLUDING THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA
Section
Net
irrigable
area
in acres
Gross allowance
in acre-feet
Net allowance
in acre-feet
Net use
in acre-feet
Total
Average
per acre
Total
Average
per acre
Total
Average
per acre
Valley floor
2,640,000
922,000
312,000
392,000
9,033,000
2,305,000
936,000
1,200,000
3.42
2.50
3.00
6,025,000
1,383,000
562,000
1,200,000
2.28
1.50
1.80
5,190,000
1,383,000
562,000
1,200,000
1.97
Foothill areas
1.50
Mountain valleys
1.80
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta..
Total....
4,266,000
13,474,000
9,170,000
8.335,000
Control of Salinity in Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
A study of variation of salinity in upper San Francisco Bay and the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and its control by fresh water releases
has been under way since 1929. The detail results of this investiga-
tion are presented in a separate report,t and are briefly summarized in
the following paragraphs.
The channels of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta form a part of
the tidal l>;isin of San Francisco Bay. The regimen of these channels
is affected by tidal action, the extent and magnitude of which is depend-
en1 at any particular time upon the amount of stream flow 7 discharging
through the channels into the bay. During summer periods of low
• I'.uii. tin No. 6, "Irrigation Requirements of California Lands," Division of Engi-
neering and Irrigation. 1923.
t Bulletin No. 27, "Variation and Control of Salinity in Sacramento-San Joaquin
ta and Upper San Francisco Bay," Division of Water Resources.
STATE WATER PLAN 77
stream flow the effect of tidal action on these channels is a maximum
and is characterized by the rise and fall and flood and ebb of the
channel waters. As stream flow increases with the winter season and
floods occur, these tidal effects are diminished and often eliminated
from all or a large portion of the delta channels; and during extreme
floods the effect of tidal action may be partially eliminated from a large
portion of the waters of the upper bay.
The waters of San Francisco Bay are a combination of the salt waters
of the ocean, which enter the bay through the Golden Gate, and the
fresh waters of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers and local
streams of the San Francisco Bay region, which discharge into the bay.
The salinity of the water resulting from this combination is extremely
variable, both geographically and during different periods of the year,
and depends upon the amount of fresh water discharged by the streams
into the bay. In general the more saline waters are found in the lower
bay nearest the ocean, the fresher waters in the upper bays and tidal
estuaries and channels through which the fresh water enters the bay,
while in between are found gradual gradations of salt to fresh water.
The pulsating action of the ocean tides accompanying the tidal flow
into and out of the tidal basin of San Francisco Bay exerts a positive
force tending to push upstream and mix the more saline waters from
the lower bay with the fresher waters of the upper bay, with a resulting
upstream advance of salinity. Opposed to this action, stream flow
resists this upstream advance of salinity and tends by its action to push
the fresher waters downstream. The relative magnitude of these two
opposing forces exerted by tidal action and stream flow controls the
advance and retreat of salinity in the upper portions of the tidal basin
into which the fresh water stream flow enters. The force exerted by
tidal action toward advancing salinity upstream is measured by the
total amount of tidal flow into and out of the basin. Since the amount
of tidal flow passing any section decreases the farther the section is
upstream and the smaller the tidal volume becomes in the basin above
the section, the effect of tidal action in advancing salinity decreases
progressively upstream.
The salinity at any point in the tidal basin is constantly changing
with the rise and fall of the tide. Wide variations occur during a tidal
cycle, amounting to as much as 200 per cent above and 80 per cent
below a mean value. The maximum salinity during a tidal cycle occurs
at time of slack water following higher high tide and the minimum at
time of slack water following lower low tide. The salinity at any time
during a tidal cycle is directly related to the height of the tide above
lower low water, increasing in direct proportion to the height of the tide
above its lower low stage.
Salinity increases only slightly with depth. The maximum variation
found from surface to bottom for water with a salinity about half that
of ocean water was three-tenths per cent increase per foot of depth.
The amount of increase is gradually less as the water becomes either
more fresh or more salty.
There is little lateral variation in the salinity of water in any channel
in the delta. The waters in the entire channel are quite uniform in
78 DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES
saline content at any particular time, except for a slight tendency
toward increase in salinity at greater depths. There is no evidence of
high concentrations of sail water creeping along either the bottom or
sides of any channel.
The salinity conditions in the upper bay and delta region during
any season are characterized by marked cyclic variations which result
directly from the variations in stream flow entering the basin. The
maximum retreat of salinity and the farthest downstream advance of
fresli water is practically coincident each season with the maximum
flood flows. As the stream flow decreases with the approach of sum-
mer, the salinity gradually advances upstream until the maximum
advance and degree of salinity at any point is reached in late summer,
some time after the minimum stream flow for the season occurs. The
salinity starts to retreat as soon as the stream flow has increased suffi-
ciently above its minimum summer flow and continues as the stream flow
increases with the coming of winter, until it again reaches a point of
maximum retreat during the period of maximum flood run-off.
The invasion of saline water from the lower bay into the upper bay
and lower delta is a natural phenomenon which has occurred each year
as far back as historical records go. The magnitude and extent of
saline invasion varies widely from year to year as a direct result of the
wide variations in the total amount and distribution of seasonal stream
flow entering the delta and upper bay. It is approximately related to
the total seasonal stream flow into the delta, the records indicating that
the drier the season and the smaller the total amount of stream flow
entering the delta, the greater will be the advance of salinity and the
smaller will be the retreat of salinity. The magnitude and extent of
invasion of salinity during the summer period of low stream flow, how-
ever, are more closely related to the total amount of summer stream flow
into the delta. Records show that the smaller the total amount of
stream flow into the delta during the summer period of June 15 to
September 1, the farther upstream will be the advance of salinity and
the greater will be the degree of salinity reached at any point in the
upper bay and delta channels.
The actual occurrence of advance or retreat of salinity at any point
or channel section in the upper bay or delta region is dependent upon
the rate of stream flow passing the section and the initial degree of
salinity present in the water at and below the particular point at any
time. For any particular degree of salinity at any particular point or
channel section there is a rate of stream flow which will equalize the
action of the tides and control or prevent the advance of salinity. If at
any time the rate of flow is less than the required amount for control
for the particular degree of salinity, the salinity will tend to advance
to points farther upstream and to increase to greater degrees at the par-
ticular point or channel section. If, on the other hand, the rate of flow
is greater than the control flow, the salinity will tend to retreat to points
downstream and to decrease to smaller degrees at the particular point
or channel section. At any particular section, the rate of stream flow
required to control or prevent the advance of salinity increases as the
degree of salinity at the particular point or channel section decreases.
For any particular degree of salinity the rate of flow required to control
STATE WATER PLAN 79
or prevent the advance of salinity becomes smaller the farther upstream
the point or channel section.
The maximum extent of advance of salinity and the maximum
degrees of salinity reached in any season at various points in the upper
bay and delta channels is directly related to the amount and variation
of rate of daily stream flow into the delta and of daily consumptive use
of water in the delta by crops, natural vegetation and evaporation from
open water. The consumptive use of water in the delta is estimated to
vary from a minimum of 400 second-feet (in winter) to a maximum of
3700 second-feet (in August), with an average consumption during
July and August of 3500 second-feet. In order to control or prevent
the advance of salinity at any point in the upper bay and delta region
the rate of inflow into the delta must exceed the amount of water con-
sumed above the particular point by an amount sufficient to equalize
the action of the tide in its tendency to advance salinity upstream.
The last thirteen years have been a period of subnormal precipita-
tion and stream flow. Moreover, during this period there have been
increases in irrigation developments and diversions on the Sacra-
mento and San Joaquin river systems. As a result of the combined
effect of subnormal stream flow and increased upstream irrigation
diversions, the stream flow into the delta has been greatly diminished.
This has had the effect of causing abnormal invasions of salinity into
the upper bay and delta region during certain years of this period.
The maximum invasion of salinity occurred in the summer of 1924,
when the water in the channels of nearly one-half of the delta at the
time of maximum invasion of salinity during the summer season was
not suitable for irrigation use. In the dry years of 1920 and 1926
about one-fifth of the delta was similarly affected. During the
remainder of the last ten years the extent of invasion has not been
serious, similarly affecting only three to nine per cent of the delta.
The extent of invasion of salinity into the delta is naturally con-
trolled by stream flow. When stream flow is sufficient, no invasion of
magnitude occurs. It is evident, therefore, that the invasion of salinity
into the delta can be positively prevented artificially by means of releases
of fresh water into the delta at rates and in amounts equivalent to
natural flow, which the records show has actually and positively pre-
vented and controlled the advance of salinity.
In order to control the advance of salinity, a supply of water flowing
into the delta must be provided sufficient in amount, first, to take care
of the consumptive use in the delta and, second, an additional amount
flowing into Suisun Bay sufficient to repel the effect of tidal action in
advancing salinity. The studies show that the practicable degree
of control by means of fresh water releases would be a control at
Antioch sufficient to limit the increase of salinity at that point to a mean
degree of not more than 100 parts of chlorine per 100,000 parts of water,
with decreasing salinity upstream. In order to effect a positive control
of salinity at Antioch to this desired degree, a flow of 3300 second-feet
in the combined channels of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers
past Antioch into Suisun Bay would be required. This would necessi-
tate a maximum gross rate of inflow into the delta at the time of
maximum consumptive use of water in the delta in midsummer of about
7000 second-feet. The studies show that it would be impracticable,
80 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
because of the much greater amounts of water required, to control
salinity by means of fresh water releases to this degree ;it a point farther
downstream. The point and degree of control proposed would not
only fully protect the delta from invasion of salinity to a harmful
degree, but also would permit the diversion of water from the channels
of the delta for the fresh water needs of the industries, municipalities
and agricultural lands in the upper bay region. Fresh water of high
quality with a saline content of ten parts or less of chlorine per 100,000
parts of water would be available with this proposed control in the
channels of over 90 per cent of the delta area.
The annual amount of water required to control salinity as proposed
would total 2,390,000 acre-feet. However, only a portion of this water
would be released from storage, because, even under the conditions of
ultimate development in the proposed State Water Plan, a portion of
the water required for control of salinity would be contributed each
year from unregulated run-off. In years of large stream flow, this
unregulated run-off would constitute a large portion of the total supply
required. With stream flow into the delta such as occurred in the last
ten-year period and with the present consumption of water in the delta,
the additional amount of water required to supplement the available
supply during this period would have averaged 384,000 acre-feet per
year, varying from a minimum of 149,000 acre-feet in the more normal
years to a maximum of 850,000 acre-feet in the extremely dry year of
1924. This water requirement would have been in excess of the con-
sumptive demands in the delta.
San Joaquin River Basin.
Like the Sacramento River Basin the principal demand for water in
the San Joaquin River Basin is for irrigation. Due to smaller rainfall,
irrigation is more essential for crop production than in the Sacramento
River Basin. This fact accounts in part for the larger irrigation devel-
opment in the San Joaquin Valley. The ultimate future water require-
ments for this area are estimated on the basis of those for agricultural
use. Under conditions of ultimate development, the total seasonal
requirement will be in direct proportion to the area of land available
and susceptible of development under irrigation.
As might be expected in a basin so great in extent, there are wide
variations in the types and grades of agricultural land. For this reason
it was necessary to make a complete classification of all the lands in
the basin. In making the field survey the entire floor of the valley was
examined and classified to the extent of 7,933,000 acres. The foothill
areas on the eastern rim of the valley, aggregating 977,000 acres, also
were examined and classified on the same basis as those in the Sacra-
mento River Basin. This makes a total of S, 910,000 acres examined and
classified in the San Joaquin River Basin, exclusive of the San Joaquin
portion of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. This area is included
in the Sacramento River Basin total in Table 8.
The basis for the classification of the lands in the San Joaquin Valley
is similar to that in the Sacramento Valley. The survey comprehends
the determination of the suitability of the lands for profitable develop-
ment under irrigation. It was more comprehensive than a soil survey
since it involved the elements of soil texture, presence of alkali and
STATE WATER PLAN
81
topography. The lands on the valley floor were placed in the following
five general classes:
Class 1. Lands not limited in the feasibility of irrigation or in crop
yield by the elements of soil texture, alkali or topography. These are
lands capable of good yield at reasonable costs of preparation.
Class 2. Lands placed in a grade below class 1 because of the
presence of hardpan, roughness, alkali, or other factors. These are
lands of medium ability to carry irrigation costs.
Class 3. Lands which, by present standards, do not justify irriga-
tion with regulated water supplies, but which may eventually come into
class 2 with improvements in methods of alkali removal or reduction
in cost of leveling. These are lands not now suitable for irrigation,
but for which the conditions may not justify a present conclusion as to
the permanence of this limitation.
Class 4. Lands suitable only for pasture with flood irrigation and
of too poor quality to be utilized for the usual crops.
Class 5. Lands considered as permanently nonirrigable by any
reasonable or probable future standards. The poor quality of the land
may be due to alkali, shallow depth of soil, hardpan, roughness or
steepness, or a combination of these factors.
Table 10 summarizes, by classes, the lands of the entire San Joaquin
Valley floor, excluding the San Joaquin Delta, in accord with the fore-
going standards :
TABLE 10
CLASSIFICATION OF LANDS ON SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY FLOOR, EXCLUDING
THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA
Gross area
Class
In acres
In per cent
of total
1
3,950,000
1,726,000
1,175,000
391,000
691,000
49.8
2
21.8
3
14.8
4 ,
4.9
5
8.7
Total
7,933,000
100.0
The foothill areas, as in the Sacramento River Basin, were not classi-
fied on the same basis as the valley floor, but the quality of soil, topog-
raphy and physical possibility of furnishing a water supply to them
were given consideration in estimating the percentage of irrigable land
that at some future time might come under irrigation.
Table 11 presents, by sections, the gross agricultural lands and net
irrigable areas obtained by applying factors to gross areas of lands
falling in classes 1, 2, 3 and 4. The figures of net irrigable area include
all lands which, on the basis of classification adopted, might at some
future time produce crops, but without consideration of availability or
cost of a water supply. Class 5 land is not included. The San Joaquin
portion of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta has been included witli
irrigable lands of the Sacramento River Basin.
6 — 80993
S2
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
TABLE 11
SUMMARY OF GROSS AGRICULTURAL AND NET IRRIGABLE AREAS IN SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER BASIN, EXCLUDING THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA
Gross agricultural area
Nat irrigable are*
Section
In acres
I n per cent
of total
In acres
In per cent
of total
Valley floor -
7,242,000
977,000
88.1
11.9
5,324.000
380,000
93 3
6 7
Total
8,219,000
100
5,704.000
100
As compared with the above net areas that may ultimately require
water for irrigation, it is estimated that there were 2,033,000 acres, or
about one-third of the total net irrigable area, irrigated in 1929.
In estimating the ultimate water requirements of the San Joaquin
Valley, it has been necessary to take into account the marked difference
between the upper and lower portions thereof in the adequacy of local
tributary streams to meet the ultimate irrigation demand. For the
purposes of this report the upper San Joaquin Valley is the southern
portion of the valley extending on the east side as far north as the
Chowchilla River and on the west side to a line extending from Men-
dota to Oro Loma. The lower San Joaquin Valley is the remaining
portion of the valley lying north of this line.
Upper San Joaquin Valley — The upper San Joaquin Valley is an area
in which the tributary run-off is inadequate to meet the ultimate water
requirements and in which full development will be possible only with
the importation of waters from more distant sources. Along the east-
ern side of the valley, the topographic and geologic characteristics of the
basin are such that extensive underground storage capacity is avail-
able. The development of ground water supplies drawn from such
storage adds to the effective utilization of the tributary run-off to the
extent that it may be efficiently utilized within the particular area.
Where adequate storage is available, the required inflow may be esti-
mated upon the basis of net use. On the western slope of the valley a
large body of fine land overlies subsoils of such chemical constituents
that the use of shallow ground water would be injurious to irrigated
crops. Therefore, the application of water to these lands must be upon
the basis of actual plant needs and the net allowance should closely
approximate net use. This area has extremely limited local water
resources and if developed extensively would require the importation of
practically all of its supply.
On the eastern slope of the valley, records, continuous in most areas
since 1921, of the extent of irrigation development effected through the
utilization of surface and ground water supplies, together with those of
the conditions of underground storage, afford the basis for estimating
the average net use. A study of this subject, based on data collected
for all the developed areas along the cistern side of the valley and
covering the period 1921-1929, was made. These data consist of the
record of seasonal surface inflow, the total area irrigated each year from
STATE WATER PLAN 83
surface and underground sources and the records of observations for
varying periods of the depth to ground water in some 4000 wells
scattered throughout the region.
Based upon an analysis of these data it is concluded that, while use
varies for different crops, a reasonable estimate of the average seasonal
net use for the types of crops now grown is two acre-feet per acre.
This figure is supported by results obtained in a large district situated
in the lower San Joaquin Valley where measurements of surface diver-
sion into the district, the measured outflow and the area of irrigated
land permitted the calculation of the net use per acre. For the fore-
going reasons, the water requirements of the upper San Joaquin Val-
ley are estimated on the basis of an average seasonal allowance of two
acre-feet per acre to the net area of irrigable land.
This basis of estimating the water requirement for the area does not
mean that the actual delivery of water upon irrigated land would be
at a uniform rate or restricted to two acre-feet per acre. On the con-
trary it is recognized that, dependent upon the kind of crop served,
the type of soil and subdrainage conditions, seasonal applications of
water would vary from a minimum of less than two acre-feet per acre
to a maximum of perhaps as much as 100 per cent in excess of that
figure. In any case, the only water actually used is that which supplies
the needs of plant transpiration and surface evaporation. On non-
absorptive soils, applications in excess of these needs result in surface
run-off to adjacent lands or drainage systems. On absorptive soils
such excess applications are, to a large extent, accounted for by deep
percolation losses, which constitute one of the principal sources of
replenishment to the underlying ground water. In areas where it is
feasible to recover these deep percolation losses by pumping from under-
ground sources, the application of the water so recovered to the irriga-
tion of additional lands constitutes a reuse of the original supply and
makes for a high degree of utilization, the limit of which is reached
when the net use of water equals the consumptive use. The essential
element of such a plan of utilization is the availability of underground
storage capacity of magnitude sufficient to absorb all available waters,
and so located that water drawn therefrom can be utilized upon over-
lying or adjacent lands.
Consideration has been given to possibilities of ultimate harmful
concentration of mineral salts in a ground water supply utilized as con-
templated. This result is not considered possible, owing to the
chemical characteristics of the water supply, the unavoidable ground
water outflow (and consequent free circulation) involved in the net
use allowances, and the extent of surplus and waste from tributary
surface supplies. It is obvious that the greater the area involved the
more flexible the plan becomes, since waters not readily utilizable in one
part of the area may be shifted to others through the medium of this
underground storage.
Underlying practically the entire eastern side of the upper San
Joaquin Valley, underground storage capacity, sufficient with available
feasible surface storage to effect practically full regulation of the
tributary water supplies, is available. Under any plan for the full
development of this area, the utilization of this underground storage
84
DIVISION' OF WATER RESOURCES
capacity is considered an essentia] element. It is deemed feasible by
the us.' of this underground Btorage capacity to effect such a degree of
utilization of all waters, both local and imported, thai t he net use on
irrigated land will not exceed two acre-feet per acre.
Lower San Joaquin Valley — The lower San Joaquin Valley, with the
exception of the extreme northern portion on the eastern side, is an
area in which the local supplies to areas now under irrigation are gen-
erous in amount and dependable in their occurrence. These supplies
are afforded by the San Joaquin River and its east side tributaries.
For the areas on which these local supplies are now utilized, and for
unirrigated irrigable land similarly situated the estimate of total ulti-
mate water requirements lias Keen made upon a basis similar to that
used in the Saeramento Valley, where a ".toss allowance is made in all
lands which might at some time be irrigated.
For rim lands above existing irrigation development on the west side
of the valley, now without water supply, the ultimate water require-
ments are estimated in accordance with the practice in adjacent pump-
ing projects and upon the same basis as used for similar lands in the
upper San Joaquin Valley.
Based upon these per acre values and the net area of all irrigable
lands, the ultimate seasonal water requirements have been estimated
by sections and are set forth in Table 12.
TABLE 12
ULTIMATE SEASONAL WATER REQUIREMENTS OF IRRIGABLE LANDS IN SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER BASIN, EXCLUDING SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA
Net
irrigable
area
in acres
Gross allowance
in acre-feet
Net allowance
in acre-feet
Net use
in acre-feet
Section
Total
Average
per acre
Total
Average
per acre
Total
Average
per acre
Upper San Joaquin Valley.
Lower San Joaquin Valley.
Foothill areas...
3,648,000
l.'.7ti,000
380,000
Mi.OOO
4,968,000
1,062,000
•20
3
2.8
7,296,000
3,651,000
.000
•2
2.2
2
7,296,000
3,019.000
637,000
2.0
1.8
1.7
Total
5,704,000
13,326,000
11,720,000
10,952,000
'An average seasonal gross allowance of 2.5 acre-feet per acre, or more, is provided on canal-irrigated areas.
San Francisco Bay Basin.
In estimating the ultimate water requirements of the San Francisco
Bay Basin, a study was made to determine the character of the ulti-
mate development likely to take place in this area. Unlike the
Sacramento ami San Joaquin River basins, the area within the San
Francisco Bay Basin includes densely populated metropolitan districts
and large industrial and suburban sections, which occupy a consid-
erable portion of the area subject to development. Predictions as to
the future character and magnitude of development in this region are
necessarily attended with uncertainty. It appears, however, that much
of the area bordering San Francisco Bay will develop into a densely
populated metropolitan ami industrial district. On the other hand.
it may be expected that a portion of the more favorably situated
agricultural lands in the Larger valleys within the basin, such as the
STATE WATER PLAN 85
Santa Clara, Livermore, Ygnacio, Clayton, Suisun, Napa and Sonoma
valleys, will continue in the future to be devoted principally to agricul-
tural use.
The San Francisco Bay Basin, which includes all of the area drain-
ing into the bay below the confluence of the Sacramento and San
Joaquin rivers, embraces a gross area of about 4000 square miles,
consisting of 3500 square miles of land and 500 square miles of open
water in the bays. A study has been made of the entire basin for the
purpose of estimating the ultimate utilization of the area. Of the
total gross area, about 2000 square miles consists of mountains and
rolling hills and minor valleys, which are not likely ever to come into
intensive development of any kind. The balance of the land area of
about 1500 square miles, or approximately 1,000,000 acres, comprises
the major valleys and areas bordering the bay which probably will be
intensively developed in the future. This area was classified as
urban, suburban, industrial and rural. It is estimated that of the total
gross area, a net area of 870,000 acres will, at some future time, require
water service if it is to be developed.
The ultimate water requirements of the basin are based upon the
predictions of the utilization of the areas as heretofore described, and
upon estimates of use of water per unit of area. In metropolitan
areas the water requirements are approximately in direct proportion
to the density of population. Statistics on water consumption, popu-
lation and areas in the cities of California and of the United States,
indicate that the water requirements for urban and suburban areas,
expressed in feet depth per annum, range from an average of about
one foot for a population density of ten persons per acre to about
four and a half feet for a density of population of forty persons per
acre. The future water requirements of such areas have, therefore,
been estimated on the basis of predicted density of population in the
several urban districts of the San Francisco Bay region.
The water requirements of industrial districts have been estimated
on the basis of available statistics of consumption and area for present
industrial districts in the bay region and other cities of California and
the United States. The water requirements for industries vary widely,
depending upon the type of industry and the intensity of development.
The data on industrial water consumption in the upper bay area
obtained during this investigation,* was given particular weight in
estimating the unit water requirements for the ultimate predicted
industrial district. The amounts used in estimating the industrial
water requirements vary from two to five feet in depth per annum
in the various areas of the bay region. Inasmuch as the water sup-
plied for urban, suburban and industrial use are generally conveyed
to the areas in pipe lines, conveyance losses are small and hence the
gross allowance for these purposes is approximately equal to the net
allowance. In the more densely populated areas, little opportunity is
afforded for reuse of return water.
For the rural or agricultural areas of the basin, the ultimate water
requirements have been estimated on the basis of the best data avail-
able as to the amount of water required for irrigation in the several
*Bulletin No. 28, "Economic Aspects of a Salt Water Barrier Below Confluence of
Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers," Division of Water Resources.
86
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
areas. The net allowances are estimated for the assumed irrigable
areas and range from 1.25 feet in depth per season for the Santa Clara
Valley and the valleys north of San Pablo Bay to two feet in depth
per Beason for the Livermore Valley and the areas north and south of
Suisun Bay. The gross allowance is based upon the net allowance,
with the addition to the latter of estimated conveyance losses in serv-
ing t lie several areas.
Table 13 summarizes, by type of district development, the gross area
and the gross allowance for ultimate water requirements of the San
Francisco Bay Basin.
TABLE 13
ULTIMATE ANNUAL WATER REQUIREMENTS OF SAN FRANCISCO BAY BASIN
Water service area in acres
Gross allowance in acre-feet
Districts
Gross
Net
Total
Average
per acre
207,000
791,000
207.000
663,000
493,000
1,242,000
2 4
16
Total
998,000
870,000
1,735,000
1.7
The average annual gross allowance for the entire area is 1.7 feet
depth or acre-feet per acre, equivalent to a uniform demand of about
1550 million gallons per day, or about 2400 second-feet.
Central Pacific Coast Basin.
The Central Pacific Coast Basin is that portion of the state extending
southeasterly from the San Franciseo Bay Basin to Ventura County
and draining directly into the ocean.
The water requirements for this basin, as for the Sacramento River
and San Joaquin River basins, are based on agricultural use.
Detailed investigations have just been begun in this basin and the area
of irrigable land has not been determined with any degree of accuracy.
The water requirements are based on areas of irrigable land estimated
in previous investigations.* It is estimated that there is a gross area
of 770,000 acres susceptible of irrigation in this basin. Assuming that
80 per cent of this area ultimately would be brought under irrigation
and assuming a gross allowance of 2.5 acre-feet per acre and a net
allowance of 2.0 acre-feet per acre per season, the total seasonal require-
ments would be 1,540.000 acre-feet gross allowance, and 1,232,000 acre-
feet net allowance. Due to the applied water being largely obtained
by pumping from underground sources, the net allowance is the impor-
tant factor in considering the supply for this basin. Such pumping
allows the direct return to ground Avater of the excess amount applied
upon the lands and the subsequent reuse of this excess as required,
either in the same season or in the following seasons.
South Pacific Coast Basin.
The South Pacific Coast Basin is the Pacific slope of southern Cali-
fornia, including Ventura County and extending to the Mexican
•Bulletin No. 6, "Irrigation Requirements of California Lands," Division of
Engineering and Irrigation. 19?3,
STATE WATER PLAN 87
boundary. It comprises all or portions of six counties, namely, Ven-
tura, Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside and San Diego.
The total area of the basin is about 6,750,000 acres. The total pop-
ulation of the six counties in 1930 was 2,800,000, of which nearly all
were living on the Pacific slope. This is one-half of the entire population
of the state.
Much of the agricultural land in the basin is now intensively culti-
vated. Residential settlement is encroaching upon the irrigated and
irrigable area, and this encroachment undoubtedly will continue to
increase. On the other hand, lands unsuitable for agriculture also are
being urbanized. Industrial development is, and probably will con-
tinue to be, an important element in determining the water demand.
The total gross habitable area is estimated at 2,400,000 acres. Of this,
it is estimated the total net habitable area is 2,000,000 acres, which
includes all lands which might at some future time be utilized for urban,
suburban, industrial or agricultural purposes and for which a water
supply must be provided if development is to extend over this entire
area.
In estimating the water requirements for this basin, consideration
was given to the type of development which probably will take place in
the various localities within the basin and to other factors. Require-
ments are based on the assumption that a substantial part of the entire
net habitable area of 2,000,000 acres ultimately would be urbanized with
industrial development located therein.
Ventura County and the South Coastal Basin* are characterized by
the presence of absorptive formations in the valleys which form large
underground storage basins. These furnish an unusual opportunity
for reuse of return waters for municipal, irrigation and industrial pur-
poses. In these areas, particularly in the South Coastal Basin, there
also is a considerable contribution to the surface run-off and to ground
water from the rainfall on the valley floor. In the upper valleys of
this basin a further contribution is made by sewage effluent from the
numerous cities therein. Additional contributions to the ground
water could be obtained by reclaiming sewage from urban areas
and transporting it to suitable areas where it could be introduced
underground. All of these things, in addition to the conservative
methods employed in the application of irrigation water, make for a
small net use of water in these areas. In southern Orange County and
San Diego County, there are few absorptive areas and therefore a small
reuse from underground basins, although this could be further devel-
oped. However, because of the methods used for the conveyance and
application of water, there also is a small net use of water in this area.
The ultimate water requirements for the 2,000,000 acres of net
habitable area in this basin are estimated to be 3,340,000 acre-feet per
year gross allowance, and 3,000,000 acre-feet per year net use. In
this basin, as in the Central Pacific Coast Basin, the net use is the
important factor for consideration in estimates of water supply.
Great Basin.
The area designated as the Great Basin in this report is that part of
California lying east of the Sierra Nevada and also that part naturally
tributary to the Colorado River.
*Se<? Bulletin No. 32, "South Coastal Basin," Division of Water Resources, 1930
1
88
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
With Hip exception of the investigation in the Mojave River Basin,
no detail study was made of Has basin. The water requirements are
based on areas of irrigable land and rates of use estimated in previous
investigations.*
Assuming that 80 per cent of the gross agricultural area of 3,600,000
acres ultimately would be brought under irrigation, the gross allow-
ance would be 10,000,000 acre-feet per season.
Entire State.
The areas to be served and the gross annual water requirements for
the entire state, estimated on the foregoing bases, are summarized in
the following table :
TABLE 14
SUMMARY OF ULTIMATE GROSS WATER REQUIREMENTS FOR ENTIRE STATE
Water service area in acres
Annual
water
Basin
Gross
Net
requirement^
in acre-.''
North Pacific Coast
421,000
6,435,000
8.219,000
998,000
770,000
2,400,000
3,600,000
337,000
4,266.000
5,704,000
870,000
616,000
2,000,000
2,880,000
1,011,000
Sacramento River
'15,864,000
San Joaquin River
13,326,000
San Francisco Bay..
1,735,000
fentral Pacific Coast
1,540,000
South Pacific Coast
3,340,000
( i reat Basin
10,000,000
Totals
22,843,000
16,673,000
46,816,000
1 Actual use is much less than gross allowance. A considerable portion would be available for reuse in some basins.
' Includes requirements for salinity control (see pp. 79 and 80).
♦Bulletin No. 6, "Irrigation Requirements of California Lands," Division of
Engineering and Irrigation, 1923.
STATE WATER PLAN
89
CHAPTER V
MAJOR UNITS OF ULTIMATE STATE WATER PLAN
In the formulation of a plan for development of the state's water
resources, inquiry must be made into the relation of available water
supply to ultimate needs. It has been estimated that the mean run-off
of California's streams for the forty-year period 1889-1929, is about
71,000,000 acre-feet per season and that the total gross potential water
service area is approximately 23,000,000 acres. If all this water could
be conserved and applied to this area, it would amount to a depth per
season of about three feet, an adequate amount for average municipal,
industrial and agricultural purposes. However, in comparing the
water supply to the agricultural lands in each of the seven hydro-
graphic basins of the state it is found that 37.6 per cent of the state's
water originates in the North Pacific Coast Basin, which contains only
1.9 per cent of the agricultural lands, whereas only 1.4 per cent of the
water originates in the South Pacific Coast Basin, which contains 10
per cent of the land.
The distribution of water supply and agricultural land is illustrated
on Plate III. The figures thereon show clearly, for each basin, the
relation between these two resources. They do not, however, furnish
a definite comparison between total water supply and total needs
because the requirements of the present and future metropolitan areas
and industrial districts in the San Francisco Bay and South Pacific
Coast basins are not included under the standard of measurement
established by the extent of agricultural land. These areas require
substantial amounts of water.
A more definite relation between total water requirements and
water supply is summarized, by basins, in Table 15.
TABLE 15
WATER SUPPLY AND REQUIREMENTS BY BASINS
Annual
gross water
requirements
in acre-feet 1
Seasonal run-off'in acre-feet
Basin
40-vear mean,
1889-1929
20-vear mean,
1909-1929
10-year mean,
1919-1929
5-vear mean,
1924-1929
North Pacific Coast 2 ..
1,011,000
'15,864,000
13,326,000
1,735,000
1,540,000
3,340,000
10,000,000
26,797,000
24,801,000
11,980,000
824,000
2,248,000
1,114,000
3,624,000
23,659,000
20,593,000
10,160,000
634,000
1,927,000
1,146,000
2,956,000
21,906,000
17,920,000
r8,547,000
r 526,000
1,228,000
894,000
2,463,000
25,034,000
Sacramento River
19,027,000
San Joaquin River
8,137,000
San Francisco Bay.. .. . .
600,000
Central Pacific Coast
1,166,000
South Pacific Coast
709,000
Great Basin 2 .
2,395,000
Total
46,816,000
71,388,000
61,075,000
53,484,000
57,068,000
1 Actual use is much less than gross allowance. A considerable portion would be available for reuse in some basins.
* Run-off from this basin largely physically unavailable for use in the state as a whole.
1 Portion of the run-off from this basin now used outside of the state.
4 Includes requirements for salinity control (see pp. 79 and 80).
This comparison of the water supply and requirements indicates a
large excess of water over the needs of the North Pacific Coast Basin,
some excess in the Sacramento River Basin and a deficiency in supply
in the other basins, if each is considered as a unit. Before it can be
90 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
definitely determined that such an excess exists, however, inquiry must
be made, particularly in the Sacramento River Basin, to determine
the degree of synchronism existing between supply and demand. This
determination can be accomplished only by a study of operation of
physical works to equate the stream flow so as to be in consonance
with the demand for water in its several uses.
A plan must be formulated not only to overcome the unequal
geographical distribution of water supply with respect to needs, but also
to so regulate the seasonal distribution that the availability of supply
will be simultaneous with the demand. Such a plan has been formu-
lated for the Larger and more importanl divisions of the state. Under
this plan the basins favored with water in excess of their needs would
be furnished a completely regulated supply in accordance with the
requirements for their ultimate development. "Waters in excess of
these requirements would be conveyed to areas of deficiency and there
used to supplement local waters and afford those areas supplies ade-
quate to meet the requirements for their future development. The
primary physical features of this plan are storage reservoirs, both
surface and underground, to be used in regulating the available run-
off, and conduits for the conveyance of the supply from points of
origin to areas of use. In conjunction with the surface reservoirs,
hydroelectric power plants would be utilized in some cases to generate
electric energy incidental to the primary use of the reservoir. Returns
from the sale of such electric energy would carry a substantial portion
of the total annual cost of the project. In particular instances the
surface reservoirs also would be utilized to reduce flood flows, improve
navigation and control salinity.
The plan as formulated and presented in this report is limited in
its scope. It includes only the major units for the principal geograph-
ical divisions of the state. The locations of these units are shown in
Plate IV, "Major Units of State Plan for Development of Water
Resources of California." Other units, both constructed and to be
constructed, are necessary and essential parts of any comprehensive
plan for the development of the state's waters. Additional reservoirs,
which would increase the degree of control and perfect the utilization,
can be built. Many distributary conduits and other accessory works
not shown in this report also will be necessary. A plan has not been
presented for the entire state. However, the one that is presented
provides a system of physical works which would make available a
water supply for the benefit of 75 per cent of the agricultural area,
90 per cent of the taxable wealth and 90 per cent of the population
of the state. Certain portions of the area affected by this plan and
other areas of the state are still under investigation. The work in
progress in these areas is described in Chapter IX.
Great Central Valley.
The Great Central Valley of California includes both the Sacra-
mento and San Joaquin River basins and, in this portion of the
report, is considered as one geographic division, since plans for the
development of the water resources of the two basins and their greatest
utilization are closely related. Because of the small water supply in
proportion to the ultimate water requirements for full development
s
90 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
definitely determined that such an excess exists, however, inquiry must
be made, particularly in the Sacramento River Basin, to determine
the decree of synchronism existing between supply and demand. This
determination can be accomplished only by a study of operation of
physical works to equate the stream flow so as to be in consonance
with the demand for water in its several uses.
A plan must be formulated not only to overcome the unequal
geographical distribution of water supply with respect to needs, but also
to so regulate the seasonal distribution that the availability of supply
will be simultaneous with the demand. Such a plan has been formu-
late] for the Larger and more important divisions of the state ruder
this plan the basins favored with water in excess of their needs would
be furnished a completely regulated supply in accordance with the
requirements for their ultimate development. "Waters in excess of
these requirements would be conveyed to areas of deficiency and there
used to supplement local waters and afford those areas supplies ade-
quate to meet the requirements for their future development. The
primary physical features of this plan are storage reservoirs, both
surface and underground, to be used in regulating the available run-
off, and conduits for the conveyance of the supply from points of
origin to areas of use. In conjunction with the surface reservoirs,
hydroelectric power plants would be utilized in some cases to generate
electric energy incidental to the primary use of the reservoir. Returns
from the sale of such electric energy would carry a substantial portion
of the total annual cost of the project. In particular instances the
surface reservoirs also would be utilized to reduce flood flows, improve
navigation and control salinity.
The plan as formulated and presented in this report is limited in
its scope. It includes only the major units for the principal geograph-
ic;)] divisions of the state. The locations of these units are shown in
Plate IV, "Major Units of State Plan for Development of Water
Resources of California." Other units, both constructed and to be
constructed, are necessary and essential parts of any comprehensive
plan for the development of the slate's waters. Additional reservoirs,
which would increase the degree of control and perfect the utilization,
can be built. Many distributary conduits and other accessory works
not shown in this report also will be necessary. A plan has not been
presented for the entire state. However, the one that is presented
provides a system of physical works which would make available a
water supply for the benefit of 75 per cent of the agricultural area,
90 per cent of the taxable wealth and 90 per cent of the population
of the state. Certain portions of the area affected by this plan and
other areas of the state are still under investigation. The work in
progress in these areas is described in Chapter IX.
Great Central Valley.
The Great Central Valley of California includes both the Sacra-
mento and San Joaquin River basins and, in this portion of the
report, is considered as one geographic division, since plans for the
development of the water resources of the two basins and their greatest
utilization are closely related. Because of the small water supply in
proportion to the ultimate water requirements for full development
STATE WATER PLAN 91
in the San Joaquin River Basin, there will be a deficiency in supply-
therein. This is particularly true in the upper valley where a large
part of the area is highly developed, where surface water is now utilized
to the maximum degree possible without regulation, and where there is,
in some localities, a serious overdraft even at present on the ground
water supply. In the Sacramento River Basin on the other hand,
there is a surplus of water over its ultimate needs. The logical source
of an additional supply for the San Joaquin River Basin is in the
surplus water of the Sacramento River Basin.
Surface Storage Units — To make the surface water supply of both
basins available for use in the desired quantities and at the proper
time, would require both surface and underground storage to regulate
the winter and spring run-off of the major streams so as to meet the
demand for irrigation and other uses. Conduits would be required to
convey the surplus water from the Sacramento River Basin to the
areas of deficient supply in the San Joaquin Valley.
The major units of the plan in the Sacramento River Basin are
all surface storage reservoirs. Conduits necessary for distribution
of water from these reservoirs within the basin are not included as
they are considered to be a feature for local development. In con-
nection with some of the reservoirs, power plants and afterbays are
proposed where the power developed can be made to defray a por-
tion of the expense and thereby reduce the cost of water for irrigation
and other purposes. The reservoirs on the major streams also would
be used to regulate and reduce flood flows, improve river navigation
and control salinity in the lower delta. These storage units are ten
in number and include the following reservoirs:
Kennett on Sacramento River; Oroville on Feather River; Nar-
rows on Yuba River ; Camp Far West on Bear River ; Folsom. Auburn
and Coloma on American River; Millsite on Stony Creek; Capay on
Cache Creek; and Monticello on Putah Creek.
