(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Report to the legislature of 1931 on state water plan, 1930"

■:.•■■■■.•...■.■■ 



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 under the Colorado River Compact to 4,400,000 acre-feet per 
annum consumptive use, plus one-half of any excess of surplus waters 
unapportioned by the compact. California's share includes the water 
necessary for present rights, as w T ell as one-half of any deficiency which 
must be supplied to Mexico from the lower basin, if it shall become 
necessary to supply water to Mexico from waters over and above the 
surplus quantities as defined by said compact. 

Precipitation. 

Records of the precipitation in the state have been kept by the 
United States Weather Bureau and its predecessor, the Army Signal 
Corps, for many years. Starting with records at Sacramento and San 
Francisco in 1849 and at San Diego in 1850, the number of stations 
has gradually increased until there are at present a total of 335. The 
records at Sacramento, San Francisco and San Diego have been kept 
continuously since the date of the establishment of the stations. A 
number of stations have continuous records extending back to the late 
sixties or early seventies. Some of the older stations, however, have 
been discontinued. The preciptation stations that have been main- 
tained by the United States Weather Bureau are shown on Plate I. 
"Geographical Distribution of Precipitation in California." The solid 
red dots indicate stations at which records are now being taken, and 
red open circles those stations which have been discontinued. The 

• Bulletin No. 5, "Flow in California Streams," Division of Engineering and 
Irrigation, 1923. 



1 



fr 





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 
season — 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 under the Colorado River Compact to 4,400,000 acre-feet per 
annum consumptive use, plus one-half of any excess of surplus waters 
unapportioned by the compact. California's share includes the water 
necessary for present rights, as well as one-half of any deficiency which 
must be supplied to Mexico from the lower basin, if it shall become 
necessary to supply water to Mexico from waters over and above the 
surplus quantities as defined by said compact. 

Precipitation. 

Records of the precipitation in the state have been kept by the 
United States Weather Bureau and its predecessor, the Army Signal 
Corps, for many years. Starting with records at Sacramento and San 
Francisco in 1849 and at San Diego in 1850, the number of stations 
has gradually increased until there are at present a total of 335. The 
records at Sacramento, San Francisco and San Diego have been kept 
continuously since the date of the establishment of the stations. A 
number of stations have continuous records extending back to the late 
sixties or early seventies. Some of the older stations, however, have 
been discontinued. The preciptation stations that have been main- 
tained by the United States Weather Bureau are shown on Plate I. 
"Geographical Distribution of Precipitation in California." The solid 
red dots indicate stations at which records are now being taken, and 
red open circles those stations which have been discontinued. The 

• Bulletin No. 5, "Flow In California Streams," Division of Engineering and 
Irrigation, 1923. 




Precipitation Stations 

• Active 

O Discontinued 



/ 

.***■ ! ill! 



LEGEND 

Mean annual precipitation 
f I Less than 10 inches tTTTH 50 to 60 inches 
EUD 10 to 20 inches f==j 60 to 70 inches 

20 to 30 inches V/A 70 to 60 inches 

m 30 to 40 inches igS 80 to 90 inches 

ES3 40 to 50 inches S3 90 to 100 inches 

■I More than 100 inches 








v 



/ 











GEOGRAPHICAL 

DISTRIBUTION OF PRECIPITATION 

IN 

CALIFORNIA 



A 



K^ 
•n^ 






:^S^%\ 1 



-7" 






m / 

i 



/ 
/ 



v> v 






^> 







i 

froi 

r 

\ 









P, 



STATE WATER PLAN 



59 



geographical distribution of precipitation throughout the state is shown 
by the data compiled in Table 1, and also by the zones of variations 
on Plate I. 



table 1 A 

GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF PRECIPITATION 

Values taken from Plate I 





Basin 


Range of mean seasonal 
precipitation in inches 




Maximum 


Minimum 




109 
90 
55 
50 
55 
48 
55 


12 




12 




5 




15 




10 




10 




2 







Precipitation varies from a mean seasonal total of over 100 inches 
in the northwest corner of the state to almost zero in the southeast 
desert region. In the Sacramento Valley it ranges from about fifteen 
to twenty-five inches per season; in the San Joaquin Valley from five 
to fifteen inches; on the coastal plain of southern California from 
ten to twenty-five inches ; and in the coastal valleys south of San 
Francisco Bay, from about ten to twenty inches. This indicates that 
the mean seasonal rainfall in the valley areas, where the largest por- 
tions of the state's crops are grown, is in most sections insufficient to 
bring the majority of crops to maturity even if it were properly 
distributed. 

There is not only a very unequal distribution of precipitation 
throughout the state, but also a large variation in its amount from 
season to season. To illustrate the variation in total seasonal precipi- 
tation in different parts of the state, data for nine representative 
stations are shown in Table 2. 

