months' annual supply, this would be sufficient for the irrigation of 75,000 acres of land. In the San Fernando and Canada Valleys, and the country as far south and east as Eagle Rock, there are 106,440 acres of agricultural land. Between Ivanhoe and Santa Monica there are 40,550 acres, or a total of 146,990 acres, of which only 11,360 are now supplied with water, leaving 135,630 unprovided for. In the country between Pasadena, San Gabriel and the San Gabriel River, there are 43,200 acres additional. It will be seen, therefore, that in the country immediately adjacent and contiguous to the City of Los Angeles, there is an area twice as great as we can possibly hope to supply with water from the Los Angeles Aqueduct as planned, and this does not include the valuable lands south of the City. OWENS RIVER PROJECT. INCEPTION OF IDEA. The idea of bringing the water of the Owens River to the City of Los Angeles originated in 1893 with Mr. Fred Eaton. Mr. Eaton was for several years engineer and superintendent of the Los Angeles City Water Company. He was subsequently City Engineer, and in 1893 he was engaged in the ranch business in Owens Valley, where he resided for a number of months. Mr. Eaton did not publicly discuss this idea. His training as an engineer, both for the City and with the Water Company, together with his general knowledge of the water situation in and around the City of Los Angeles, particularly qualified him to judge of the necessities of the case, and the merits of this project. He was Mayor of the City during the years 1899-1900. In the Fall of 1904 and the early Spring of 1905, Mr. Eaton on his own responsibility and at his own expense, began obtaining contracts and options on water-bearing property in Owens Valley. With these contracts and options in hand, he first presented the matter to representatives of the City of Los Angeles late in the Fall of 1904, and early in the year 1905. The first idea that Mr. Eaton had concerning the handling of the proposition, contemplated a combined private and municipal project, the City to receive 10,000 miner's inches of water for domestic uses, and the surplus water to be available for Mr. Eaton and his associates for disposal outside the City; this surplus water to pay toll for the use of the aqueduct, and all water to be available in transit for the benefit of the corporation for purposes of generating power. The aqueduct was to be built and paid for by the City and have a capacity of at least 20,000 inches. Mr. Eaton was to secure all necessary lands and water rights, and to deliver the water rights without cost to the City. The Board of Water Commissioners, as well as other city officials, declined this, and insisted upon an exclusive municipal ownership and control. At this time, the U. S. Reclamation Service was investigating the Owens Valley Project, and had withdrawn all public lands there, including reservoir sites, and had filed on the water. Mr. Eaton's program was presented to the officials of the Reclamation Service, including Mr. F. H. Newell, chief engineer, and Mr. J. B. Lippincott, supervising engineer, for the first time in the Fall of 1904. Both these officers of the Reclamation Service took the stand that they could not aid the City of Los Angeles unless the project was exclusively a municipal one. The Board of Water Commissioners detailed the superintendent to make an investigation of the water supply in the Owens River Valley in September, 1904, at which time of the year the waters of the streams in that valley are usually at their lowest ebb. This was followed up by a careful reconnaissance of the route, to determine the practicability of the constructing of a canal to bring the water to the City of Los Angeles. About three months was spent on this reconnaissance work. The superintendent reported favorably on the adequacy of the water supply and the feasibility of constructing a canal to bring it to the City, and the Board of Water Commissioners then asked him to make a preliminary estimate of the probable cost of such an enterprise, with a view to getting data on which to base a bond issue for the purchase of the Eaton water rights. In April, 1905, Messrs. Fay and Elliott of the Water Board, accompanied by Mayor McAleer, City Attorney Mathews, and Messrs. Eaton and Mulholland, made a visit to the Owens River Valley for the purpose of further investigating the project, and of considering a proposal from Mr. Eaton to sell to the City certain options and contracts for the purchase of lands and water rights along the Owens River. After carefully considering all available information concerning sources of water supply, sufficient for the needs of the City, both in and outside of Southern California, the Board became thoroughly convinced that the Owens River afforded the only adequate supply that could be obtained by the City at