in winter but the time has arrived when sites, although not economically feasible at an earlier period, can be reconsidered for the reason that the demand for, and value of water has increased, and the cost of storage may now in some cases be in part charged to power development and flood control. The reservoirs being constructed by Los Angeles County for the purpose of flood control are not expected to be great aids to irrigation because when filled they must be emptied to catch the next floods so they can not well be used to hold water for the irrigation season. This need not be the case with other reservoirs constructed primarily for irrigation and power and with flood control as a secondary purpose. It has become necessary for this department to give some attention to drainage conditions in southern California. Inquiries received indicate that some erroneous ideas prevail as to the causes of the excess moisture in some of the lands that have been drained or that need drainage in the coastal region. It has been taken for granted that the moisture is the result of irrigation. Practically no land and none of that which has been drained has been damaged by irrigation. The lands, moist originally, have been dried up and made suitable for profitable tillage by pumping down the water levels for irrigation. This general result, differing from that commonly found in the irrigated valleys of the west, would probably not occur were it not that so much of the water used in irrigation is pumped from the underground and applied to crops under a high duty. Fears are expressed that drainage may become necessary in San Fernando Valley as a result of the irrigation under the Los Angeles aqueduct. This valley is closed to both surface and underground water except for its one main narrow outlet through which flows Los Angeles River. Nearly all of the 100,000 acres of the basin are now irrigated and owing to restrictions put on pumping by the city of Los Angeles under authority of a legally sustained Pueblo water right the underground water may not be held down as it has been in other valleys. In such case water logging might be avoided by allowing more pumping as well as by draining the wet surface stratum. The chief moist areas are of 10,000 to 40,000 acres in extent and they are located near the coast in Ventura, Los Angeles and Orange counties. Smaller moist areas generally not exceeding 6,000 acres are found in the lower portions of San Bernardino, San Gabriel and San Jacinto valleys and on Chino Creek and on Santa Ana River near Arlington and Corona. In nearly all of these areas numerous flowing wells have been obtained. Considerable portions of all the larger areas have been drained by underground tile and open ditch systems installed by drainage districts and private parties. Coachella and Antelope valleys both situated on the inland side of the coast range contain moist and flowing well areas in their lower levels and in both, the effect of pumping for irrigation on the higher levels has had, as in the coast valleys, the effect of contracting instead of expanding the areas of moist land. Drainage may become necessary in portions of all of the large Colorado River valleys. The Imperial Irrigation District is now proceeding with the preliminary work for the drainage of portions of its territory under a bond issue of $2,500,000 for the purpose. The plans now being formulated for further work from Los Angeles headquarters include the enlargement of the investigation on the cost of irrigation water to embrace all of the representative water companies and irrigation districts in the state. This course has been deemed advisable in response to an indicated wide demand for information on the subject. Cooperative Investigation with the United States Reclamation Service and KlamathShasta Valley Irrigation District. The Shasta Valley, which is located in the extreme northern part of California, pours its drainage into the Klamath River about midway along the river's course to the Pacific Ocean. This valley, situated at an elevation of about 2000 feet above sea level, is the largest body of agricultural land in the extreme northern part of the state. It contains 164,000 acres of agricultural land well fitted for dairying purposes and raising stock feed to supplement the grazing lands of the surrounding mountains. The rainfall in this valley is about 12 inches per annum and falls almost entirely in the winter season, so that without irrigation stock feed can be raised only in the spring months. The Klamath Shasta Valley Irrigation District was organized under the Wright Act in 1921 and includes 125,000 acres of this valley. It does not include land already under irrigation, approximately 43,000 acres. The 1921 legislature appropriated $20,000 of state money to be used with a sum double this amount to be furnished by the Irrigation District and $5,000 from the United States Reclamation Service, for an engineering investigation of the project. Accordingly, a contract was executed in October, 1921, between the three parties for the advancement of the investigations as provided by the legislative enactment. The first work undertaken was the mapping of the irrigable area on a scale of 2,000 feet to the inch, with 5 foot contour intervals. This work was completed by the topographers of the U. S. Geological Survey in September, 1922. A survey of the main canal diversion from the Klamath River, the source of the water supply, by the engineers of the U. S. Reclamation Service, has also been completed. The proposed main canal heads at Keno on the Klamath River and is 62 miles in length to the Little Shasta River. A study of the irrigable area for design of distribution and drainage. system is now in progress and should be completed at an early date. Reclamation Service engineers are also making a determination of the available unappropriated water and the best plan of development to secure the greatest use of this water on the lands of the Klamath Shasta Irrigation District. The cost of this work to September 1, 1922, has been approximately $28,000 for topographic service, $6,600 for canal survey, and $2,600 for engineering investigations, making a total of $33,000. Applications to use the waters of the Klamath River for developing power in California have been made to the Division of Water Rights by the Electro-Metals Company and H. L. Jackman, of San Francisco. These applications propose to develop 375,000 theoretical horsepower, requiring a maximum of 9000 second feet, a distance of 100 to 125 miles downstream from the confluence of the Shasta River with the Klamath. Should these applications be granted with priority over the applications of the Klamath Shasta Valley, the waters of the Klamath River would flow by the Shasta Valley to be used in power development of these applicants, and it would be illegal to divert them for the irrigation of the Shasta Valley. The State Engineer or Chief of Division, under provisions of section 2a of the Wright Irrigation District Act, has requested that no action. be taken on the applications of the Electro-Metals Company until a report on the feasibility of the Klamath-Shasta Project is completed. Section 2a places this power in the hands of the State Engineer to request deferred action on applications before the Division of Water Rights whenever such applications appear to interfere with future development of irrigation, such deference of action for the period of investigation by the State Engineer's office. FUNCTIONS OF THE DIVISION OF ENGINEERING AND IRRIGATION. The Division of Engineering and Irrigation is directed by law, through its executive officer, the Chief of Division and State Engineer, to perform many functions relative to the organization and construction of works by irrigation, reclamation and water storage districts, and in the development of the water resources of the state. Specifically, the principal functions are: 1. To investigate and report on feasibility of proposed irrigation districts. 2. To investigate and report on proposed bond issues by irrigation. districts before the California Bond Certification Commission for approval. 3. To supervise expenditure of funds from approved bond issues and to inspect generally the construction work of irrigation districts. 4. To collect data, make surveys and perfect plans for reclamation of Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers in conjunction with work of State Reclamation Board and to advise and assist the Board. 5. To investigate feasibility of water storage districts, the fixing of their boundaries and passing on their organization. 6. To pass on plans and specifications for construction of dams by other than municipalities or public utilities and inspect their construction. 7. To pass on plans for bridges across navigable streams. 8. To plan and construct works for rectification of river cnannels and protection of property from flood damage on the rivers of the state. 9. To direct cooperative stream-gaging, topographic surveying and irrigation investigations in cooperation with the Federal Government. 10. To direct cooperative work with the Federal Government in restraining debris on the Yuba River. Along with these many permanent statutory duties which continue through succeeding years, the State Engineer is enjoined by legislative enactments to make special engineering investigations concerning the water resources of the state and to serve on special state commissions. EXPENDITURES FOR BIENNIAL PERIOD 1920-1922. Expenditures by Division of Engineering and Irrigation, July 29, 1921 to June 30, 1922, Expenditures by Department of Engineering, Bureau of Engineering and Irrigation, |