In addition to these reservoirs in the Sacramento River Basin, it is
proposed to divert water into the Sacramento Valley from the Trinity
River by a tunnel through the Trinity Mountains. In connection
with this diversion, storage would be provided in the Fairview reser-
voir on Trinity River.
Power plants are proposed in connection with the Kennett, Oroville,
Narrows, Folsom, Auburn and Coloma reservoirs and the Trinity River
diversion.
It may be noted that no reservoir is included in the above list for
the lower canyon of the upper Sacramento River above Red Bluff.
The value of a reservoir in this location has long been recognized as
it would be in a position to control the entire run-off of the upper Sac-
ramento River, nearly one-third of which originates below Kennett
reservoir. Diligent search for a favorable dam site has been made prior
to and during the present investigation by both federal and state agen-
cies. Four sites, including three at Iron Canyon immediately above
Red Bluff and one at Table Mountain about ten miles further upstream,
have been drilled and geologized. Information developed at the sites
thus far explored indicates that the foundation conditions are unsatis-
factory for a masonry dam and doubtful for an earth fill or rock fill
dam. Furthermore, the desirability of a large earth or rock fill dam
02 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
impounding 1,000,000 to 3,000,000 acre-feet on the main Sacramento
River above the entire Sacramento Valley also is open to serious ques-
tion. Although the investigations to date have not disclosed a suitable
dam site for such a large reservoir on this stretch of the stream, it is
believed the importance of such a reservoir justifies further search and
exploration work.
Another reservoir site investigated in the upper Sacramento River
basin is one whose dam site is on the Pit River below the mouth of the
McCloud River. The reservoir site lies within the area which would
be flooded by a dam constructed at the Kennett site and is therefore not
an auxiliary reservoir thereto. Its advantage over the Kennett site is
that the large cost of relocating the Southern Pacific Railroad would
be obviated. Its disadvantage is that, being located on the Pit River,
it would not be in a position to control the run-off from the Sacramento
River and several minor streams which constitutes 20 per cent of the
run-off tributary to the Kennett reservoir, and furthermore would have
much less value than the Kennett reservoir for controlling floods in the
Sacramento River below Red Bluff. The dam site has not been explored
by core drilling or other means. A preliminary geological examina-
tion indicates a favorable foundation for a main dam across the Pit
River, but a much less favorable foundation for a necessary auxiliary
dam on the left abutment for reservoirs of capacities comparable to
Kennett reservoir. The foundations at the Kennett dam site have been
proved to be very satisfactory. A combination of a reservoir at the Pit
River site with one in the lower canyon of the Sacramento River near
Red Bluff might be more attractive than the Kennett reservoir if it were
definitely proven that safe dams could be constructed at these locations.
The uncertainty of constructing a safe dam at the Pit River site to a
height that would create a reservoir of capacity adequate to meet imme-
diate and ultimate water requirements in accord with the State Plan
in the Sacramento River Basin and the infeasibility of coordinating the
two developments because of the overlapping of the two sites, lead to
the conclusion that the reservoir on the Pit River should not be con-
sidered now as an alternate for the Kennett reservoir.
The major units of the plan in the San Joaquin River Basin consist
of surface storage reservoirs and conveyance systems with pumping
plants as required. Since the San Joaquin River Basin has a supply
inadequate to meet the ultimate demand for agricultural purposes, it is
proposed to operate the entire system in such a way as to most effectively
utilize all local waters to meet such agricultural demand. This would
be accomplished in the upper San Joaquin Valley by utilizing the
large natural underground reservoir capacity to the greatest advantage.
Power development, flood control and navigation are incidental and
secondary in importance to this principal objective.
The surface storage reservoir units are thirteen in number, namely.
Nashville on Cosumnes River-, lone on Dry Creek, a tributary of Mokel-
umne River; Pardee on Mokelumne River; Valley Springs <>n Calaveras
River; Melones on Stanislaus River; Don Pedro on Tuolumne River;
Exchequer on Merced River; Buchanan on Chowchilla River; Windy
Gap on Fresno River; Friant on San Joaquin River; Pine Plal on Kings
River; Pleasant Valley on Tulc River; and Isabella on Kern River.
STATE WATER PLAN 93
Power plants are proposed at Melones, Don Pedro, Friant and Pine
Flat reservoirs. The Exchequer and Pardee reservoirs with power
plants are included in the plan as already constructed and are assumed
to be operated for the purposes for which they were designed. The
Valley Springs reservoir would be enlarged from 76,000 acre-feet to
325,000 acre-feet capacity, reserving 165,000 acre-feet of space in the
reservoir for flood control purposes. At the Melones and Don Pedro
reservoirs, it is proposed to construct new dams downstream from the
existing ones, creating reservoirs of larger capacity, and to reconstruct
and enlarge the power plants.
Flood control features are included in the Kennett, Oroville, Nar-
rows, Camp Far West, Folsom, Auburn, Coloma, Nashville, Melones,
Don Pedro, Friant, Pine Flat and Isabella dams.
Table 16 summarizes, for both basins, the salient features of the
storage units, including the height of dam, capacity of reservoir,
installed capacity of power plant, if any, and estimated capital cost,
with and without power features. The foundations of nine of the
dam sites have been explored at least preliminarily and all have been
examined by a geologist and reports rendered thereon. The dam sites
drilled or on which other exploratory work has been done are Ken-
nett, Folsom, Millsite, lone, Valley Springs, Buchanan, Windy Gap,
Friant and Pine Flat. Actual surveys of each dam and reservoir
site listed have been available for the investigation. Several hundred
sites have been examined and from these sites those shown in Table 16
have been selected as major units of the State Water Plan. Pre-
liminary plans for each dam and all appurtenant works have been
prepared. The cost of the dam for each reservoir is based on a gravity-
concrete section, except for the dams of the Capay, lone and Pleasant
Valley reservoirs, which are estimated as earth fill sections, and the
dam for Millsite, which is estimated as a concrete slab-buttress type.
These estimates are based on present day prices of construction and
on the assumption that each unit would be constructed in one step.
If based upon the assumption of progressive development, the cost
would be substantially greater than set forth herein. Allowances have
been made for rights of way and all improvements flooded. There
also is included an allowance of 25 per cent for contingencies and
overhead, and interest at 4^ per cent compounded semiannually during
the period required for construction.
Conveyance Systems — In formulating a plan for the conveyance from
the Sacramento River Basin of the water required to supplement the
available local supplies in the San Joaquin River Basin for full develop-
ment of the latter area, many alternate plans were investigated.
Among these was a plan with a gravity canal extending from the
Feather River to Kern River. This plan would involve no exchange
of water supplies. It would deliver water directly to areas on the
eastern slope of the upper San Joaquin Valley in need of additional
water supplies, but would not furnish any water to the undeveloped
areas on the western slope. Its intake on the Feather River would be
above the major reservoir in this drainage area, from which originates
a large part of the potential surplus waters of the Sacramento River
Basin. The capital cost for a 3000 second-foot conduit for this plan
would be in the neighborhood of $200,000,000.
94
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
u
CQ
<
3
■a 5-5
te-4
85
3 -TJ »0 *.
C^ -*iC CO — — <o
loop C ©o g p C o
B t^" to of S c4" co <o — •" c j" *o
o mm o rr — «
I If J J a
&1J
lil
o.S
siissss
09
883 1 8 8" 8 5 888888"
;i
© *+ o
■^ CO —
gj
'O
I I-
1 00
^ZJ ;
33
S88SSI
IOOOOOOOOOC
>ooc = = coooe
>ooo = o£ooo:
y -<r
- I-
M 'SO
1
u5io«o^^eo«fO«^«iN-Mrtci^vrt^iNCJci^-H
§5
r.~
iass2|a||||
aSSa E-C3 na S £° "3 .2 § .2 -2 £ 343 I
I
a5i
o a. b
■ si
X*- Uh
. ft ■ i -E^
a S .$ ' ur
llll I'll g-E |"| e-g-g"! !
25 *s
g" a
!
.s-2
11
O 0)
s «
1 g
-So
-a a
•=.3
2 i-
H *
11
y
- s
9 «
a
3
1(1
5 g p '■*«
1 3 8~8a
tt "p "p .ti S a
9=5= ass
O C C'^T3 ~
S
STATE WATER PLAN 95
A second plan investigated, which would involve the exchange of
water supplies on the upper San Joaquin River, was a 3000 second-
foot conduit extending from the Folsom reservoir on the Amer-
ican River to Mendota on the San Joaquin River where canals, which
now serve large irrigated areas in the lower San Joaquin Valley, head.
The cost of the conduit for this plan is estimated at $60,000,000. Both
of the foregoing schemes would divert water above riparian owners in
the Sacramento Valley, which, in the light of present knowledge of the
operation of the riparian doctrine, appears infeasible.
A third plan studied was a direct pumping system from the delta
channels of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers to the upper San
Joaquin Valley, without exchange of supplies. Still another scheme
investigated was the exchange of supplies from one stream to another
on the east side of the valley from Feather River to Kern River.
Preliminary studies of this latter plan indicate that not only would it be
more costly than the one adopted, but it also would involve water right
adjustments on each stream, which appear impracticable.
After a study of these various methods of exporting water from the
Sacramento River Basin and also many modifications of the plan set
forth herein, a plan has been adopted and set forth in this report
providing for the diversion of water from the delta. This would
be accomplished by means of a pumping system on the San Joaquin
River and the exchange of a portion of the water for San Joaquin River
water, which would be diverted at the Friant reservoir, located 61 miles
upstream and 308 feet higher in elevation than the point of delivery of
imported water at Mendota. The water diverted at Friant would be used
on lands on the eastern slope of the upper San Joaquin Valley. The
lands on the western slope of the upper valley would be served by an
extension of the pumping system from Mendota. The advantages of the
plan are many. Both the capital and annual costs would be much less
than for conveyance by any other method. Diversion in the Sacramento-
San Joaquin Delta would be effected below all the riparian lands in the
Sacramento River Basin. The flexibility of the plan would be of great
advantage. The source of the water supply would be the delta, the tem-
porary catch basin of all the run-off and return water from 42,900 square
miles of drainage area, which comprises 74 per cent of the entire area of
the Sacramento and San Joaquin River basins and contributes 91 per
cent of the run-off of the two basins. Water developed in any part of the
two basins north of the upper San Joaquin River would naturally find
its way to this catch basin. A pumping lift of more than 300 feet would
be saved over the direct pumping plan. It would lend itself more readily
to progressive development with minimum expenditures and it would
interfere least with present rights and interests. These great advantages
would not be attained by any scheme that does not utilize the delta as
a source of supply, and only in part, if not combined with exchange with
San Joaquin River water.
The conveyance channels, natural and constructed, which would be
required for the exportation and delivery of water from the Sacramento
River Basin to the lands of the San Joaquin River Basin, would extend
from the Sacramento River at the head of Snodgrass Slough to the
southern extremity of the San Joaquin Valley.
96 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
Beginning a1 the northerly end of the conveyance system, a new
connecting channel, in conjunction with a suitable diversion structure
in the Sacramento River, is proposed to cany from the Sacramento
River to the San Joaquin River Delta the water required to meet the
four-fold demand of salinity control, delta consumptive use, agricul-
tural and industrial use in Contra Costa County, and exportation
to the San Joaquin Valley. It would consist of an artificial channel
dredged from the Sacramento River, at a point just below Hood,
to the head of Snodgrass Slough, from which point this natural
channel would be utilized, with improvements, to Dead Horse Island.
At that point a triple connection would be made with the North and
South Forks of the Mokelumne River and Georgiana Slough, all three
of which would be utilized from there to the San Joaquin River at
Central Landing. The length of this eioss connection, designated as
the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta cross channel, by the shortest route
would be 24 miles.
From Central Landing to the first unit of the pumping system below
Mossdale bridge, it is proposed to utilize three main channels, each
about 30 miles in length. The most easterly of these channels would
be the Stockton Deep Water Channel and the San Joaquin River. The
other two main channels would be Old River and Salmon Slough, and
Middle River with artificial connections already constructed, such as
the Victoria-North Canal and the Grant Line Canal. With some
enlargement in portions of these channels, the conveyance capacity
would be adequate to meet the requirements of the delta irrigation use
and that of exportation to the San Joaquin River Basin.
The first unit of the San Joaquin River pumping system would be
located just above the point of bifurcation of the San Joaquin River
and Old River. From this point to the mouth of the Merced River,
the channel of the San Joaquin River would be utilized for a distance
of 72 miles. By means of a series of five successive dams and pumping
plants, w r ater would be conveyed from the delta and raised to an eleva-
tion of 62 feet U. S. Geological Survey datum. The dams used for this
portion of the conveyance system would be of the collapsible type so
that the river channel could be opened to permit free discharge in case
of large flows. The maximum capacity of the pumping system would
be 8000 second-feet.
From the pond above Planl No. 5 it is proposed to depart from the
river with a constructed canal extending southerly along the most favor-
able topography. By means of three pumping lifts in a distance of
seven miles the water would be raised to an elevation of 137 feet at the
discharge of Plant No. 8 and would continue a distance of sixteen miles
to Plants No. 9 and No. 10, about live miles west of Los Banos. An
exchange would be made with existing systems serving lands lying
below Planl No. !>. From the discharge of riant No. 10, at an elevation
of 180 I'eet. the eaual would extend southerly about 38 miles to the
Mendota weir, delivering water to an elevation of 15!) feet. The total
distance from Pumping riant No. 1 to Mendota weir would be 135 miles.
The pond above the .Mendota weir would be the source of supply for
lands now served by diversion a1 and near this point. The Chowchilla
and Columbia lands on the east side of the river, now served by canals
of heavy grade with higher points of diversion, would be served by a
STATE WATER PLAN
97
new canal constructed from the Mendota weir. A small part of the
Columbia area would be served by pumping from the Mendota pool.
The delivery of imported waters to Mendota, to meet the demand of
existing rights, would make possible the diversion at the Friant reservoir
of the flow of the San Joaquin River for use on the eastern slope
of the upper San Joaquin Valley. To effect such diversion it is proposed
to construct, in addition to the Friant reservoir, two main canals, one on
each side of the San Joaquin River. The Madera canal, with a diversion
capacity of 1500 second-feet, on the north side of the river would extend
for eighteen miles to the channel of the Fresno River. The San Joa-
quin River-Kern County canal on the south side of the stream would
extend southward along the eastern rim of the valley a distance of 165
miles. With a diversion capacity of 3000 second-feet at the Friant
reservoir, it would cross in turn the channels of the Kings, Kaweah,
Tule and Kern rivers, terminating at the Kern Island Canal with a
capacity of 500 second-feet.
In order to utilize Kern River waters released by the importation of
new supplies, it would be necessary to construct the Kern River canal
with a diversion point near the mouth of the canyon on the south side
of the stream and extending under the Kern Mesa and thence around
the south end of the valley to Buena Vista Valley. The diversion capac-
ity of this canal would be about 1500 second-feet and the total length
75 miles.
To make water available for the good land lying on the western slope
of the upper San Joaquin Valley would require a pumping system
extending from Mendota Pool to Elk Hills. Water for this area would
be imported through the San Joaquin River pumping system. An
essential element of such a system would be a conveyance channel,
which, for full development, would be 100 miles long and have a capac-
ity varying from 4500 to 500 second-feet. Located along the lower
edge of the irrigable lands, this canal would terminate at an elevation
of 250 feet.
Table 17 summarizes the data for the major conveyance units of the
Great Central Valley. It may be noted that the aggregate length of
the channels and conduits is 549 miles and the total estimated cost
$88,000,000.
TABLE 17
ULTIMATE MAJOR CONVEYANCE UNITS OF STATE WATER PLAN IN
GREAT CENTRAL VALLEY
Unit
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta cross channel.
San Joaquin River pumping system
Madera canal
San Joaquin River-Kern County canal
Kern River canal
Mendota-West Side pumping system
Total.
Maximum
capacity in
second-feet
8,000
1,500
3,000
1,500
4,500
Length
in miles
24
167
18
165
75
100
549
Capital cost
14,000,000
28,500,000
2,500,000
28,000,000
9,000,000
16.000.000
188,000,000
Summary — In Table 18 are summarized the estimated costs of the
ultimate major units, both storage and conveyance, of the State Water
Plan in the Great Central Valley.
7—80993
08 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
TABLE 18
SUMMARY OF COSTS OF ULTIMATE MAJOR UNITS OF STATE WATER PLAN
IN GREAT CENTRAL VALLEY
Units
Capital cost
Excluding
power plants
Including
power plants
Reservoirs —
Sacramento Hiver Basin..
San Joaquin Kiver Basin.
( kmveyanoe systemi
Total
J381.800.0O0
110.400,000
88,000,000
$471,500,000
124.400.000
88.000,000
$580,200,000
1688,900,000
Underground Reservoirs — Utilization of underground storage is
growing increasingly important throughout the state. In the upper
San Joaquin Valley, the South Coastal Basin, Ventura County, the
Santa Clara Valley and most of the Central Pacific Coast valleys, under-
ground storage now is being utilized to a large extent. Where suitable
underground storage is available and a proper control of draft and
replacement are exercised, it is a most flexible, efficient and economical
means of conserving and utilizing water over a period of years.
Due to the importance of this subject, a geologic study was made of
the entire Great Central Valley to locate underground storage areas,
to estimate their capacity and to determine the practicability of their
utilization for the storage and extraction of water supplies in irrigation
development. This study reveals that the areas of available capacities
are extensive, particularly in the upper San Joaquin Valley, but limited
in their effective utilization due to the lack of readily available surplus
water for their charge and recharge. In the San Joaquin Valley, the
underground storage reservoir areas are confined to the eastern slope,
principally to the alluvial cones and flood plains of the major streams.
The surface soil and the geologic formation on the western slope and
in the trough of the valley are of such character that no utilizable
underground capacity exists. In the Sacramento Valley, the potential
capacity is comparatively large, but it has not been utilized as exten-
sively as in the San Joaquin Valley.
The surface areas of the ground water storage reservoirs were esti-
mated through field examination of the physical characteristics of sur-
face soils and the application of geologic reasoning, checked and aided
as to subsurface characteristics by the penetration records of several
hundred wells. The depth of pervious formations was estimated in this
manner. The maximum usable storage capacity was limited by eco-
nomic pumping lifts and the availability to the irrigable areas. The
drainage factor of the favorable formations is probably more open to
• I nest ion than any other, as but few actual tests on comparable material
are available. Results of experimental work furnish a measure for
estimating the free water content of various types of alluvial material
and soils. The materials logged in the well penetration records avail-
able were evaluated and es1 imates made of the average effective capacity
of 1hi- soil column per foot of water table lowering. These estimates
were checked with actual results obtained through tests in areas
known to be somewhat comparable and factors were deduced. The
STATE WATER PLAN
99
total usable capacities of the ground water reservoirs in the various
sections of the valley were estimated and are shown in Table 19, first
between a depth of ten feet below ground surface and the underground
water level of 1929, and second, between depths of ten and fifty feet
below ground surface. Within some of these areas a greater depth of
water table lowering than fifty feet, on the average, would be desirable
and probably economically warranted at the end of a long dry period.
There also is included in the table, for the upper San Joaquin Valley,
the estimated underground capacity between the depth of ten feet below
ground surface and assumed limit of economic pumping.
TABLE 19
USABLE UNDERGROUND CAPACITY IN GREAT CENTRAL VALLEY
Section
Capacity in acre-feet
Between depth
of 10 feet
below
ground surface
and
ground water
levels of 1929
Between
depths of
10 and 50
feet below
ground
surface
Between depth
of 10 feet
below
ground surface
and assumed
limit of
economic
pumping
Upper San Joaquin Valley.
Lower San Joaquin Valley.
Sacramento Valley
1,000,000
160,000
14,000,000
3,000,000
3,000,000
20,000,000
Total.
20,000,000
In proportioning the physical works of the plan for the Sacramento
and the lower San Joaquin valleys, no account was taken of the avail-
ability of potential underground capacity in these basins. However,
if it were operated in conjunction with surface storage, a greater use
could be made of the run-off of the tributary streams. In the upper
San Joaquin Valley, full account was taken of the available under-
ground capacity in the design of the works to serve this region. Both
local and imported supplies must be husbanded if the fullest prac-
ticable utilization for beneficial purposes and maximum economy are to be
attained. To accomplish the desired results would require the opera-
tion of the underground reservoir in a specific manner similar to that
of a surface reservoir. A large portion of the gross draft upon the
ground water would be through the medium of privately owned pump-
ing plants, and, in order to maintain a balance in supply and draft
over long periods throughout the area, it would be necessary that works
for the distribution of surplus waters and pumping equipment in stra-
tegic locations be under the control of recognized local public agencies.
The utilization of this underground capacity affords the cyclic storage
necessary in the plan for the full practical development of the eastern
slope of the upper San Joaquin Valley. The average seasonal water
supply capable of being diverted with the works proposed from the
San Joaquin River for the forty-year period 1889-1929 is 1,720,000
acre-feet. Of this total 355,000 acre-feet would be diverted northward
to the Madera area and the remainder, or 1,365,000 acre-feet, to the
south. This latter amount is a supply adequate to supplement the
local sources for practically full development of the eastern slope of the
100 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
valley. Furthermore, it is the least expensive supply available for
importation. Its utilization through the combined means of surface
distribution systems and .underground reservoirs would constitute
the cheapest, most flexible and dependable plan of any that has been
suggested or investigated to furnish the required additional water
supply to this region.
Based upon studies of the geologic and ground water conditions of
this area, it is estimated that within the assumed limits of economic
utilization for cyclic storage there is available a total underground
capacity of some 20,000,000 acre-feet, of which 18,000,000 acre-feet is
located south of the San Joaquin River. This would require the low-
ering of the ground water levels below a depth of 50 feet in portions
of this area. In accordance with the recognized principles of reservoir
analysis, a detailed month by month study of the operation of the under-
ground water reservoirs was made for the forty-year period 1889-1929,
using as sources of supply not only the imported waters, but also those
contributed by local sources. The net draft upon a reservoir would
be the consumptive demand of the area. The results of this study show
that, in addition to meeting the total demand of the area, the supply
would be sufficient to build up the underground storage.
The operation of the underground reservoirs in the several selected
divisions on the eastern slope of the upper San Joaquin Valley is
graphically illustrated on Plate V, "Operation of Underground Reser-
voirs in Upper San Joaquin Valley under Plan of Ultimate Develop-
ment South of San Joaquin River, 1889-1929." Assuming an empty
underground reservoir at the beginning of the season of 1889-90,
the storage on hand would have mounted from zero to 10,000,000
acre-feet by 1897. From 1897 to 1900 it would have been drawn down
to 6,000,000 acre-feet, to mount almost continuously to 15,000,000 in
1911. From 1911 to 1913 it would have decreased to 12,000,000, to
increase again to nearly 18.000,000 in 1917. From 1917 to the end
of the period in the fall of 1929 the decrease of storage on hand
would have been almost continuous to 6,000,000 acre-feet. Thus,
through the utilization of the available underground capacity in this
area there would be attained the regulatory effect of a cyclic storage
capacity of 18,000,000 acre-feet, a result impracticable of accomplish-
ment by surface reservoirs.
The plan of utilizing ground water reservoirs as a source of irriga-
tion supply is not new. It has been practiced for many years in the
upper San Joaquin Valley. However, quality of land, rather than
adequacy of supplies, has been the factor controlling irrigation develop-
ment of this type, and the result in many localities has been a net draft
in excess of the average seasonal replenishment. Little or no considera-
tion has been given in the development of these areas to the possibility
of systematic artificial replenishment of the ground water reservoirs.
Along the eastern slope of the lower San Joaquin Valley the chief
ground water problem is one of drainage. It is an area of plentiful
supplies, and liberal allowances to the lands result in relatively high
water levels. These are being controlled in some areas by the use of
wells and pumping plants. By utilizing pumped water for the peak
demands of the irrigation season in these areas, effective use could be
made of the underground storage capacity and a more uniform draft
I
STATE WATER PLAN
101
PLATE V
o
t
0)
0)
CO
CO
OPERATION OF UNDERGROUND RESERVOIRS
IN
UPPER SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY
UNDER PLAN OF ULTIMATE DEVELOPMENT
SOUTH OF SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
1889-1929
102 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
upon surface reservoirs could bo matin. This method of operation
would have advantages on a system where hydroelectric power is
generated.
Navigation — The Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers form natural
waterways extending northerly and southerly from the upper San
Francisco Bay into the Great Central Valley. These waterways play
an important part in the commercial activities in these regions. Proj-
ects for the maintenance and improvement of navigation on both of
these rivers have been adopted by Congressional enactment. The oper-
ation of major units of the State Plan in the interest of navigation
would materially improve and extend navigation on both of these
streams.
The water-borne commerce on these rivers is large. On the Sacra-
mento River, from 1,000.000 to nearly 2,000,000 tons have been handled
each year for the past ten years, and on the lower San Joaquin River,
nearly 1.000,000 tons. Large investments have been made in terminal
facilities utilized by nearly 100 individuals or companies operating
freight and passenger vessels.
Improvement of the navigation facilities on the lower sections of the
rivers is now in progress. On the San Joaquin River, a ship channel
with a depth of 26 feet is under construction from upper San Francisco
Bay to Stockton. From the mouth of the Sacramento River to the
city of Sacramento, a navigable depth of ten feet is being maintained
by dredging and other means.
Above the cities of Sacramento and Stockton, the navigation condi-
tion should be improved. In the low water season of each year, navi-
gation is greatly impaired from Sacramento to the head of navigation at
Chico* Landing, a distance of 138 miles. With the reservoirs of the plan
in operation, particularly Kennett, a satisfactory navigable depth of
from five to six feet could be maintained from Sacramento to Chico
Landing. On the San Joaquin River above Stockton, navigation has
been practically abandoned. It could be restored by the incorporation
of locks in the dams of the pumping system proposed and utilization of
the lakes formed by the dams. A depth of six feet could be afforded
to Salt Slough, nine miles above the Merced River and 95 miles from
the Stockton Ship Canal, by the plan proposed. If it should be desir-
able to extend navigation farther upstream to Mendota, the benefits to
accrue from such an extension might justify altering of the location of
the proposed pumping system for irrigation by following the river to
this point.
Flood Control — Protection against floods may be afforded by either
of two methods or by a combination of the two. One of these is to
confine the flood waters to natural and artificial channels by means of
levees. The other is to reduce the flood flows to amounts that can be
safely carried by the stream channels, by storing the excess flows in
reservoirs and releasing them at such a rate as not to overtax the
the channel capacities. A combination of the two methods would per-
mit lower levees along the channels than with operation under the first
method above, and also would require smaller reservoir space than
with the second method alone. With reservoir control, levees are
usually necessary.
■
STATE WATER PLAN
103
Prevention of flood damage by means of leveed channels has long
been used in the Sacramento Valley and the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta, and to a lesser extent in the San Joaquin Valley. The Flood
Control Project in the Sacramento Valley, using leveed stream and
by-pass channels, has been largely completed, except for the Butte
Basin and the upper Feather River. It is likely the levees along the
Feather River will be completed before the Oroville reservoir, which
could give flood regulation, is constructed. The levees provided by the
project in the Sacramento Valley will not give full protection against
exceptionally large floods which might occur at long intervals. A
higher degree of flood protection could be obtained for the lands in this
valley, however, with the reservoirs on the major streams operated for
flood control. To do this would require the reservation of space in the
reservoir for flood control purposes and its operation in a specific
manner through the utilization of the flood control features in the dam.
The amount of space in any reservoir which would be held in reserve
would vary with the degree of control desired, with the normalcy of
the season, and with the time of the year.
In the San Joaquin Valley, reclamation by levees and large flood
channels is not as feasible as in the Sacramento Valley because of
the small area reclaimed after deducting the overflow channels. Flood
control by storage in reservoirs offers a means of regulating floods to
flows of such magnitude that narrower channels and lower levees
could be used, thereby permitting the reclamation of the present over-
flowed lands.
The reservation of space and its operation for flood control is pro-
posed under the State Plan in each of the major reservoirs on the more
important streams. In Table 20 there is shown a list of the streams
on which flood control by reservoirs is proposed, the maximum reservoir
space required to regulate floods to certain controlled flows, the amounts
of these controlled flows and the frequency with which the controlled
TABLE 20
RESERVOIR SPACE REQUIRED FOR CONTROLLING FLOODS
TO CERTAIN SPECIFIED FLOWS
Reservoir
Stream
Point of control
Maximum
reservoir
space
employed
in acre-feet
Controlled
flow in
second-feet
Number of times
controlled flow
would be exceeded
on the average
Kennett
Sacramento River
Feather River
Yuba River
Bear River
American River
Cosumnes River
Dry Creek ._
Mokelumne River...
Calaveras River
Stanislaus River
Tuolumne River
Merced River .
San Joaquin River. ..
Kings River.
Red Bluff
512,000
521,000
272,000
50,000
300,000
56,000
'121,000
'0
165,000
204,000
214,000
59,000
75,000
80,000
•125,000
100,000
70,000
20,000
80,000
15,000
5,000
10,000
25,000
15,000
15,000
25,000
15,000
15,000
Once in 14 years
Oroville..
Oroville
Once in 100 vcars
Narrows
Smartsville
Wheatland
Fair Oaks
Once in 100 years
Once in 100 years
Once in 250 years
Camp Far West
Folsom, Auburn and
Coloma
Nashville . ,
lone .
Pardee
Calaveras..
Michigan Bar
Gait..
Clements.
Jenny Lind.
Once in 100 years
Once in 100 years
Once in 100 years
Once in 100 years
Melones
Don Pedro
Knights Ferry
La Grange
Once in 100 years
Once in 100 years
Exchequer
Friant
Pine Flat
Exchequer
Friant
Piedra
Once in 100 years
Once in 100 years
Once in 100 years
1 Floods which would cause flows in excess of 10,000 second-feet in the Mokelumne River at Clements would be
diverted from the Pardee Reservoir to Dry Creek by the Jackson Creek spillway and the water stored in lone reservoir.
2 Mean daily flow on day of flood crest. Floods would be controlled to 125,000 second-feet maximum flow exceeded
once in 100 years, except when this amount is exceeded by uncontrolled run-off between Kennett reservoir and Red Bluff.
Flows greater than 125,000 second-feet would continue for only a short time.
104
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
Mows would be exceeded. The operation of these reservoirs for flood
control would not materially impair their value for conservation pur-
poses, nor materially decrease the amount or value of the electric energy
generated by water released from them.
The operation of all the foregoing reservoirs specifically for flood
control, employing the reservoir space assigned to each reservoir for
the purpose of controlling floods to the specified flows, would result in
a substantial reduction of floods and in an increased degree of pro-
tection to the areas subject to overflow, particularly those within the
Sacramento Flood Control Project, and therefore would decrease the
potential annual flood damages in those areas. The following table
sets forth, for various points on the main stream channels, the crest
flood How exceeded once in 100 years, except as noted, with and without
reservoir control. These flows in the Sacramento Valley are those
that would obtain with the completed Flood Control Project, including
the reclamation of Butte Basin. In the San Joaquin Valley, the flows
without reservoir control are those that would obtain with levees con-
structed along the San Joaquin River from Herndon to the delta to
form a channel of sufficient width to care for these flows and reclaim
the remaining land now subject to overflow. The flows with reservoir
control are those that would obtain with the same channel, but with
the flood flows from the larger streams controlled by means of regula-
tion in the major reservoir units of the State Plan in this basin to
those shown in Table 20 at the foothill gaging stations. If reclamation
of the valley lands by means of levees was not effected until after the
reservoirs with flood control features were completed, a narrower flood
channel along the river could be constructed because of the smaller
regulated flows. Under this condition, however, the flows might be
slightly larger than those shown in the last column of Table 21, since
the reduction of quantities by storage in the narrower channel might
be less and the rate of concentration somewhat greater.
TABLE 21
FLOOD FLOWS IN GREAT CENTRAL VALLEY WITH AND WITHOUT
RESERVOIR CONTROL
Stream
Crest flocd flow in second-
feet, exceeded once in 100
years on the average
Without
With
reservoir
reservoir
control
control
■303,000
U87.000
'218.000
M25.000
370.000
250,000
254,000
170,000
670,000
535,000
400.000
201.000
430,000
226,000
70,000
50.000
103,000
64.000
133,000
82,000
780,000
506,000
Sacramento River at Red Bluff -
Sacramento River at Red Bluff (flow exceeded once in 14 years on the average)
Sacramento River at Colusa
Sacramento River at Colusa (flow exceeded once in 14 years on the average)...
Sacramento River below city of Sacramento
Feather River below confluence with Yuba River
Feather River below confluence with Bear River
San Joaquin River below confluence with Merced River-
San Joaquin River below confluence with Tuolumne River _
San Joaquin River below confluence with Stanislaus River
Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers at confluence
1 Mean daily flow on day of crest of flood.
■ Mean daily flow on day of flood crest. Floods would be controlled to 125.000 second-feet maximum flow exceeded
once in 100 years, except when this amount is exceeded by uncontrolled run-off between Kcnnett reservoir and Red Bluff.
Flows greater than 125,000 second-feet would continue for only a short time.
STATE WATER PLAN 105
Operation and Accomplishments of Plan — Analyses have been made
of all the major units in the Great Central Valley, both storage and
conveyance units, and the underground storage capacity in the upper
San Joaquin Valley, operated coordinately for various purposes,
through the eleven-year period 1918-1929. This was a period of
the lowest average run-off of any of the same length of which there is
definite knowledge. It includes the season of 1923-24, the driest of
record. Studies were made in accord with three methods of operation
which, together with their accomplishments, are as follows:
Method I.
1. The amount of water utilized for storage and regulation in
the major reservoir units was obtained by deducting from the
full natural run-off of the streams entering the Great Central
Valley, the net use of 2,283,000 acre-feet per season for an ade-
quate and dependable irrigation supply for 1,439,000 acres of
land, being the net irrigable mountain valley and foothill
lands lying at elevations too high to be irrigated by gravity from
the major reservoir units, thus providing for the ultimate needs
of these areas, and also deducting 448,000 acre-feet per year for
the water supply of the city of San Francisco. An additional
amount of 224,000 acre-feet per year also was furnished the
San Francisco Bay Basin from Pardee reservoir on the Mokel-
umne River.
2. Reserve storage space would have been held in the reservoirs
listed in Table 20 for controlling floods. The amount of this
space and the regulated flow to which floods on each stream
would have been controlled also are shown in the same table.
This control of floods on the major streams would have resulted
in an increased degree of protection for areas subject to over-
flow in both the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys.
3. Stored water would have been released from the major reservoir
units in such amounts and at such times as to supplement
unregulated flows and return waters to make water supplies
available for the following purposes : '
a. A supply of 9,033,000 acre-feet per season, gross allowance,
without deficiency, available in the principal streams for
the irrigation of all of the net area of irrigable lands of all
classes — 2,640,000 acres — on the Sacramento Valley floor.
b. A supply of 1,200,000 acre-feet per season, without defi-
ciency, for the irrigation of all the net area of 392.000 acres
of irrigable lands and for unavoidable losses in the Sacra-
mento-San Joaquin Delta.
c. A flow maintained in the Sacramento River sufficient to
provide required depths for navigation as far upstream as
Chico Landing, with improvement in present depths upstream
to Red Bluff.
d. A fresh water flow of not less than 3300 second-feet pasl
Antioch into Suisnn Bay, Avhieh would have controlled salin-
ity to the lower end of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
e. A supply of 5,342,000 acre-feet per season, gross allowance,
with a maximum seasonal deficiency of 35 per cent in those
areas dependent upon local supplies, made available for the
]06 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
irrigation of all the net area of 1,810,000 acres of land of all
classes in the lower San Joaquin Valley, including 134.000
acres of foothills on the eastern side of the valley below the
major reservoirs.
f. A supply of 4,700,000 acre-feet per season, without defi-
ciency, made available for the irrigation of a net area of
2,350,000 acres of class 1 and 2 lands on the eastern and
.southern slopes of the upper San Joaquin Valley. This
would have been accomplished by the utilization of under-
ground storage capacity in conjunction with the major reser-
voir and conveyance units proposed.
g. A supply of 520,000 acre-feet per season in all years, except
1924 when there would have been a deficiency of 14 per cent,
made available for the irrigation of a net irrigable area of
260,000 acres lying entirely on the western slope of the
upper San Joaquin Valley.
h. A water supply and channel depth in the San Joaquin
River sufficient to provide navigation as far upstream as
Salt Slough, nine miles above the Merced River,
i. A supply of 403,000 acre-feet per season, except for a defi-
ciency of 18.5 per cent in 1924, in that portion— 323,000
acre-feet — allotted to irrigation use, made available in the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta for use in the San Francisco
Bay Basin. This amount, together with full practicable
development of local resources and annual importations of
224,000 acre-feet from the Mokelumne River and 448,000
acre-feet from the Tuolumne River and an importation
from the Eel River, would have given an adequate and
dependable supply for the ultimate development of this
basin.
j. The generation of more than five billion kilowatt hours of
electric energy annually, on the average.
Table 22 shows, with the operation of the plan under Method I, the
net flow into the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the amount required
from this water for all uses in the delta and adjacent uplands, the
amounts required for supplemental supplies for irrigation in the San
Joaquin Valley and for irrigation and other uses in the San Francisco
Bay Basin, the amount of water which would flow past Antioch into
Suisun Bay for salinity control, the surplus water which would reach
the delta, in addition to that for all requirements, and the total amount
of water which would flow into Suisun Bay after all requirements have
been satisfied. The amounts shown for net flow into delta from the
San Joaquin Valley in Table 22 include such portions of the regulated
and unregulated water from the reservoirs and return waters inter-
cepted by the San Joaquin River pumping system before reaching the
delta as could be used in supplying "crop land" rights or additional
new lands in this valley, obviating the pumping of that portion of this
supply from the delta. "Crop lands" are those lands suitable for
growing crops and which are now or probably will be served in the
near future by diversion under existing rights from the San Joaquin
River above the mouth of the Merced River.
STATE WATER PLAN
107
oo
CO
30000000C
.5 3 cj
2 03
dg.5
~£ =3 G OJ
» » S i
s > s "
a-a 3 d
=. d ST e
CO •»
■S g.3.5
— -a? ^r *~
wOOOOOOOOOO
ooo oooooooo
oooMiOM-^rr— ^o^oi
OOOOOOOOQOO
ooooooooooo
o ooooo ooooo
a d <r ffl ci i/J i 1 - n* oi co n
p^MOCXOOfO'l'Wh'CO
ooooooooooo
ooooooooooo
oooo oqooooq
W MM « MM MM W « N
ooooooooooo
— a a
i- 3^ S 3
H M d 0) fl
ceo
3 =
S2si ■
— -+J
- Sg-g>.s *-^ fe
OOOOOOOOOOO
ooooooooooo
o ooo o o o_o o_o_o
o"o"o*o"o"o"^'o"'o*'o"o
ooooooooooo*
ooooooooooo
OO 0O_O_O_0^O_0_0_O_
cDto'cOtOcCtD iC CD C tD C
O3iOClO0lOO0l0l0l
0000000000000000000000
CC O o °
u —
«cc-3
OOOOOOOOOOO
ooooooooooo
o ooo oo > o_o_o_oo_
CWC if?0 0i 3) ifl d *- d l<5
OOOOOOOOOOOCriOOOCCCCS
cowconwwfccc mm m
ea c>f ci c4" d c4" c4" ci t>J of c4"
ooooooooooo
ooooooooooo
ooo qo o_o_o^o_o__o_
fe-a
ooooooooooo
ooooooooooo
o o o o o o q_qqoo
n ci o: oo -"■* a ^*co <nV"
— r^'— ■oc^o'^-'^m^ - ^ 1
C5 o OO N « oo °i ^ *~1 *^ *^.
c; •— •" ao *o" ""5 Ci o w^occcq
' g =4 O
ooooooooooo
ooooooooooo
ooo oo o_o_o_o_o o
ooootdH'c^'o'oroit^t^oo
o o ice ? i^ c f r- "^ ©
CiQO5O3iOO00Cll>0>Oi
a £ £.3 %3
r «- osls — os-O
CO
ooooooooooo
ooooooooooo
ooooo o_o o © © ©
© —" e>=7 ep oi ■* 9» SB 5 S! 55
-a< — .cc-«r'Mtfj©oc-c©©
C: ^- X N t* N r- « « w in
CO
^J3
CJ L-
>,"3,
•° a
-a 3
<D CO
a- 2
o *»
— 1^
i»
S a
■" o
58
<a o.