These data show that the maximum seasonal precipitation varies 
from 184 to 266 per cent, and the minimum from 12 to 52 per cent of 
the mean seasonal. Data also show that there are wet and dry periods 
of several years' duration. The seasonal precipitation is not always 
above normal in the wet periods, nor always below in the dry ones, 
but the average for the entire period is either above or below normal. 
The period of the last ten or twelve years has been a period of low 
average precipitation and the season of 1923-24 was one of the driest 
of record. 

Practically all the precipitation occurs during the winter months. 
A few showers may occur during the summer, but they are usually of 
insufficient volume to produce substantial run-off. The winter rains 
begin as early as September in some years and may continue into May. 
However, the greater portion of the precipitation occurs in the period 
from November to April. Furthermore, the precipitation is not dis- 
tributed uniformly throughout these months, but occurs in storms, 



60 



DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 









f 


1 ^ 


> 00 


1 u 


; c 


s r 


2 2 


I 3 




s 


1 


C 


s ■« 


r ao e 


4 e 


• 


> c 


ft a 


3 C< 




■a 
B 
a 


^ 


r 


J -" c 


i 














SH 




















c 












































a 












































1 




f 


«- 


■H C 


i 3 


J a 


n u 


r a 


> O 




I 

6 


■ 


5 C 


1 t- ^ 


s u 


» ^ 


i 


CO 




'a 


C 


j - 


« ■«■ r- 


- ^ 


!• 1/ 


> c 


3 C 


3 O 


</J 


1 

fa 


c 


4 *• 














z 


M 


~. 





















1 




















^H 






















< 
H 




a 


c 


> e> 


■ w r- 


w 


> 01 


> t" 


- ■« 


» » 


2 




• e> 


1 co o 


1 ^ 


r - 


• o 


a c* 


3 


3 

a 

9 


*< 
1 




> to a 

> CO ^ 


a a 

^ f 


> 01 


5 U 


i ^ 


) U3 




o 


1 


















5 


H 


S 


















< 






















tu 
























§ 
























CO 
























a 
























1 


•a 


c 


> 








c 
c- 


> c 


> o 

J CO 


o 

S2 


c 


i 








; a 


> a 


> en 


H 




• c 


> d c 


> c 


> c 


> " 




« ~* 


< 




c 


> CO c 


i c 


> c 








fa 


a 


1 o 


> oS a 


> a 


> a 


1 « 


i c 


> 0J 


U 




1 










c 


: c 


: c 


£ 


o 














i : 


) 3 






•— 


i a 


a> « 


> a 


» a 


> •• 


» *- 


> "-» 


GQ 

H 


1 


i 


1 I 


B c 
> 3 : 


: c 

) : 


: c 
s z 


i i 


! i 


i 5 


'C 
H 


a 
a 


<- 

j c 

> * 


1 5 £ 


> •- 


> *• 

i i 


' c 

3 
> a 


) a 

> o 
a 


1 g 


< 








' r* 


OS O 


i w 


• t- 






« ^ 








r- 


f •«* 


• a 


> »> 








H 






i 




OO 01 


> a 


OI 


> > 


f £ 


f & 


w 






j 










r 


c 


d 


Q 






t 


2 


■. ^ p 


1 i< 


;. i 


:• c 


) : 
: c 


3 

: a 









: 


3 "= 


": 


> "= 


I r 


! 


1 09 


U 






i-i 


> >- 


i —a *• 


> >- 


> l-l 


> h 


> *■ 


> ■-» 


H 










































HN 






e* 


1 e- 


oi ir 


> r- 


ot 


) r- 


Cs 


s 


z 


C 




<c 


) c 


to u- 


> o 


c 


> a 


1 2 


w 

<s Z 


.2 «u 
W 


> « 

— <H 

00 




c 


•" 


• c 


> Tl 


< 


> 1-" 

• 


W Z 






















-j r 
























03 H 
























3 < 
























H z 









































































H 
























< 
























H 


























z 






















- 


s 




-t- 








4j 


-^ 










PC 




I 

c 


8 

> 


•i 5 


'1 


C 


i 
c 








B 






c 


« 


OS g 


g 


c 








E 






<c 


5 

c 


o .2 


.£ 


<c 


tc 


c 


c 


j 






E 

I 




\ 

c 


. 'S 




1 


J 


< 






P. 


I 


a > 


g 


0. 


a 


cc 


S3 


z 


c/3 






-•- 

c 

c 
Z 


s 

a: 


u c 

bo a 


C 
c 
a: 


1 


E 
c 


1 

C 


s 

E 

a 


< 












































w 
























J 
























< 
























H 

















































H 
























Z 
























M 
























z 


c 
E 















































H 


■ 






















< 


E 






















M 


'■£ 






















3 

> 


5 

'5. 

La 
















i 

=1 






t£ 








3 1 








"5 

> 


> 

1 
1 

a 








1 


1 

cc 


a S 


o 

a 


1 

< 


c 
% 

a 


o 










c 

3 

w 


1 


1 1 


1 


J 


eg 


a 
1 OS 


E 
03 





STATE WATER PLAN 61 

some of which are of sufficient length and magnitude to produce floods 
of major proportions. The monthly distribution of precipitation at 
nine representative Weather Bureau stations is shown in Table 3. The 
data on which this table is based are the precipitation records for the 
period of measurement. 