a cost which it would be justified in incurring. Having reached this conclusion, the Board entered into a contract with Mr. Eaton for the acquisition of the property embraced in the proposal submitted by him, and devoted the available funds of the Water Department for that purpose. Appendix "B" gives the official minutes of these proceedings. In this transaction, the City acquired all lands controlled by Mr. Eaton in what is known as the Rickey ranch, lying south of the north line of Township 10 South, Range 34 E., M. D. M., embracing 22,670 acres, together with all water rights appurtenant thereto, including about 16 miles of frontage on the Owens River; also an easement permitting the use perpetually of 2684 acres in the Long Valley reservoir site for storage purposes, and in addition thereto, options held by Mr. Eaton on large tracts of land, with extensive frontage on the river below the Rickey property. The commercial organizations of the City were taken into the full confidence of the Water Commissioners, and each step in this affair was fully considered by them. The minutes of the Board of Water Commissioners were public documents open to inspection. The Chamber of Commerce appointed a special committee to investigate the plan of the Water Commissioners for an additional water supply, and the advisability of voting the $1,500,000 bond issue of September, 1905, for the purchase of water rights, making survey and starting construction. They reported as follows: Los Angeles, California, September 1, 1905. REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF CHAMBER OF Board of Directors, Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce. Gentlemen: Your committee appointed to investigate the plan proposed by the Board of Water Commissioners for bringing a supply of water from the Owens River Valley report as follows: By careful investigation we have endeavored to secure all the information possible in connection with the proposed plans. We have conferred with the City officials, the Water Board, and with disinterested engineers and contractors. We have examined maps and Government reports, and have joined with othe rcommercial bodies in sending a special committee consisting of Messrs. H. C. Witmer, M. Lissner, and Fred A. Hines to the Owens River Valley to make a personal investigation, especially with reference to the quality of the water, of which a number of analyses were made by different chemists. From this inquiry the conclusion of your committee may be thus summarized: First: It is imperatively necessary to secure a new water supply if the development of this City is to be continued. Second: The Owens River Valley is the only source that promises a permanent supply that will be sufficient. Third: There is an ample supply for our needs, and the quality of the water is satisfactory. Fourth: There are no difficult engineering problems presented in building the conduit needed. It is a large but simple proposition. Fifth: The estimates of cost of construction are very liberal, and the total outlay will probably come well within the estimate of $21,500,000 made by Mr. Mulholland, Engineer of the Water Department. Sixth: While there will undoubtedly be more or less litigation as in all enterprises of this character, we believe that the rights sought to be acquired by the City can be successfully maintained and defended. In connection with the above conclusions, we desire to express our satisfaction with the skill and marked ability displayed by those officials of the City who have had charge of its interests. A project of this kind conducted by a municipality usually fails, or becomes a matter of great expense by reason of premature knowledge of the plans. We believe that they were sufficiently informed on all material points involved in the enterprise to justify the action taken by them. They do not expect to expend any more money than is necessary to conserve the City's interest until they shall have secured the approval of the entire plans by disinterested experts of the highest character. We attach hereto a copy of letter received from the Water Board concerning same. We heartily approve the entire project and recommend that the bonds be voted. Respectfully submitted, (Signed) W. J. WASHBURN, (Signed) A. B. Cass, (Signed) WM. D. STEPHENS, (Signed) JACOB Baruch, Committee. Prior to the time that money was available from the sale of bonds for the Los Angeles Aqueduct, and before the appointment of the Board of Public Works funds were advanced by the Water Commissioners to the extent of $233,865.53. This advance was made on the advice of the City Attorney and after careful deliberation with the City officials and commercial organizations. After the voting of the bonds in September, 1905, these funds were returned to the Water Department. The action of the Board of Water Commissioners was |