IT) "S
.3 3
.a 3
o
ja
3
o
a
0>
>
09
I*
a;
>
3
s?
o
•-»
a
03
CO
4)
-=
s
o
l-
c
o
3 M
».9
a) -
>
3 "-3
3
b
03
OJ
c
■n.2
3 >
c o
c >>
03 —
= d
Cx!
'3""
cr c
g— c
O OT • —
gj 1
fe * —
° c ™
o
S ■» ^ a
® = -^ li
t. O {« o
S h ? e
6:
S i. c3 CM c» CM 'M. C-l t» CM C2
OOJ05CJ}CS3'01C35C:-
>
= o a c
H C OJ
: »e s
5_>. OJ o
IP 1
S.sgg
.s-sis.
h oj o o
o cj^- C
i oo ° M
• 03 en ^
cj-3 OJ ^ os
Soj^= oi *;
c_ J3 bC ^ co
ilijb
S 3 fc 2 oj l "
tsllll
sill 8 !
iO w F/ - **- J5 "^
O « >}0-g c
oj cp gf n£ l.
C^, Cj .- 83 53
stl 3 So 05
• - g« - g
108
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
u
J
03
<
a.
o
2
S
I
P
CO
s
ZZ
3
>.a>
"23
-- —
e-
>
1.3.S
► = s
«_3«
"a.o'3 §
en t-
?
a
2
a
Is
•as
o
it i*
S 3 o
oo ci « d ^« — C2 ?? ■* h»«(©
OHOOO^IOCONWNPHOI-
iO I - OJ CO ~- *o
9 CO- K »C
t- -*r <5 « co <-•
iC 'T C CO
mop tP
— -r i-
7
OWC-OMTMncD?10)C
>ooo ooo<
h~ <M rt
co r~ ©
a
Is
•as
lis
a «
Safe
fe .2^
S.2
n
.2 o.
C/2
«.-
o
s
(DNNNOOJOOOWOa
8QOOOOOOCOOO
o_ ©^ o o © © © © © ©
r^^o^ri**^"0? t^cococo"
in ^f r- n o oj co^oi
§
E
STATE WATER PLAN 109
Although there would be a large surplus in every year, most of it
would occur in the winter months from unregulated run-off. During
the summer months there would be just sufficient water released from
the reservoirs to care for all needs. Table 23 shows the amounts of
surplus water in the delta and the total flow into Suisun Bay, by
months, for the years of maximum and minimum run-off and the average
for the period 1918-1929. It may be noted that there would have
been no surplus in July and August of any year under this method of
operation.
Method II :
The method of operation would have been the same as numbers
1, 2 and 3 under Method I, except that more water would have
been furnished to supply additional irrigable lands along the west
side of the upper San Joaquin Valley. There also would have
been a larger deficiency in supply to lands in the San Joaquin
Valley, other than those dependent upon local supplies, and to
lands in the San Francisco Bay Basin, than under Method I.
Water supplies would have been made available under this method
of operation for the following purposes :
a. Same as a under 3 in Method I.
b. Same as b under 3 in Method I.
c. Same as c under 3 in Method I.
d. Same as d under 3 in Method I.
e. A supply of 5,342,000 acre-feet per season, gross allowance,
with a maximum seasonal deficiency of 35 per cent, made
available for the irrigation of all the net area of 1,810,000
acres of irrigable land of all classes in the lower San Joaquin
Valley, including 134,000 acres of foothills on the eastern
side of the valley, below the major reservoirs.
f. Same as f under 3 in Method I.
g. A supply of 1,570,000 acre-feet per season, with a maximum
deficiency of 35 per cent, made available for the irrigation of
all the net irrigable area of 785,000 acres of class 1 and 2
lands lying on the western slope of the upper San Joaquin
Valley.
h. Same as h under 3 in Method I.
i. Same as i under 3 in Method I, except that the deficiency
in the supply for irrigated lands would have been 35 per cent
in 1924.
j. The generation of more than five billion kilowatt hours of
electric energy annually, on the average.
Table 24 shows the same items for the operation of the plan under
Method II as shown in Table 22 for the plan of operation under
Method I. Table 25 gives similar data on monthly surplus and flow
into Suisun Bay under Method II as are presented in Table 23 for
Method I. It may be noted there would be less surplus water in the
delta, and more months when there would be no surplus, than with the
plan of operation under Method I.
no
DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES
Hi
J
CQ
<
S3 c i>
•g .a «
3_|-
IS
11
-a
3
a
a>
a
'3
a"
a*
o
s
to
IS.I.E
■OS*!?
5.2 g
c.2
t 3-6 ft
I
o po co i*- o ■*• oo cc
<M ift (C «r oo cc m c*i m oo oo
«s c V o* d -j: « w ^' -• a*"
iftWQO- f'V'MO'OOOO
oe-ooNfcmQ-cNtco
OO-CIC *«r 0» O Q© OS ^ ■*
c: -r r i' or" a-' ci — " ci c i -I r -
S © © <
ooooooooooo
■ I 5 "si
'>?-2°£ ■-£ -
o-o
3 «
"S £ «.Jj
- c *e*_
W O o °
j o
« — "O ■»» 03
K>2 « « c
— « « 3.S
,211^ =
i
§"3
S **
i— —
1
'3 tr -. .
h c >*.£ s 5
o o =z 3 qj
=>
■
OiOSOSCSC dODOSC-OSO""
OOOOOOOOCOOOiOOOCOOOOO
OS OS iC C s OS Os if? OS OS OS »0
QOQOCSQCOOOOCSaCaOOOOS
S3 ci o a ■* ■* ■* - n •*» o
o ©•- x w t>. oo o »-- n m
d d oi V to oi o" 05 oi jo ^"
o
3
©*©^S*©©*52*22©
oo" oo t--^ iri Oi O ©" B> j" r -^ i - ao"
c. ~- ~- r^ >o _ r - o i - . - ~.
■7. s
~ _
.= '
<ococc"^5^-cc— • r— r^- — c>
tNiOf>-ii5a»ooiNu:Tc-3
t-- OS — _*S W!CONOSrt w
OiOSOOCOCOOOCDOOOOiCCO
^ (-* _ OJ ■* •
Ills «•»
S &2.Z "JT3
as cl- 3 •■
— — CJ C» CJ <r4 &t C^i C^ <M <M
0> 0> O) O) 0> 9 A OS 9s oa OS
>
STATE WATER PLAN
111
TABLE 25
MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF SURPLUS WATER IN SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN
DELTA AND FLOW INTO SUISUN BAY WITH MAJOR UNITS OF
STATE PLAN IN GREAT CENTRAL VALLEY
OPERATED UNDER METHOD II.
1918-1929
Year of maximum run-off,
1927
Year of minimum run-off,
1924
Average for period
1918-1929
Mentb
Surplus water
above all
requirements
in acre-feet
Flow into
Suisun Bay
in acre-feet
Surplus water
above all
requirements
in acre-feet
Flow into
Suisun Bay
in acre-feet
Surplus water
above all
requirements
in acre-feet
Flow into
Suisun Bay
in acre-fee
January
1,054,000
4,043,000
1,719,000
1,029,000
357,000
32,000
588,000
647,000
1,257,000
4,227,000
1,922,000
1,225,000
560.000
196,000
203,000
203,000
196,000
235,000
784,000
850,000
204,000
249,000
55,000
248,000
246,000
407,000
439,000
203,000
196,000
• 203,000
196,000
203,000
203,000
196,000
258,000
444,000
449,000
722,000
1,320,000
1,486,000
167,000
219,000
113,000
33,000
328,000
474,000
925,000
February .
1,505,000
March
1,689,000
April
363,000
May
422,000
309,000
July
203,000
August
September
203,000
196,000
October
236,000
November
524,000
December
677,000
Total
9,469,000
11,858,000
1,002,000
3,397,000
4,862,000
7,252,000
The same analysis from which the foregoing results for Method II
were obtained shows that by the utilization of the physical works pro-
posed herein for the Sacramento River Basin, including the Trinity
River diversion, regulated supplies, without deficiency in amount and
dependable in time, could have been made available in the principal
streams to irrigate all of the net irrigable lands — 2,640,000 acres — in
the Sacramento Valley, after allowing a gross diversion of 3,241,000
acre-feet, with a net use of 1,945,000 acre-feet per year, for the irriga-
tion of a net irrigable area of 1,234,000 acres of foothill and mountain
valley lands in the Sacramento River Basin. The analysis also shows
that there would have been a large surplus of water in every year, over
and above these needs, in the basin above the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta. Some of this surplus water would have been contributed
directly by releases and spill from the reservoirs and the remainder
would have been that returning to the streams from water applied for
irrigation on the valley floor, or foothills at elevations higher than the
reservoirs, but draining directly to the valley floor. The portion of this
surplus water not used in or diverted from the Sacramento-San Joa-
quin Delta would have wasted into the ocean. A large part of this
surplus, however, could have been put to beneficial use in all years,
except in the winter months when a portion would have wasted. The
tabulation in Table 26 gives the amounts of water contributed by the
reservoirs and the surplus available in the delta for the maximum and
minimum years and the average annual for the eleven-year period
3918-1929.
The ultimate average annual requirements for the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta and salinity control would amount to 3,590,000 acre-feet.
A portion of this would be contributed by water from the San Joaquin
Valley streams, but if the entire amount had been obtained from
Sacramento Valley waters during the eleven-year period there still
11'2
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
TABLE 26
SURPLUS WATER IN SACRAMENTO RIVER BASIN
Releasee and spill from major reservoir units
requirements for lands on Sacramento Valley floor
Surplus from releases and spill
Iteturn rater from valley floor
Return water — from foothills above reservoirs
Total surplus available in delta
Amount of water in tore-feet
Minimum
year, 1927
19,837,000
:;.!>:«,000
II 1,81 ,4,000
3,843.000
341,000
14,988,000
Minimum
year, 1924
lO.tSOS.OOO
9,033,000
1, 575,000
3,843,000
341,000
5,75i>,000
Average
annua]
for period
1918-1929
15.141,000
9,033,000
ii.10S.000
3.843,000
341,000
10,292.000
would have been surpluses in the maximum and minimum years of
11,399,000 and 2,164,000 acre-feet, respectively, and an average annual
surplus for the period of 6,702,000 acre-feet.
Method III.
In the accomplishments with the two foregoing methods of opera-
tion, the Sacramento Valley w T ould have received an irrigation
supply without deficiency. Another study was made for the same
eleven-year period 1918-1929 with a method of operation which
would be the same as under Method II, except that an additional
supply of 1,500,000 acre-feet annually would have been made avail-
able in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in accord with a uni-
form demand. This additional supply would have resulted, how-
ever, in some additional deficiencies and less wasted surplus, and
would have been 35 per cent deficient itself in 1924. It would
have been obtained with a maximum deficiency of 22 per cent in
the supply to the Sacramento Valley and with the same maximum
deficiencies in the supplies for the areas in the San Joaquin Valley
and San Francisco Bay Basin as in Method II.
In all of the foregoing methods of operation, the accomplishments
would be obtained with the use of only the major units of the ^\n\r
Water Plan. Investigations have been made of other reservoir sites
in the Sacramento River Basin upstream from the major reservoirs,
and on streams on which no major reservoirs arc proposed, to determine
the possibilities of obtaining additional regulated Hows. It is found
that the yield in irrigation water from the Feather River could be
increased more than 450,000 acre-feet per year and the yield from the
Yuba River probably as much as 170,000 acre-feet per year by the
use of other known reservoir sites. A relatively small additional
yield also could be obtained from the Americas River and some of the
small streams entering the Sacramento Valley from the east and west
side foothills. If it should be demonstrated that a safe dam could be
constructed in the lower canyon of the Sacramento River, near Red
Bluff, to create a reservoir with a capacity of about 1,000,000 acre-feet,
an additional regulated supply of over 600,000 acre-feet could be
obtained from this river. A still further increase in yield could be
obtained with a greater storage capacity.
STATE WATER PLAN 113
A preliminary study indicates that it would be physically feasible to
divert 500,000 acre-feet annually from Eel River into the Sacramento
River Basin without impairment of the present uses on the upper
reaches of the stream. If 200,000 acre-feet annually from this source
were furnished the San Francisco Bay Basin to fully supplement other
supplies available to that area, 300,000 acre-feet annually still would
be available for use in the Great Central Valley. The cost of this
supply would not exceed that obtainable from some of the major reser-
voir units of the State Plan in the Great Central Valley. It also is
physically possible to divert a substantial supply from the upper
Klamath River into the upper Sacramento River drainage basin. No
studies have been made, however, to determine the amount that could
be so diverted, or the economic feasibility of the plan.
San Francisco Bay Basin.
The principal unit located in the San Francisco Bay Basin, and
incliKled in previous reports* to the Legislature, in the plan for the
maximum utilization and conservation of the state's water is a salt
water barrier below the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin
rivers.
The intended primary functions of a barrier would be to prevent
the invasion of saline water into upper San Francisco Bay and the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, act as a diversion dam for the exporta-
tion of water to the upper San Joaquin Valley, and, by the creation of
a fresh water lake, provide a means of diversion of fresh water sup-
plies for the industrial, metropolitan and agricultural areas of the
upper San Francisco Bay region.
From 1924 to 1926, an investigation was made of a barrier by the
United States Bureau of Reclamation in cooperation with the state.
That investigation pertained to the physical aspects. The reportt con-
cluded that it was physically feasible to construct a barrier either in
Carquinez Strait or at Point San Pablo. However, no conclusion was
reached as to its economic feasibility.
The present investigation has been directed to the economic aspects
of a barrier. This has involved, as an essential feature, a study of
alternate plans, with and without a barrier, to provide for the basic
necessities of salinity control and dependable fresh water supplies for
the upper San Francisco Bay and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
region, in order to determine, if possible, the most feasible and eco-
nomical plan for serving the present and ultimate water demands and
facilitating the development of industries, municipalities and agricul-
ture in the area. The study has included a consideration of the advan-
tages and disadvantages of a barrier to local developments, operations
and activities which would be affected, and the necessity and economic
feasibility of a barrier, not only as a means for serving the needs of
the upper bay and delta region, but also as a unit for attaining the
maximum conservation and utilization of the state's water resources.
* Bulletin No. 4, "Water Resources of California," Division of Engineering and
Irrigation, 1923.
Bulletin No. 9, "Supplemental Report on Water Resources of California," Division
of Engineering and Irrigation, 1925.
Bulletin No. 12, "Summary Report on the Water Resources of California," Division
of Engineering and Irrigation, 1927.
t Bulletin No. 22, "Report on Salt Water Barrier Below Confluence of Sacramento
and San Joaquin Rivers, California," Division of Water Resources, 1929.
8—80993
1 1 & DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES
Special reports have been prepared on particular phases of the inves-
tigation by men especially well qualified thereon. The United States
War Department also has been making an investigation of the barrier,
including particularly studies of navigation, flood control, silt move-
ment and tidal action. The basic data and other information so far
developed by the War Department have been made available for use
in the preparation of this report.
Closely allied with the investigation of a salt water barrier has been
a study of salinity conditions and control in upper San Francisco Bay
and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region. The results of ten
years of investigation and records on salinity have formed the basis for
an exhaustive analysis of its variation and control. Estimates have
been completed of the amount of stream flow required for control and
prevention of invasion of saline water for various points and degrees
of control. The results of this salinity investigation are presented in
detail in another report.* The control of salinity by fresh water
released from storage reservoirs is an alternate plan to that by a salt
water barrier.
Out of the several available sites for a barrier, three typical ones
have been selected for the economic studies in this investigation, namely,
an upper site at Chipps Island, an intermediate site at Dillon Point
in Carquinez Strait, and a lower site at Point San Pablo. Foundation
conditions at the tw r o latter sites are favorable for construction of a
barrier. Conditions are not so favorable at Chipps Island site. How-
ever, preliminary studies indicate that a dam, founded on long piles,
could be constructed. Estimated costs, including navigation and flood
control features, are given in Table 27. For the Dillon Point and Point
San Pablo sites the estimates are based upon the plans presented in a
previous report, t but with certain minor modifications. The plans for
the Chipps Island site, upon which the cost estimate is based, are similar
to those for the other sites, but modified to meet the foundation con-
ditions. These costs include an allowance for contingencies and over-
head, and interest during construction at 4£ per cent compounded
semiannually for a construction period of six years. This table also
sets forth the estimated annual cost of a barrier at each site. These
figures include interest at 4^ per cent per annum, maintenance, depre-
ciation, and amortization on a four per cent forty-year sinking fund
basis.
TABLE 27
CAPITAL AND ANNUAL COST OF A SALTWATER BARRIER
Site
Cost
Capital
Annual
Chipps Island
140,000.000
50.000,000
75,000,000
|3 300 000
Dillon Point
3 900 000
Point San Pablo
5.600,000
• Bulletin No. 27, "Variation and Control of Salinity in Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta and Upper San Francisco Hay," Division of Water Resources.
t Bulletin No. 22, "Report on Salt Water Barrier Below Confluence of Sacramento
and San Joaquin Rivers, California," Division of Water Resources, 1929.
STATE WATER PLAN 115
The industrial area along the shores of upper San Francisco Bay is a
most attractive district for the location of heavy industries, as evidenced
by the growth during the past five years. Its rate of growth has
been one-third greater than the average for California and five times
as great as that of the average for the United States as a whole. All
of the location factors for industries are favorable with the one excep-
tion of water. This needs correction. At present the industries
obtain part of their supply from wells, part from public utilities
and part from the bay itself. During the summer and fall months,
the water in the bay becomes brackish and then is only suitable for
cooling purposes. Moreover, some of the well supplies have turned
saline, which further limits the dependability of fresh water supply.
The present use of water -by the industries is about 16 million
gallons per day for boiler and process, and about 65 million gallons
per day for cooling and condensing purposes. Of the above amounts,
about 13 million gallons a day for boiler and process and 38 million
gallons a day for cooling and condensing purposes are used by the
industries above the Dillon Point site. At the present time the
average cost of water per thousand gallons for boiler and process use
is about twelve cents for the entire area and seven cents for the
industries above Dillon Point site, and the average cost of cooling
water is about two and one-tenth cents for the entire area and two
cents for the industries above Dillon Point. The use of salt or
brackish water for cooling or condensing purposes is satisfactory and
its cost is low. On the other hand, fresh water for boiler and process
use is relatively high in cost and limited in dependability of supply.
A lower cost with additional dependability would be desirable.
Along the shores of upper San Francisco Bay are a number of
urban and suburban districts. Water supplies for these cities and
towns are obtained locally from wells and streams and at certain
periods of the year from Suisun Bay. Antioch obtains its supply from
the San Joaquin River near its mouth. A public utility obtaining its
supply both from wells and from Suisun Bay serves several cities
and towns in Contra Costa County. Water rates to the consumer
vary from 10 to 73 cents per 1000 gallons, with a prevailing rate
probably equal to the average of these limits, for all systems.
The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta has a gross area of nearly one-
half million acres of the richest agricultural land in the state. The
menace of saline water invasion has tended to depreciate land values,
particularly in the lower end of the delta where the salinity situation
is most aggravated. A salt water barrier would, if supplemented by
release of stored fresh water, solve the salinity problem for the delta.
On the other hand, levee maintenance and drainage pumping costs
would be increased because of a higher constant barrier lake level
than the average water level at present in the delta. A barrier
would not have any appreciable effect on increasing the flood heights
in the delta. It is believed by the best informed on the delta situation
that if the salinity menace were removed and dependable fresh
water conditions provided by some method of salinity control, land
values and average crop returns in the lower part of the delta would
tend to increase.
116 DIVISION OF WA'l'LR RESOURCES
Adjoining Suisun and San Pablo bays, there is a gross area of
130,000 acres of marsh lands about equally divided between the two
bays. In the Suisun Bay area about 46,000 acres are reclaimed, of
which only 5000 acres are farmed. In San Pablo Bay area there are
also about 46,000 acres reclaimed, of which 24,000 acres are farmed.
A large part of these lands have been unsuccessfully farmed due to
the saline conditions. These lands, if furnished with a fresh water
supply, might be completely reclaimed and brought into agricultural
production. This would involve the building of levees and drainage
works and removal of salt from the soil, all of which would be difficult
and expensive.
If the economic conditions become sufficiently favorable to permit the
expenditures required to put these marsh lands into agricultural pro-
duction, their reclamation and utilization could be effected either with
or without a barrier. Preliminary studies of the works and opera-
tions involved in carrying out a complete reclamation development
indicate a high barrier lake level would be a detriment by reason of
more difficult and expensive drainage operations; and that a plan of
reclamation providing for the leveeing off of the marsh lands from the
bay without a barrier could be carried out and permit the regulation
of water inside at a more favorable level, thus eliminating the detriment
of a high barrier lake level.
Adjacent to upper San Francisco Bay, there are upland areas,
below the assumed limit of present economic pumping lift of 150 feet,
totaling 246,000 acres, about 118,000 acres of which are contiguous to
Suisun Bay and about 128,000 acres contiguous to San Pablo Bay.
About 190,000 acres are suitable for irrigation development and 12,000
acres may be classified as urban and industrial areas. Some of the
areas now under irrigation are deficient in water supply. Others, such
as Napa Valley, appear to have sufficient local water, if properly con-
served and applied, to meet their ultimate development. Some of these
areas, particularly the Ygnacio Valley, are in need of a supplemental
supply.
A large amount of sewage and industrial waste now is discharged
into the upper bays. Under present conditions, tidal action assists
in its removal with little, if any, nuisance resulting therefrom. More-
over, this method of disposal, under similar conditions to the present,
would probably be satisfactory for an indefinite period. However,
it' sewage and industrial waste, in the increasing amounts to be expected
with the future growth of industries and urban districts, were dis-
charged into a barrier lake, it would pollute the water to such an
extent that its availability for use would be quite limited without
construction of disposal and treatment works involving substantial
expenditures to prevent such pollution.
Navigation in upper San Francisco Bay would be affected by a bar-
rier. Locks would be required in a barrier structure for the passage of
ships. This could be easily accomplished, however, with some loss of
time. Navigation above a harrier would be improved somewhat due
to the removal of tidal currents.
In connection with the fishing industry, studies indicate that a
serious detrimental effect might result from a salt water barrier. It
would offer an obstruction to the free migration of fish into and out
STATE WATER PLAN 117
of the bay and rivers and would reduce the brackish areas which, it is
reported, are necessary to the young fish fry.
The industrial water front structures in the upper bay area have
been seriously affected during the past ten years or more by an infes-
tation of marine borers, such as the teredo, which attack and destroy
timber piles in salt water. For the existing structures, the bulk of
the damage has already occurred and capital investments made to
replace the timber piles by more resistant types. A change to fresh
water conditions, however, probably would effect savings in the mainte-
nance costs of present structures and in capital expenditures of future
ones.
Salinity Control and Water Service for the Upper Bay Area — A por-
tion of the ultimate water requirements of the San Francisco Bay
Basin could be supplied from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. This
appears to be not only the nearest, but the most feasible source of
water supply to take care of the future ultimate requirements of the
upper San Francisco Bay area. A portion of the area already is
served from this source. In order to make this source of supply avail-
able, provision must be made to control the invasion of saline water
into the upper bay and delta so that a dependable and adequate fresh
water supply can be obtained. This objective could be attained either
by a salt water barrier or by means of fresh water releases without a
barrier. Studies have been made to estimate the relative value and
cost of these two alternate plans.
The effective storage capacity of a barrier lake is relatively small.
The level at which water could be held is limited, both as to its maxi-
mum and minimum elevation. The maximum elevation is controlled
by the height which the levees in the delta could continuously with-
stand, to about three feet above mean sea level, or approximately mean
high tide level in the delta. The minimum elevation is controlled
partly by the required navigation depths for the Stockton Ship Canal
to about one and one-half feet above mean sea level, or approximately
mean tide level in the upper San Joaquin Delta. The minimum level
is controlled also in part by the necessity of holding the lake level as
high as possible above mean tidal levels below a barrier in order to
obtain effective operating conditions required for flushing out infiltrat-
ing salt water. Although the total storage capacity of a barrier lake is
relatively large, the portion thereof that could be utilized is small
because of the foregoing limitations and probably should not exceed a
range of one foot. The usable storage capacity for this range would be
as follows:
TABLE 28
USABLE STORAGE CAPACITY IN A BARRIER LAKE
Site
Chipps Island
Dillon Point
Point San Pablo.
Capacity
in acre-feet
for one foot
of range
4.5,000
75,000
155,000
118 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
Control of salinity with a salt water barrier would require substan-
tial amounts of fresh water to provide for barrier operation and
unavoidable losses from a barrier lake. A large part of the 'fresh
water required with the usual type of locks is directly due to the neces-
sity of operating locks In a barrier structure for the passage of vessels.
During Lockage operations, salt water from below the barrier would be
discharged into the lake and seek iis lower levels, and, unless removed,
would progressively replace and pollute the fresh water therein. Large
amounts of fresh water therefore would be required to flush out this
salt water. Lockage operations also would result in direct losses of
fresh water from the lake. The operation of fish ladders and leakage
around flood and lock gates would require additional amounts of fresh
water. The creation of a barrier lake, with a large area of water sur-
face and extensive marginal vegetation, would result in large evapora-
tion and transpiration losses which could not be prevented and must
be supplied as a part of the water requirements for salinity control
with a barrier. Evaporation from the lake surface would be from five
to eight inches in depth per month during the summer. Transpiration
from the areas of natural vegetation, especially tules and cat-tails,
would be of considerably greater magnitude per unit area. At present,
there are large unreclaimed areas in the marsh lands adjacent to Suisun
and San Pablo bays and also large areas of uncultivated lands enclosed
in levees on which various kinds of natural vegetation grow. The
consumptive demands of this vegetation would have to be supplied
from a barrier lake. Even under future complete reclamation and
cropping of these marsh lands, the extent of marginal vegetation and
the amount of transpiration would be considerable. All of these water
requirements are of special importance in the period of low summer
stream Aoav when supplies would have to be released from mountain
storage.
Table 29 shows the estimated water requirements for salinity control
with a barrier under both present and future conditions, including
amounts for barrier operation and unavoidable evaporation and tran-
spiration losses from a barrier lake. The water requirements for
present conditions are based upon present water-borne traffic and
estimates by U. S. Army Engineers. The amounts of water required
for lockage and flushing both for present and future (25 years hence)
water-borne traffic and for leakage are estimates which were submitted
by the Division Engineer of South Pacific Division, U. S. War Depart-
ment. The unavoidable losses, evaporation and transpiration, are esti-
mated as an average for the months of July, August and September.
Evaporation, for both present and future conditions, is based on losses
from a barrier lake below the delta. Transpiration, for present condi-
tions, is estimated for the present vegetation on the marsh lands of
Suisun and San Pablo Bay and. for future conditions, for the vegeta-
tion on marginal areas which would remain permanently unreclaimed
after the marsh lands have been fully reclaimed and put into agricul-
tural production.
If a barrier were constructed, it appears obvious that the locks
would be designed, if possible, so as to prevent the entrance of salt
water into a barrier lake. A modification in the design and operation
of the navigation locks, such as salt clearing devices, might materially
STATE WATER PLAN 119
TABLE 29
WATER REQUIREMENTS FOR SALINITY CONTROL WITH A BARRIER
Site
Water requirements
in second-feet
Present
conditions
Future
conditions
1,300
2,300
5,550
2,800
Dillon Point
2,650
Point San Pablo
7,500
decrease the water requirements for lockage and flushing. Studies
indicate that the use of such devices in place of the usual type of locks
might reduce the water requirements for future conditions to perhaps
less than half those shown in the table, how 7 ever, with increased capital
and annual costs. On the other hand a volume of water-borne traffic
greater than estimated for 25 years hence might be expected. The
uncertainty of the volume and character of future traffic makes it
impossible to estimate closely the water required ultimately for lockage
and flushing purposes. However, any possible reduction in these
requirements below the amounts shown would not affect the conclusions
set forth in this report.
The plan for salinity control by fresh water releases without a bar-
rier is based upon a study of the variation and control of salinity in
the upper bay and delta. It is concluded from this study that the
invasion of saline water into the delta can be positively prevented and
salinity controlled by provision of a fresh water supply sufficient to
maintain a flow in the two rivers of not less than 3300 second-feet past
Antioch into Suisun Bay. With such a control at the mouth of the
rivers, a source for diversion of a fresh water supply of equivalent
dependability and quality to that which could be provided in a bar-
rier lake would be provided in the channels of the delta and not far
distant from the upper bay area.
The control of salinity by means of fresh water releases, as proposed,
does not rest upon theory, but is supported by the actual observed
occurrence of natural control which has been effected by stream flow, as
shown by the detailed records of the past ten years. It offers not only
a positive and dependable means of controlling salinity, but also a
method that would be feasible and economical of consummation. Under
the proposed plan of control, saline conditions in the upper bay region
would be greatly improved over those which have occurred during the
last ten to thirteen years and would tend to approach the equivalent
of conditions which naturally occurred prior to the extensive develop-
ment of irrigated agriculture and reclamation in the Sacramento and
San Joaquin valleys.
Exportation of water from the Sacramento River across the delta
and up the San Joaquin River can be accomplished either with or
without a barrier. The present investigation shows that a barrier is not
necessary as a means of effecting this transfer. "With an adequate
water supply provided for the control of salinity at the lower end of
the delta, and w r ith additional channel capacity connecting the Sacra-
mento River to the San Joaquin Delta, there would be no physical
120 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
impediment to the transfer and diversion of water up the San Joaquin
River.
As a means of providing water service for the ultimate needs of the
industrial, municipal and agricultural areas of the upper bay region,
the two alternate plan? of salinity control are fundamentally the same.
In both plans, conduits would be required to transport the water to the
areas served in the upper bay region. The only salient difference
between the physical features of the two plans of service would be in
the length and size of conduits. Either plan would render equally
favorable service. The determination of the better plan must, there-
fore, rest upon the question of cost. Preliminary estimates on a strictly
comparable basis have been made of the major conduit units and works
for alternate plans of development, with and without a barrier. The
proposed works would furnish equivalent service and accomplishments,
with and without a barrier, at each of the three sites. In the plan
without a barrier, the cost of additional levees and works assumed as
necessary for reclaiming the marsh lands adjoining Suisun and San
Pablo bays and also the cost of a connecting channel between Sacra-
mento and San Joaquin rivers are included. The plans provide only
for main conduits extending from the source of supply, whether from
the delta or a barrier lake, both north and south of the bay and designed
1o serve the areas. Based upon this study, it is estimated thai a plan
of ultimate development with conduits extending from the lower delta,
together with additional works for the reclamation of the marsh lands
of Suisun and San Pablo bays and channel enlargements in the delta,
would involve a capital expenditure of less than half that required for
an equivalent development with a barrier; and that the annual cost,
including interest, amortization, operation, maintenance and deprecia-
tion, also would be less than half that with a barrier. Plans for the
major conduits required for ultimate service to the San Francisco Bay
Basin are not shown herein, but preliminary studies and cost estimates,
which show their physical feasibility, have been made and are presented
in another report.*
The plan for serving the upper bay area by conduits from the delta
is a flexible one and lends itself to progressive development with mini-
mum expenditures. Thus, without the large capital cost required for
a barrier, initial conduit units extending from controlled fresh water
channels of the delta could be constructed with relatively small capital
outlays to take care of immediate water requirements. Such initial
conduit units later could be enlarged and extended as future demands
increase, and likewise other conduit units could be added.
The foregoing figures for salinity control, with and without a barrier,
indicate thai some saving in water would be effected by a barrier at
Chipps [sland site, and a1 Dillon Point site under present and assumed
future conditions. At Point San Pablo site no water could be saved,
even under present conditions. Greater savings could be effected
through utilization of salt clearing devices. However, such amounts
of water as mighl be saved by a barrier could be supplied from the
major reservoirs of the Sacramento Valley at an annual cost per acre-
font panging Prom about $1.00 from the Kennett Reservoir to $3.33
• Bulletin No. 28, "Economic Aspects of a Salt Water Barrier Below Confluence of
Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers," Division of Water Resources.
STATE WATER PLAN 121
from the Oroville reservoir, with an average from all reservoirs of about
$2, or considerably less than the cost with a barrier. (See Table 30.)
A study of the ultimate water requirements and sources of supply
for the San Francisco Bay Basin indicates that, in addition to the water
supply obtainable from a complete feasible development of all local
water resources in the basin and the imported supplies from Hetch
Hetchy and the Mokelumne River, about 600,000 acre-feet of water
would' be required annually. This could be partially supplied from
Eel River. All or the greater portion of this additional supply could
be obtained from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, especially that
required for the upper bay area. The studies of water supply, yield and
demand for the Great Central Valley show that ample supplies of water
would be available with the operation of the major units of the ultimate
State Water Plan to meet all demands in the Great Central Valley and
delta, including salinity control to the lower end of the delta, and also
an amount sufficient to meet a considerable part of the additional
demands of the San Francisco Bay Basin. Such savings in water as
might be effected by a barrier would not be needed to provide a complete
supply for the Great Central Valley and San Francisco Bay Basin.
Furthermore, regulated water supplies in addition to those that could
be provided by the major reservoir units of the State Plan in the Great
Central Valley, could be furnished in amounts greater than the pos-
sible water savings with a barrier and at much smaller cost by develop-
ment of other known reservoir sites on the Feather and Yuba rivers.
The conclusions of the investigation as to the feasible and economical
method of controlling invasion of saline water and making available
an adequate and dependable source of water supply for the upper bay
area are summarized as follows:
1. It would be physically feasible to construct a salt water barrier
at sites in Carquinez Strait and at Point San Pablo. Founda-
tion conditions at the Chipps Island site are not as favorable for
constructing a barrier at this location. The capital cost of the
barrier would vary with the location and type of structure from
$40,000,000 to $75,000,000 and the annual cost corresponding to
the same would vary from $3,300,000 to $5,600,000.
2. The amount which might be contributed from highway funds
towards the building of a barrier, by reason of present facilities
and savings effected, is small in comparison with the total cost of a
barrier and can not be considered a controlling factor in selecting
the site, methods of financing or time of construction ; and the com-
bination of a highway crossing with a salt water barrier is not
economically warranted.
3. The furnishing of an adequate and dependable cheap fresh water
supply for industrial use would no doubt prove an attraction to
heavy users of industrial water and probably would stimulate
industrial growth in the upper bay area. If this were accomplished
by the assistance of a barrier with a fresh water lake maintained
by adequate water supplies furnished from mountain storage reser-
voirs, the attraction might be still further enhanced. However, the
large expenditure required for a barrier might result in these bene-
fits being entirely offset by the burden in additional taxes the local
122 DIVISION OF WATKR RESOURCES
industrial area might have to assume as its share of a barrier cost.
Moreover, other competing industrial areas naturally would offer
counter-attractions, such as comparable water rates, and hence it
can not be expected that there would be any rapid influx of indus-
tries to locate on a barrier lake. Therefore, in so far as fresh water
supply is a factor in industrial development, the essential require-
ment would be the furnishing of adequate fresh water supplies by
the consummation of the most practicable plan that can be devised.
4. The primary function of a salt water barrier would be to pre-
vent the invasion of saline water into the upper bay and thus pro-
vide a convenient source of diversion of a fresh water supply for
industrial, agricultural and domestic use in the upper bay area.
A barrier in itself would not create the water supplies required
either for present or future needs of the area. Its function as
regards water service would be primarily that of a diversion struc-
ture from above which fresh water supplies developed on the Sacra-
mento and San Joaquin rivers could be diverted for various use-
ful purposes. Moreover, in order to control salinity with a barrier,
substantial quantities of fresh water must be furnished from
upstream storage developments in much greater amounts than the
usable storage in a barrier lake to provide for barrier operation
(lockage, flushing and leakage losses) and unavoidable losses (evap-
oration and transpiration) from a barrier lake. Therefore, the
necessity and desirability of a barrier as a means of controlling
salinity and serving the fresh water demands of the upper bay
area must be determined on the basis of the comparative cost of a
plan of salinity control and water service with a barrier and an
alternate plan without a barrier providing equivalent service and
accomplishments.
5. Control of salinity and a dependable fresh water supply for the
upper bay area could be provided with equal certainty without
a barrier by means of fresh -water released from storage reservoirs.
With salinity controlled at the mouth of the river in this manner,
not only would the delta be fully protected, but also a fresh water
supply equivalent in dependability and quality to that with a bar-
rier could be made available in the channels of the delta and not
far distant from the upper bay area.
6. A barrier is not necessary for the exportation of water from
the Sacramento River to the San Joaquin Valley above the delta.
Wit h salinity controlled at the lower end of the delta by fresh water
releases and with additional channel capacity connecting the Sacra-
mento Uiver to the San Joaquin Delta, there would be no phj'sical
impedimenl to the transfer and diversion of water up the San
Joaquin River.
7. A barrier would not be essentia] to the feasibility of reclaiming
the marsh lands adjacent to Suisun and San Pablo bays.
8. A barrier would probably effect substantial savings in the cap-
ital and annual costs of water front structures in the barrier lake
above, but such savings might be more than offset by losses entailed
in delays to navigal ion. additional eosts of drainage and levee main
tenance in the delta and bay marsh lands, and possible damage to
STATE WATER PLAN 123
the fishing industry. Moreover, construction of a barrier would
precipitate a sewage and industrial waste disposal problem which
would require substantial expenditures for construction of disposal
and treatment works for its solution.
9. The proposed alternate plan of salinity control by means of fresh
water releases without a barrier, providing conduits from the delta
to serve the ultimate fresh water demands of the upper bay area,
additional works of channel enlargement between the Sacramento
River and San Joaquin Delta and works for the reclamation of bay
marsh lands, could be consummated for a capital and annual cost
of less than half that required for a plan of equivalent scope and
service with a barrier. It would have the additional advantage
of requiring immediate expenditures of but a small fraction of
the cost of a barrier for amply serving the needs of the immediate
future. Moreover, it would lend itself to a program of progressive
development with expenditures made only as required to keep pace
with the growing demands, thus keeping both capital and annual
• costs to a minimum for the progressive and ultimate stages of
development.