During a previous investigation,* a careful study and analysis were 
made of the precipitation records for the entire state. Inquiry was 
made into the geographical distribution, magnitude and variation in 
occurrence, both seasonal and periodic, of precipitation in all seetions 
of the state. An important part of the study was the relation of the 
precipitation in any one year to the normal or mean precipitation. 
From the results of the study, the state was divided into 26 precipita- 
tion groups or divisions having similar precipitation characteristics. 
The precipitation in a particular year at a station was expressed by a 
number representing the precipitation in per cent of normal and 
defined as the "index of seasonal wetness." Indices for each division 
were calculated from precipitation records at stations within the 
division. For stations with missing records, indices were estimated 
from records at other stations within the same or adjacent divisions. 
The index for each season in a particular division was taken as the 
arithmetical mean of the seasonal indices of wetness of the several 
stations in that division. Indices were calculated for the 26 precipta- 
tion divisions for the period 1871 to 1921. In the present investiga- 
tion, they have been extended through the season of 1928-29. In mak- 
ing the extensions, the mean seasonal precipitation for each station 
was assumed as that for the fifty-year period 1871-1921, used in the 
previous study. The indices of seasonal wetness for the period 1871- 
1929 are given by divisions in Table 4. These indices are useful not 
only in showing the wide variation in precipitation by seasons, during 
the fifty-eight year period, but also in estimating run-off from unmeas- 
ured streams and measured streams with missing records, by develop- 
ing a relation between seasonal run-off and seasonal index of wetness. 

Run-off. 

That portion of the seasonal precipitation which flows from the 
mountain and foothill drainage areas through natural channels, is 
defined as run-off. No account has been taken of the possible contribu- 
tion to surface run-off from rainfall on the valley floor. Studies are 
in progress to determine the extent of such contribution. In some 
localities, this, together with ground water replenishment from rainfall 
on the valley floor, may constitute a considerable portion of the avail- 
able water supply. However, in this report, because of the lack of 
definite information on the subject, this source has been disregarded 
in the estimates, except in the coastal basin of southern California. 
The run-off from the mountain and foothill areas only has been included 
for the remaining basins. 

Although the first gaging stations were established on some of the 
major streams in 1878 under the direction of the State Engineer, these 
were abandoned in 1884. Consequently the longest continuous records 
of stream flow are those begun on a few major streams by the United 
States Geological Survey in 1894 and 1895. With the cooperation of 

* Bulletin No. 5, "Flow in California Streams," Division of Engineering and Irri- 
gation, 1923. 



62 



- 

< 



in 

Z 

o 

< 
H 
(/) 

< 

a 

D 

a 
a 

< 

* 

C/3 

U 
H 
< 
H 
c/> 

Q 
u 
H 

t-M 

z 

D 

w 
z 



DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 



Z 5 

< 5 



z 

o 

< 



5 c 

OS eg 

j -a 

^ s 

z 

;?; i* 
<< ra 
U ® 

z 

fa 

o 

Z 

o 



OS 
H 
(/> 

Q 

>* 

i 

Z 

o 

2 



| 

M 

C 

o 



a 
8 

E 

a 
>> 

J3 



ill 

£ a » 



^. 



eoneoToenaicoioxv 



§ 






§ 



ooofwciagnoxKO 



C 



s 



OOflOOfNiONCft^-H 



o 
.2 

V 

c 

s 

fc. 

c 
a 



2 

C 

E 









1 



OOrt«-NS!«5eCX^F- 



3 



OOMiOMiCNCnoO^fPJ 



c 
o 









1 

o 



> 






62 



DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 



< 



Z 

o 

< 
H 
to 

< 



OQ 

% 
H 

I 
H 
< 

C/) 
W 

H 

< 
H 
c/3 

Q S 
Z 3 

5 

w 
z 

z 

H 



z 

o 

H 
< 



CO 


o 


E 


a 


c 


o. 





§ 


CO 


Q. 


s 


>» 




-a 






V 


s 






a 


a 



— o. 

° h 
w vS 

Ci co 
^ to 

-3 "° 

z ° 

O "° 
)s! « 

03 « 

««• co 

U CQ 
CO 

z 

I 

o 

z 

o 

H 

b 

i 
s 

p 

c/3 



1 



3 



•3 

B 
O 



a 






BO -r i - CO i 



000^000)90}>0(OrCO 



OONUJO'J'NiONai^H 



s 



JWCOCDWi 



3 

s 



OOccio-Naiontcv- 



K 



00«iO«iCNCrtX^fM 



- L4J5 >.£ ! 
J 3 .So BS 1 EE<? n 



b S 



3 

o 



L- 




FORESTED AREA 

STREAM GAGING STATIONS 

CALIFORNIA 



1'LATK 111 



^ 



^ 



lake i.i't ■■'■■ 



k 



< 



( I •( X .R 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