My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP08613
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
WSP08613
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:48:56 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:07:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8040.950
Description
Section D General Studies - General Water Studies
Basin
Statewide
Date
1/1/1989
Author
John U. Carlson
Title
The Colorado River Compact - A Breeding Ground for International National and Interstate Controversies
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />v. California scrupulously avoided a decision with <br /> <br />respect to Upper-Lower Basin issues, it did imply in <br /> <br /> <br />dictum that tributaries of the Colorado River were <br /> <br />comprehended by the 1922 Compact's apportionment scheme. <br />The Court states: <br /> <br />Arizona, because of her particularly strong <br />interest in the Gila, intensely resented the <br />Compact's inclusion of the colorado River <br />tributaries in its allocation scheme and was <br />bitterly hostile to having Arizona tributaries, <br />again particularly the Gila, forced to con- <br />tribute to the Mexican burden. <br /> <br />.. . <br /> <br />Inclusion of the tributaries in the Compact was <br />natural in view of the upper states' strong <br />feeling that the Lower Basin tributaries should <br />be made to share the burden of any obligation <br />to deliver water to Mexico which a future <br />treaty might impose. <br /> <br />Arizona v. california, 373 U.S. at 558, 568. <br /> <br />This <br /> <br />language indicates that the Supreme Court was aware of <br /> <br />the equities and concerns of the Upper Basin. Nonethe- <br /> <br /> <br />less, it must be remembered that this language is dictum <br /> <br /> <br />and does not dispose of the technical argument discussed <br /> <br />above. <br /> <br />a. 1922 Compact Language and Negotiations <br />The most persuasive proof that tributaries <br /> <br />are included under Article III (c) lies in the language <br /> <br /> <br />of the 1922 Compact itself which includes tributaries <br /> <br /> <br />within the definition of the waters apportioned. Article <br /> <br />-20- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.