10. All present and ultimate fresh water requirements and the com-
plete development of the ultimate potentialities of industries,
municipalities and agricultural lands in the upper San Francisco
Bay region would be provided for under the proposed alternate
plan of development and service, with salinity controlled to the
lower end of the delta by fresh water releases from mountain
storage. The plan would include main conduits extending westerly
from the delta along the north and south sides of the bay, located
and designed to serve the fresh water demands in the upper bay
area. The upper bay channels would continue to serve as outlets
for sewage and industrial waste and as a source of supply for
cooling and condensing water for industries, with advantages
resulting for both purposes. Preliminiary designs and studies of
the proposed plan demonstrate its physical feasibility and econom-
ical advantage, and give assurance of satisfactory service. The
proposed alternate plan would not disturb the present status of
developments and operations in the upper San Francisco Bay and
delta region and, to a large extent, would restore fresh water con-
ditions in upper San Francisco Bay equivalent to those existing
under natural conditions before the expansion of irrigation in the
Great Central Valley.
11. Water in the amounts that might be saved in controlling salinity
with a barrier would be available and could be furnished at con-
siderably less cost from mountain storage reservoirs. Therefore,
the conservation efficiency and value of a barrier would be small
in comparison with the cost.
12. The final conclusion of this investigation of a salt water barrier
located at any of the three typical sites is that this structure is not
necessary or economically justified as a unit of the State Water
Plan.
124 DIVISION OF .WATER RESOURCES
South Pacific Coast Basin.
The water problems in the South Pacific Coast Basin comprise the
largest practicable conservation of the supplies originating within the
basin, the acquisition of additional supplies to make up local deficiencies
and protection against flood damage.
Tlie estimated annual water requirements for ultimate development
in the basin are 3,340,000 acre-feet gross allowance and 3,000,000 acre-
feet net use. The mean total run-off from local mountain and
foothill areas is 1,114,000 acre-feet per year for the forty-year
period 1889-1929; 1,146,000 acre-feet per year for the twenty-year
period 1909-1929; 894,000 acre-feet per year for the ten-year period
1 91 9-1929 ; and 709,000 acre-feet per year for the five-year period 1924-
1929. The total water supply, however, can not be conserved and
utilized. "Wastes and irrecoverable losses -will occur regardless of the
conservation measures taken. In addition to the surface run-off it is
estimated that an average of about 350,000 acre-feet per year will be
contributed to the ground water supply from rainfall on the valley
floors. The safe utilizable yield from all local resources is estimated at
1.200,000 acre-feet per year, but this is not uniformly distributed, San
Diego County especially having a small proportion as compared to
water demands.
The term "net use" in the case of metropolitan areas includes sewage
wastes into the ocean. Conditions in much of the South Pacific Coast
Basin are favorable to use of the sewage after purification and, in fact,
that from several cities in Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino
counties now is being used, either directly after it has discharged into
surface streams or by pumping from ground water to which the
effluent has percolated after having been spread upon the gravels. The
sewage from the metropolitan area of Los Angeles now approximates
160,000 acre-feet annually and will continue to increase in amount.
It now discharges into the ocean. In view of the question surrounding
the reclamation and reuse of sewage, it is not possible witli present knowl-
edge to evaluate the amount which may ultimately be usable, but what-
ever of the present and future additional sewage wastes are saved will
reduce the deficiency of 1,800,000 acre-feet, which is found by subtract-
ing the estimated net safe yield from the estimated ultimate net use and
which, if no local supply is available, must at some future time be
imported if the ultimate water requirements of the entire potential hab-
itable area are to be met.
Where pumping from underground basins, with consequent reuse of
water, is the prevailing method of securing supplies, as is the case in a
large part of South Pacific Coast Basin, there is a tendency for salt and
alkali to concentrate in the underground water, which must be pre-
vented by waste into the ocean. The amount of waste required for this
can not be evaluated with present knowledge and, therefore, it is not
certain that it has been fully cared for in the allowance of 3,000,000
acre-feet for "net use." Siill another item is the reduction in perco-
lation of rainfall to the underground basins when the surface is sealed
by buildings and pavement, but this, in the case of ordinary urban
area outside of the business district, may be less than usually sup-
posed and it is believed this decrease is more than compensated for by
STATE WATER PLAN 125
the increase of such percolation when brush is replaced by cultivated
crops. No attempt is made to accurately evaluate these items. On the
one hand they subtract from and on the other add to the apparent
deficiency. It is believed the net result, if sewage reclamation and dis-
tribution is adopted, would be a considerable reduction in the amount
of water which must ultimately be imported if the entire area, including
habitable hills and foothills, is furnished a complete supply.
Importations of about 160,000 acre-feet per year now are being made
by the city of Los Angeles from Owens River, and an extension of this
project to Mono Basin is planned by the same agency to bring in
an additional supply. These supplies are important. However, they
would not be available for use in Santa Ana River Basin or in San
Diego County, areas of extreme water shortage, and even if they could
be thus widely distributed they would not be sufficient for ultimate
needs.
A source of large supplemental supply is the Colorado River. No
other has been studied in this investigation. The plans of the Metro-
politan Water District of Southern California call for an aqueduct of
1500 second-feet diversion capacity from the Colorado River capable
of delivering about 990,000 acre-feet per year to terminal storage in the
district and approximately 900,000 acre-feet net delivery from terminal
storage. The immediate future needs of the eleven cities* comprising
the district will not require all of this amount. Other municipalities
or organized districts can, under the terms of the district act, partici-
pate financially in the consummation of the project and share in its
water supply. The total supply that can be obtained from full develop-
ment on Owens River and in Mono Basin may be approximately 400,000
acre-feet. To import this supply would require the enlargement of the
present Los Angeles aqueduct. Therefore, the total aggregate supply
from both of these sources would be about 1,300,000 acre-feet per year.
This may be the total ultimate importation required if reclamation of
sewage wastes proves feasible. However, if such reclamation does not
prove feasible, then perhaps as much as 500,000 acre-feet per year
additional must be obtained at some future time if the entire habitable
area from Ventura County south to the Mexican border is to be fully
supplied.
Colorado River Aqueduct — Many routes have been studied for an aque-
duct to import water from the Colorado River which would be controlled
by the Boulder Canyon reservoir.
In 1926 a route was investigated by the state for an aqueduct from
Black Canyon, the site of the Hoover dam, which would deliver water
at San Jacinto on the Pacific slope of southern California at sufficient
elevation so that practically the entire habitable area could be reached
by gravity through distributary conduits. The city of Los Angeles
and later the Metropolitan Water District have been engaged since
1922 in an exhaustive study of this subject. Many routes have been
studied, among them that investigated by the state. A report on all
of the investigations by the Metropolitan Water District has been pre-
pared and recently published. The aqueduct route selected by the
Engineering Board of Review of the district would leave the Colorado
* On September 1, 1930.
126 DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES
River 150 miles downstream from the Hoover dam. After an initial
pumping lift of 539 feet with the Parker reservoir constructed, or 617
feet without it, to elevation 989 feet, the aqueduct would pass through
Whipple Mountains in 12.3 miles of tunnel and thence in surface conduit
for 51 miles via Rice to the Granite Mountains. It would pierce these
mountains in a tunnel, followed almost entirely by surface conduit, with
some short tunnels, to a point west of Shaver's Summit. A series of
pumping lifts located in this section of the line would deliver water at
the summit at elevation 1817 feet. At the intake of the last pumping
plant, a natural reservoir (Hayfield) would be developed for equaliza-
tion and stand-by purposes. "West of Shaver's Summit, the aqueduct
would be principally in tunnel along the face of the San Bernardino
Mountains. It would cross the Coachella Valley in surface conduit and
pass through the San Jacinto Mountains in tunnel, emerging on the
Pacific slope near the mouth of Potrero Canyon, about midway between
Banning and San Jacinto, at elevation 1548 feet. This point of emerg-
ence is almost identical with that of the route reconnoitered by the stale.
The total length of the aqueduct line to this point is about 206 miles, of
which about 44 per cent is in tunnel. The total static pumping lift
would be 1564 to 1601 feet, none of which would be recoverable in
pow r er drops to this point.
The route recommended by the Engineering Board of Review of the
Metropolitan Water District for the aqueduct from the Potrero Canyon
portal to terminal storage extends almost due west across San Jacinto
and Perris valleys from the tunnel to the first terminal reservoir in
Cajalco Canyon, a branch of Temescal Wash, between Corona and
Elsinore. From this reservoir the route runs southwesterly to Temescal
Wash and then northwesterly through the Santa Ana Mountains to the
Santa Ana Canyon, which it crosses near the Orange County line. It
then extends northwesterly through the Puente Hills to possible addi-
tional terminal storage in Brea Canyon, Walnut Creek, Puddingstone
and Pine Canyon reservoirs. This line would consist mostly of tunnels
and siphons, with five short lengths of surface conduit. Power could
be developed below the Cajalco reservoir.
The capital cost of the complete aqueduct with a diversion capacity
of 1500 second-feet is estimated by the Engineering Board of Review for
the Metropolitan Water District to be $199,618,000. This estimate does
not include interest during construction, the cost of terminal storage
reservoirs or distributary conduits.
Distributary Conduits — Ultimate development of the habitable lands
would require distributary systems to San Diego County, Orange
County and to the heads of the San Bernardino and San Gabriel basins
and possibly into Ventura County, if the estimated ultimate deficiencies
in water supply in these regions are to be satisfied in accord with the
plan. In connection with these conduits, power could be developed at
several drops. The general locations of these conduits, as found by the
state's reconnaissance survey, are shown on Plate IV by black lines.
Near the Potrero Canyon portal of the tunnel under the San Jacinto
Mountains, two distributary conduits would take out, one leading south-
erly into San Diego County and the other northerly toward Riverside.
This latter conduit would divide about halfway between the tunnel and
STATE WATER PLAN 127
Riverside, one branch extending westerly and southerly to Lake Elsi-
nore and from it through the Temescal and Santa Ana canyons to the
coastal plain in Orange and Los Angeles counties, and the other branch
extending northerly by way of Redlands into the San Bernardino Basin
and thence around the rim of the valley lands toward Pasadena and the
San Fernando Valley. These systems would consist of tunnels and
surface conduit, with siphons across canyons and stream channels where
required. These conduit routes have been reconnoitered, but no cost
estimates have been prepared.
An alternate plan proposed by the city of San Diego is to divert
water from the Imperial Valley canals and deliver it to that portion of
San Diego County on the Pacific slope lying south of the Santa Mar-
garita River drainage basin.
Conservation and Flood Control Work in Santa Ana River Basin —
The plan for the conservation of water and control of floods in this basin
is described on page 168 in Chapter VI.
North Pacific Coast, Central Pacific Coast and Great Basins.
No units of a State Plan are presented herein for development of the
water resources of these basins. Investigations are in progress in these
basins and are described in Chapter IX.
128 DIVISION" OF WATER RESOURCES
CHAPTER VI
INITIAL UNITS OF STATE WATER PLAN
Three important regions in the state have water problems which have
become acute and which require immediate attention. These are upper
San Francisco Bay, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Sacramento
V alley; upper San Joaquin Valley; and the Pacific slope of southern
California. Plans are presented herein for meeting these immediate
future needs. In the first area, the water shortage exists in the summer
and fall months of nearly every year, with a large surplus naturally
tributary and available to the atfected area in other months. To correct
this unsatisfactory situation, the only requirement is proper control,
regulation and distribution of the tributary water. In the other two
areas a different problem presents itself. Here are highly developed
areas which are overdrawing the average water supplies naturally and
legally available to them. There are no nearby sources which can be
developed. The only method of relief must be in seeking supplies from
outside sources.
Sacramento River Basin.
The water problem in the Sacramento River Basin is that of inva-
sion of saline water into the upper San Francisco Bay and delta region.
In months of low water flow from the Sacramento and San Joaquin
rivers, saline water from the lower bay has, due to tidal action, invaded
the upper reaches of Suisun Bay and far up into the many channels
of the delta. As stated in Chapter V, this condition could be corrected
by either of two general methods. One method would be the construc-
tion of a physical barrier at some strategic point below the affected
area, together with sufficient mountain storage to be utilized to replen-
ish the diminishing fresh water supply in a barrier lake. The second
method would be to store water in a mountain reservoir during periods
of plenteous run-off and later release it at the proper time and in suffi-
cient volume to supplement the unregulated low water flow to prevent
the invasion of saline water of a specified degree beyond a certain
point. The practical limit of control with this method is the lower
end of the delta. As shown in Chapter V, the first method is too costly
and not economically justified. The second method only, therefore,
will be considered as a means for controlling salinity.
Attendant with this situation, the flow in the Sacramento River dur-
ing the summer months of subnormal years has been so low that navi-
gation has been greatly hampered and distance of navigability has been
much reduced. During several of the past dry years, particularly in
1920 and 1924, the irrigators drawing their supply from the Sacra-
mento River have been forced to accept a deficient supply. Increased
pumping costs also have resulted from the low discharge in the stream.
All of these problems — salinity in the delta and upper San Francisco
Bay regions, navigation, and deficiency in irrigation supply along the
Sacramento River — are closely allied.
STATE WATER PLAN 129
To control salinity by the method adopted, would require the storage
of fresh water in reservoirs and its later release at the proper time and
in sufficient volume into channels tributary to the delta. The amount
of release would vary with the season and the month during the season
and with the point and degree of control. To prevent the invasion
of saline water into the delta, would require a flow past Antioch into
Suisun Bay of not less than 3300 second-feet. With stream flow into
the delta as it was during the last ten years and present consumptive
use of water in the delta, the supplemental flow required for control
of salinity and consumptive demands in the delta would have been
1,128,000 acre-feet in 1924, 825,000 acre-feet in 1920, 359,000 acre-feet
in 1928 and 150,000 acre-feet in 1927.
The most advantageous location of a reservoir for the control of
salinity would be in the San Joaquin River Basin because two-thirds
of the water demands are in the San Joaquin River section of the
delta, and further because the present low water inflow into the delta
from the San Joaquin River is much less than from the Sacramento
River, with only two existing channels, Georgiana Slough and Three
Mile Slough, of limited capacity interconnecting the two rivers. The
reservoirs in the upper San Joaquin Valley would not be available
because the water developed by those units would be used within that
area. A study of the major reservoirs of the State Water Plan in the
lower San Joaquin River Basin reveals that only two, the Don Pedro
and Melones reservoirs, have promise. Each has sufficient capacity to
meet the salinity control demands, but, due to the fact that a sub-
stantial part of the potential yield of each now is attached to present
developed areas, the resultant added yield of each as a unit would be too
small to meet salinity requirements. Both taken together, however,
would produce sufficient new water to meet the requirements, but at two
or more times the net cost of obtaining the same quantity of water at
the more favorable reservoirs in the Sacramento River Basin. Other
combinations of smaller units with one of these reservoirs also could
meet the requirement, but again at much higher costs than could be
obtained in the Sacramento River Basin.
A study has been made to estimate the amount and net cost of regu-
lated supplies that could be developed at the major reservoir units in
the Sacramento River Basin. In Table 30 the amount of water that
could be made available in accordance with an irrigation demand
and the net cost per acre-foot thereof are given for each unit. The
amount of new supplies in each instance is that obtainable, through
development of storage, over and above present possible use from the
stream under an irrigation demand schedule. The net cost of yield
is the cost after allowance is made for power credit at those units where
it would be profitable to install a hydroelectric power plant in order
to defray part of the cost of the project.
Although the salinity control demand would vary somewhat from
that for irrigation and the net cost per acre-foot would be different from
that given, the figures are comparable as to relative costs of regulated
water from the various units. To obtain these amounts, the units
would be operated primarily to yield a maximum irrigation supply,
modified slightly, however, to furnish a more dependable and valuable
electric energy output.
9—80993
130
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
TABLE 30
COST OF REGULATED IRRIGATION SUPPLIES AT MAJOR UNITS OF STATE PLAN
IN SACRAMENTO RIVER BASIN
Reservoirs Operated Primarily for Irrigation
Stream
Height
of dam
in feet
Capacity
of reservoir
in
acre-feet
Seasonal irrigation yield
in new water
Unit
In
acre-feet
Average
net annual
cost per
acre-foot
Sacramento River. .
Sacramento River.
Feather River... .
420
520
580
580
180
2,940,000
5,967,000
1,705,000
853,000
151,000
1,952,000
1,436,000
115,000
378,000
130,000
2,850,000
3,896,000
1,910.000
869,000
130,000
1.656,000
'555,000
77.000
155,000
96,000
*0 99
'1 24
'3 33
Yuba River
'2 44
Bear River
3 10
Folsom, Auburn and Coloma reser-
American River
'1.32
Trinity River
365
135
170
150
'2 45
Stony Creek
2 75
Cache Creek..
2 18
Putah Creek..
1 81
1 Irrigation water available in accordance with irrigation demand from water released primarily for the generation
of power.
« Net annual cost after deducting from the total annual cost the estimated revenues from the sale of electric energy.
Only three units, each by itself, would be able to meet salinity con-
trol requirements in a year like 1924, under existing irrigation and
storage developments in the Sacramento and San Joaquin River basins.
These are Kennett reservoir on the Sacramento River, Oroville reser-
voir on the Feather River and the American River unit. If it is
assumed that perfect salinitj' control would not be required in a year
like 1924, then the Narrows reservoir on the Yuba River and the Trin-
ity River diversion in conjunction with regulatory storage in Sacra-
mento River Basin also would be capable of meeting the situation.
Combination of smaller units by themselves or with the Trinity River
diversion or Narrows reservoir also could effectively control salinity.
However, a study of costs of new water for various units and combina-
tions definitely shows that only two units are worthy of more detailed
consideration, namely Kennett reservoir and American River unit.
Although salinity control is the immediate primary function of a
reservoir in the Sacramento River Basin, other considerations are
quite important. If the reservoir were located on the main Sacra-
mento River, it could be operated to improve navigation on the
river to the present head of navigation, and even above that point,
to perfect the irrigation supply of the lands now under irrigation
along the river, to reduce the floods in the Sacramento Flood Con-
trol Project, and to make available in the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta supplies for the delta and upper San Francisco Bay area and
for the San Joaquin Valley. If the reservoir unit were located on a
tributary of the Sacramento River, its value for navigation on the
Sacramento River would be much less. However, it could perform
the other functions it" of sufficient output capacity. In selecting an
initial unit of the State I Man in the Sacramento River Basin, all of
these things must be given consideration.
Referring to the Kennett reservoir, it is seen that the ultimate height
of dam would be 520 feet, and the storage capacity about 6,000,000
STATE WATER PLAN
131
aere-feet. A detailed analysis of cost and performance of this reser-
voir for various heights of dam discloses that the economic height of
dam, when consideration is given to all the demands that would be
made on the reservoir, is 420 feet. It would meet all the foregoing
requirements successfully at lesser cost than for any other size of
reservoir at this location. The capacity of the reservoir would be
2,940,000 acre-feet. Flood control features capable of controlling
floods to 125,000 second-feet would be included in the dam. A power-
house below the dam with installed capacity of 275,000 kilovolt amperes
would be a part of the plan. Nine miles downstream, there would be
an afterbay dam, together with a power plant. The capacity of the
afterbay would be 14,000 acre-feet and of the power plant 50,000
kilovolt amperes. The total static head developed would be 500 feet.
The reservoir would flood portions of the state highway and a main line
of the Southern Pacific Railroad. The cost of relocating the railroad
to clear a 520-foot dam is included in the estimate for the 420-foot dam.
The total cost is estimated at $84,000,000, including an allowance of
25 per cent for engineering, administration and contingencies, and
interest during construction at 4| per cent per annum compounded
semiannually. A profile of the proposed development and a map
showing its geographical location are shown on Plate VI, "Kennett
Reservoir. ' '
PLATE VI
LOCATION MAP
SOUTHERN PACIFIC R.R
ANDERSON-COTTONWOOD IRRIGATION
DISTRICT DIVERSION DAM
R/VJER^
SOUTHERN PACIFIC R.R.
Redding
KESWICK DAM
PROFILE
KENNETT RESERVOIR
Capacity 2.940,000 ac-f I.
.„,■.„ W-S.EIe». lOOOfl.
IOOO
c 800
c
o
'■S 600
>
400
c
■Power drop 415'
POWER HOUSE
KESWICK AFTERBAY
Capacity 14,000 ac-ft.
W.S.Eiev 585ft.
Power drop 85'
— TT POWER HOUSE
4 6 6
Distance in miles
W5Dev.485ft
KENNETT RESERVOIR
132 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
On th<' American River, there would be three major reservoirs —
Folsom, Auburn and Coloma with an aggregate capacity of 1,952,000
acre-fort. There would be an afterbay below each reservoir. Included
.is a pari of the American River unit, would be six power plain-, one
downstream from each major dam and afterbay. The total installed
capacity would be 295,000 Idlovoll amperes. The total cost of this
unit, including power plaids and flood control features in the dams,
would 1"' $68,500,000, including overhead and interest during con-
struction at the Bame respective rates as for the Kennett reservoir.
Poison) and Auburn would be the more productive of the three reser-
voirs in water yield. These two reservoirs in themselves could meet
the earlier requirements for an initial development, leaving Coloma to
be constructed at a later date when additional water would be needed.
The aggregate storage capacity of these two reservoirs would be
1,186,000 acre-feet and installed capacity of the power plants 235,000
kilovolt amperes. The total cost of this partial American River unit is
estimated at $50,100,000. A profile of the proposed development and a
map showing its geographical location are shown on Plate VII, "Ameri-
can River Unit."
Detailed analyses have been made of these units, operated under
various conditions to determine the better unit in the Sacramento River
Basin for initial development in the State Plan. These analyses for
Methods I and IV for the Kennett reservoir and for the same methods
for the complete American River unit cover the forty-year period 1889-
1929. The analyses for Methods II and III for the Kennett reservoir,
for Methods II and III for the complete American River unit, and for
Methods I and II for the partial American River unit were made only
for the ten-year period of low average run-off. 1919-1929, but the
average power outputs for these methods have been estimated for the
forty-year period 1889-1929.
Kennett Reservoir
The four general methods of operation under which the Kennett
reservoir was analysed, together with the accomplishments, are as
follows :
Method I. Water would have been released from the reservoir in such
a manner as to obtain the greatest possible revenue from the pro-
duction of electric energy, all other uses of the water being inci-
dental. The following would have been accomplished:
1. An annual average of 1,622,800,000 kilowatt hours of hydro-
electric energy would have been generated.
2. Five hundred ninety-five thousand acre-feet of new water would
have been made available, with a maximum deficiency of 35 per
cent in the driest year, for use in accord with the irrigation
demand in the Sacramento Valley.
3. There would have been incidental benefits to navigation, flood
control and salinity control.
Method II. Space would have been reserved in the reservoir for flood
control, and stored water would have been released in a manner so as
to supplement the flows from unregulated streams and from return
STATE WATER PLAN
irrigation water to make water available for irrigation, navigation,
salinity control and power generation. The following would have
been accomplished :
1. The space reserved in the reservoir each season for flood control
would have reduced flood flows to 125,000 second-feet.
2. A navigable deptli on the Sacramento River of five to six feet
would have been maintained from the city of Sacramento to
Chico Landing, with a substantial increase in depths from this
latter point to Red Bluff,
134 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
3. Irri«rnt ion demands on the Sacramento River above Sacramento
woul.l have been supplied, without deficiency, up to 6000 second-
feet maximum draft in July. A full irrigation supply would
have been furnished in all years to all lands along the Sacra-
mento River above the delta. There would have been over
700,000 acre-feet more water available for these lands in 1924.
4. An irrigation supply, without deficiency, would have been
furnished the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta for its present
requirements.
5. A fresh water flow of not less than 3300 second-feet would have
been maintained past Antioch into Suisun Bay, controlling
salinity to the lower end of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
6. A water supply, without deficiency, would have been made
available in the delta for the developed industrial and agricul-
tural areas along the south shore of Suisun Bay in Contra Costa
County.
7. An annual average of 1,591,800,000 kilowatt hours of hydro-
electric energy would have been generated, incidental to other
uses.
Method III. Space would have been reserved in the reservoir for
flood control, and stored water would have been released in such
manner as to supplement the flows from unregulated streams
and from return irrigation water to make water available for irri-
gation, navigation, salinity control and power generation. The
following would have been accomplished :
Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, same as under Method II.
7. An irrigation supply, without deficiency, would have been made
available in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta* sufficient in
amount to fully supply the "crop lands" now being served from
the San Joaquin River above the mouth of the Merced River.
This would have been conveyed to these lands by the San Joa-
quin River pumping system and would have made possible the
exportation of all the available supply in the San Joaquin River
at Friant if the "grass land" rights on the San Joaquin River
above the mouth of Merced River had been purchased.
8. An annual average of 1,581,100,000 kilowatt hours of hydro-
electric energy would have been generated, incidental to other
uses.
Method IV. "Water would have been released from the reservoir in
such manner as to supplement the flow at Red Bluff to make avail-
able a maximum possible irrigation supply at that point. Hydro-
electric energy would have been generated with the water released
from the reservoir under the irrigation demand schedule. The
following would have been accomplished:
1. Two million eight hundred fifty thousand acre-feet of new water
would have been made available annually, with a maximum
deficiency of 35 per cent in the driest year, for use in accordance
with the irrigation demand in the Sacramento Valley.
• See footnotes to Table 34,
STATE WATER PLAN 135
2. An annual average of 1,285,000,000 kilowatt hours of hydro-
electric energy would have been generated.
3. There would have been incidental benefits to navigation, flood
control and salinity control.
Complete American Eiver Unit
The four methods of operation under which the American River unit
was analysed, together with the accomplishments, are as follows:
Method I. Water would have been released from the reservoirs in
such manner as to obtain the greatest possible revenue from the
production of electric energy, all other uses of the water being
incidental. The following would have been accomplished :
1. An annual average of 1,052,400.000 kilowatt hours of hydro-
electric energy Avould have been generated.
2. Five hundred twenty-four thousand acre-feet of new water
would have been made available, with a maximum deficiency of
35 per cent in the driest year, for use in. accordance with the
irrigation demand in the Sacramento Valley.
3. There would have been incidental benefits to flood control,
salinity control and navigation.
•■&*
Method II. Space would have been reserved in the reservoirs for
flood control, and stored water would have been released in such
manner as to supplement the flows from unregulated streams and
from return irrigation water to make water available for irrigation,
salinity control, and power generation. The following would have
been accomplished :
1. The space reserved in the reservoirs each season for flood control
would have reduced flood flows to 80,000 second-feet maximum
flow at the U. S. Geological Survey gaging station at Fairoaks.
2. A fresh water flow of not less than 3300 second-feet would have
been maintained past Antioch into Suisun Bav, controlling
salinity to the lower end of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
3. An irrigation supply, without deficiency, would have bepn
furnished the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta for its present
requirements.
4. A water supply, without deficiency, would have been made avail-
able in the delta for the developed industrial and agricultural
areas along the south shore of Suisun Bay in Contra Costa
County.
5. An annual average of 972,500,000 kilowatt hours of hydro-
electric energy would have been generated, incidental to other
uses.
Method III. Space would have been reserved in the reservoirs for
flood control, and stored water would have been released in such
manner as to supplement the flows from unregulated streams and
from return irrigation water to make water available for irrigation,
salinity control, and power generation. The following would have
been accomplished :
Items 1, 2 ? 3 and 4 ? same as Method II,
136 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
5. An irrigation supply, without deficiency, would have been made
available in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta* sufficient in
amount to fully supply the "crop lands" now being served from
the San Joaquin River above the mouth of the Merced River.
This would have been conveyed to these lands by the San Joa-
quin River pumping system and would have made possible the
exportation of all the available supply in the San Joaquin River
at Friant.
6. An annual average of 951.700,000 kilowatt hours of hydro-
electric energy would have been generated, incidental to other
uses.
Method IV. "Water would have been released from the reservoirs in
such manner as to make available a maximum possible irrigation
supply at Folsom. Hydroelectric energy would have been gen-
erated with the water released from the reservoirs under the irri-
gation demand schedule. The following would have been accom-
plished :
1. One million six hundred fifty-six thousand acre-feet of new water
would have been made available annually, with a maximum
deficiency of 35 per cent in the driest year, for use in accordance
with the irrigation demand in the Sacramento Valley.
2. An annual average of 898.800,000 kilowatt hours of hydro-
electric energy would have been generated.
3. There would have been incidental benefits to flood control,
salinity control, and navigation.
Partial American River Unit
The American River unit, using only the Folsom and Auburn reser-
voirs and their afterbays, also was analysed under two methods of
operation which, together with their accomplishments, are as follows:
Method I. Space would have been reserved in the reservoirs for
flood control, and stored water would have been released in such
manner as to supplement the flows from unregulated streams
and from return irrigation water to make water available for
irrigation, salinity control, and power generation. The follow-
ing would have been accomplished :
1. The space reserved in the reservoirs each season for flood con-
trol would have reduced flood flows to 100,000 second-feet maxi-
mum flow at the U. S. Geological Survey gaging station at
Fairoaks.
2. A fresh water flow of not less than 3300 second-feet would have
been maintained past Antioch into Suisun Bay, controlling
salinity to the lower end of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.
3. An irrigation supply, without deficiency, would have been furn-
ished the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta for its present require-
ments.
4. A water supply, without deficiency, would have been made
available in the delta for the developed industrial and agri-
cultural areas along the south shore of Suisun Bay in Contra
Costa County.
• See footnotes to Table 34.
STATE WATER PLAN 137
5. An annual average of 762,500,000 kilowatt hours of hydro-
electric energy would have been generated, incidental to other
uses.
Method II. Space would have been reserved in the reservoirs for
flood control, and stored water would have been released in a
manner so as to supplement the flows from unregulated streams
and from return irrigation water to make water available for
irrigation, salinity control, and power generation. The follow-
ing would have been accomplished :
Items 1, 2, 3 and 4, same as under Method I above.
5. An annual irrigation supply of 500,000 acre-feet, with a defi-
ciency of 31 per cent in 1924, would have been made available
in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta* for the supply of the
"crop lands" now being served from the San Joaquin River
above the mouth of the Merced River. This supply would have
been conveyed to these lands by the San Joaquin River pumping
system and would have made possible the exportation of a like
amount of water from the San Joaquin River at Friant.
6. An annual average of 730,000,000 kilowatt hours of hydro-
electric energy would have been generated, incidental to the
other uses.
Under Methods I, II and III for the Kennett reservoir, Methods
I, II and III for the "Complete American River Unit," and Methods
I and II for the "Partial American River Unit," the run-off from
the basin considered available at each unit was that impaired by present
upstream development. Under Method IV for both the Kennett reser-
voir and the "Complete American River Unit," the run-off considered
available was that impaired by estimated ultimate future upstream
development.
The gross annual cost and the net annual cost, after deduction of
anticipated revenue from the sale of electric energy, for each of the
various methods of operation have been estimated for each unit. The
bases for estimating annual costs are as follows:
Interest, in per cent 4.50
Amortization of capital investment (forty-year sinking
fund basis at four per cent), in per cent of capital
cost 1.05
Depreciation —
Lands and improvements flooded, in per cent
of capital cost
Dams, in per cent of capital cost 0.30
Power plants, spillway gates, flood control gates and
appurtenances (forty-year sinking fund basis at four
per cent), in per cent of capital cost 1.05
Taxes
Operating expenses and maintenance —
Dam and reservoir $20,000 to $100,000
Power plant $10,000 plus $0.65
per kilovolt ampere of installed capacity.
In Table 31 is set forth a financial comparison of the units on the
foregoing bases.
* gee footnotes to Table 84.
138
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
o
** « ° fc a
'.i-sl-f
«2 It £
£p eu to «
□a 5 Si
b.E
Uii
a g
'Is 6
Mis
«> °.-L V
eu_ epJ£ o -
g 3 e «£ bo
■< rt s t. " «
o
*- 5 -*-» »- 3 Et rs
< rt *> * 213
£ 3 "8 S
"2 i.
gfcg
-B Q. O
■g o\S
— •_ a
*5 O
& S E J--S fe
M O fe w" B
CO "C.
13
1
^ rt O <- > X
3 S b > a
O. B. rt O fl
! <*- H? ~ B
! O B.jd ,-
4) -^ O SJ
CO « fc- <£,
fc CO 4> il
5 2-8 8
■g.s
Wo.S
£
« i - i - —
aootoo
CO iC »0 M
SCO OOC
ph rM v>< C^
RS
oo
-r K (C Q
** M QO ■*■
- H E
553
■* ~- r^ O
800
M
-TOO
m«-^
8* 8" §8"
oooc — o
2 ooo
8.888
8888
gMOO
= -
»c ©
CI o
*.B CO
o
CO
CO
•s->
«.— I.— I'
8
o
o
o
o
8
o
o
8
o
o
e
a
S
•—
00
as
2
=
Of
a
CO
5
a
3
;-
a
s
;.§
B.fc «
c « ?■£
S B C a>
5 ■- < « £
•S5 o c;
q:
c
s
1
E
<
o-9
;.s >.
a [
if
- es
»
"3. ®
feu
o &
sf
B S
■-s
3-s
H.S
"3
CO
8
STATE WATER PLAN 139
The advantages of the American River unit over the Kennett
reservoir are :
1. The capital investment for partial development would be
$34,000,000 less and for complete development $15,500,000 less.
2. It could be constructed progressively.
3. The initial block of hydroelectric energy would be 48 per cent
of that at Kennett, thus lessening the problem of power absorption.
4. It would be in a position to control floods on the American River
to a degree that would greatly benefit the project of the American
River Flood Control District and to a lesser extent the Sacramento
Flood Control Project. With either the partial or complete unit,
floods would be controlled to 100,000 second-feet or less, exceeded
not oftener than once in 250 years, on the average, whereas the
crest flow of the March 25, 1928, flood was 184,000 second-feet.
5. Water would be released below all of the riparian lands in the
Sacramento River Basin above the city of Sacramento. The
riparian acreage along the American River is small.
6. No major improvements would be flooded and therefore there
would be less interference with existing interests.
7. The net annual cost of the partial development would be less, if
revenues from sale of electric energy alone are considered, with
no participation by the federal and state governments or other
interests or agencies.
The advantages of the Kennett reservoir over the American River
unit are :
1. It would be in a position to control floods on the Sacramento
River, thus giving an added degree of protection to a large por-
tion of the lands in the Sacramento Flood Control Project.
Flows would be reduced to 125,000 second-feet mean daily flow on
the day of the flood crest, measured at Red Bluff, exceeded once
in fourteen years, on the average. The controlled flow exceeded
once in 100 years, on the average, would be 187,000 second-feet due
to the uncontrolled run-off between Kennett reservoir and Red
Bluff, but flows in excess of 125,000 second-feet would be of short
duration. The maximum flood flow of record at Red Bluff was
278,000 second-feet on February 3, 1909.
2. It would improve navigation facilities in the Sacramento River
for 190 miles above the city of Sacramento.
3. It would furnish a full water supply to lands along the Sacramento
River above Sacramento now under irrigation or having water
rights. There would have been over 700,000 acre-feet of addi-
tional water available for these lands in 1924.
4. Both navigation and flood control benefits would be greater than
with the American River unit.
5. If the reservoirs were operated primarily for irrigation, one and
three-quarters times the amount of new water would be developed
at three-fourths the cost per acre-foot.
It is seen from Table 31 that to meet salinity control, delta and
immediate upper San Francisco Bay requirements only, the partial
American River unit, comprising Folsom and Auburn reservoirs only,
would meet these demands at a net annual cost $270,000 less than the
Kennett reservoir. However, to meet these requirements and also
140 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
make available 500,000 acre-feet of irrigation water per season for the
San Joaquin Valley (with ;i deficiency of 31 per cent in 1024), the net
annual cost would be $1,474,000, as compared to $1,471,000 with Ken-
nett reservoir operated for the same requirements, except that the
latter would make available 896,000 acre-feet per season, without defi-
ciency, for the San Joaquin Valley. If Kennett reservoir were
operated to make available only 500,000 acre-feet per season for the
San Joaquin Valley, the difference in net annual cost would be even
more in its favor. To meet the first requirements and also to make
water to the extent of 896,000 acre-feet per season available in the delta
for exportation, the Auburn and Folsom reservoirs would not be large
enough and Coloma reservoir also would be required. With these
three reservoirs in the American River unit, the net annual cost would
be $234,000 greater than for the Kennett reservoir. If there were no
demand for several years for additional waters in the upper San Joa-
quin Valley over what could be obtained from the initial step of the
development, Auburn and Folsom reservoirs would be able to meet the
other demands and construction of Coloma reservoir could be deferred.
If the period of deferment were less than eleven years, the Kennett
reservoir would be the more economic unit to construct; if the defer-
ment period were greater than eleven years, the American River unit
would be the better. This period of deferment is based on the average
annual costs for a forty-year amortization period and average annual
revenues from power estimated for the forty-year period 1889-1929.
After careful consideration of all the foregoing advantages and dis-
advantages of each unit and in view of the possibility that water, in
addition to that necessary for initial uses, would be required for expor-
tation to the San Joaquin Valley during the earlier years of operation
of the plan, and of the greater benefits that would accrue to the
greater number of interests, particularly navigation and flool control,
it is believed the first unit in the State Plan in the Sacramento River
Basin should be the Kennett reservoir.
The methods of operation of the Kennett reservoir and its accom-
plishments already have been given. Studies have been made for the
period 1919-1929 to estimate the amount of water which would have
reached the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta with the reservoir operated
under Methods II and III, the amount that would have been surplus
after all requirements were satisfied from this water, and the flows into
Suisun Bay. The results of these studies are shown in Tables 32 to 35.
Table 32 shows the net annual amounts of water reaching the Sacra-
mento-San Joaquin Delta with the Kennett reservoir operated under
Methd II, the amount required from this water for all purposes in the
delta, the amount of water which would have flowed past Antioch into
Suisun Bay for salinity control, the amount of water available for irri-
gation and industrial use in the San Francisco Bay Basin, the surplus
water which would have reached the delta, in addition to that for the
above requirements, and the total amount of water which would have
flowed into Suisun Bay, including that required for salinity control.
Table 33 is given to show the distribution of these surpluses and flows
into Suisun Bay by months, in the j-ears of maximum and of minimum
run-off and the average for the whole period. This table shows no, or
STATE WATER PLAN
141
w 3 ">
w
co
ggggggogog
oooooooooo
cf o~ ^ *ra oo co ci ci" ^* ^
OO — « lO CJ CI 00 CI 00 t— OO
OSOOeOtDWMOlOOOlM
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
>oqqqqoo o o_
io^t"05cioiootc^rooos
8S
5
s
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
OO oo oooo oo
COC^COCOCOci'cdoco'ci'
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
3 q, C3 *, «
d rt oco
OOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOO
CO O o o
OOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOO
o o o o o o o o © ©_
ci io o o> o in o o 05 Ki
00 0)000000 0000000
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
ei d of c* ci c^T cf <ri cnT of
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
©_© ©_©©_©_© ©_o©
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
OOOOOOOOQOOOCOOOOOOO
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
ONi-I'cqicdoiCTJNrt
a a* >»
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
o_ooooooooo
03*NdNiO»MO*aiO
Oh^O)>hO«©OCO
t^co^ai«-H_'-^'^wcoc^
ci" <n ■* o "* -h co cn ■*« eo
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
*i
o a
c 2
•a*
21
O *
o a>
050^-oacoTf<ictoi--cx)
-1 CI CI N CI IN C) <N W N
05QO>030300J)03J)
142
DIVISION OP WATER RESOURCES
Z H
31
eCC»~
s.ix
-O.S « | i
" « £ £ *
5*^-3 8
a ct n « i^ oo o * f »o qo -
— co" c* w e*
^•Cl^'h.M'OO'-h-QQOpC
O>^NMI-O0O0C*C»C00C
>« — eoao <
— CO CI O* CI «
lis
2~
•-NMiijaOOOiCCiCOO
[8§8j
• : : ,— r . -
«00«N"TO
— CO CO <© CD —
CO ^ C^ OS
cot-oi
Sta-
ck's
""" B »
°.a a
£ B J'! a
* ST.s
> o o<
i e e e c
ISSSl
WOJOOtOO^^fWt-iCI-QO
r^_c©o«^-0'*cooo»ccoc|
C I I - "-f* -»f" CO c j' — —
iqu3oooo»aoci^ -co — ©
cJ t^co Vci"^ ^ -h
a
&
J1
:J5 JJ5.S
■<ciCZQ
1
STATE WATER PLAN
143
z
D
5
(«
o
H
Z
W
oa
^3 o •
— ■«a£
« S 3 B
o •§§
3 -2-
— o.s 2
O.J3 3 «
3 a>.s
co »-
2
o
H
is
o
.3
3
C »"g MO fc,
■a c o o-Sm
•r.~ a> d « c
■*2 "S > «? « 3
"S.S.S s s ra
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
oo oo oooooo
co »■* soofos to 4o oo oToo
O Oi^t^-CO*-^pOCOWDCC
t^"c<f'^'*'^CO<O"0t , -Q0
^Hi-H(MC^»-t *-l ^H « *-«
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
ooooooo_ooo
tjJ 1 '^* n « d '- , * n a o «
OMN-HINIMOOOO
-^ o e>f c-f oi" co" *£ co *o o
.-H ,-H M <M 1-t 1-H^C-J^H
00 0.0000000
oooooooooo
ooooooooo_o
cS cc cS cS c^i oo cS oi oi oo
ooooooooo>o
OOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOO
if >■, c cs jj ■- 1. s g
O O O-O o o> o o o o
oooooooooo
ooooooo_oo_o
oooooooooooooooooooo
c« a feu-
c^ o o o
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
oooooo^oooo
o io o oTcTio oiOiOi»o
00 05-00 'OO OO 01 OO OO 00 05
cocOooeococococo^coco_
c-f c<f c<f w cn" cf <>f (M c^ ci
01
a
a?
