My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09097
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09097
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:51:12 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:27:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8510.100.40
Description
Rio Grande Compact Commission
Basin
Rio Grande
Water Division
3
Date
1/1/1979
Title
San Luis Valley Water Problems: A Legal Perspective - Part I of II
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.
/
48
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 />;'i}"' ' <br /> <br />o <br />'lII:l" <br />ocT\ <br />.,..j <br />Q <br />o <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />the federal government remove its embargo on the rights-of-way over public <br />lands. But money to construct the reservoirs could not be raised because <br />of threatened litigation. <br />In 1929, a temporary compact was entered into among Colorado, New Mexico <br />and Texas which attempted to maintain the status quo upon the river until <br />a permanent compact could be negotiated. The temporary compact required <br />that gauging stations be maintained and operated upon the river to collect <br />information on stream flow. The initial compact was to last for five years <br />but it was subsequently extended for two more years. <br />Finally in 1938, Colorado, New Mexico and Texas signed the Rio Grande <br />River Compact.3 The specific terms of the Compact will be examined in <br />greater detail later in this report. <br /> <br />However the Compact did .not solve the water shortage problem in the <br />Rio Grande Basin and by 1965 Colorado was accused by Texas and New Mexico of <br /> <br />being more than 900,000 acre feet behind its delivery commitments under <br /> <br />the terms of the Rio Grande River Compact. The next year Texas and New <br />Mexico filed suit against Colorado in the United States Supreme Court. <br />The case was subsequently continued provided that Colorado annually meets <br />its delivery commitments pursuant to the terms of the Rio Grande River <br />Compact.4 Until the latter part of 1975, Colorado attempted annually to <br /> <br />regulate water use in the San Luis Valley by means of voluntary compliance <br />on the part of the water users in the Valley with an annual set of operating <br />criteria negotiated by the State Engineer, the Rio Grande Water Users <br /> <br />.3Radosevich, G., D. Hamburg and L. Swick, Colorado Water Laws, pp. 1- <br />112 to 122; Appendix D. <br /> <br />4Texas, et al. vs. Colorado, Original No. 29, (October Term, 1966). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.