53
_
>.
-3
*->
o
H
"3
O
—
—
3
_=
o
H
gg
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
ooooo^oo_ooo
co co co co co co cc co co co
coooooooaocooocoaoao
oooooooooo
p o3
o
03
o
fie
ass?
o S=a
00
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
oooo o_oo_o^oo
co" rr 05 uo <M O 05 •— iNih
oooooooooo
oooooooooo
oooo_oo # _ooo_o
oscvfot^cDodc-foooio
l>- CO "^ 05 »— If- i^i— « O CM
c^c^^jHco-^'--*co"c^''Trco
OOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOO
oooooooooo
l> N OS CO '^" ^" h-" -H V «o
MVOiNOMOMON
«^>o>i>eoO'*iN05'- 1
^ (N N N <N M CI (N N N
05 05 05 C5 05 05 05 05 05 05
.2 °
uj C!
°3 § s«
"*" 3cZ : 3
cj tn qj 03 -a
( " > ~' 5<"3' s
^5 S
144
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
n
U
-J
ao
H
f»
III
'-S.S
*o — ■*■ r* <
)«h-r- WN<-«»o
^WPIC-1'M-
H
a
Bio
cSJ-7
~ c t
£ 3 ^
_o a «
IO N o r- ID -f 33 I— -- ao ~-
t--fOnooi rtt* w
— « ec ci c» cs
fifii
do
•«» ~-> c* ■*<
oo>o«o
c-)io to
ana-
ill
* 1 5
*0*MJOIOQM'Onrt"0
ih(OmhU)QNOOONN
a
o
STATE WATER PLAN 145
only a small, surplus in the summer months, but large quantities of
fresh water in excess of those required for salinity control in eight or
nine months of the year. These excess flows would improve the salin-
ity condition in upper San Francisco Bay, making it practically
equivalent to natural conditions existing before expansion of irrigation
and reclamation development in the Great Central Valley.
Table 34 shows the corresponding results for the operation of the
Kennett reservoir under Method III, except that in this case the
amount of water available for irrigation supply for lands in the San
Joaquin Valley also is shown. It may be noted that the amounts of
surplus water and total flow into Suisun Bay would be smaller than
under Method II because of the allowance for the San Joaquin Valley.
However, they are still substantial quantities. Table 35 contains the
same information for Method III as is presented in Table 33 for
Method II.
San Francisco Bay Region.
The portion of the San Francisco Bay region which appears to be
most in need of a supplemental water supply to take care of immediate
requirements and shortages in the local resources is the part of Contra
Costa County lying south of Suisun Bay.
At present the industries in the Pittsburg-Antioch area, which use
large quantities of fresh water for process and boiler purposes, obtain
their water supply partly from wells and partly from the river. Both
sources are limited under present conditions. The annual invasion of
saline water into the upper bay region renders the waters in the bay
and adjacent channels so salty that this source usually can not be used
for fresh water requirements during several months of the year. Wells
have been developed in this area to supply fresh water needs from
underground sources, but the waters in many of them have turned
salty by reason of some cause as yet undetermined. There appears to
be an urgent need for an adequate and dependable fresh water supply
to serve the industries in this area.
The agricultural development in this section is suffering from an
insufficient water supply which can not be remedied by additional devel-
opment of local water resources. Underground water levels have
receded during the last ten years to such an extent that the orchards
and vineyards, which previously, under natural conditions, have been
successfully operated without irrigation, are now in need of irrigation.
There are at present 18,000 acres of cultivated lands in the Ygnacio and
Clayton valleys near Concord and Walnut Creek, of which only about
3500 acres are under irrigation from underground water supplies. The
present irrigation draft, combined with the draft of the public water
supply company and industries diverting water from underground
sources in the valley, are 50 per cent greater than the average annual
underground supply available under natural replenishment from the
tributary streams. Due to the large drop in the water table, there
appears to be a demand for an extension of irrigation and it is esti-
mated that a gross area of 7000 acres in the Ygnacio and Clayton
valleys might be expected to use an irrigation supply if available.
In addition, there is a highly developed agricultural area south of
the San Joaquin River and east of Antioch, with a gross area of about
10—80993
1 Mi DIVISION OF WATBB RESOURCES
6000 acres, which would be benefited by irrigation. It is evident that
there has been a lack of adequate moisture for the orchards and vine-
yards in this area.
Studies and preliminary designs, including cost estimates, have been
made for a conduit to serve the combined water demands of the
industries and agricultural developments for the portion of Contra
Costa County above described. This conduit and its relation to the
agricultural and industrial areas, which it is designed to serve, are
shown on Plate VIII, ' ' Contra Costa County Conduit. ' ' It would have
a point of diversion near Knightsen, at the westerly end of Rock
Slough, and, with a succession of pumping plants, extend westerly on
the south side of Suisun Bay and into the Clayton and Ygnacio
valleys, with a total length of about 50 miles.
The capacity of the conduit is based upon the irrigation of 80 per
cent of the gross area of about 13,000 acres of agricultural lands, with
a maximum monthly requirement of 25 per cent of the total seasonal
irrigation requirements, assumed at two acre-feet per acre, requiring a
maximum rate of 86 second-feet ; and an industrial fresh water demand
of 34 second-feet, an amount estimated as ample to take care of the
water requirements for the entire area from Antioch to Martinez for ten
years or more. The present consumption of fresh water for process
and boiler purposes by the industries in Contra Costa County in the
Antioch-Martinez area amounts to about 13 million gallons per day or
approximately 20 second-feet. The industries estimate that their fresh
water demands will increase about 70 per cent by 1940, or to an
amount of 22 million gallons per day, or approximately 34 second-feet.
The plans for the initial unit have been designed to care for this
combined demand.
The conduit would have a capacity of 120 second-feet at the head
and decrease in successive steps to a minimum capacity of about 20
second-feet at the lower or westerly end. The elevation at which
water would be held at various sections of the conduit is shown on the
hydraulic profile on Plate VIII. Considerable pressure would be avail-
able for delivery of water supplies to the existing industries. Its
elevation in relation to the agricultural lands is fixed on the basis of
economy in operation and maintenance cost. Additional works and
small pumping plants would be required to serve certain limited areas,
which lie above the main conduit. A branch pipe line from Bay Point
to Martinez would serve the industries in this portion of the area
The total estimated cost of the initial unit is $2,500,000. This includes
.in ;i mount of 25 per cent to cover contingencies and administration,
legal and engineering expenses, and interest at 4i per cent per annum
for a construction period of one year.
The annual cost of water delivered from this conduit would depend
upon the amount used. If it be assumed that the entire industrial and
irrigation supply which the conduit is designed to deliver would be
used, the total annual cost would be $300,000 for the delivery of 43,500
acre-feet. This includes interest at 4£ per cent, amortization at four
per cent on a forty-year sinking fund basis, depreciation, maintenance
and operation, including electric energy pumping charges. On this
basis the cost of water at the conduit would be two and one-tenth cents
per thousand gallons, or $6.90 per acre-foot.
I'LATE VIII
OAF
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
Developed agricultural area to be served by conduit
*' industrial area * •• "
^©FOLI
50
40
30 20
Distance in miles
_L
STATE WATER PLAN 147
The plan for this initial unit to serve the upper Contra Costa County
area is a reasonable and economical one and its consummation would
meet the water requirements of this area for several years to come.
Upper San Joaquin Valley.
A study of existing conditions of irrigation development in the upper
San Joaquin Valley indicates that on all the streams tributary thereto,
there long since has been effected the maximum degree of utilization of
surface run-off feasible without storage regulation. For many years,
therefore, while the irrigated area devoted to annuals has varied with
surface water supplies, the expansion of the irrigated area devoted to
permanent crops has occurred chiefly through the development of
ground water supplies. With limited or no surface supplies, the replen-
ishment of ground water storage commonly resulting from the use of an
ample surface supply is lacking in many of these areas. In many locali-
ties, expansion of the irrigated area has continued to such an extent that
the net draft on the ground water storage exceeds the average seasonal
replenishment from whatever sources are available. The result has been
a depletion of ground water storage, which is indicated by a continu-
ously receding water table.
A study has been made of the ground water conditions in the five
southern counties, namely, Madera, Fresno, Tulare, Kern and Kings.
For convenience of study and in estimating amounts of depletion of
ground water, areas within the first four counties were divided into
ten major ground water units, namely, Madera, Fresno-Consolidated,
Alta, Kaweah, Lindsay, Tule-Deer Creek, Earlimart-Delano, McFar-
land-Shafter, Rosedale and Edison- Arvin. The locations of these units
are shown on Plate IX, "Ground Water Units and Developed Areas
With Deficient Water Supply in Upper San Joaquin Valley. ' ' Lands
under irrigation, developed areas with deficient water supply and
initial units of State Plan for immediate development in upper San
Joaquin Valley also are shown on the plate.
The Madera unit is bounded on the north by the Chowchilla River
and on the south by the San Joaquin River. Its eastern limit is along
the line of the Santa Fe Railroad and it extends westward an average
distance of fifteen miles to the limits of the higher class lands. The
gross area of the unit is 343 square miles and the area irrigated in
1929 was 81,000 acres. The Fresno-Consolidated unit includes the
total combined area of the two irrigation districts from which its name
is derived and a small additional area under pumping development just
west of these districts. It extends from the San Joaquin River to the
Kings River and has a gross area of 700 square miles, of which 321,800
acres were irrigated in 1929. The Alta unit lies immediately south of
the Kings River and its boundaries coincide approximately with those
of the Alta Irrigation District. The gross area is 191 square miles, of
which an average area of 79,000 acres was irrigated during the period
1921-1929. The Kaweah unit includes that portion of the Kaweah
Delta served by surface waters from that stream. Its northern limit is
at Cottonwood Creek and the southern limit two miles south of the
Fifth Standard Parallel near Waukena. The eastern limit is about two
miles east of Exeter and the western limit one mile east of the east line
148 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
of Range 22 East at Waukena. The gross area is 468 square miles and
the average area irrigated is L33,700 acres. The Lindsay unit lies just
south and east of the Kaweah unit, it includes a large portion of the
Lindsay-Si rathmore Irrigation District and all of Township 20 South,
Range 26 East. The gross area is 64 square miles and the irrigated
area 22,000 acres. The Tule-Deer Creek unit is bounded on the north
by the Kaweah and Lindsay units, along the line of the Fifth Standard
Parallel. It extends southward about sixteen miles to a line two miles
north of Earlimart. The eastern limit is near Porterville and the west-
ern limit is four miles east of Angiola. The gross area is 373 square
miles, of which an average area of 67,400 acres is irrigated. The Earli-
mart-Delano unit includes the pump developed areas around those
two towns. It is bounded on the north by the Tule-Deer Creek unit
and extends southward for eleven miles to an east and west line three
miles south of the north line of Kern County. The eastern limit is
along the Southern Pacific branch line between Richgrove and Ducor
and the western limit is the west line of Range 25 East. The gross
area is 150 square miles and the area irrigated in 1929 was 30,500 acres.
The McFarland-Shafter unit extends southward from the Earlimart-
Delano unit, a distance of 21 miles, to the Seventh Standard Parallel.
The eastern boundary is about two miles east of the Southern Pacific
Railroad and the state highway and the western limit is the west line of
Range 24 East. The gross area is 310 square miles and the average
area irrigated during the period 1921-1929 has been 49,800 acres. The
Rosedale unit lies immediately south of the Seventh Standard Parallel
and extends southward for a distance of five and one-half miles. Its
eastern limit is along the Kern River near Bakersfield and the western
boundary is near Rio Bravo. The gross area is 79 square miles and the
average area irrigated during the period 1920-1929 has been 12,300
acres. The Edison- Arvin unit includes the pump irrigated areas lying
above the East Side Canal on the south side of Kern River. Its north-
ern limit is that of the developed area between Bakersfield and Edison,
from which it extends southward, a distance of fourteen miles, to the
south line of Township 31 South. The eastern limit is that of the
intensive development around Arvin and on the cone of Caliente Creek.
The gross area of the unit is 51 square miles and the area irrigated in
1929 was 20,000 acres.
For all units the studies cover the eight-year period 1921-1929. In
the Kern County units, the records covered the nine-year period 1920-
1929 but in order to make the studies in all of the units comparable,
the eight-year period was used throughout. Data on some 4000 wells,
distributed over the entire area, were available for the study. Utiliz-
ing all the available data, an analysis was mafic, year by year, of ground
water conditions in each unit for the period 1021-1929. The results
of the analysis are given in Tabic 36. In this table are set forth for
each unit the total and average seasonal depletion of ground water
and also the area of the unit and the average area irrigated for the
period studied.
PLAT 10 IX
LEGEND
— — i Boundaries of ground water units
///////, Developed areas with deficient water supply
cQHH Initial Units of State Water Plan
BI^^^^B for immediate development
Lands under irrigation
Boundaries of Counties
GROUND WATER UNITS
AND
DEVELOPED AREAS WITH DEFICIENT WATER SUPPLY
IN
UPPER SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY
STATE WATER PLAN
TABLE 36
CHANGE IN VOLUME OF GROUND WATER IN UPPER SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY
BY GROUND WATER UNITS
1921-1929
149
Area of
unit in
square miles
Average
area
irrigated
in acres
Depletion of ground water
in acre-feet
Unit
Total
Average
per season
Madera -
343
700
191
468
64
373
150
310
79
51
69,000
319,900
79,000
133,700
22,000
67,400
21,200
50,100
12,000
18,600
487,000
566,000
161,000
732,000
148,000
447,000
400,000
491,000
69,000
103,000
61.000
Fresno-Consolidated -._
Alta...
71,000
20,000
Kaweah
92,000
Lindsay -_
Tule-Deer Creek _
19,000
56,000
Earlimart-Delano
50,000
McFarland-Shaf ter
61,000
Rosedale
9,000
Edison-Arvin
13,000
The boundaries of ground water units have been selected in each case
to include irrigated lands with a common source of water supply,
whether from surface or underground development. By a study, year
by year, during the period 1921-1929, of the collected data on monthly
surface inflow, irrigated area and change in ground water level for
each ground water unit, it has been possible to estimate the average
seasonal inflow required to support the existing irrigation development
and prevent a continuous recession of the ground water. The seasonal
inflow into any particular area is defined as that part of the tributary
run-off actually entering the area, less known exportations and surface
outflow from the area. Since ground water is a form of cyclic storage,
fluctuations in level are permissible from year to year so long as the
minimum levels do not increase pumping lifts beyond the economic
limit. The fact that, during a period of subnormal inflow, a lowering
in the ground water has occurred in an area of pumping development
does not necessarily mean that it is an area with a supply inadequate
to meet existing irrigation demands. If, however, the long-time avail-
able mean seasonal inflow to the ground water unit is less than that
estimated as the mean requirement, it is concluded the area is one of
deficient local supply as now utilized. On this basis, the conditions in
each ground water unit have been studied and the total and mean
seasonal depletion of ground water storage estimated. Estimates of
depletion in each unit are for the entire area. In some units, portions
of the area, due to their favorable position on the schedule of utilization
of local surface supplies, are without deficiency, even in periods of sub-
normal run-off. In such units the ground water contour maps for each
year of record show clearly, by cones of depression in the water table,
where the overdraft upon the ground water is greatest. It is not
feasible, however, to exactly define the boundary of the area of defi-
ciency, to say what part of the overdraft is due to pumping in adjacent
areas, nor is it safe to assume that, upon the introduction of an imported
supply to relieve the deficiency, new lands around the fringe will not
come under development.
For these reasons no attempt has been made to lay down the exact
boundaries of the areas of deficiency within each ground water unit,
150 division op water resources
but only to indicate their general location and to estimate the require-
ment tor imported water to restore the balance between supply and
draft.
The depletion of ground water for the period 1921-1929 in the several
ground water units, as se1 forth in Table -'Hi. reflects the relation between
the inflow and the net draft during the period of ground water record.
It so happens thai the entire range of continuous observations of
ground water conditions falls within a period of subnormal run-off.
The occurrence of a year of normal rnn-off during this dry cycle is
sharply reflected in the ground water conditions in some of the units.
It is not sufficient to use the data of a series of dry years alone in
determining which of the ground water units have inadequate local
supplies. Examination also must be made of the relation between
average seasonal inflow during the recent period of depletion and the
seasonal inflow for various periods. However, in this investigation in
estimating the seasonal inflow to a certain area for periods longer than
that of ground water measurement, a somewhat different basis was used.
Under this procedure the inflow was taken as the part of the estimated
tributary run-off practicable of utilization through the full use of exist-
ing physical works and underground storage, less exportation and sur-
face outflow from the area, as under present conditions of development.
The exportation and surface outflow records considered were obtained
from outflow data for seasons of corresponding run-off during the period
of measurement. For the purpose of setting up such a comparison
Table ^7 has been prepared. In this table the average seasonal deple-
t ion of ground water occurring during the period of continuous record,
1921-1929, and the corresponding inflow for the same period are shown
for each unit. It is obvious the depletion of the underground storage
represents an overdraft upon the available supply, and therefore the
sum of this depletion and the inflow for the same period is the value of
the average seasonal inflow which would have been adequate to main-
tain stable ground water conditions during this period. The summa-
tions shown in the last column are for the purpose of determining
whether each unit is one of permanent deficiency in local supply. The
(plant it ies in this column may be compared with the average seasonal
inflow for each of the five, eight, twenty and forty-year periods ending
in 1929. The average seasonal inflows set forth in the table for the
Tule-Deer Creek unit for the various periods contain a supply for about
5000 acres of developed lands lying east of the unit and for which no
records of ground water or diversion are available. Similarly for the
ECaweah unit, the figures of average seasonal inflow contain a supply
for 3600 acres lying east of the unit. It was impracticable to segregate
the use on these two particular areas from the total inflows which
should he done to obtain exact figures for the inflow into the respective
units. However, this approximation does not affect the conclusions ;i^
to the deficiencies in supply in these units.
The Mud era Unit — The Madera unit is one in which the draft upon the
ground water evidently exceeds the replenishment that would be
effected even over a forty-year period including both wet and dry cycles.
During the eight-year period l!»L'l 1929, the irrigated area in this unit
increased from (50. (MM) to 81,000 acres. The sources of water supply now
utilized in this area are the Chowchilla and Fresno rivers, augmented
STATE WATER PLAN
151
TABLE 37
COMPARISON OF DEPLETION OF GROUND WATER STORAGE WITH AVAILABLE LOCAL
SUPPLIES IN UPPER SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY BY GROUND WATER UNITS
Average
seasonal
depletion
in ground
water,
1921-1929,
in acre-feet
Average seasonal inflow to ground water unit in acre-feet
Required
average
seasonal
Ground water unit
40-year
period
1889-1929
20-year
period
1909-1929
8-year
period
1921-1929
5-year
period
1924-1929
inflow to
prevent
depletion
in acre-feet 1
Madera
61,000
71,000
20,000
92,000
19,000
56,000
50,000
61,000
9,000
13,000
144,200
770,000
225,000
370,000
(')
155,000
4,000
86,000
87,000
37,000
121,000
680,000
182,000
297,000
M
130,000
3,500
79,000
81,000
29,000
111,400
537,000
133,900
250,800
13,900
92,300
2,800
38,900
46,700
23,600
101,400
568,200
145,300
248,200
14,000
87,100
2,800
27,100
41,200
22,100
172,400
Fresno-Consolidated
Alta
608,(100
153,900
Ka weah
342,800
Lindsay ..
'44,000
Tule-Deer Creek
148,300
Earlimart-Delano-
McFarland-Shafter
Rosedale
52,800
99,900
55,700
36,600
Edison-Arvin
1 Sum of average seasonal depletion and average seasonal inflow for eight-year period 1921-1929, excepting Lindsay
unit. In this unit the sum of these items does not represent an adequate supply and therefore a net use of two acre-feet
per acre is assumed.
'Inflow to Lindsay unit is an importation from the Kaweah River of about 14,000 acre-feet annually, beginning in
1918. This was taken into consideration in estimating the net inflow to the Kaweah unit.
by an importation of about 10,000 acre-feet each year from the Merced
and San Joaquin River drainage areas. The average seasonal inflow
available during this period was 111,400 acre-feet. With this inflow
the average seasonal depletion of ground water was 61,000 acre-feet and
that during the season 1928-29 was 146,000 acre-feet. The forty-year
average seasonal inflow available is estimated as 144,200 acre-feet, or
32,800 acre-feet in excess of that during the period of ground water
record. Comparing this with the 61,000 acre-feet of average seasonal
depletion, it is obvious present development could not have been sup-
ported without an overdraft on the ground water storage.
The Fresno-Consolidated Unit — The data on the Fresno-Consolidated
unit show no indication of permanent depletion of its ground water
storage. The Fresno and Consolidated irrigation districts, which are
included within this unit, have been under practically full irrigation
development for some years. The Fresno district has extensive diver-
sion rights of relatively early priority on Kings River and receives a
more dependable water supply, both in amount and in distribution
through the season, than other large areas on Kings River. From the
inception of irrigation in this area to the beginning of the period of this
study, the ground water had risen some 50 feet above its position prior
to irrigation. This resulted in the water-logging of a considerable
portion of the area now in the district and it is only with the develop-
ment of pumping and the recent series of dry years that conditions
favorable to the proper production of crops have been reached. The
depth to ground water over the greater part of the Fresno districl
varies from ten to twenty-five feet. At the extreme northern edge of
the district the depth to ground water ranges from 50 to 70 feet. The
average total lowering in different parts of the district for the eight-
year period of record was approximately six feet. The water rights of
the Consolidated district furnish only a limited supply at meduim to
low stages of Kings River, but yield a large flow during the short
152 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
period of high water. This condition results in an unfavorable distri-
bution, of the season's total supply and for this reason practically all
canal-irrigated lands are equipped Cor supplemental pumping. The
average depth to ground water varies from ten to twenty-five feet,
with an area of two or three sections on the bank of Kings River,
just east of Parlier, having a depth of 50 feet. The average total
lowering during the eight-year period varied from five to ten feet,
with a small area near Kings River having a lowering of fifteen feet.
The quantities in the table show that, while the seasonal inflow has
been somewhat inadequate during the recent years of subnormal run-
off, the average seasonal inflow for either the twenty or forty-year
periods preceding li'L'!) could have supported the present development
of the unit with a safe margin. For the five and eight-year periods
the average deficiency in seasonal inflow into this unit was only about
one-tenth of the full requirement.
The Alta Unit — The Alta unit, which consists principally of the Alta
Irrigation District, is similar to the Fresno-Consolidated as to the suffi-
ciency of its water supply, in that, for the long-time average, the inflow
is adequate to support the present irrigation development, with the pos-
sible exception of an area of 5000 acres along its eastern rim. In this
limited area a total lowering of ground water of from 25 to 35 feet
occurred during the period of observation. In the central portion of
the district the total lowering has been from five to fifteen feet and
twenty-five feet in a very limited area. The present depth to ground
water varies from fifteen to thirty-five feet. The data for this unit show
that, with proper distribution of local supplies, the twenty and forty-
year values of average seasonal inflow are adequate to meet the needs of
the unit with a liberal margin of safety.
Lying east of and immediately adjacent to the Alta district is the
area of the Foothill Irrigation District, some 50,000 acres in extent and
with a present developed area of 11,000 acres planted to citrus and
deciduous trees and vines. This district was organized under a plan
calling for the exchange of a supply pumped from ground water along
Murphy Slough for a gravity diversion right on Kings River. The plan
has never been consummated and, with practically no run-off trihutary
to the area, the district is entirely without a water supply. No observa-
tions of ground water have been maintained in the Foothill district, but
a few recent observations indicate such ground water supply as origi-
nally underlay the area is practically exhausted. The present developed
area of 11,000 acres, combined with the 5000 acres of the higher rim of
the Alta unit, is considered to be one of zero water supply and has been
so treated in estimating the requirements for importation under initial
development.
The Kaweah Unit — The Kaweah unit, including all of the area nat-
urally dependent upon the Kaweah River for its water supply, is
apparently one in which, over the forty-year period, the local sources
of supply are adequate. However, the higher eastern portion of the
unit around Exeter is so situated that it receives no portion of the
available surface flow so that its principal source of ground water
replenishment must be through relatively impervious materials from
the west. A deep trough of depression in the ground water is
STATE WATER PLAN 153
revealed by a study of ground water levels in this area. The total
lowering during the period of record has been from 20 to 50 feet.
The present depth to ground water is from 50 to 110 feet. This
portion of the unit has relatively nonabsorptive soils and it is con-
eluded an additional supply must be provided, chiefly in the form
of surface application. At the extreme north edge of the unit, but
slight lowering of the water table has occurred during the period of
record. In the areas served by canals the lowering has been from five
to fifteen feet. Farther from canal service and near the town of Tulare,
extensive pumping development has resulted in a lowering of from
25 to 35 feet. "While the tabular quantities show that the forty-year
average seasonal inflow is adequate to support existing development, it
is judged that its distribution throughout the area in accordance with
existing rights probably will result in some permanent depletion.
The Lindsay Unit — The Lindsay unit lies between the deltas of the
Kaweah and Tule rivers in a locality of small tributary inflow. It is
devoted largely to citrus culture and is one of the oldest pumping areas
in the San Joaquin Valley. It is relatively distant from the Tule and
Kaweah rivers and out of the line of ground water movement from the
deltas of these streams. The lack of any active source of ground water
replenishment is shown by the rapid rate of lowering which has
occurred. Practically the only source of inflow to this area during the
period of record has been the seasonal importation of about 14,000 acre-
feet pumped from a well field at the head of the Kaweah Delta by the
Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation District. The total ground water
lowering during the period 1921-1929 averaged 55 feet, with a range
of 25 to 75 feet. The present depth to ground water varies from 25
to 175 feet.
The Tule-Deer Creek Unit — The Tule-Deer Creek unit includes lands
dependent upon the Tule River and Deer Creek for their ground water
replenishment. A total average lowering of ground water during the
eight-year period of record has been 23 feet. Along the main line of
the Southern Pacific Railroad the depth to ground water varies from
50 to 70 feet. At the westerly edge of the unit the depth is about 30
feet and at the eastern rim of the unit southeast of Terra Bella the
depth to ground water is 200 feet. Although the forty-year average
seasonal inflow shows a slight excess above the average requirement for
this area, the average seasonal inflows for the twenty, eight and five-
year periods show marked deficiencies. It is concluded that this
area is one requiring an imported supply. Over the southeastern por-
tion of this unit the soil types are considered nonabsorptive and an
imported water supply will have to be delivered, chiefly in accordance
with a surface irrigation demand.
The Earlimart -Delano Unit — The Earlimart-Delano unit includes the
east side valley lands from Earlimart and Ducor on the north to the
southern limit of the Delano development in northern Kern County.
This is an area of extremely limited tributary run-off. White River is
the only stream draining higher foothill areas. Rag Gulch drains
additional low foothill areas. All irrigation development is by pump-
ing. The irrigated area increased from 11.600 acres in 1921 to 30,500
acres in 1929 and the tabulated figures show the great discrepancy
154 division OF WATER RESOURCES
between available inflow and the overdraft to date. East of Delano a
maximum Lowering of the water table of 70 feet has occurred in the
eight-year period, with a Lowering of 50 feet shown for a large area.
At tin' in nth end of the unit, depths to ground water range from 50
feet ;it Barlimarl to 200 feet just east of Ducor, with a midway depth
of 100 feet. At the south Limit of the unit, the range is from 25 feet at
the weal to 200 feet near Jasmin on the east, with a midway depth of
I:!.") feel just east of Delano. An examination of the seasonal inflows
and the depletion of ground water in this unit shows that it requires an
additional supply almost equal to its total irrigation needs for present
development.
The McFarland-Shafter Unit — The McFarland-Shafter unit, border-
ing the Earlimart-Delano unit on the south, extends southward
21 miles and includes within its boundaries the highly developed
areas around the towns of McFarland, Wasco and Shaffer. These
irrigated areas are dependent entirely upon a supply pumped
from the underlying ground water. There also are some 60,000
acres of land lying for the most part above the pumping develop-
ments, which are properly located to receive surface irrigation
from existing canals of large capacity but with diversion rights of late
priority on the Kern River, included within the unit. With the excep-
tion of Poso Creek, which is estimated to contribute a long-time mean
seasonal replenishment of 17,000 acre-feet to the ground water of this
unit, the only source of replenishment for the ground waters underlying
the pump-developed areas are the losses of conveyance and distribution
from the supplies delivered through canals to the large area dependent
upon surface irrigation. These canal-irrigated lands are in one owner-
ship and, in past cycles of high run-off, have been liberally supplied
with water, the effect of which during the period from 1880 to 1920 was
to raise the natural water table about 50 feet. Pumping development
began about 1910 and has continued steadily ever since. At approxi-
mately the same time the pumping draft reached proportions accounting
for the average seasonal replenishment, a cycle of subnormal run-off
began. The effect of these two conditions of steadily increasing draft
and diminishing inflow is sharply reflected in the data for this unit.
The maximum total lowering of the water table during the period of
ground water record has been 40 feet at McFarland, about the same
near Wasco, and about 30 feet at Shaffer. The depths to ground water
at these points, as of October, 1929, were from 50 to 100 feet at McFar-
land and from 50 to 75 feet in the vicinity of Wasco and Shafter.
The data for this unit indicate that even the forty-year average sea-
sonal inflow would have been entirely inadequate to support existing
development. The propriety of including these pumping areas in an
immediate initial project may be questioned when it is remembered that
careful studies of the Kern River area for a local project indicate that,
if properly utilized through the combined medium of surface and ground
water storage, the run-off of that stream is adequate to serve all the area
now within the outlines of existing canal systems and dependent more
or less directly thereon for a water supply. However, the existing
status of the recognized diversion rights on the stream is such that,
without const ruction of a complete system of regulatory works, no relief
STATE WATER PLAN 155
can be expected from the receding ground water underlying the pump-
ing areas of McFarland, Wasco and Shafter. The extension of a main
importation canal past these areas would be a progressive step toward
ultimate development and in order to afford relief to the Magunden-
Edison area it would be necessary to construct the canal as far as
Kern River, where exchange could be made with some of the existing
rights. This extension also would be desirable for providing spillway
facilities at the canal terminus. Taking into consideration all of these
factors, it is concluded this area is one requiring an imported supple-
mental supply.
The Rosedale Unit — The Rosedale unit, lying between the McFarland-
Shafter unit and Kern River, is one served by supplemental gravity
and pumped supplies. Being adjacent to Kern River and traversed
by an extensive canal system, it is subject to heavy recharge and large
outflow to the west. While some lowering of the water table has
occurred during the recent dry years, the long-time average of avail-
able inflow is far in excess of that required to support existing develop-
ment. In earlier years of plentiful water supply, a considerable por-
tion of this unit was subject to water-logging. After a lowering of
about ten feet during the nine-year period of record, the depth to
ground water in the main portion of the area is about 20 feet. The
data show that there is no shortage of supply in this unit.
Canal Irrigated Area South of Kern River — South of the Kern River
lies an agricultural area of some 100,000 acres which for forty years
has been in the same general state of irrigation development. This
area has an adequate supply under diversion rights of early priority
on Kern River. The ground water problem in this area is one of
drainage. With the recent series of dry years the ground water is at
a depth of about ten feet from the ground surface.
At the eastern edge of the foregoing canal-irrigated area, but sepa-
rated from the main body of that area by an alkali-impregnated topo-
graphic trough of the old South Fork channel, lies the East Side Canal
area of 16,000 acres. Of this area, some 6200 acres of service right
lands in the past thirty years have received an average gross diversion
supply of four acre-feet per acre. While lowering of from five to ten
feet in the water table has occurred during the period of record, due to
subnormal inflow, the average supply is considered adequate to main-
tain existing irrigation development under both canal and pumping
service. Therefore, it is not considered as an area requiring a supple-
mental supply.
The Edison-Arvin Unit — Contiguous to the East Side Canal area on
the east lies the Edison-Arvin unit. This unit includes in its southern
portion the entire area developed under pump irrigation on the cone
of Caliente Creek and around the town of Arvin. In its northern
portion it includes the citrus development around Edison and the
area devoted to both citrus and deciduous fruits extending on both
sides of the Southern Pacific Railroad from Edison westward past
Magunden toward Bakersfield. The principal source of replenishment
for the ground water of this unit is the run-off of Caliente Creek. The
existence of a cone of depression under this area, caused by heavy
pumping draft during the past five years, has lowered the water table
under this area below that under the East Side Canal three miles
156 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
away. This condition can no1 Long continue without appreciable move-
ment of ground water from the canal area to the Arvin area. The
total irrigation development under pumping on the Caliente Creek
fan is 17,400 acres and the long-time mean yield of the tributary
drainage area is 37,000 acre-feet. During the period of ground water
record, 1920-1920, the average seasonal inflow from Caliente Creek is
estimated as 22,900 acre-feel and under these conditions there has
occurred a lowering of from ten feet to thirty feet with resulting
depths, as of October, 1929, varying from 70 feet near the East Side
Canal to 200 feet at the eastern limit of the development. The data
indicate that even though the forty-year average inflow shows a slight
excess over the mean requirement, the twenty-year average inflow is
inadequate for a full supply. The northern portion of this unit, the
area of permanent deficiency, can not avail itself of any of the local
supply from Caliente Creek because of its relative elevation and imper-
vious subsoil. Between the developed area around Arvin and that
around Magunden and Edison there is an uncropped area underlain by
a relatively high water table which separates the cones of depression
underlying each of the developed areas.
A study of the geologic, run-off and ground water conditions of the
Magunden-Edison area indicate that the principal source of replenish-
ment is from the apex of the delta cone of the Kern River as that
stream passes beyond the impervious toe of Kern Bluffs at Bakersfield,
and from the East Side Canal. From Bakersfield to the bottom of the
ground water depression underlying this development, the water table
descends 50 feet in seven miles. From the East Side Canal the fall is
about six feet in two miles. These slopes indicate some movement of
ground water, but they have been created by a total lowering of 20 feet
for the period of record, 1920-1929. This movement, however, is inade-
quate to support the existing development. It is estimated that a net
area of 2600 acres in the Magunden-Edison area is in need of a supply
of two acre-feet per acre, or a seasonal total of 5200 acre-feet.
Other Areas Studied — In selecting areas in need of immediate relief,
those used for annual crops under canal irrigation varying in adequacy
from year to year and those of high ground water, where good opportu-
nities arc afforded! for pumping development, have not been included.
Within these excluded classes fall Kern County areas in the Buena Vista
Water Storage District, Pioneer Canal area, Buttonwillow and Semi-
tropic ridges and the canal-irrigated areas above discussed in the
McFarland-Shafter unit. The Kings County Canal area also falls in
these classes. It lies immediately south of the Kings River channel
and contiguous to the Kaweah unit on the west. The gross area is
159,000 acres served by gravity waters from the Kings River under the
diversion rights of the Peoples, Lasl Chance and Lemoore canals.
The water supply has been sufficient to cause high ground water under
much of the area. Some supplemental pumping has obtained in recent
irs. hut has not attained proportions comparable with the upper
Kings River areas. During the recent years of subnormal run-off the
water table has receded somewhat. In ihe fall of 1929, depths to
ground water varied from ten to fifteen feet. In normal years drain-
age would be beneficial to this area
STATE WATER PLAN 157
The Tulare Lake area, which is here used to include the total area of
the Corcoran and Lakelands districts and Tulare Lake Water Storage
District, is served by water diverted from the Kings and Kaweah rivers
mainly at high stages. Due to the deficiency of water supply during
the recent series of years of subnormal run-off and the menace of floods
in years of large run-off, the bed of Tulare Lake, which has for the most
part been reclaimed by levees, is devoted chiefly to grain farming. On
the higher lands lying principally in the Corcoran district, cotton is
the predominating crop with smaller areas of alfalfa and grain. The
cropped areas vary considerably from year to year. Ground water
supplies in the Tulare Lake area are obtained mainly from the deeper
strata and artesian wells formerly were obtainable. The formation is
considered relatively nonabsorptive and a definite natural barrier along
the eastern rim seems to resist ground water movement into the area
from the east. The depth to ground water in wells in June of 1929
was about 100 feet, as compared with that of 30 feet in the area just
east of Corcoran on the outer Tule Delta. This area could be ade-
quately supplied either from the Kings River, if regulated, through
the media of pumping and surface supplies or from the excess ground
water supplies which could be made available on the lower edge of the
Kaweah and Tule deltas under the plan of immediate initial develop-
ment.
There is a large area lying north of the lower Kings River and south-
westerly of the Fresno and Consolidated irrigation districts which is
under irrigation and which is supplied by gravity diversion and pump-
ing from wells and natural drains. This area is divided into organized
districts and groups, namely, Laguna Irrigation District, Riverdale
Irrigation District, Crescent Irrigation District, Cuthbert-Burrel lands,
Stinson Irrigation District, Residual Murphy Slough group, James Irri-
gation District and Tranquillity Irrigation District. The total gross
area included within these districts and groups is about 135,000 acres.
The area irrigated in 1929 was 69,000 acres.
The Laguna and Riverdale Irrigation districts include the lands
between the north bank of Kings River and Murphy Slough. Pumping
was begun in this area in recent years and the former high water table
appears to be under control. The average depth to ground water in the
fall of 1929 was from ten to fifteen feet. The Crescent Irrigation Dis-
trict is situated west of the Riverdale area. Cuthbert-Burrel lands,
Stinson Irrigation District and Residual Murphy Slough group are to
the north of these areas. Farther north, and adjacent to Fresno Slough,
are the James and Tranquillity irrigation districts. All of these areas
divert water from Kings River at the higher stages of flow. Supple-
mental pumping from ground water is practiced when river water is
not available. The James and Tranquillity irrigation districts also
pump San Joaquin River water backed up Fresno Slough by the
Mendota Weir. The James Irrigation District operates both deep wells
within the district and shallow wells in the general area of undeveloped
land between Fresno Slough and the Fresno Irrigation District. With
an estimated mean seasonal pumping draft of 17.000 acre-feet from a
battery of shallow wells during the period 1921-1929, a maximum
lowering of ground water of ten feet and an average depth to water
table of 20 feet has resulted. The draft of 1929 has been estimated at
158 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
24,000 acre-feet. The obvious source of replenishment of these ground
water supplies is the outflow from the Fresno Irrigation District.
Within the foregoing areas, notably under some canals of late priority
serving lands adjacent to the valley trough, are developed lands
dependent in part upon ground waters of considerable mineral content.
During recenl years ol deficieni canal supply (normally depended on
to counteract the toxic effect of the use of mineralized ground waters)
some portions of these areas have been insufficiently supplied with fresh
water. It is considered possible that portions of these areas may require
relief, both for the restoration of soil conditions and relief of ground
water draft. This could be afforded through additions of fresh water
to their present available surface supplies to overcome the harmful
effects of recent increases in the use of ground water.
Estimation of Relative Deficiencies in Water Supply — The total deple-
tion of ground water storage for a given period is not an absolute
measure of the degree of water shortage in any particular area.
Other factors must be given consideration. Therefore, in deter-
mining the developed areas in the upper San Joaquin Valley which need
immediate relief in the form of a supplemental supply from an outside
source, consideration and weight also have been given to the extent of
the area under irrigation, the relative and total lowering of the ground
water plane during the eight-year period 1921-1929, as well as the
seasonal inflow for t h is and Longer periods. The factors used in esti-
mating the relative deficiencies in water supplies of the ground water
units are shown in Table 38. For each unit the irrigated area, the aver-
age seasonal lowering of ground water, the required average seasonal
inflow to prevent depletion and the average seasonal ground water
depletion, expressed in total acre-feet, acre-feet per acre and per cent
of required average seasonal inflow to prevent depletion, are given.
Units now under development having comparatively small lowering
of their ground water levels and an average seasonal inflow for
the twenty-year period 1909-1929 adequate for complete replenishment
thereof, have no permanent deficiencies of water supply even though
the records for the 1921-1929 period indicate ground w T ater depletion.
A study of the data in Table 38 shows that the Fresno-Consolidated
unit, Alta unit, excluding 5000 acres of rim land, and Rosedale unit fall
in this classification. The Edison-Arvin unit, excluding 2600 acres in
the Magunden-Edison area, also is placed in this classification although
the estimated average inflow into the unit for the twenty-year period
is slightly less than the estimated required average inflow to prevent
depletion for the eight-year period. However, the average inflow, as
estimated for a twenty-five year period 1904—1929, is adequate.
Units underlain with impervious material and having practically no
means of replenishment of ground waters are considered as having a
deficiency of a total net use of two acre-feet per acre. An area of
11,000 acres in the Foothill Irrigation District, 5000 acres on the
• astern rim of the Alta Irrigation District and 2600 acres in the Edison-
Arvin ground water unit, designated as the Magunden-Edison unit, are
considered in this class. These areas have no loeal inflow. The Lindsay
unit of 22,000 acres also falls in this classification, except that about
14,000 acre feci are imported annually from the Kaweah Delta.
STATE WATER PLAN
159
TABLE 38
FACTORS USED IN ESTIMATING RELATIVE DEFICIENCIES IN WATER SUPPLY OF
IRRIGATED AREAS IN UPPER SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY— 1921-1929
Average seasonal ground water depletion
Average
Required
average
Average
seasonal
seasonal
Per cent
area
lowering
inflow to
of required
Unit
irrigated
of ground
prevent
depletion
average
in acres
water
Total
Acre-feet
seasonal
in feet
in acre-feet 1
acre-feet
per acre
inflow to
prevent
depletion
Madera
69,000
16,000
133,700
22,000
1.4
172,400
32,000
342,800
44,000
01,000
32,000
92,000
19,000
0.88
2.00
0.69
0.86
35
Alta-Foothill
100
Kaweah
2.3
0.9
27
Lindsay
43
Tule-Deer Creek
67,400
2.8
148,300
56,000
0.83
38
Earlimart-Delano
21,200
50,100
4.2
3.1
52,800
99,900
50,000
01,000
2.30
1.22
95
McFarland-Shafter
61
Magunden-Edison
Fresno-Consolidated
2,600
5,200
5,000
2.00
100
319,900
0.8
608,000
'71,000
0.22
12
Alta—
Including 5000 acres of
rim land -
79,000
• 1.4
153,900
20,000
0.25
13
Excluding 5C00 acres of
74,000
12,000
143,900
55,700
10,000
9,000
0.14
0.75
7
Rosedale
1.3
16
Edison-Arvin —
Including 2600 acres in
Magunden-Edison
18,600
2.9
36,600
13,000
0.70
36
Excluding 2600 acres in
Magunden-Edison
16,000
31,400
8,000
0.50
25
! Sum of average seasonal depletion and average seasonal inflow.
'Includes present known outflow of about 17,000 acre-feet supplying lands in James Irrigation District, for whicli a
supplementary supply is provided in plan of proposed immediate initial development.
Units having lowering of ground water levels and a net use in excess
of their twenty-year average seasonal inflow are considered as areas of
deficient supply. The units in this classification are Madera, Kaweah:,
Tule-Deer Creek, Earlimart-Delano and McFarland-Shafter. The indi-
cated present seasonal net requirement in the Kaweah unit of about 2.5
acre-feet per acre is due partly to subirrigated undeveloped lands not
included in the tabulated area and partly to an unavoidable unbalanced
condition of supply and use in different portions of the unit, which
result from limitations imposed by prior diversion rights in certain
areas and low absorptive factors in others.
Areas Requiring an Imported Water Supply — Based upon the fore-
going considerations, it is concluded that the developed areas in the
ground water units in the upper San Joaquin Valley requiring an
imported supplemental water supply are those given in Table 39 and
delineated on Plate IX. The figures in the table for irrigated areas
are for 1929, except for the Kaweah and Tule-Deer Creek units, which
are the average areas irrigated during the eight-year period 1921-1929.
Lands under canal service of late priority in the Kings River area
lying north of the Kings River and along the valley trough and
dependent upon ground water of considerable mineral content are
omitted from the above summary, but are included in the area for
immediate relief, not because of a shortage of water particularly but
because of the harmful quality of the supply. These lands need an
additional surface supply of fresh water for the restoration of soil
conditions and relief of ground water draft.
160
DIVISION' OP WAllli RESOURCES
TABLE 39
DEFICIENCIES IN WATER SUPPLY IN GROUND WATER UNITS IN UPPER SAN JOAQUIN
VALLEY REQUIRING IMPORTED SUPPLIES
•
Ground water unit
Irrigated
area
in acres
Average
seasonal
deficiency,
1921-1929,
in acre-feet
81,000
18,000
133.700
22,000
07,400
30,500
49,800
2,600
61,000
32,000
92,000
30,000
56,000
50.000
61.000
5,000
Total
403,000
387,000
The average seasonal deficiency in supply for the period 1921-1929,
as set forth in the summary, is estimated at 387,000 acre-feet. The
maximum deficiency in one season was about 680,000 acre-feet in 1928-
29. The minimum seasonal deficiency was about 100,000 acre-feet
in 1921-22, excluding the figures for the Madera and Kaweah units
which had a surplus in that' season. To meet the deficiency in supply
and to provide for ground water replenishment, it is estimated that
importations of from 500,000 to 600,000 acre-feet would be required
annually on the average.
The Supplemental Imported Water Supply — It has been pointed out
in Chapter V that the most logical source of a supplemental water
supply for the upper San Joaquin Valley is the San Joaquin River.
The water supply considered available for an initial step for the
early relief of the areas of deficiency, is thai which can be developed
from the utilization of surplus waters of that stream and those available
by purchase under rights now devoted to inferior use on "grass
lands" served by diversions above the mouth of the Merced River.
It is proposed to acquire these waters with due consideration for
all existing rights that may be invaded in the process. Sufficient
water could be obtained from these sources to meet the needs of
the developed areas of deficient water supply at a cost less than that
from any other source. By this plan, the importation of water from
the delta of the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers would not be
required until there was a demand for additional waters to irrigate new
lands. Construction of the San Joaquin River pumping system, there-
fore, could be deferred. However, it should be included in the plan as
an initial unit tor the sake of insurance, because a succession of years
drier than has been experienced in the past would result in an available
supply less than estimated on the basis of records of the past eight or
twelve years and would necessitate installation of the pumping system.
The physical works proposed for delivering a supplemental water
supply to the upper San Joaquin Valley areas in need of new water are :
1. Friant reservoir with a gross capacity of 400,000 acre-feet and
a usable capacity of 270,000 acre-feet above elevation 467 feet,
diversion elevation of San Joaquin River-Kern County canal.
STATE WATER PLAN 161
2. San Joaquin River-Kern County canal to Kern River with a
maximum diversion capacity of 3000 second-feet.
3. Madera canal with a maximum capacity of 1500 second-feet.
4. Magunden-Edison pumping system.
5. San Joaquin River pumping system (construction deferred).
The general locations of the physical works above listed are shown
on Plate IV. To further delineate the features of this system, there
is presented Plate X, "Profile of San Joaquin Conveyance System."
In conjunction with the physical works, it is proposed to utilize to
the greatest practicable extent the natural underground reservoirs
underlying a large portion of the area.
The amounts of water that could be made available for immediate
relief of these areas through the physical works proposed have been
estimated, month by month, over the forty-year period 1889-1929,
utilizing the surplus water and water not attached to areas devoted to
crop production served from the San Joaquin River above the mouth of
Merced River. The flow at Friant was estimated on the assumption
that the existing storage reservoirs, with an aggregate capacity of
335,000 acre-feet, above Friant reservoir would have been operated pri-
marity for power purposes during the entire forty-year period.
In making the yield studies for the immediate initial development,
it was assumed that the first demand upon the flow entering Friant
reservoir would be to satisfy a schedule of monthly requirements of
San Joaquin River "crop lands" served by diversion above the mouth
of the Merced River. The maximum seasonal total of this demand is
895,700 acre-feet. Only water in excess of monthly requirements in
accord with the schedule was assumed available for storage in Friant
reservoir and for conveyance to the areas of deficiency. It further was
assumed that an arrangement including the Madera area as a part of the
area for immediate relief, and which would afford a supply adequate to
maintain existing development, would be satisfactory to Madera Irriga-
tion District, provided it be protected in the matter of its right to
acquire and divert 350,000 acre-feet seasonally under the conditions
of ultimate development. For the purposes of the study, it was assumed
that the Madera area would receive 180,000 acre-feet seasonally, on
the average, over the forty-year period 1889-1929. The remainder
would be available for diversion to the areas south of the San Joaquin
River.
Table 40 shows, in the form of seasonal averages for various periods,
a summary of the utilization of the waters of the San Joaquin River
under the conditions of immediate initial development. For the forty-
year period 1889-1929, the average seasonal supply available for the
upper San Joaquin Valley is 1,032,000 acre-feet, of which the Madera
area would have received 181,000 acre-feet. The average for the
twenty-year period 1909-1929 is 839,000 acre-feet, of which the Madera
area would have received 151.000 acre-feet. For the twelve, eight and
five-year periods, the averages are, 602.000, 601,000 and 500,000 acre-
feet, respectively, for the entire area and 107,000, 108,000 and 90,000
acre-feet, respectively, for the Madera area.
For the eight-year period 1921-1929 an average annual inflow of
108,000 acre-feet would have been available for use in the Madera area
and 493,000 acre-feet for the areas south of the San Joaquin River.
11 — 80993
162
DIVISION- OF WATER RESOURCES
o
-r
a
w
a
z
3
5 s
<
p
>
s
z
a
<
o
—>
u.
O
2
u.
o
§
H
<
3
i
a
■§
8.
1*
3-
SLS
!8 M
£2
SL2
f
*2
>>2
1«
^" CO CO CO -J
ii i 7"
Oi Ol CT1 OS
osao os--« -v
' — •" —
qo oo oo cp
CO 00 GO 00
NO O ^
o5 ^ «
88 888
o o © © o
oo co" cc ^ui"
N © OS —
I- — • -^
os© o>*-«
18
>©C
5 O C
CO — OOtM iO
<— i iO CO i— CO
CO ^ CO
lO « _ -j ,-;
^■co *o «-■ o
CO -^ QO -^
>
2
a
•3
"3 ■
OK rj-
E.5S
9 B 5
o
l.i
2
£
a *
§3
E £ -
51
1 B c
--
2
to
o 2
87-
»S
= <
1
B
Canal capacity 2,000 secrft.
* 1 5
SI 3 5
$ 5 *
«.
Canal capacity 1,500 secrft. — «j
^ 9v399g '_ ,W.SEIe.38S*'
phor
4
30
-
—
—
™
1
s^
Jgv.383J-
-AV5.EJev.378Z'
|f . W.S.tlev.369S;
'•Siphon 200'"
-~T — 1 — i
-
1
12
!0
13
M
►0
r
>o
SAN ,
260
270
280
290
300
162
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
J
CQ
<
2
S
u
Q
—
H
HI
z
P
<
►—I
Q
W
O
a.
OS
u
Q
Z
D
at
E
H
<
3
<
o
z
<
u.
O
o
-J
u,
u.
o
z
o
H
<
N
5
E
3
1
<
4-
3.
g.2
^0>
So.
fc.<M
£2
1-
&2
lo,
is
2-
1
•r-o>
&2
c?1 22 22 S2 - ""
ii i 7"
31 OS 9) OS
ss
OS OO 31 — ^r
GO <W »C ^«
^ W CT w> CI
0>Oi — -h
OO o o o
88 888
oooo CO pn *o
I'- o O* —
§
5s
SO OO o
o o o o
oo oo_o_
O Ol ^n
00 — OOWW3
~ »C QO «-" CD
00 ~ <£>
>§:
oo oo_
VOO io ~ o
00« 00 «
.8
a
£
■ejs-
§■§ £ £ | SL8
: QQ W&
B EC
o o
.11
e 9
22
1
- I
\
i 3
1 i
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER-HERN COUNTY CANAL
. . . - -
Distance m miles
S . , ■-.-.„..> : -
MAGUN DEN- EDISON PUMPtNG SYSTEM
SAN JOAOUIN CONVEYANCE SYSTEM
N JO»QUIN DELTA TO KERN COUNTY
STATE WATER PLAN 163
Referring to the summary of deficiencies in units requiring immediate
relief, it is seen that the latter amount is sufficient to meet the estimated
average seasonal deficiency — 326,000 acre-feet — in the areas south of
the San Joaquin River with an average seasonal excess of 167,000 acre-
feet. This could be utilized to replenish the underground basins and
to furnish a supply to the areas Lying north of the Lower Kings River
and adjacent to the valley trough and which are troubled with mineral-
ized ground water. The desirable amount for this latter purpose is not
known. It is estimated, however, that 35,000 acre-feet annually, on the
average, would be adequate, leaving 458,000 acre-feet to be distributed
among the areas south of the Kings River. The desirable full surface
supply for the impervious Alta-Poothill unit of 16,000 acres is esti-
mated as 35,000 acre-feet, the Magunden-Edison area of 2600 acres as
6000 acre-feet, and the required additional supply for the Lindsay unit
of 22,000 acres as 35,000 acre-feet. This would leave 382,000 acre-feet
to be distributed among the ground water units having deficient sources
of replenishment. The desirability of reducing the pumping lift by
raising the water level in these areas varies with the depth of depletion.
Therefore, the total lowering of the ground water levels during the
period of record, 1921-1929, in addition to the volume depletion, was
used as a factor in estimating the relative requirements for these ground
water units under conditions of initial development. These requir-
ments, including ground water replenishment, for Kaweah, Tule-Deer
Creek, Earlimart-Delano and McFarland-Shafter units are estimated as
103,000 acre-feet, 80,000 acre-feet, 104,000 acre-feet and 95,000 acre-
feet, respectively. These relative quantities may be used for propor-
tioning flows, which do not exceed the average for the period 1921-1929.
A modification in seasons of large run-off would be required because of
low rates of absorption in certain areas and the value of excess supply
for reducing pumping lifts of local and imported water in highly
absorptive areas. Furthermore, actual irrigation requirements would
become the prime factor in determining redistribution when ground
water in these areas would have been replenished.
Taking into consideration all of the foregoing factors which have
been discussed, and also the methods of irrigation practiced in the sev-
eral areas, it is believed the supply which could be obtained from the
surplus waters and ' ' grass land ' ' rights in the San Joaquin River above
the mouth of the Merced River, based upon the modified stream flow
records for the period 1921-1929, is adequate to fully supplement the
deficiencies in the available local supplies for maintaining present
development, and that an equitable distribution of these waters for an
average season of this period, in accord with the present needs, is as set
forth in the two following tables.
164
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
TABLE 41
DISTRIBUTION BY GROUND WATER UNITS OF WATER SUPPLY FOR AN AVERAGE
SEASON OBTAINABLE FROM SURPLUS AND "GRASS LAND" RIGHTS
OF SAN JOAQUIN RIVER- 1921-1929
Quit
Madera
Foothill, including 5,000 acres in Alta Irrigation District
Kaweah ■
Li ndsay
Tule-Deer Creek
Karlimart- Delano
M cKurland-Shafter -
Magunden-Edison (portion of Edison-Arvin)
Lower Kings River area
Total -
Average seasonal
water supply
available at
K riant reservoir
in acre-feet
108,000
35,000
103,000
35,000
80,000
104,000
95,000
6,000
86,000
601,000
Table 41 gives the distribution by ground water units and Table 42
the distribution by counties of the water obtainable from the San
Joaquin River under the plan of immediate initial development. In
Table 41 the figure for the Tule-Deer Creek unit includes a supple-
mental supply for about 5000 acres of developed land lying east of the
unit. In this distribution it is assumed that lands in Kings County
lying in and east of Tulare Lake now used chiefly for growing of annual
crops could be furnished a supply either from tne Kings River, if prop-
erly regulated, or from the lower absorptive areas of the Kaweah and
Tide deltas which supply could be made available under the plan of
immediate initial development. If it should prove desirable and nec-
essary to furnish a direct surface supply to these lands, water would
be available for that purpose, however, with a corresponding reduction
in supply to some of the other areas. In Tulare Lake, there are about
.")(), 000 acres of land used for grain and in the area to the east of the
lake there are about 20,000 acres used principally for growing of cot-
ton. These acreages vary from season to season. If allowed a full
surface supply from the imported water for the irrigation of these
crops, it is estimated that about 90,000 acre-feet per season would be
adequate.
TABLE 42
DISTRIBUTION BY COUNTIES OF WATER SUPPLY FOR AN AVERAGE SEASON
OBTAINABLE FROM SURPLUS AND "GRASS LAND" RIGHTS
OF SAN JOAQUIN RIVER— 1921-1929
County
Madera...
Fresno
Tulare....
Kern
Total
Average seasonal
water supply
available at
Friant reservoir
in acre-feet
108.000
50.000
318.000
125,000
001.000
To illustrate the operation of the plan, Plate XI, "Ground Water
Conditions in Absorptive Areas in Upper San Joaquin Valley," has
STATE WATER PLAN
165
been prepared and is presented herein. It delineates, under conditions
without importation of a supplemental supply, the accumulative deple-
tion for each ground water unit and for the entire area, and also, under
conditions with importation of a supplemental supply, the accumulative
importation for each unit and the entire area, as well as the accumu-
lative net accretion to ground water for the entire area. It is seen that
with this plan in operation during the eight-year period 1921-1920
there would have been 1,361,000 acre-feet more water available in the
underground reservoirs at the end of the period than at the beginning.
PLATE XI
1 1 1 1
CONDITIONS WITH IMPORTATION OF SUP-
PLEMENTAL WATER SUPPLY UNDER PLAN
OF IMMEDIATE INITIAL DEVELOPMENT
1922
1923
1924
1926
1927
1928
GROUND WATER CONDITIONS
IN
ABSORPTIVE AREAS IN UPPER SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY
WITH AND WITHOUT
SUPPLEMENTAL IMPORTATION UNDER PLAN OF IMMEDIATE INITIAL DEVELOPMENT
1921-1929
It has been shown that, under the plan of immediate initial develop-
ment, the average seasonal supplemental supply during the eight-year
period would have been 601,000 acre-feet. The importation of this
supply into the areas of deficiency not only would have more than
llili
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
doubled the utilizable water supply of these areej, but also would have
improved the characteristics of occurrence of the present deficient
supplies. A substantial part of the seasonal inflow into these areas
occurs now iii months outside of the irrigation season. During the
eight-year period H)21-1920, 41 per cent, mi the average, so occurred,
while o!) per cent occurred within the irrigation season. For the
imported supplemental supply, the corresponding figures would
have been 22 and 78 per cent, and with the combination of the local
and imported supplies, 32 and 68 pei- cent respectively. Therefore, it
is seen that with this plan not only would the present supplies have been
more than doubled, but the characteristics of occurrence of the supply,
as related to demand, would have been much improved.
The physical works for the initial development have been planned
with the view not only of meeting the immediate needs, bul also of bein^
accordant with the requirements for ultimate development in the upper
San Joaquin Valley. Careful consideration was given to the proper
capacities of the Priant reservoir and San Joaquin River-Kern County
canal. After many trial studies, involving yield and costs of various
combinations of storage and diversion canal capacities, and after con-
sideration was given to value of additional storage space for flood
control and to flexibility of operation under conditions of initial devel-
opment, it was concluded the economical and practical combination of
canal and reservoir capacity for initial development would be 3000
second-feet and 270,000 acre-feet (net), respectively. These are the
capacities for the ultimate development.
The Madera canal would have the same capacity — 1500 second-feet —
as for the ultimate development. It would leave the Friant reservoir
at elevation 415 feet and extend northward eighteen miles to the
Fresno River.
A small pumping system of 20 second-feet capacity is proposed to
serve the Magunden-Edison area in Kern County. Kern River water,
made available by exchange with San Joaquin River water, would be
diverted from the East Side Canal.
A power plant would be installed at the dam of the Friant reservoir.
It would have an installed capacity of 30,000 kilovolt amperes and
would produce, on the average, 105,000,000 kilowatt hours annually,
utilizing "crop land" and waste waters.
The capital costs of the physical units of the initial plan proposed
for the upper San Joaquin Valley, exclusive of cost of water rights
and general expense, are given in Table 43. These costs include an
allowance of 25 per cent for engineering, administration and contin-
gencies and interest during construction at 4£ per cent per annum, com-
pounded semiannually.
TABLE 43
COST OF PHYSICAL WORKS OF INITIAL PLAN IN SAM JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN
Item
Friant dam, reservoir and power plant
Sun Joaquin River-Kern County canal (concrete lined)
Madera canal (concrete lined)
Magunden-Edison pumping system
Ban Joaquin River pumping system (construction deferred). ..
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta cross channel (construction deferred)
Total
Capital cost
$15,500,000
27,300,000
2,500,000
100,000
15,000.000
4,000,000
$64,400,000
STATE WATER PLAN 167
In making provision for proper utilization of imported water, con-
sideration should be given to the method of distributing both the
"in season" water falling within the irrigation demand and the excess
flows not within the irrigation demand, both in and out of season, for
replenishment of ground water storage. It is proposed that the "in
season" water falling within the irrigation demand be supplied to the
irrigated lands by means of surface conduits and ditches in accord with
the demand for irrigation water. The water outside of the irrigation
demand would be introduced underground, by application on absorp-
tive lands for irrigation in greater quantities than net use require-
ments; through seepage losses from unlined canals and ditches, both
existing and proposed; through absorption in stream beds of natural
channels; and by the construction of spreading works or by other
artificial means of accelerating percolation. The water thus intro-
duced underground would be recovered later by pumping. Areas of
ground water storage therefore would require wells and pumping
plants as under present conditions of development and utilization of
the local water supplies. Under the proposed plan, however, the pro-
portion of the mean annual supply which would be obtained by pump-
ing, as well as the average pumping lift, would be materially reduced.
South Pacific Coast Basin.
The immediate problem on the Pacific slope of southern California is
to obtain additional supplies from local resources by greater conserva-
tion efforts and from sources outside of the basin so that the deficiency
now being supplied by overdraft on certain of the underground reser-
voirs may be met.
Conservation of Local Water Resources — Since as much of the supply
from local sources as can be conserved will be necessary in addition to
imported water and since to obtain an additional supply from Mono
Basin and the Colorado River will at best require several years, atten-
tion must be given to the conservation of these local supplies.
Opportunities for salvage exist in the flood water that escapes into
the ocean during the periods of more severe storms, present waste of
sewage into the ocean and evaporation from seeped lands. So effective
is the capacity of the extensive underground basins existing in many
parts in absorbing water from the stream channels crossing them, that
three-fourths of all local supplies are now obtained by pumping from
these basins and a large part of the remainder is from rising water
flowing out of the basins.
Large cyclic storage is necessary, either in surface or underground
reservoirs, if the variably occurring floods that constitute the last
undeveloped increments of local waters are to become useful continuous
supplies. Wherever extensive underground basins exist, the last incre-
ments of local water can be made available for use at less cost by
utilizing the large storage capacity in these basins. Where the cyclic
storage can be obtained underground, regulatory storage only is
needed in surface reservoirs for controlling the flood waters so that
they may be directed onto spreading grounds and sunk into the under-
ground basins. The large additional capacity required for cyclic
storage need be constructed in surface reservoirs only on those streams
L68 division OF watki; RESOURCES
on which extensive underground capacity does not exist. In addition
to saving the cost of construction of large capacity in surface reservoirs,
tlic use of the underground basins as the place for storage of the flood
waters makes the conserved water available tor use in the same way
that it has been found most convenient to obtain present supplies and
therefore no new distribution systems are needed.
Regulation of floods so thai their waters may be sunk into the under-
ground basins, to a certain extent accomplishes their control, as well
as the conservation of their waters. However, a high degree of con-
servation may be attained in this manner without completely controlling
the larger and more damaging floods. For this reason, if complete
control is desired by the reservoir system, special attention must be
given to construction and operation of reservoirs for this Bpecific pur-
pose. This system is particularly desirable in southern California,
because it permits the use of smaller channels with shorter traffic
crossings, involves a nominal waste of land and thus enables a more com-
plete beneficial utilization of a rather limited area of valley lands.
Santa Ana "River Basin Flood Control and Conservation Works —
Plans for the conservation of water and control of floods in the Santa
Ana River Basin are given in another report.* The principal features
of the plan outlined in that bulletin are briefly described in the follow-
ing paragraphs. Spreading works in addition to those presented
herein have been or now are being constructed by local organizations.
Improvement of the San Antonio and Chino Creek channels by con-
structing levees and enlarging the cross-section to give a carrying capa-
city of 10,000 second-feet to the Santa Ana River is proposed.
Spreading works and settling basins are proposed on the debris cones
at the debouchures of Cucamonga, Deer and Day creeks from
the mountains to sink as much of the unused run-off as possible into
the underground basin. In order to care for flood waters not controlled
by the spreading works, channel construction or improvements are pro-
posed where the present channels do not have sufficient capacity to
carry the estimated flood discharges of 5000 second-feet from Cucamonga
Creek and the 4000 second-feet from Deer and Day creeks, or 6000
second-feet below the confluence of the three.
Additional spreading works are proposed for the Lytle Creek cone to
aid in the percolation of the unused and flood waters of that stream to
the underground basin, but since Cajon Creek is naturally well cared
for in this way no spreading works are proposed for it. From the
crossing of the Santa Fe Railway on Lytle Creek, which is below the
confluence of Lytle and Cajon creeks, to the Santa Ana River, works
are proposed to control flood waters not absorbed by spreading. These
works would consist of the improvement of the channel of the East
Branch of Lytle Creek to carry 25,000 second-feet to its confluence
with Warm Creek, which in turn would convey the flood water to the
Santa Ana River. A debris dam also is proposed near the mouth of
the mountain canyon of Lytle Creek.
A dyke is proposed to divert the waters from Devil Canyon into Lytle
Creek channel. It also is proposed to construct a diverting dam on
Waterman Creek, above the present spreading area, and a channel to
* Bulletin No. 31, "Santa Ana River Basin," Division of Water Resources, 1930.
STATE WATER PLAN
169
carry its excess waters to Twin Creek, down which they would flow to
Warm Creek. A protection levee also is proposed along the west side
of Twin Creek to a point below Highland avenue. Several debris dams
on Little Sand and Sand creeks are proposed to prevent the deposition
of sand on orchards. It also is proposed to divert City Creek into the
Santa Ana River by means of a low levee, in which gates would be
installed for the diversion of water for spreading. On Mill Creek it is
proposed to strengthen the present dam diverting to spreading works
and construct a levee at the lower end of the spreading works to protect
cultivated land. Levees are proposed along both sides of San Timoteo
Creek from Redlands to the Santa Ana River, together with three debris
dams in the vicinity of and above Redlands.
The works proposed for the upper Santa Ana River consist of spread-
ing works and channel protection. A debris dam would be constructed
above the Mentone gaging station and an area of 1230 acres of spreading
grounds developed in the river wash between Redlands and East High-
lands. Flexible revetments are proposed for the protection of the river
banks on the north and south sides. The north side would be protected
from the Pacific Electric Railroad crossing to the proposed diversion
levee for City Creek. The south side would be protected for a distance
of about 13,500 feet east of the railroad and west from it to the mouth
of San Timoteo Creek.
The works proposed for the lower Santa Ana River are the construc-
tion of a reservoir in the lower Santa Ana Canyon for the storage of
flood water, which would be released at such a rate that it might perco-
late into the underground basin, and the improvement of the channel
between this reservoir and the ocean to carry off excess flood waters
not controlled by the reservoir. Two reservoirs* also are proposed for
construction on Santiago Creek to store the winter and flood run-off of
that stream and release it for irrigation, both by direct diversion and by
recharging the underground basin for pumping supplies.
It is estimated that construction of all of the works in the Santa Ana
River Basin, above briefly described, would save about 90 per cent of
the water now wasting into the ocean from this stream. They would,
in addition, control larger floods on the main stream and its tributaries
than any yet recorded. The cost of constructing these works is esti-
mated as follows :
TABLE 44
COST OF FLOOD CONTROL AND SPREADING WORKS IN SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN
Location
Upper Santa Ana River Basin-
West End
Lytle Creek.
Miscellaneous creeks north of San Ber-
nardino
Santa Ana River.
Mill Creek
San Timoteo Creek.
Subtotal, Upper Santa Ana Basin .
Lower Santa Ana River Basin
Total, Santa Ana River Basin.
Item
San Antonio, Cucamonga, and Deer and Day creeks and
Ontario flood channels; Cucamonga, and Deer and Day
creeks spreading works . .
Flood channel, debris dam, mountain gravel storage, and
spreading and revetment works
Works on Devil Canyon, Waterman, East Twin, Little
Sand, Sand and City creeks
Spreading works, debris dam, mountain gravel storage
and bank protection
Spreadi ng works _
Flood channel and protection ...
Reservoir in lower Santa Ana Canyon and channel
improvement and acquisition on Santa Ana River below
reservoir, and reservoirs on Santiago Creek
Cost
$1,667,300
1,135,500
178,400
1,069,700
42,800
140,800
$4,234,500
$12,000,000
$16,234,500
* This is the plan formerly proposed by Orange County Flood Control District.
A report, dated April, 1931, by a special board of engineers retained by this dis-
trict to restudy the Dlan, proposes one reservoir.
17i)
DIVISION OF \VATI:k RESOUR( ES
Los Angeles County — In Los Angeles County, work has I n under
way by Los Angeles Countj Flood Control Distrid for several years on
;i plan for the control of floods by storage and channel <'orrection and
improvement. This work will aid in conserving water by detaining
Hood peaks, thereby extending the time of run-off which will allow more
percolation into the underground basins.
Vt ntura County — Investigations of the conditions in Ventura County
have not yet been carried to a point where it is advisable to lay out a
plan for caring Eor either present or future needs.
Colorado River .\</n<<h<ct — The route and units of the Colorado River
aqueduct have been described in Chapter V. The initial development,
.is recommended by the Engineering Board of Review of the Metro-
politan Water Distrid of Southern California, -would have a delivery
capacity of 800 second-feet, which is about 580,000 acre-feet per year.
The tunnels and surface conduits would be constructed to the full
capacity of 1 500 second-feet, but pressure siphons and pumping plants
would be constructed for only 800 second-feet. The Parker dam and
its appurtenances would be deferred. Clarification works, however,
would be installed at the intake on the Colorado River in lieu of the
Parker reservoir. Provision would be made for terminal storage near
the lower end of the aqueduct on the Pacific slope in the amount of
100,000 acre-feet. Suitable locations for reservoirs to provide this
capacity are available along the aqueduct line in the Cajalco Canyon
and the Puente Hills district. The total cost for the initial develop-
ment, including terminal storage, as estimated by the Engineering
Hoard of Review for the district. ; s set forth in Table 4."». The figures
do not include interest during construction.
TABLE 45
COST OF COLORADO RIVER AQUEDUCT
\^ recommended by Hnnineering Board of Review of Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Item
Initial
development
I nvc.*t igations and designs
$2,500,000
The aqueduct
146,222.000
Pumpiiig and power plants and equipment
24,931,000
Clarification w orks
7,419,000
Terminal storage
17,500,000
Total
$198,572,000
STATE WATER PLAN
171
Summary.
The estimated costs of the units for initial development are sum-
marized in the following table :
TABLE 46
SUMMARY OF COSTS OF UNITS FOR INITIAL DEVELOPMENT
Item
Great Central Valley—
Kennett reservoir
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta cross channel (construction deferred) _
San Joaquin River pumping system (construction deferred)
Friant reservoir
Upper San Joaquin Valley conduits
Rights of way, water rights and general expense _
Subtotal, Great Central Valley
San Francisco Bay Basin—
Contra Costa County conduit
South Pacific Coast Basin-
Colorado River aqueduct. _
Santa Ana River Basin hood control and conservation works .
Subtotal, South Pacific Coast Basin-
Total
Cost
$84,000,000
4,000,000
15,000,000
15,500,000
29,900,000
8,000,000
'$198,600,000
'16,200,000
$156,400,000
2,500,000
$214,800,000
$373,700,000
1 Estimate of Engineering Board of Review for MetropDlit3n Water District. Does rot include interest during con-
struction. Figures rounded to the nearest $100,000.
2 Figures rounded to the nearest $100,000.
171' DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
CHAPTER VII
ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF INITIAL UNITS OF
STATE WATER PLAN
A fundamental prerequisite to the execution of any unit of the State
Water Plan imist he a consideration of its economic soundness. Before
any unit is adopted for execution, it should be definitely determined
that the value of benefits,* including collectible revenues therefrom,
would exceed the cost. In some of the projects collectible revenues
would he obtained from the sale of water and hydroelectric energy.
In addition to revenues from actual use of water, however, there would
be benefits which would accrue to many interests through the correction
of the water shortage situation. Federal and state governments, the
large metropolitan centers, cities, public and privately owned public
utilities, industrial and commercial interests, individuals, and other
interests, would be benefited to a varying degree. It is not within the
province of this report, however, to determine the extent of these bene-
fits, but only to set forth those interests which would be benefited and
in what way. Therefore only the comparative amounts of annual costs
and anticipated collectible revenues are presented herein.
Economic aspects of the three initial projects, Great Central Valley,
Colorado River aqueduct and the Santa Ana River Basin are con-
sidered.
Great Central Valley Project.
For the Great Central Valley, including the Contra Costa County
conduit in the upper San Francisco Bay Basin, the capital and gross
annual costs of the units for both the immediate and complete initial
development are set forth i i tables on pages 173 and 174. The costs,
in addition to the cost of the physical works, include allowances for
rights of way, water rights and general expense amounting to $7,000,000
\'t>r the immediate initial development and $8,000,000 for the complete
initial development. The annual costs include interest at 44 per cent
pei' annum, amortization on a forty-year sinking fund basis at four per
cent per annum, depreciation, operation and maintenance. Annual
revenues are based upon the sale of electric energy and water at prices
determined by special studies undertaken in this investigation.
The values of the electric energy at the power plants of the Kennett
and Friant reservoirs are based on the lowest of several estimates of
the cost of producing an equivalent amount of electric energy of the
same characteristics with a steam-electric plant located in the area of
consumption, taking into account the cost of transmission from point
of generation to load centers. An average rate of $3 per acre-foot for
irrigation water, measured at the main canal in the upper San Joaquin
Valley, is based on the crop distribution shown by the 1929 crop survey
in that area and on the permissible annual charges for irrigation water
;it the land for these crops, as set forth in another report.* Important
factors, in arriving at this figure, were class of service, the costs of
•Bulletin No. 84, "Permissible Annual Charges for Irrigation Water in Upper San
Joaquin Valley," Division of Water Resources, 1930.
STATE WATER PLAN 173
surface distribution, of ground water utilization, and of pumping,
both local and imported water, taking into account the reduction of
pumping lifts which would be effected through ground water replen-
ishment.
It is assumed that the water delivered by the Contra Costa County
conduit for agricultural and industrial use would be sold at rates
which would average $6.90 per acre-foot (2.1 cents per 1000 gallons) or
sufficient to meet the total annual cost of this unit. This would not
include any portion of the cost of furnishing the supply in the delta
or of keeping the delta channels fresh.
Predictions as to the time when the quantities of water supplies and
electric energj^ developed by the initial units would be sold are uncer-
tain, particularly irrigation and industrial supplies. The amount of
electric energy generated probably could be absorbed over a period of
four years. However, the factors entering into the utilization and
sale of irrigation and industrial supplies are so numerous and diverse
that no prediction as to the time of complete utilization has been
attempted. The revenues from the sale of electric energy and water
are estimated as the total amounts which would be realized when fully
utilized and sold at the unit prices stated. Any deficiencies in revenues
during the period of partial utilization would have to be provided by
some other means. The net annual costs would be greater than cal-
culated during this development period, but no attempt has been made
to estimate the added cost.
A comparison of the annual costs and anticipated revenues from the
sale of water and electric energy for the initial units for the Great
Central Valley for both the immediate and complete stages of initial
development are summarized below :
Immediate Initial Development
< \ ross
Item Capital cost annual cost
CAPITAL AND ANNUAL COST—
Kennett reservoir $84,000,000 $5,297,000
Contra Costa County conduit 2,500,000 300,000
Friant reservoir '15,500,000 1,062,000
Madera canal 2,500,000 213,000
San Joaquin River-Kern County canal 27,300,000 2,225,000
Magunden-Edison pumping system 100,000 18,000
Rights of way, water rights and general expense 7,000,000 389,000
Total $138,900,000 $9,504,000 $0,504,000
ANNUAL REVENUES—
Electric energy sales:
1,591,800,000 kilowatt hours at $0.00265 $4,218,000
105,000,000 kilowatt hours at $0.0035 367,000
Total electric energy sales $4,585,000
Water sales:
600,000 acre-feet for upper San Joaquin Valley, based on average
for twelve-year period 1917-1929, at $3 per acre-foot $1,800,000
43,500 acre-feet for Contra Costa County conduit at $6.90 per acre-
foot 300,000
Total water sales $2,100,000
Total revenues, electric energy and water $0,685,000 $6,685,000
NET ANNUAL COST IN EXCESS OF REVENUES— $2,819,000
1 Includes $1,500,000 for cost of 30,000 kilovolt ampere power plant, the amortization ol which, in a ten-year period,
is included in the annual cost.
174
1>1Y1SH>X OF WATER RESOURCES
Complete Initial Development
dross
Item Capital cost annual cost
CAPITAL \M) ANNUAL o>m
Kennett reservoir.. J84.ooo.ooo $5,297,000
Sacramento-San Joai|iiin Delta cross channel 4,000,000 300,000
Contra Carta County conduit 2,500,000 300,000
San Joaquin Hiver pumping system 15,000,000 2,50C,0O0
Friant reservoir '14,500.000 885.000
Madera canal 2,500.000 213.000
Ban Joaquin River-Kern County canal 27.300,000 2,225.000
Maguudcn-Kdison pumping system 100,000 18,000
Mights of way, water rights and general expense 8,000,000 444,000
Total $157,900,000 $12,182,000 $12,182,000
ANNUAL REVENUES—
Electric energy gales:
1.581,100,000 kilowatt hours at $0.00242 $3,826,000
2:1,000,000 kilowatt hours at $0.0035 80,000
Total electric energy sales $3,906,000
Water sales:
1,720,000 acre-feet for upper San Joaquin Valley, based on average
for forty-year period 1 889- 1 929, at $3 per acre-foot $5, 1 60,000
43,500 acre-feet for Contra Costa Countv conduit at $6.90 per acre-
foot 300,000
Total watersales $5,460,000
Total revenues, electric energy and water $9,366,000 $9,366,000
NET ANNUAL COST IN EXCESS OF REVENUES $2,816,000
1 Does not include the cost of the 30,000 kilovolt ampere power plant of the immediate initial development, which
would not be operated under the complete initial development, but does include a new 10,000 kilovolt ampere plant cost-
ing $500,000 on the Madera canal, the amortization of which in a forty-year period is included in the annual cost.
Under the complete initial development, it may be noted that the
water sales to the upper San Joaquin Valley are based on a delivery of
1,720,000 acre-feet annually. This is the estimated amount of water
that could be obtained from the San Joaquin River at Friant under com-
plete utilization of the waters of the stream (based on the forty-year
period 1889-1929). It is the estimated amount which, together with the
full practicable development of the local supplies, would be sufficient for
development of practically all the class 1 and 2 lands on the eastern
side of the upper San Joaquin Valley. This would mean the bringing
in of new lands, which is not contemplated with the immediate initial
development. However, if it should be desired to import more water
than is contemplated under the immediate initial development, either for
ground water replenishment or for additional supplies in areas with
temporary deficiencies in surface supplies without further conservation
of local supplies, the San Joaquin River pumping system would be
required. Since it is impossible to forecast the amount of additional
water that might be desired to be imported under these conditions, the
anticipated revenues for a complete utilization of the full average supply
of 1,720,000 acre-feet annually available from the San Joaquin River
only is estimated for the complete initial development.
It may be seen from the financial statements that, with the immediate
development, the net annual cost would be $2,819,000 and with the
complete initial development, $3,000 less. Hence the cost per acre-
foot of water for the complete development would be less with the
entire deficit charged to water. However, if there were not the demand
for the Larger amount of water and the burden for the cost of the proj-
ect should fad upon those who actually would use water, the cost
PROJECT FOR VARIOUS RATES OF INTEREST WITH FORTY-YEAR
nnual cost '
50-year amortization, 4 per cent sinking fund basis
40-year
straight line
amortiza-
cent
6 per cent
5 per cent
±Yi per cent
4 per cent
3/4 P^r cent
3 per cent
tion, no
interest
13,000
$15,462,000
$5,456,000
$4,965,000
$4,486,000
$4,022,000
$3,564,000
$2,422,000
.2,000
327,000
302,000
290,000
277.000
265,000
252,000
215,000
e.ooo
1,261,000
1,091,000
1,007,000
924,000
842,000
762,000
554,000
o.OOO
240,000
215.000
203,000
190,000
178,000
165,000
131,000
i6,000
2,610,000
2,279,000
2,117,000
1,959,000
1,804,000
1,652,000
1,255,C00
IH.000
19.000
18,000
17,000
17,000
16,000
16,000
15,000
54,000
466,000
396,000
361,000
326,000
291,000
256,000
175,000
12.000
$11,385,000
$9,757,000
$8,960,000
$8,179,000
$7,418,000
$6,667,000
$4,767,000
55,000
6,685,000
6,685.000
6,685,000
0,685,000
6,685,000
6,685,000
6,685,000
)7,000
$4,700,000
$3,072,000
$2,275,000
$1,494,000
$733,000
'$18,000
■$1,918,000
*3,000
$6,462,000
$5,456,000
$1,965,000
$4,486,000
$4,022,000
$3,564,000
$2,422,000
54,000
$353,000
$304,000
284,000
264,000
244,000
219,000
169,000
52.00C
327,000
302,000
290,000
277,000
265,000
252,000
215,000
J9.000
2,754,000
2,534,000
2,440,000
2,334,000
2,244,000
2,141,000
1,851,000
53,000
5,000
1,067,000
900,000
828,000
750,000
673,000
59?, COO
415,000
240.000
215,000
203,000
190,000
178,000
165,000
131,000
56,000
2,610,000
2,279,000
2,117,000
1,959,000
1,804,000
1,B52,000
1,255,000
1*5,000
19,000
18,000
17,000
17,000
16,000
16,000
15,000
24.000
532,000
452,000
412,000
372,000
332,000
292,000
200,000
1)2,000
114,364,000
$12,466,000
$11,556,000
$10,649,(I(HI
$9,778,000
$8,898,000
$15,673,000
56,000
So.coo
9,366,000
9,366,000
13,100,000
9,366,000
9,366,000
9,366,000
9,366,000
9,366,000
$4,998,000
$2,190,000
$1,283,000
$412,000
WiS.UOO
>$2,693,UO()
bsta
cost of a new 10,000 kilovolt ampere power plant on the Madera canal, the amortization of which,
174 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
Complete Initial Development
< Iruss
Itrin Capital OOlt annual cost
CAI'ITAI. AND ANNUAL COST
Kannett reearvoir $84,000,000 $5,297,ooo
S:i(T:uni-nto-San Joa(|uin Delta cross channel 4,000,000 300,000
Contra Coat* County oonduil 2,500,000 300,000
Ban Joaquin Kiver pumping system 15X00,000 2,500,000
Friant reservoir '14,500,000 885,000
Madera oanaJ 2,500,000 213,000
Ban Joaquin River-Kern County eanal 27,300,000 2,225,000
Mngundcn-Kdison pumping system 100,000 18,000
Mights of way, water rights and general expense 8,000,000 444,000
Total $157,900,000 $12,182,000 $12,182,000
ANNUAL MKVENUES—
Electric energy aalea:
1,581,100,000 kilowatt hours at $0.00242 $3,826,000
23,000,000 kilowatt hours at $0.0035 80,000
Total electric energy sales $3,906,000
Water sales:
1,720,000 acre-feet for upper San Joaquin Valley, based on average
for forty-year period 1889-1929, at $3 per acre-foot $5, 1 60,000
43,500 acre-feet for Contra Costa Countv conduit at $6.90 per acre-
foot 300,000
Total water sales $5,460,000
Total revenues, electric energy and water $9,366,000 $9,366,000
NET ANNUAL COST IN EXCESS OF REVENUES $2,816,000
1 Does not include the cost of the 30,000 kilovolt ampere power plant of the immediate initial development, which
would not be operated under the complete initial development, but does include a new 10,000 kilovolt ampere plant cost-
ing $500,000 on the Madera canal, the amortization of which in a forty-year period is included in the annual cost.
Under the complete initial development, it may be noted that the
water sales to the upper San Joaquin Valley are based on a delivery of
1,720,000 acre-feet annually. This is the estimated amount of water
that could be obtained from the San Joaquin River at Friant under com-
plete utilization of the waters of the stream (based on the forty-year
period 1889-1929). It is the estimated amount which, together with the
full practicable development of the local supplies, would be sufficient for
development of practically all the class 1 and 2 lands on the eastern
side of the upper San Joaquin Valley. This would mean the bringing
in of new lands, which is not contemplated with the immediate initial
development. However, if it should be desired to import more water
than is contemplated under the immediate initial development, either for
ground water replenishment or for additional supplies in areas with
temporary deficiencies in surface supplies without further conservation
of local supplies, the San Joaquin River pumping system would be
required. Since it is impossible to forecast the amount of additional
water that might be desired to be imported under these conditions, the
anticipated revenues for a complete utilization of the full average supply
of 1,720,000 acre-feet annually available from the San Joaquin River
only is estimated for the complete initial development.
It may be seen from the financial statements that, with the immediate
development, the net annual cost would be $2,819,000 and with the
complete initial development, $3,000 less. Hence the cost per acre-
foot of water for the complete development would be less with the
entire deficit charged to water. However, if there were not the demand
for the Larger amount of water and the burden for the cost of the proj-
ect should fall upon those who actually would use water, the cost
CAPITAL AND ANNUAL COSTS OF IMMEDIATE INITIAL DEVELOPMENT AND COMPLETE INITIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR THE GREAT CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT FOR VARIOUS RATES OF INTEREST WITH FORTY-YEAR
AND FIFTY-YEAR AMORTIZATION PERIODS
Capital cost
Annual cost '
Interest rate
40-year amortization, 4 per cent sinking fund basis
50-year amortisation. 4 per cent sinking fund basis
40-year
straight line
6 per cent
5 per cent
4 '-s per cent
4 per cent
3H per cent
3 per cent
No interest
6 per cent
5 per cent
i l A per cent
4 per cent
3H per cent
3 per cent
6 per cent
5 per cent
4H per cent
4 per cent
3M per cent
3 per cent
tion, no
interest
Immediate Initial Development
$87,200,000
2,500,000
15,800.000
2,500,000
28,200,000
100,000
7.000,000
$85,100,000
2.500.0C0
15,600.000
2,500,000
27,000,000
100.000
7,000,000
$84,000,000
2,500,000
15,500,000
2,500,000
27,300,000
100,000
7,000,000
$82,900,000
2,500,000
15,400,000
2,500.000
27,000,000
100,000
7,000,000
$81,000,000
2,500,000
15,300,000
2.500,000
26,700,000
100,000
7,000,000
$30,800,000
2,500,000
15,200.000
2.500,000
20,400,000
100,000
7,000,000
$74,400,000
2,400.000
14.500,000
2,400,000
24.600.000
100.000
7,000,000
$6,807,000
337,000
1,318,000
250,000
2,722,000
r 19,000
494.000
$5,792,000
312,000
1.147,000
225.000
2,388,000
» 18,000
424,000
$5,297,000
300,000
1,062,000
213.000
2,225,000
18,000
389,000
$4,813,000
287,000
979,000
200,000
2,066,000
17,000
354,000
$4,346,000
275.000
.1897,000
1 188,000
1,909.000
> '17,000
319,000
$3,883,000
262,000
816,000
175,000
1,756,000
16,000
284.000
$6,462,000
327.000
1,261.000
240,000
2,610.000
19.000
466.000
$5,456,000
302,000
1,091,000
215,000
2,279,000
18,000
396.000
$4,965,000
290,000
1.007.000
203,000
2,117,000
17,000
361,000
$4,486,000
277,000
924,000
190,000
1,959,000
17.000
326,000
$4,022,000
265,000
842,000
178,000
1,804,000
16.0C0
291,000
$3,564,000
252,000
762.000
165.000
1,652,000
16,000
256,000
$2,422,000
215.000
554,000
131,000
1.255.C00
15.000
175,000
Contra Costa County conduit
Rights of way. water rights and general expense
Total
$143,300,000
$140,400,000
$138,900,000
$137,400,000
$136,000,000
$:34.500,0Ui
$125,400,000
$11,947,000
o.o.s.-,,ooo
$10,306,000
0,685,000
$-1,504,000
6.685,000
$8,716,000
6,685,000
$7,951,000
6,685,000
$7,192,000
6.685,000
$11,385,000
6,685,000
$9,757,000
6,685.000
$8,960,000
6,685,000
$8,179,000
0,685.000
$7,418,000
6,685,000
$6,667,000
6,685,000
$4,767,000
6,685,000
$5,262,000
$6,807,000
369,000
337,000
2,815,000
1,125,000
250,000
2,722,000
19,000
564,000
$3,621,000
$5,792,000
320,000
312,000
2,609,000
964,000
225,000
2,388,000
18,000
484,000
$2,816,000
$5,297,000
300.000
300,000
2,500,000
885,000
213.000
2.225.000
18,000
444,000
$2,031,000
$4,813,000
280,000
287,000
2,392,000
807,000
200,000
2,066,000
17,000
404,000
$1,266,000
$4,346,000
260,000
275,000
2,302,000
730,000
188,000
1,909,000
17,000
364,000
$507,000
$3,883,000
234,000
262,000
2,199,000
1 053.000
} 175,000
1,756,000
16,000
324,000
$4,700,000
$6,462,000
$353,000
327,000
2,754,000
1,067,000
240.000
2,610,000
19.000
532,000
$3,072,000
$5,456,000
$304,000
302,000
2.534,000
906.000
215.000
2.279,000
18,000
452,000
$2,275,000
$1,965,000
284,000
290,000
2,440,000
828,000
203.000
2,117,000
17,000
412,000
$1,494,000
$4,480,000
264,000
277,000
2,334,000
750,000
190,000
1,959,000
17,000
372,000
$733,000
$4,022,000
244,000
265,000
2,244.000
673,000
178,000
1,804,000
16,000
332,000
'$18,000
$3,564,000
219,000
252.000
2.141.000
59/, 000
165,000
1,652,000
16,000
292,000
'$1,918,000
$2,422,000
169,000
215,000
1,851,000
415,000
131,000
1,255,000
15,000
200,000
Complete Initial Development
Kennett reservoir
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta cross channel
$87,200,000
4,100,000
2,500,000
15,500,000
14.800.000
2.500,000
28.200,000
100,000
8,000.000
$85,100,000
4.000.000
2,500,000
15,200,000
14,600.000
2,500.000
27,600,000
100,000
8,000,000
$84,000,000
4,000,000
2,500,000
15,000,000
14,500,000
2,500,000
27,300.000
100.000
8,000,000
$82,900,000
4,000,000
2.500,000
14,800,000
H.400.000
2,500.000
27.000,000
100,000
8,000,000
$81,900,000
4.000,000
2,500,000
14,700,000
14,300,000
2,500,000
26.700,000
100,000
8,000,030
$80,800,000
3,900,000
2.500.000
14,500,000
14,200.000
2,500,000
26,400,000
100,000
8,000,000
$74,400,000
3,800,000
2,400,000
13,600,000
13,600,000
2,400,000
24,600,000
100,000
8,000,000
Madera canal
San Joaquin River-Kern County canal .
Rights of way, water rights and general expense
Tutal
$162,000,0011
$158,600,000
$157,900,000
$156,200,000
$154,700,000
$152,900,000
$142,900,000
$15.0118,
9.366,000
$13,112,000
9,366,000
$12,182,000
9,366,000
$11,266,000
9,366,000
510,391,000
9,360,001!
$9,502,000
9,306,000
$14,364,000
9,366,000
$12,466,000
9,366,000
$11,556,000
9,366,000
S 10.649,000
9,366.000
$9,778,000
9,366.000
$8,898,000
9,366,000
$6,673,000
9.366,000
$5,042,000
S3,74l.,tlUU
$2,816,000
. $1,900,000
$1,025,000
$136,000
$4,998,000
$3,100,(100
$2,190,000
$1,283,000
$412,000
'$468,000
'$2,693,000
1 Capital cost of this unit includes $1,500,000 for all cost-^ including interest and *I, 400, 000 at no interest for cost of a 30,000 kilovolt ampere power plant, the amortization of which, in a ten-year pericd, is included in
* Capital cost ot this unit does not include that of the 30,000 kilovolt ampere power plant of the immediate initial development, which would not be operated under the complete initial development, but does include $5C
in a forty-year period, is included in the annual cost.
* Revenue L= in excess of annual cost.
•Computed on capital coats for which interest rates during construction arc the same as the interest rates used hereunder.
S0993 — pp. 174-175
the annual cost*
$500,003 for the co-it of a new 10,000 kilovolt ampere power plant o
the Madera canal, the amortization of which,
STATE WATER PLAN 17.")
might be greater than with the immediate development. This would
vary with the amount of water imported.
The foregoing estimates are based on financing the development at an
interest rate of 44 per cent per annum and on an amortization period
of forty-years. To illustrate the added cost for both capital and annual
costs with a higher rate of interest and the decreased cost with ;i lower
rate of interest and for a fifty-year period of amortization. Table 47
is presented. The rates of interest vary from six per cent to interest
free money. For all annual costs with interest, amortization is estimated
on a four per cent sinking fund basis. With interest free money, it is
estimated on a straight line basis for a forty-year period.
Many interests, other than those who actually would receive water in
the upper San Joaqnin Valley, also would be greatly benefited. In the
Sacramento Valley there would be many beneficiaries. The reduction of
floods on the Sacramento River would furnish an additional degree of
protection to the overflow lands in the Sacramento Flood Control Proj-
ect, resulting in a reduction of potential annual flood damages. The
federal and state governments, the various districts and individual
landowners would be interested in this feature. The improvement of
navigation on the Sacramento River for 190 miles above the city of Sac-
ramento is a feature in which the federal government would be inter-
ested and is a basis upon which it might be expected to participate finan-
cially. The furnishing of a full supply to the lands under irrigation
along the Sacramento River and in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
w r ould be of great benefit to the lands above the city of Sacramento in
their being assured of an adequate supply in all years without being
curtailed in their diversions because of navigation requirements or the
possibility of being enjoined by the water users below the city of Sacra-
mento. Some of the lands above Sacramento also would be benefited
in all years, and particularly in dry years, by decreased pumping
charges due to higher water levels in the Sacramento River channel.
This would be a substantial sum in dry years. The city of Sacramento
would be benefited as to the quality of its water supply, which it obtains
from the Sacramento River. In all years, a flow of not less than 5000
second-feet would be passing the intake of its pumping plant. In
1920, the mean flow during one 24— hour period in July was as low as
440 second-feet. On this day there was a reversal of flow upstream
amounting to a maximum of 2300 second-feet.
The control of salinity to the lower end of the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta would relieve the salt water menace in that area and
would furnish the irrigated lands a fresh water supply at all times.
The furnishing of an adequate and suitable water supply to the indus-
trial and agricultural areas along Suisun Bay not only would benefit
the immediate area, but also the metropolitan areas of Oakland and
San Francisco.
The relief afforded the upper San Joaquin Valley by the consumma-
tion of this plan would prevent the retrogression of a large area of
agricultural land. The maintenance of these lands in production
would prevent a loss of taxable wealth in the southern valley counties,
help to restore agricultural credit, maintain and increase business in
the communities of the affected areas and between those areas and the
176
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
large metropolitan centers, and assist in the protection of public utility
and banking investments in these areas.
Colorado River Aqueduct and Santa Ana River Basin Projects.
The economic aspects of the Colorado River aqueduct and the Santa
Ana River Basin projects are confined to the annual costs. No esti-
mates are presented as to the revenues which might be expected from
the sale of water and power because no definite information pertaining
to these items is available.
The Engineering Board of Review for the Metropolitan Water Dis-
trict of Southern California has prepared an estimate of the annual
cost of the aqueduct, which is presented below:
Interest at 4f per cent on $200,000,000 $9,500,000
Taxes and insurance 250,000
Electric energy for pumping 3,367,000
Operation, maintenance, repairs and renewals 2,217,000
Storage in Boulder Canyon reservoir 272,000
Total annual charges $15,606,000
This annual cost is based on a diversion of 1500 second-feet, which
would amount to some 1,086,000 acre-feet per year, or, according to the
estimates of the Metropolitan Water District, about 990,000 acre-feet
per year delivered into terminal storage on the Pacific Slope after
deducting aqueduct losses, and 900,000 acre-feet net delivery from
terminal storage.
The estimated capital cost of the physical w r orks for the Santa Ana
River project, designed both for the salvage of flood wastes and flood
protection, is given in Table 48 for several different rates of interest
during the period of construction. The table also shows the annual
costs, including interest, depreciation, amortization, operation and
maintenance. These costs are shown w r ith amortization on both a forty-
year and fifty-year, four per cent, sinking fund basis, with interest at
the same rates as those used for the construction period. The annual
cost also is shown for the project constructed without interest. This
cost includes depreciation, operation and maintenance, and amortiza-
tion on a forty-year straight line basis, but no interest on bonds.
TABLE 48
CAPITAL AND ANNUAL COSTS OF SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN PROJECT
Interest rate in per cent
6
5
4H
4
3H
3
Capital cost
$16,200,000
1,466.000
1,402,000
$16,000,000
1,288,000
1,225,000
$15,900,000
1,200,000
1,138,000
$15,800,000
1,114,000
1.051,000
$15,700,000
1.028,000
966,000
$15,600,000
944,000
882.000
$15,000,000
Gross annual cost, amorti-
zation on 40-year, 4 per
cent sinking fund basis .
Amortization on 50-year, 4
per cent sinking fund
basis...
Amortization on 40-ycar
straight line basis. .
675,000
STATE WATER PLAN 177
CHAPTER VIII
MAJOR LEGAL ASPECTS OF STATE WATER PLAN
Developments considered in preceding chapters would obviously
effect vast changes in existing conditions of stream flow occurrence
and distribution. The impounding of flood waters in mountain and
foothill reservoirs would enable equalization of stream flow with con-
sequent elimination or reduction of floods and consequent increase
of flow during present periods of low discharge. Also, water would
be exported from areas of surplus production and imported into areas
of deficient supply and water naturally tributary to one area would be
exchanged for water imported from another area. By means of such
storages, equalizations of flow, exportations, importations and exchanges
of water, flood control would be obtained and supplies would be pro-
vided for irrigation, navigation, salinity control, power development
and other beneficial uses.
Initial Units of Plan.
The initial units heretofore proposed in the Great Central Valley
and the San Francisco Bay Basin are Kennett reservoir in the Sacra-
mento River; an industrial and irrigation canal taking out of the
delta for supplying areas in Contra Costa County ; a cross channel
in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and pumping plants, gates,
ponds, and canals in the San Joaquin River and valley when necessary ;
Friant reservoir on the San Joaquin River ; a canal northward from
Friant reservoir to supply lands in Madera County ; a canal southward
from Friant reservoir to the Kern River and a small diversion south-
ward from the Kern River. Purchase of so-called "grass land"
water rights on the San Joaquin River is included so as to provide
additional water for storage in Friant reservoir and for use in other
areas.
Changes Resultant From Initial Units of Plan.
Kennett reservoir would be operated to reduce flood flows in the
Sacramento River and for maintaining higher stream levels during
other periods. This regulation or equalization of flow would reduce
flood hazards, lessen frequency of occurrence and extent of overflow
in areas now subject to inundation, lessen pumping lifts and costs
during the irrigation season, provide a full supply for areas now under
irrigation, maintain fresh water conditions in the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta and afford a surplus of fresh water for exportation from
the delta into the San Joaquin Valley and for supplying industrial
and agricultural areas in Contra Costa County, as well as supplying
valuable hydroelectric power developments and improving navigation.
The San Joaquin River pumping plants and canals, when constructed,
would provide the means of importing surplus Sacramento River
water into the San Joaquin Valley and enable the release of San
Joaquin River water for exportation to the upper San Joaquin Valley.
Friant reservoir would store flood waters of the San Joaquin River
for diversions to the Madera area and the upper portion of the San
Joaquin Valley.
12—80993
178 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
Purchase of "grass land" rights would remove an obstacle to Frianl
storage, as would the presence of Kennetl waters in the delta region.
It is tlms obvious thai the initial units proposed would involve
stream How regulation, exportations of water, and exchanges of water.
Stream Flow Regulation by Means of Storage.
Opposed to readjustments of stream How by storage is a fundamental
doctrine of California water law which invests riparian landowners
with the right to maintenance of stream How undiminished, unaltered
and according to present occurrence. The only exception is in favor
of a correlative right of use by other riparian owners, but not even
the riparian owner enjoys the right of storage. Furthermore the
riparian owner is limited to use upon riparian lands. It is thus mani-
fest that the riparian doctrine presents a serious obstacle to the opera-
tions proposed, whether by storage or exportation, and that the State
Water Plan is fundamentally nonriparian in character.
A basic feature of the riparian doctrine is ownership of the entire
stream by the riparian owners as tenants in common. They enjoy the
light to enjoin nonriparian usage and prevent seasonal storage.
[Jnlimited by any rule of reasonableness as against diversion to or
usage upon lands other than those riparian to the source, entitled to an
injunction without a showing of damage and empowered to prevent
storages for release at periods of scant How, these paramount pro-
prietors, though the owners of relatively small acreages along the
stream, may restrict usage to said acreages, though the water produced
by the stream, if properly husbanded, would supply not only all that
they can reasonably use, but also an abundance for nonriparian usage.
That such is the law of riparian right has been recently affirmed by the
Supreme Court of California in Herminghaus vs. Southern California
Edison Company, 200 Cal., 1.
In the decision of the court in the case last cited it is suggested that
public policy, public interest and a most liberal interpretation of the
police power might be invoked in aid of the state itself were the
state essaying to execute a general plan for the equitable adjustment
Of rights and uses in water in the interests of the whole people and
lor conservation, development and utilization of the water resources
of California. Also, a constitutional amendment (Art. XTV, Sec. 3)
added since the Herminghaus decision invokes the general welfare
of the state in support of a declaration that riparian water rights
shall be Limited to amounts reasonably required for beneficial use and
shall not extend to waste or unreasonable use or methods of use or
diversion. Nevertheless the decision referred to is far from an assur-
ance that it would be so held and the constitutional amendment in
question must face a determined challenge and be construed by the
Supreme Court of the Tinted States in reference to the "due process"
clause of the federal constitution before its validity or effect will be
definitely established. Reliance upon the police power, either as indi-
cated in the Herminghaus case or in Section 3 of Article XIV of the
constitution, therefore is uncertain.
Other pertinent considerations are that only flood and freshet
waters of very infrequent and inconsequential amounts are excluded
from riparian control; that dedication to public use and prescription
STATE WATER PLAN 179
are ineffectual against an alert and determined riparian owner; and
that neither California decisions as to state authority over navigable
waters with relation to riparian ownership, nor variant decisions else-
where afford a sufficient basis upon which to rest a dependable conclu-
sion. By this process of elimination eminent domain is suggested.
This is the remedy offered by the court in the Ilerminghaus case and
at least for the present affords the only certain means of removing
the riparian impediment by legal process.
Exportation from Watershed.
As in the case of stream flow regulation by storage, so also in the
case of exportation of water from a watershed does the riparian
doctrine present formidable opposition in so far as exportations are
attempted from points above riparian ownerships, and such exporta-
tions are apparently amenable only to an exercise of eminent domain.
There should be noted, however, a more or less prevalent notion
that owners of nonriparian lands, which have never been irrigated,
but which are irrigable, are possessed of a legal right by virtue of
such ownership to prevent exportations for use out of the watershed
in which their lands are situated. This idea is without foundation.
Riparian ownership is limited to parcels bordering the stream and
to such back lying parcels as have been carvel out of such border
parcels with a reservation of riparian right expressly provided.
Neither are such owners appropriators. The doctrine of appropria-
tion requires a taking and application of water to beneficial use, and
furthermore, were they appropriators, they could not, as such, object
to exportations from the watershed unless they were thereby deprived
of water needed for beneficial use. The very doctrine of appropria-
tion countenances exportation and many of the earliest appropriations
in California involved exportations of water from the watershed source.
Exchanges of Water.
An exchange of existing supplies for an imported supply would be
immediately involved in the plan proposed by virtue of substitution
of Kennett storage releases into the delta in lieu of waters stored in
and exported from Friant reservoir, and ultimately the initial unit
would provide for pumping Sacramento River water up the San Joa-
quin River and canals and make it available so that further storages and
exportations of San Joaquin River water would be permissible. Also
water imported into the Kern River from Friant reservoir would be
substituted in lieu of additional Kern River water taken through the
East Side Canal.
The question of whether a water user or a riparian claimant may
insist upon a supply of the water from the source to which his right
is appurtenant or may be compelled to accept imported water in lieu
thereof is thus squarely presented. There are decisions in other states
holding in favor of such substitutions of water. Cases directly in
point are the Idaho case of Reno vs. Richards, 178 Pac. 81; the Utah
ease of United States vs. Caldwell, 231 Pac. 434; and the Washington
case of State vs. American Fruit Growers, Inc., 237 Pac. 498. In so
deciding, the courts in each of these states acted without reference to
180 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
the aforesaid decisions of the other courts, and. in so deciding, all the
decisions involved considered principles of law established by Cali-
fornia eases as in support of their decisions.
Upon analysis of the nature of the property righl in water, which
is that of a mere lisufruct, and the ri<_dit to mingle waters and use the
channel of a stream as a medium of conveyance, and the righl to change
the point of diversion, place of use and purpose of use. and in view
of the decisions cited, it is believed a substitution of water is legal,
whether the opponent be a riparian owner or an appropriator.
Purchase of So-called San Joaquin Grass-Land Water Rights.
Under claim of riparian ownership and appropriations of early
priority, a large area of grass and pasture lands lying between the
Priant reservoir site and the mouth of the Merced River arc irrigated
by canals from and overflows of the San Joaquin River during sta<j'^
of high flow. Inasmuch as this usage requires a great quantity of
water for a relatively unimportant purpose, it is proposed to purchase
these rights, and release the waters thereby acquired for storage in
Friant reservoir and diversions therefrom northward to Madera County
lands and southward into the areas of the San Joaquin Valley lying
south of the San Joaquin River.
While it is true a purchaser of a riparian right may not by virtue
of such purchase transfer usage to lands other than those in which the
right purchased inheres, the effect of such a purchase is to eliminate
the riparian vendor as an objector to such a transfer. On the other
hand a purchaser of an appropriative right may change its place
of use, point of diversion and purpose of use, subject to the condition
of no injury to other vested rights. Thus such high-water flows as now
are unavailable to storage because they are required for this grass or
pasture land usage or flooding would be rendered legally usable for
more valuable purposes after storage and diversion at Friant.
Underground Storage and Exportation Therefrom.
The canal leading southward from Friant reservoir would traverse
areas wherein water may be released for spreading and sinking to
underground storage. In this way the storage capacity of Friant res-
ervoir may be supplemented during the aonirrigation season and addi-
tional supplies made available when needed by pumping from the
underground basins. Such underground storage may be used either to
supply areas overlying such basins, or may in part or entirely be
pumped therefrom for exportation and use elsewhere during seasons
of need. Underground storage and exportations from underground
basins long have been in practice in southern California and judicial
decisions have established the principles of law governing such methods
of conservation and use.
Report of 1928 Legal Committee.
A committee of ten lawyers versed in water law and constitutional
doctrines functioned as a subcommittee of the Joint Legislative Water
Committee appointed by the 1927 Legislature. This legal committee's
report is contained in the report of the legislative committee to the
1929 Legislature. A review of this legal committee's report reveals
STATE WATER PLAN 181
that these attorneys considered "how the most extensive practicable
use may be made of the waters of the state" and recognized that this
involved "radical interference with the natural flow of our streams
and underground waters, both by diversion and distribution of these
waters in ways widely at variance with the course of nature."
The legal committee then considered the "fundamental water law
of the state," which it declared to be the riparian right, and in view
of the necessity of use upon areas nonriparian it proceeded to inquire
into how the state might make this broader use consistent with the
private riparian right to a full flow of the stream. It found that the
riparian doctrine was firmly established by judicial decision, and, after
reviewing the law pertinent to flood and freshet waters, dedication
to public use and prescription, the police power, and navigable waters,
concluded that eminent domain was the only certain remedy.
Three distinct procedures for the employment of this remedy were
considered.
First, the present statutory method of a proceeding in the superior
court, in which the judge decides all questions except the amount of
compensation, which is fixed by a jury, unless a jury is waived by the
parties, in which case the judge fixes compensation.
Second, a proposed method of fixing damage by an administrative
body established by legislative enactment and authorized to make
findings, subject to judicial review but prima facie evidence of amount
of damage.
Third, a proposed judicial tribunal to administer eminent domain,
as applied to water, created by constitutional amendment and function-
ing as does the Railroad Commission and Industrial Accident Commis-
sion when exercising judicial power, with its determinations to be
conclusive as to questions of fact and its decisions reviewable by appel-
late courts on questions of law only.
Regardless of machinery employed, the committee warned of diffi-
culty in that in most cases it will be desirable to take only excess water
over and above that which the riparian owner reasonably requires
by economical methods of diversion and use. The committee held, the
plaintiff stating the quantity of water which he wishes to take, the ques-
, tion arises whether such a taking will only deprive the riparian owner
of excess water which he really does not need or whether it will reduce
the supply so that the demands of other riparian owners entitled to
share the flow will render the same inadequate. The effect of taking
any given amount can best be determined by an investigation of the
entire stream and the needs of all parties upon it. Such an investiga-
tion will manifestly be impracticable and unbearably expensive in
many instances. In view of this consideration the committee declared :
"Whatever procedure, therefore, is adopted, it should be adequate
in some way to ascertain the amount of water which the riparian
owner does require and in some way assure him of that quantity, and
then, if necessary, condemn the right to take the surplus as against
the legal right to the full flow of the stream."
A suggestion of the committee to meet this difficulty was condemna-
tion of the entire riparian right, with a guarantee by the condemning
party of a certain definite supply to be taken from the appropriation
182 DIVISION OF WATKK BB80UBGBS
of the condemning party. The committee recommended changes in
the law of eminent domain which may be summarized as follows:
1. That unless a tribunal having state-wide jurisdiction is provided,
the law should be amended to allow a condemnation proceeding
to be brought in any county through which the stream flows so
that relative rights t<> the stream can be determined by a single
court in a single action.
2. That a taking be allowed upon security •riven to insure payment
after valuation has been adjudged. Except in the matter of right
of way condemnations by the state and certain agencies, the
requirement at present is that compensation be first made and
paid.
3. That a constitutional amendment authorizing compensation by
substitution or physical adjustments in lieu of money compensation
be provided. There are cases wherein such substitutions mani-
festly afford the only fair basis of compensation. Two illustra-
tions are stated by the committee. Code amendments have beeen
made relative to such compensation in the matter of relocation of
structures, the making of crossings and the construction of fences.
4. That the entire code provisions relative to eminent domain should
be overhauled and revised to eliminate the present chaotic and
contradictory status occasioned by piecemeal amendments which
have been enacted from time to time.
5. That irrigation be established as a public use and condemnation
therefore be allowed to the would-be irrigator of nonriparian
tracts.
Relative to a Constitutional Amendment in Aid of the Remedy by Eminent
Domain.
In view of the recommendations of the legal committee above referred
to. it is concluded that a comprehensive, detailed and specific constitu-
tional amendment designed especially to care for all problems involved
in a coordinated State Plan is advisable because of the complicated
and novel problems thereby presented. Clearly no plan of such magni-
tude, expenditure and importance will be financially feasible unless
certainty as to the power to execute it, the manner in which execution
can be undertaken, and the approximate cost are known. It is believed
that an explicit constitutional amendment will afford the greatest
security against delays in execution and certainty as to the various
factors which must be made known in advance. Considerations perti-
nent to such a constitutional amendment include :
1. A grant of plenary authority to the Legislature to enact a law of
eminent domain relative to projects of a State Water Plan;
2. A water adjudication agency with state-wide and exclusive juris-
diction over suits to enjoin such projects or suits for damages on
account thereof;
3. The conversion of injunction suits against projects into condem-
nation suits by the state agency administering such projects;
4. The combination in a single proceeding of all actions that pertain
to interrelated rights ;
5. The institution and prosecution before the water adjudication
agency of condemnation proceedings either in rem versus all water
rights claimed or versus particular rights;
STATE WATER PLAN 183
6. The condemnation of all or a portion of a water right ;
7. Findings of fact by the adjudication agency as to damages, off-
setting benefits and compensation, which shall be conclusive;
8. A review of decisions of the water adjudication agency by the
Supreme Court, only as to questions of law ;
9. Awards of compensation either in money or in substituted benefits
or physical adjustments;
10. An offset of any benefits deemed substantial, including such bene-
fits as flood protection, salinity control, navigation, irrigation,
ground water, higher stream levels and reduced pumping costs;
11. Compensation in whole or in part by a guarantee of maintenance
of specified conditions which will make offsetting benefits definite
and enable fixation of their value;
12. A taking by the project agency without first making compensa-
tion, and for a continuance of such taking upon security required
by the adjudication agencj^ in case of suit.
Conclusion.
Stated adversely the execution of a State Water Plan might, under
the present status of the law, be long delayed by injunction suits by
many claimants in many courts and might be made unduly burdensome
by awards of excessive compensation in condemnation proceedings.
Thus the riparian owner, with his claim of right to maintenance of the
status quo, might interpose great embarrassment. In anticipation of
such difficulties a revised law of eminent domain could be designed to
meet all contingencies. In conclusion, it is submitted that an adequate
law of eminent domain, administered by an agency having state-wide
jurisdiction and properly constituted and empowered, should afford
the means by which those entitled to compensation could be speedily
and fairly provided for without undue difficulty, delay, or expense in
the prosecution of a plan.
184 DIVISION OF watkk BE80UBOE8
CHAPTER IX
INVESTIGATIONS IN PROGRESS
[nvestigations are 'id progress in several areas of the state. Insuffi-
cient data are available tlms far to carry oul studies of water require-
ments and supplies and to formulate plans of development and opera-
tion to serve the ultimate needs in these areas. In general, they include
the more or less isolated valleys in the northern and southern pari
of the state and in the central coastal region, lying outside of the
Greal Central Valley and South Pacific Coast Basin. There also are
important additional studies, however, being initiated in the South
Pacific Coast Basin.
The areas now being investigated include. (1) Northeastern Cali-
fornia, (2) Xapa Valley, (3) Santa Clara Valley, (4) Salinas Valley,
(5) Santa Barbara County, (6) Ventura County, (7) Mojave River
and Antelope valleys, (8) South Coastal Basin, (9) San Diego County.
The type of development and the conditions of water supply and
utilization in these various areas have markedly different charac-
teristics and offer separate and distinct problems for solution. Except
in the South Coastal Basin, the water problems are not usually as
acute as in the major areas for which plans of development are pre-
sented in this report. However, in some of the areas additional water
supplies must be provided in the near future if development is to con-
tinue. In most of the areas under investigation in the central coastal
region and in southern California, water supplies are largely obtained
from underground sources. In some of the areas, the underground
water supplies already have been fully developed and utilized, whereas
in others irrigation has been of comparatively recent origin and of
small extent. In all of those areas in which the underground basins
are the chief sources of water supply, the investigations necessarily-
include complete records of ground water levels and measurements of
local streams.
Northeastern California.
The investigations in northeastern California include the area
embraced in the counties of Siskiyou. Modoc, Lassen and Shasta. The
principal streams of the region from which water supplies may be
obtained include the Pit River and its tributaries, the tributaries of the
Klamath River and numerous streams in the lake country of Modoc
County. Many of these streams are fed by springs emanating from
the lava beds. Irrigation developments thus far chiefly consist of
gravity diversions from the surface streams. However, on the Pit
River a Large number of storage reservoirs have been constructed and
are in operation to augmenl the natural stream supplies.
The investigations in progress in the area include the determination
of water requirements, adjudication and distribution of available water
Supplies, and determination of the amount and source of supplemental
water supplies required for ultimate needs. The Division of Water
Resources (and the former Division of Water Rights) has adjudicated
and is administrating a great many of the major streams of the region.
r-
STATE WATER PLAN 185
These include Shasta River and Butte Creek in Siskiyou County, Hat,
Burney, North Cow and Clover creeks in Shasta County, the Pit River
in Lassen County and some ten streams in Modoc County. This work
of adjudication and administration lias generally resulted in increasing
the extent and efficiency of utilization of the available water supplies,
and thus has accomplished the equivalent to furnishing additional
supplies.
Investigations in the upper Pit River Basin above Pittville were
started in 1928 under cooperative agreement and joint financing
between the stale and Modoc and Lassen counties. The area being
studied embraces about .'3000 square miles, about two-thirds of which
are situated in Modoc County and one-third in Lassen County. The
principal agricultural areas involved are South Fork Valley, North
Pork Valley, Hot Springs Valley, Big Valley and Ash Valley.
The field investigation includes the maintenance of about twenty
stream gaging stations, and the collection of data relative to diversions,
duty of water, climate, crop yields, reservoir sites, and extent of the
irrigated and irrigable lands. In addition to the work originally
planned, the state was called upon to administer all of the diversions
from the main river in Big Valley during the 1930 irrigation season.
This service was authorized by an agreement signed by all of the water
users involved, and a similar agreement has been executed to provide
for a continuation of the service during the 1931 season. These agree-
ments and the administration thereunder may lead to an agreement
permanently settling all of the water rights in Big Valley.
Napa Valley.
The Napa Valley investigation was initiated in November, 1929, at
the request of the Board of Supervisors of Napa County and has as
its object a determination of the facts with respect to the amount and
availability of local water supplies. The work is covered by a cooper-
ative agreement signed by Napa County and the Division of "Water
Resources looking toward- a three-year investigation.
Continuous recording stream flow stations have been established on
Napa River and Conn Creek. Readings are being taken at intervals
on 80 wells distributed throughout Napa Valley. A series of inter-
mittent stream flow measurements also are being taken on Napa River
and Conn Creek to establish the behavior of those streams with
respect to percolation and accretion at various stages and in various
sections.
Santa Clara Valley (Santa Clara County).
The Santa Clara Valley investigation was initiated in January, 1930,
by the execution of an agreement between Santa Clara Valley Water
Conservation District and the Division of Water Resources looking
toward a three-year investigation of the local water supplies of Santa
Clara Valley. The investigation was prompted by apprehension over
falling ground water levels. There has been a lowering over the past
fifteen years of 64.5 feet in the general level of ground water in this
area. As practically all the irrigation and domestic water used in the
valley is pumped from underground sources there is great public
concern over this situation, due to the increased costs of pumping
186 DIVISION- OF WATER RESOURCES
and tlif possibility of invasion of saline water from San Francisco
Bay. The immediate purpose of tin- investigation is to determine
the facts as to overdraft upon present underground water supply,
the availability of local supplies to make good any overdraft which
may exist, and possible means of accomplishing relief.
Continuous recording stream flow stations have been established on
Guadalupe River, AJamitos Creek, Los Gatos Creek and Stevens
Creek, and intermittent measurments have been made on those streams
and Coyote River to establish the facts with respect to percolation.
Readings are being taken at intervals on some 250 wells distributed
throughout the valley as far south as Morgan Hill to collect data
on the behavior of ground water. Arrangements also have been made
to obtain daily records of precipitation at various points in the
valley.
Salinas Valley.
Work in the Salinas Valley thus far has consisted of establishing
and maintaining two new gaging stations, including one on San
Antonio Creek immediately above its confluence with the Salinas
River and one on the Salinas River near Salinas. The program of
the investigation in this valley includes studies of the underground
basin, involving well measurements and determinations of percolation
from the streams, together with a special consideration of the con-
ditions affecting saline water intrusion from the ocean at the lower end
of the valley.
Santa Barbara County.
The investigations in Santa Barbara County thus far have included
only the establishment and maintenance of three stream gaging stations
to measure the run-off into the Santa Maria Valley. To carry out
the complete program of investigation, additional gaging stations in
the Santa Maria Valley and on other streams in the county will be
necessary, and studies of the underground water supplies will be
required in all of the valleys within the county.
Ventura County.
The investigation in Ventura County was started in August. 1!>27.
The principal stream systems of the county are the Ventura and Santa
Clara rivers. The work has consisted of stream gaging measurements
and determinations of ground water movement. Considerable basic
data have been gathered on water supply and requirements, but compli-
cated conditions render difficult the making of definite conclusions with-
out much more basic data than are thus far available. Moreover, the
entire period of investigation has been one of a succession of dry years,
which has been unfavorable to obtaining conclusive data. While it is
physically possible to bring supplies from an outside source to Ventura
County, such importations would be extremely costly. The principal
hope for full development of the agricultural resources in the county
therefore lies in complete development of the waters of its two major
streams by means of a fully coordinated plan, independent of imported
supplies. Many reservoir sites exist, but these must be surveyed and
STATE WATER PLAN 187
examined as to sufficiency of dam foundations and their cost estimated
in order to determine their necessity and desirability in a plan of
development.
Mojave River and Antelope Valleys.
The area comprising the Mojave River and Antelope valleys lies in
the desert region east of the Coast Range Mountains of southern
California in the westerly end of the Mojave Desert. Water supplies
are limited in quantity and are largely utilized by pumping from
underground sources. The amount of the available supply, is uncer-
tain and data are lacking on the amount of water now being used.
Investigation in the Mojave River Valley was started in October,
1929. Mojave River is the principal stream of the desert region of
southern California. It rises on the north side of San Bernardino
Mountains and is believed to have formerly reached Death Valley,
but in recent times its water has been disposed of by evaporation in
the sinks to the south of Death Valley. There are 8000 acres now
irrigated in Mojave Basin and previous reports indicate that 325,000
acres are irrigable. The water supply is sufficient for only a fraction
of the total area and development of any portion is complicated by legal
questions involving riparian and underground water rights. Consider-
able areas of swamped and seeped lands along the river take their toll
of water before the lower irrigated lands are supplied, further hinder-
ing an increase of development in this area.
The amount and occurrence of stream discharge from the mountains
is fairly well determined and also, through previous investigations,
the physical cost of irrigating considerable areas in the upper part of
the basin can be approximated. There remain, however, matters of
considerable importance which must be determined before compara-
tive merits of alternate plans for utilizing the water can be made
and it is to the solution of these that the present investigation is
directed. Stream gaging, measurements of percolation and ground
water movement, and surveys to determine waste of water at the sink
in the lower end of the basin and from transpiration and evaporation
within the basin itself are in progress. This work will be continued
until sufficient data are obtained to complete studies of the amount
and utilization of available water supply.
In the Antelope Valley, practically all water supplies at present
utilized are obtained by pumping from the underlying underground
basin into which surface streams from the adjacent hills sink. The
work thus far under way consists of stream gaging at two gaging sta-
tions, one of which was established during the last year. Systematic-
observation of ground water levels also will be required to determine
the safe yield of the underground basin.
South Coastal Basin.
Investigations under way in the South Coastal Basin, comprising
the areas drained by the Los Antreles, San Gabriel and Santa Ana
rivers, and the small drainage basins immediately west of the city of
Los Angeles, are directed to a study of the amount of waste water and
its availability for reuse. There is a considerable lack of uniformity
in the physical features of these three drainage areas. The under-
188 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
ground basins in each arc more or less related and as a whole form the
South Coastal Basin, but there exist certain special conditions in each
basil] requiring special study and treatment. In some basins the nat-
ural recharge is insufficient, in others a deficiency is threatened, and in
others there appears to be little danger of future deficiency. The
salvage of waste water, the imminence of a new imported supply and
the difficulties which will be encountered when an attempt is made to
supplement the underground water supply and allocate the henefits
therefrom, require an investigation more intensive than any previous
(MIC.
The investigation will include nol only a study of the salvage and
reuse of sewage wastes, but also a determination, by means of extended
ground water observations, of the most advantageous operation and use
of the underground reservoir capacity. Work is in progress to estimate
the water requirements for various uses in the basin. A study is being
made of the amount of water supply contributed to the underground
basin by rainfall on the valley floors of the basin. In the Santa Ana
River Basin the studies thus far indicate a seasonal rainfall of at least
nineteen inches is required before penetration will be effected below
the brush root zone, ten to fifteen inches on grass or weed covered lands,
about twelve inches on citrus orchards and eleven to eighteen inches on
deciduous orchards. In the Riverside area the data thus far obtained
indicates there is no substantial contribution to the underground basin
from rainfall. The soil is of the ancient alluvial type and the princi-
pal contributions come from surface run-off which is usually too small
to result in any deep penetration, except possibly in heavily irrigated
citrus orchards.
The investigation in the South Coastal Basin, when completed, should
furnish basic data for the determination and allocation of benefits
which would accrue from the newly developed water supplies made
available under a coordinated plan of utilization and operation for both
local and imported supplies.
San Diego County.
"Work done thus far has been the establishment of additional gaging
stations on the streams so that full information will be available on the
present waste of water into the ocean and the amounts available at
points where it can be conserved by surface reservoirs. Work also is
being done in connection with the international division of the water
of Tia Juana River.
APPENDIX
STATUTES DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO STATE WATER
RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS
190 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
INTRODUCTION
For purposes of reference there are included on the following pagei
those statutes of the State of California directly relevant to the water
resources investigations since 1921. A list of these, in the order of
their becoming effective, follows:
Chapter 889, Statutes of 1921. Appropriation $200,000.
Chapter 180, Statutes of 1925. Appropriation $94,125.
Chapter 476, Statutes of 1925. Appropriation $25,000, Santa Ana.
Chapter 477, Statutes of 1925. Appropriation $150,000.
Chapter 30, Statutes of 1927. Assembly Concurrent Resolution
No. 16, relative to interim Joint Legislative Committee.
(Concurrent and Joint Resolutions and Constitutional Amend-
ments.)
Chapter 79, Statutes of 1927. Assembly Concurrent Resolution
No. 30, relative to Joint Legislative Committee.
(Concurrent and Joint Resolutions and Constitutional Amend-
ments.)
Chapter 809, Statutes of 1927. Appropriation $40,000, Santa Ana.
Chapter 78, Statutes of 1929. Assembly Concurrent Resolution
No. 38, relative to Joint Legislative Committee.
(Concurrent and Joint Resolutions and Constitutional Amend-
ments. )
Chapter 561, Statutes of 1929. Relative to Water Resources Com-
mission.
Chapter 656, Statutes of 1929. Appropriation $15,000, Santa Ana.
Chapter 832, Statutes of 1929. Appropriation $390,000.
STATE WATER PLAN 191
STATUTES RELEVANT TO WATER RESOURCES
INVESTIGATIONS
CHAPTER 889, STATUTES OF 1921
An act to provide for the investigation by the State of California of
the possibilities of the storage, control and diversion of water for
public use and public protection in the State of California, and
making an appropriation for said purpose.
[Approved June 3, 1921.]
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Section 1. It is hereby declared that the people of the State of
California have a paramount interest in the use of all the waters of the
state and that the State of California shall determine what waters of
the state, surface and underground, can be converted to public use, or
controlled for public protection.
Sec. 2. The state engineering' department is hereby authorized and
instructed to make the investigation in this act provided for and for
the purposes herein specified.
Sec. 3. It shall be the duty of the state engineering department to
determine the maximum amount of water which can be delivered to
the maximum area of land, the maximum control of flood waters, the
maximum storage of waters, the effects of deforestation and all possible
and practicable uses for such waters in the State of California.
Sec. 4. It shall be the duty of the state engineering department to
determine a comprehensive plan for the accomplishment of the maxi-
mum conservation, control, storage, distribution and application of all
the waters of the state, and to estimate the cost of constructing dams,
canals, reservoirs or other works necessary in carrying out this plan,
and to report the result of such investigations with recommendations
not later than the legislative session of 1923,
Sec. 5. In carrying out the provisions of this act the state engineer-
ing department is hereby authorized to examine any and all data, esti-
mates and proposals in furtherance of the above purpose, according to
its judgment of their engineering worth, and to cooperate with any
department, bureau, office, service, or division of the United States, or
of the state or counties, or with any municipality, irrigation, reclama-
tion, conservation, drainage, flood control, levee, or other district agency
for irrigation, reclamation, drainage, or flood control purposes, or for
the development of hydro-electric power; or with any interested associa-
tion, company or individual; provided, further, that the engineering
department is hereby expressly authorized to accept, receive and use
any funds or moneys contributed to it by any person, irrigation dis-
trict, reclamation district, water and conservation district or any politi-
cal subdivision of the State of California for the purpose of cooperat-
ing in the work aforesaid and carrying out the purposes of this act.
Sec. 6. With the approval of the governor, the state engineering
department is hereby authorized to employ such assistance as in its
judgment it may require and to incur such expense as may be necessary
192 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
to carry out the purposes of tliis act. The governor is further author-
ized to appoint a consulting board, composed of citizens of special and
technical qualifications, to serve in an advisory capacity, and without
pay, in making the above investigation.
Sec. 7. There is hereby appropriated out of any money in the state
treasury, not otherwise appropriated, the sum of two hundred thousand
dollars, and made immediately available for any of the purposes of this
act.
SBC. 8. This act shall not in any way be construed so as to deprive
persons, corporations, or districts of vested rights.
Sec. !>. Any section or portion of a section of any act, statute or
law of the State of California in conflict with the provisions of this act
is hereby repealed.
CHAPTER 180, STATUTES OF 1925
An act appropriating money to pa;/ the claim of R, B. Hah against
the State of California.
I Approved by the Governor May 18, 1925.]
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Section 1. The sum of ninety four thousand one hundred twenty-
five dollars is hereby appropriated out of any money in the state
treasury, not otherwise appropriated, to pay the claim of K. B. Hale.
against the State of California.
CHAPTER 476, STATUTES OF 1925
An act to provide for the survey of and works in and upon the Santa
Ana river watershed and basin for flood control: and making an
appropriation therefor.
I I object to the item of fifty thousand dollars in section 1 and reduce the
amount to twenty-five thousand dollars. With this reduction I approve the bllL
Dat<<i: May 23, 192H. Priknd Wm. Richakdson, Governor.}
Tin people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. The sum of fifty thousand dollars is hereby appropriated
out of any money in the state treasury, not otherwise appropriated, to
be expended under the direction of the division of engineering and
irrigation, state department of public works, for the purpose of making
a survey of the Santa Ana river watershed and basin and for the con-
struction of works for the control of floods of the Santa Ana river and
its tributaries; provided, however, that the sum herein appropriated
shall not be available until an equal amount shall have been appro-
priated for the same purpose by the counties of San Bernardino, River-
side and ( Grange.
STATE WATER PLAN 193
CHAPTER 477, STATUTES OF 1925
An act to provide for the investigation by the State of California of
the possibilities of coordinating the development of the water
resources of the state for public protection and to the end that they
may be put to the greatest beneficial use, and making an appropria-
tion for said purpose.
[I object to the item of two hundred fifty thousand dollars in section 9 and
reduce the amount to one hundred fifty thousand dollars. With this reduction I
approve the bill. Dated: May 23, 1925. Friend Wm. Richardson, Governor.]
The people of the State of California do enace as follows:
Section 1. It is hereby declared that the protection of the public
interest in the development of the water resources of the State of
California is of vital concern to the people of the Stale of California
and that the State of California shall determine in what way the waters
of the state, both surface and underground, should be developed for
the greatest public benefit, or controlled for public protection.
Sec. 2. The division of engineering and irrigation of the depart-
ment of public works is hereby authorized and instructed to make the
investigation in this act provided for and for the purposes herein
specified.
Sec. 3. It shall be the duty of the division of engineering and irri-
gation of the department of public works to investigate the amounts
and location of all the waters of the state, both surface and under-
ground, and to determine the amounts available for use; to investigate
all possible uses of water ; and to determine the future growth of these
demands and the works necessary for the accomplishment of the great-
est use of the state's waters for all purposes; also to investigate the
occurrence of floods and the works necessary for their control.
Sec. 4. It shall be the duty of the division of engineering and irri-
gation of the department of public works to ascertain the bounds of the
agricultural lands of the state and the amounts of water required to
bring them to maximum productivity, their economic source of irriga-
tion supply, and the value of delivery of water to the land : to ascertain
the amounts of water required for municipal and industrial purposes
and for the generation of hydro-electric energy and for all other
practicable uses and the economic source of supplies for all these
purposes.
Sec. 5. It shall be the duty of the division of engineering and irri-
gation of the department of public works to study the coordination of
all possible uses of water to the end that a full supply may be obtained
as nearly as possible for all purposes with the greatest degree of public
economy and to determine a comprehensive plan for the accomplish-
ment of these purposes with the maximum conservation, control, stor-
age, distribution and application of all the waters of the state and to
estimate the cost of the necessary works and structures for carrying out
this plan and to make all such studies, do all work, make all investiga-
tions, compile all data required to determine the manner in which the
water resources of the state should be developed for their greatest use
and public benefit.
Sec. 6. It shall be the duty of the division of engineering and irri-
gation of the department of public works, to prepare a printed report
13—80993
1!»4 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
setting forth the results of these investigations with recommendations
for a public policy for the development and conservation of the water
resources of the state, not later than the first day of January, 1927.
Sec. 7. The division of engineering and irrigation of the depart-
ment of public works in carrying out the provisions of this act, is
hereby authorized to examine any and all data, estimates and proposals
in furtherance of the above purpose, according to its judgment of their
engineering worth, and to consult with and accept the work of any
department, bureau, office, service, or division of the United States, or
of the state or counties, or with any municipality, irrigation, reclama-
tion, conservation, drainage, flood control, levee, or other district agency
for irrigation, reclamation, drainage, or flood control purposes, or for
the development of hydro-electric power; or with any interested associa-
tion, company or individual ; provided, further, that the division of engi-
neering and irrigation of the department of public works is hereby
expressly authorized to accept, receive and use any funds or moneys
contributed to it by any irrigation district, reclamation district, water
and conservation district or any political subdivision of the State of
California for the purpose of cooperating in the work aforesaid and
carrying out the purposes of this act.
Sec. 8. The division of engineering and irrigation of the depart-
ment of public works is hereby authorized, with the approval of the
governor, to employ such assistance as in its judgment it may require
and to incur such expense as may be necessary to carry out the purposes
of this act. The governor is further authorized to appoint a consulting
board, composed of representative citizens, to serve in an advisory
capacity in preparing the above report.
Sec. 9. There is hereby appropriated out of any money in the state
treasury, not otherwise appropriated, the sum of two hundred fifty
thousand dollars, and made immediately available for any of the pur-
poses of this act.
Sec. 10. This act shall not in any way be construed so as to deprive
persons, corporations, or districts of vested rights.
Sec. 11. Any section or portion of a section of any act, statute, or
law of the State of California in conflict with the provisions of this act
is hereby repealed.
CHAPTER 30, STATUTES OF 1927
(Concurrent and Joint Resolutions and Constitutional Amendments.)
Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 16 — Relative to appointing a
committee to investigate the water resources of the state.
[Filed with Secretary of State January 27, 1927.]
Whereas, It appears that a complete and detailed report by the state
engineer upon the water resources of the state has been rendered
impossible at this time by reason of the decease of the Honorable W. F.
McClure, former state engineer; and
Whereas, The summary report upon water resources of the state
recently submitted by the state engineer to the Legislature at the forty-
STATE WATER PLAN 195
seventh session thereof is lacking in the detailed information which is
necessary to a proper and adequate study of the subjects therein con-
sidered ; and
Whereas, It is vital to the interests of this state, particularly to the
agricultural districts thereof, that the Legislature of the State of Cali-
fornia, at the forty-seventh session thereof, have available for the con-
sideration of its members sufficient and adequate information to enable
them to consider and to further the adoption and enactment of construc-
tive legislation in relation thereto ; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That a committee
of eight members, consisting of four members of the Assembly and
four members of the Senate, be appointed by the speaker of the
Assembly and the president of the Senate, respectively, to act in con-
junction with the assistance of the director of the department of public
works, to make a further study of the records of the state engineer,
pertaining to the subject of this resolution and to report its findings
and submit its recommendations to this Legislature at the forty-seventh
session thereof not later than the first week in March, 1927, and be it
further
Resolved, That the sum of one thousand dollars, or so much thereof
as may be necessary, be and the same is hereby appropriated for the
purpose of defraying the expenses of said committee and said investiga-
tion, said sum to be paid equally from the contingent funds of the
Senate and Assembly, and the state controller is hereby authorized and
directed to draw his warrants in favor of the chairman of the said
committee for such expenditures as may be certified to him from time
to time by the chairman of said committee, and the state treasurer is
hereby authorized and directed to pay the same.
CHAPTER 79, STATUTES OF 1927
(Concurrent and Joint Resolutions and Constitutional Amendments.)
Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 30 — Providing for the appoint-
ment of a joint committee to investigate the water problems of the
state and to recommend some method of procedure therewith.
[Filed with Secretary of State April 29, 1927.]
Whereas, It is necessary that the Legislature of the State of Cali-
fornia have available adequate information so as to enable its members
to consider proper legislation looking to the adoption of a statewide
plan for the conservation and use of the waters of the state; now,
therefore, be it
Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That a committee
of eight members, consisting of four members of the Assembly to be
appointed by the speaker of the Assembly, and four members of the
Senate to be appointed by the president of the Senate, be appointed to
make an investigation of the water problems of the state and to recom-
mend to the Legislature of the State of California at the forty-eighth
session thereof some statewide policy for the conservation and use of
the waters of the state ; and be it further
196 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
Resolved, That said committee shall proceed to organize by the elec-
tion of one of its members as chairman and by the election of a sec-
retary, and shall proceed with said investigation in such manner as
may bo determined by said committee; and be it further
Resolved, That each department, board, commission or officer of the
State of California, whenever requested to do by said committee, shall
furnish to said committee such assistance as it may require ; and be it
further
Resolved, That said committee is hereby authorized to hold public
healings at any place in the State of California at which hearings the
people shall have opportunity to present their views to the committees
and be it further
Resolved, That said committee is hereby authorized and empowered
to do any and all things necessary to make a full and complete investi-
gation of the matters herein referred to, and is hereby authorized and
empowered to require the production of books, agreements, documents
and papers of every kind; to issue subpoenas and to compel the attend-
ances of witnesses, and to procure testimony. Each of the members of
said committee is hereby authorized to administer oaths, and all the
provisions of article VIII of chapter II, title I, part III of the Political
Code of the state relative to the attendance and assemblage of witnesses
before the Legislature and committees thereof, shall apply to the com-
mittee appointed under this resolution. The said committee is hereby
given leave to sit during the sessions of the Legislature, during the
recess thereof and during the interval between sessions thereof, at any
place in the state as said committee shall from time to time determine ;
and be it further
Resolved, That the sum of fifteen thousand dollars or so much thereof
as may be necessary be and the same is hereby appropriated for the
purpose of defraying the expenses of said committee and said investiga-
tion, said sum to be paid equally from the contingent funds of the
Senate and of the Assembly and the state controller is hereby author-
ized and directed to draw his warrants in favor of the chairman of said
committee for such expenditures as may be certified to him from time
to time by the chairman of said committee and the state treasurer is
hereby authorized and directed to pay the same.
CHAPTER 809, STATUTES OF 1927
An act to provide for a survey of and works on the Santa Ana rivt r
watershed and basin for flood control and making an appropriation
therefor.
(I object to the Item of fifty thousand dollars In section 1 of Senate Bill No. 888,
and reduce the amount to forty thousand dollars. With this reduction, I approve
the bill. Dated May 28, 1927. C. C. Young, Governor.)
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Section 1. The sum of fifty thousand dollars is hereby appropriated
out of any money in the state treasury, not otherwise appropriated,
to be expended under the direction of the division of engineering and
irrigation, department of public works, for the purpose of making an
STATE WATER PLAN 197
investigation and a survey of the Santa Ana river watershed and basin
to determine the method of and the construction of works for con-
trolling the floods of said Santa Ana river and its tributaries. Said
investigation and survey shall be completed and a report thereof made
to the governor prior to the first day of December, 1928; provided,
however, that such sum shall be available when there is available or
shall hereafter be made available by any political subdivision, or sub-
divisions of the State of California or by the federal government, or by
other interested party, or parties an equal amount for such purpose.
CHAPTER 78, STATUTES OF 1929
(Concurrent and Joint Resolutions and Constitutional Amendments.)
Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 38 — Providing for the appoint-
ment of a joint committee to investigate the water problems of the
state and to recommend some method of procedure therewith.
[Filed with Secretary of State May 15, 1929.]
Whereas, It is necessary that the Legislature of the State of Cali-
fornia have further available adequate information so as to enable its
members to consider proper legislation looking to the further conserva-
tion and use of the waters of the state ; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That a committee
of eight members, consisting of four members of the Assembly to be
appointed by the speaker of the Assembly, and four members of the
Senate to be appointed by the president of the Senate, be appointed to
make an investigation of the water problems of the state including the
desirability for, and the location of, a salt water barrier at or near
Carquinez Straits ; the water problems of those counties not included in
the Big Basin of California and water studies of the state not here-
tofore completed ; and to recommend to the Legislature of the State of
California at the forty-ninth session thereof statewide policy for the
conservation and use of the waters of the state ; and be it further
Resolved, That said committee shall proceed to organize by the elec-
tion of one of its members as chairman and by the election of a sec-
retary, and shall proceed with said investigation in such manner as may
be determined by said committee ; and be it further
Resolved, That each department, board, commission or officer of the
State of California, whenever requested to do so by said committee,
shall furnish to said committee such assistance as it may require ; and
be it further
Resolved, That said committee is hereby authorized to hold public
hearings at any place in the State of California at which hearings
the people shall have opportunity to present their views to the com-
mittee ; and be it further
Resolved, That said committee is hereby authorized and empowered
to do any and all things necessary to make a full and complete investi-
gation of the matters herein referred to, and is hereby authorized and
empowered to require the production of books, agreements, documents
and papers of every kind ; to issue subpoenas and to compel the attend-
ances of witnesses, and to procure testimony. Each of the members of
198 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
said committee is hereby authorized to administer oaths, and all the
provisions of article eight of chapter two, title one, part three of the
Political Code of the State relative to the attendance and assemblage of
witnesses before the Legislature and committees thereof, shall apply to
the committee appointed under this resolution. The said committee
hereby given leave to sit during the sessions of the Legislature, during
the recess thereof and during the interval between sessions thereof,
at any place in the state as said committee shall from time to time
determine ; and be it further
Resolved, That the sum of fifteen thousand dollars or so much thereof
as may be necessary be and the same is hereby appropriated for the
purpose of defraying the expenses of said committee and said investiga-
tion, said sum to be paid equally from the contingent funds of the
Senate and of the Assembly and the state controller is hereby author-
ized and directed to draw his warrants in favor of the person entitled
thereto for such expenditures as may be certified to him from time to
time by the chairman of said committee and the state treasurer is
hereby authorized and directed to pay the same.
CHAPTER 561, STATUTES OF 1929
An act providing for a water resources commission, defining its duties,
and making an appropriation therefor.
[Approved by the Governor, May 29, 1929.]
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Section 1. The governor is hereby authorized and empowered to
appoint a water resources commission of not less than five nor more
than seven members each of whom shall be conversant with the water
problems of the state. It shall be the duty of the commission to cooper-
ate and confer with any board, commission or other agency of the gov-
ernment of the United States, which may be designated by the Presi-
dent of the United States, or by law, to have charge of activities of the
United States government in respect to water conservation, flood con-
trol or navigation.
It shall be the further duty of the commission to confer and cooperate
with such legislative water committee if any, as may be provided for
by the forty-eighth session of the Legislature of the State of Cali-
fornia. The commission is hereby authorized and empowered to call
upon any department of the government of the State of California,
and particularly the department of public works, for such assistance,
cooperation, information, and service as may be legal and appropriately
rendered by such department.
Sec. 2. The commission shall report to the governor from time to
time and shall file a final report with him not later than December 1,
1930, and a certified copy of the same with the next session of the
Legislature.
Sec. 3. The commissioners shall serve without compensation and are
hereby authorized and empowered to employ a secretary, to fix the
compensation of the secretary, to prescribe his duties and powers. The
secretary shall serve at the pleasure of the commission.
STATE WATER PLAN 199
The commissioners shall receive their actual and necessary expenses
incurred in the performance of their duties and shall serve at the
pleasure of the governor.
Sec. 4. There is hereby appropriated out of any money in the state
treasury not otherwise appropriated the sum of twenty-five thousand
dollars to pay the expenses of the commission authorized by this act.
The chairman of the commission is empowered to prepare and sign
claims for the pa3 T ment of such expenses, which claims shall be audited
by law and paid upon warrants drawn by the controller, ;is provided
by law.
Sec. 5. Nothing in this act contained shall be deemed to authorize
the commission herein provided for performing any of the duties or
doing any of the things referred to in the act entitled "An act creating
the Colorado river commission of California, prescribing its powers,
fixing compensation and appropriating funds for its use," approved
May 17, 1927.
CHAPTER 656, STATUTES OF 1929
An act providing money for the study of the flood problems of the
Santa Ana river system, the preparation of plans and specifications
in connection therewith, providing for study of rainfall penetration
in connection therewith, and establishment and maintenance of
gauging stations, providing for the cooperation by interested
counties and districts, and directing the division of engineering and
irrigation, department of public ivorks, to provide for the carrying
on of said work under its own direction or under the direction of the
department of agriculture of the United States, and relating thereto.
[I object to the item of twenty-five thousand dollars in section 1 and reduce the
amount to fifteen thousand dollars. With this reduction I approve the bill. Dated :
June 3, 1929. C. C. Young, Governor.']
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Section 1. The sum of twenty-five thousand dollars or so much
thereof as may be necessary is hereby appropriated out of any money
in the state treasury not otherwise appropriated, which said sum shall
be expended in and for study of the flood problems of the Santa Ana
river system and the study of rainfall penetration in connection there-
with, and for the establishment and maintenance of gauging stations
upon said river system, said work to be done under the direction of the
division of engineering and irrigation, department of public works,
and in conjunction with the department of agriculture of the United
States of America; provided, however, that such sum shall become
available and be disbursed from time to time in such amounts not
exceeding said sum of twenty-five thousand dollars, as shall be matched
or made available by any political subdivision or subdivisions within the
State of California, or by the federal government, or by any other
interested party, district or agency.
200
DIVISION OF WATER KKSOURCES
CHAPTER 832, STATUTES OF 1929
An act nulling an appropriation for work of exploration, investigai
anil preliminary plans in furtherance of a coordinated plan for the
const real ion. development, and utilization of the water resources of
California including the Santa Ana river, Mo jave river and all water
resources of south < m < California.
[I object to the item of $450, 000.00 in section 1 and reduce the amount to $390,-
000.00. With this reduction I approve the bill. Dated June 17, 1929. C. C. Young,
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Section 1. Out of any money in the state treasury not otherwise
appropriated, the sum of four hundred fifty thousand dollars, or so
much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated to be
expended by the state department of public works in accordance with
law in conducting work of exploration, investigation and preliminary
plans in furtherance of a coordinated plan for the conservation,
development and utilization of the water resources of California includ-
ing the Santa Ana river and its tributaries, the Mojave river and its
tributaries, and all other water resources of southern California.
Sec. 2. The department of public works, subject to the other pro-
visions of this act, is empowered to expend any portion of the appro-
priation herein provided for the purposes of this act, in cooperation
with the government of the United Slates of America or in cooperation
with political subdivisions of the State of California ; and for the pur-
pose of such cooperation is hereby authorized to draw its claim upon
said appropriation in favor of the United States of America or the
appropriate agenc}' thereof for the payment of the cost of such portion
of said cooperative work as may be determined by the department of
public works.
Sec. 3. Upon the sale of any bonds of this state hereafter author-
ized to be issued to be expended for any one or more of the purposes
for which any part of the appropriation herein provided may have
been expended, the amount so expended from the appropriation herein
provided shall be returned into the general fund of the state treasury
out of the proceeds first derived from the sale of said bonds.
1
PUBLICATIONS
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
202
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
PUBLICATIONS OF THE
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
When the Department of Public Works was created In July, 1921. the State Water Commission was succeeded
by the Division of Water Rights, and the Department of Engineering was succeeded by the Division of Engineer-
ing and Irrigation in all duties except those pertaining to State Architect. Both the Division of Water Rights
and the Division of Engineering and Irrigation functioned until August, 1929, when they were consolidated to
form the Division of Water Resources.
STATE WATER COMMISSION
First Report, State Water Commission, March 24 to November 1, 1912.
Second Report. State Water Commission, November 1, 1912. to April 1, 1914.
"Biennial Report, State Water Commission, March 1, 1915, to December 1, 1916.
Biennial Report, State Water Commission, December 1, 1916, to September 1, 1918.
Biennial Report, State Water Commission, September 1, 1918, to September 1, 1920.
DIVISION OF WATER RIGHTS
♦Bulletin No. 1 — Hydrographic Investigation of San Joaquin River, 1920-1923.
"Bulletin No. 2 — Kings River Investigation, Water Master's Reports, 1918-1923.
♦Bulletin No. 3 — Proceedings First Sacramento-San Joaquin River Problems Con-
ference. 1924.
♦Bulletin No. 4 — Proceedings Second Sacramento-San Joaquin River Problems Con-
ference, and Water Supervisor's Report, 1924.
Bulletin No. 5 — San Gabriel Investigation — Basic Data, 1923-1926.
Bulletin No. 6 — San Gabriel Investigation— Basic Data, 1926-1928.
Bulletin No. 7 — San Gabriel Investigation — Analysis and Conclusions, 1929.
'Biennial Report, Division of Water Rights, 1920-1922.
"Biennial Report, Division of Water Rights, 1922-1924.
Biennial Report, Division of Water Rights, 1924-1926.
Biennial Report, Division of Water Rights, 1926-1928.
♦Bulletin No. 4
♦Bulletin No. 5—
DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING
♦Bulletin No. 1 — Cooperative Irrigation Investigations in California, 1912-1914.
♦Bulletin No. 2— Irrigation Districts in California. 18S7-1915.
Bulletin No. 3 — Investigations of Economic Duty of Water for Alfalfa in Sacra-
mento Valley, California, 1915.
Preliminary Report on Conservation and Control of Flood Waters
in Coachella Valley, California, 1917.
Report on the Utilization of Mojave River for Irrigation in Victor
Valley. California. 1918.
♦Bulletin No. 6 — California Irrigation District Laws, 1919 (now obsolete).
Bulletin No. 7 — Use of water from Kings River, California, 1918.
♦Bulletin No. 8— Flood Problems of the Calaveras River. 1919.
Bulletin No. 9 — Water Resources of Kern River and Adjacent Streams and Their
Utilization, 1920.
♦Biennial Report, Department of Engineering, 1907-1908.
♦Biennial Report, Department of Engineering, 1908-1910.
♦Biennial Report, Department of Engineering, 1910-1912.
♦Biennial Report, Department of Engineering, 1912-1914.
♦Biennial Report, Department of Engineering, 1914-1916.
♦Biennial Report, Department of Engineering, 1916-1918.
♦Biennial Report, Department of Engineering, 1918-1920.
•Reports and Bulletins out of print.
Library at Sacramento, California.
These may be borrowed by your local library from the California Stat*
STATE WATER PLAN
203
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
Including Reports of the Former Division of Engineering and Irrigation
•Bulletin
♦Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
♦Bulletin
♦Bulletin
Bulletin
♦Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
No. 1 — California Irrigation District Laws, 1921 (now obsolete).
No. 2 — Formation of Irrigation Districts. Issuance of Bonds, etc., 1922.
No. 3 — Water Resources of Tulare County and Their Utilization, 1922.
No. 4 — Water Resources of California, 1923.
No. 5 — Plow in California Streams, 1923.
No. 6 — Irrigation Requirements of California Lands, 1923.
No. 7 — California Irrigation District Laws, 1923 (now obsolete).
No. 8 — Cost of Water to Irrigators in California. 1925.
No. 9 — Supplemental Report on Water Resources of California, 1925.
No. 10 — California Irrigation District Laws, 1925 (now obsolete).
No. 11 — Ground Water Resources of Southern San Joaquin Valley, 1927.
No. 12 — Summary Report on the Water Resources of California and a Coor-
dinated Plan for Their Development. 1927.
13 — The Development of the Upper Sacramento River, containing U. S.
R. S. Cooperative Report on Iron Canyon Project, 1927.
No. 14 — The Control of Floods by Reservoirs, 1928.
No. 18 — California Irrigation District Laws, 1927 (now obsolete).
No. 18 — California Irrigation District Laws, 1929 Revision.
No. 19 — Santa Ana Investigation, Flood Control and Conservation (with
packet of maps), 1928.
20 — Kennett Reservoir Development, an Analysis of Methods and
Extent of Financing by Electric Power Revenue. 1929.
No. 21 — Irrigation Districts in California, 1929.
No. 21-A — Report on Irrigation Districts in California for the Year 1929,
1930.
No. 22 — Report on Salt Water Barrier (two volumes), 1929.
No. 23 — Report of Sacramento-San Joaquin Water Supervisor, 1924—1928.
No. 24 — A Proposed Major Development on American River, 1929.
No. 25 — Report to Legislature of 1931 on State Water Plan, 1930.
No. 28-A — Industrial Survey of Upper San Francisco Bay Area. 1930.
No. 31 — Santa Ana River Basin, 1930.
No. 32 — South Coastal Basin, a Cooperative Symposium, 1930.
No. 34 — Permissible Annual Charges for Irrigation Water in Upper San
Joaquin Valley, 1930.
35 — Permissible Economic Rate of Irrigation Development in California,
1930.
No. 36 — Cost of Irrigation Water in California. 1930.
Report, Division of Engineering and Irrigation, 1920-1922.
Report, Division of Engineering and Irrigation, 1922—1924.
Report, Division of Engineering and Irrigation, 1924—1926.
COOPERATIVE AND MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS
♦Report of the Conservation Commission of California, 1912.
♦Irrigation Resources of California and Their Utilization (Bui. 254. Office of Exp.
IT. S. D. A.) 1913.
•Report, State Water Problems Conference, November 25, 1916.
♦Report on Pit River Basin. April. 1915.
♦Report on Lower Pit River Project, July, 1915.
♦Report on Iron Canyon Project, 1914.
♦Report on Iron Canyon Project, California, May, 1920.
•Sacramento Flood Control Project (Revised Plans), 1925'.
Report of Commission Appointed to Investigate Causes Leading to the Failure of
St. Francis Dam, 1928.
Report of the Joint Committee of the Senate and Assembly Dealing With the Water
Problems of the State, 1929.
Report of the California Joint Federal-State Water Resources Commission, 1930.
Conclusions and Recommendations of the Report of the California Irrigation and
Reclamation Financing and Refinancing Commission, 1930.
Report of the Joint Committee of the Senate and Assembly Dealing with the Water
Problems of the State. 1931.
Bulletin No
Bulletin
♦Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin No
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin
Bulletin No.
Bulletin
Biennial
Biennial
Biennial
•Reports and Bulletins out of print.
Library at Sacramento, California.
These may be borrowed by your local library from the California State
204 DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
PAMPHLETS
Rules and Regulations Governing the Supervision of Dams In California, 1929.
Water Commission Act with Latest Amendments Thereto. 1929.
Rules and Regulations Governing the Appropriation of Water in California, 1930.
Rules and Regulations Governing the Determination of Rights to Use of Water in
Accordance with the Water Commission Act, 1925.
Tablea of Discharge for Parshall Measuring Flumes, 1928.
General Plans, Specifications and Bills of Material for Six and Nine Inch Parshall
Measuring Flumes. 1930.
80993 6-31 7.500
t>
JUN 1 A 1985
THIS BOOK 18 DUE ON THE LAST DATE
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE
STAMPED BELOW
BOOKS REQUESTED BY ANOTHER BORROWER
ARE SUBJECT TO IMMEDIATE RECALL
jf"(|%fj
nov i b m?
PSL
LIBRARY, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, DAVIS
D4613-1 (5/02)M
CaJi-f.
111593
TCSZ4-
C2.
3 1175 00473 8517
n
at
jglgf
■
■ tii
Hi
WmUBBH
mm mm H
■til
fMm
IBH
TVNews
OpenLibrary