Laserfiche WebLink
<br />0031? <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE, CONTRACT. AND LEGAL MATTERS <br /> <br />~' <br /> <br />AGAIN IN FISCAL 1967 AS IN PREVIOUS YEARS, THE D1S,RICT PARTICIPATED IN (PFORTS BY <br /> <br />THE STATE or COLORADO AND THE OTHER SIX STAT~S or THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN TO DEVELOP <br /> <br />SUITABLE LEGISLATION FOR THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN PROJeCT (CAP). WHEN THE 89TH CONGRESS <br /> <br />ADJOURNED IN 1966 WITHOUT PASSAGE OF LEQISLATIDN AUTHORIZING THE PROJeCT, WATER uSER <br /> <br />INTERESTS IN ALL SEVEN BASIN STATES WERE BITTERLY DISAPPOINTED. THE HISTORIC AGREEMENTS <br /> <br />AND UNDERSTANDINGS BETWEEN THE STATES AS INCORPORATED IN H. R. 4671, O~FERED THE FIRST <br /> <br />REAL HOPE FOR PEACE ON THE RIVER SINCE THE COLORADO RIVER COMPACT WAS NEGOTIATED IN 1922. <br /> <br />IN ORDER To SALVAGE. IF POSSIB~E, THE HARMONIOUS INTERSTATE RELATIONSHIPS ATTAIN~D <br /> <br />THE PREVIOUS YEAR, THE STATES RENEWED THEIR EFfORTS TO PREPARE NEW LEGISLATION FOR CON5ID- <br /> <br />ERATION ay THt 90TH CONGRESS. DURING THE FALL AND EARLY WINTER MONTHS OF 1966-1967, <br /> <br />NtGOTIATORS ~ROM ALL SEVEN STATES WORKED HARO TO ARRIVE AT CHANGES IN THE LEGISLATJON THAT <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />WOULD SATISFY CONGRESS AND AT THt SAME TIME SE ACCEPTABLE TO EACH OF THE STATES. SEVERAL <br /> <br />DRAFTS or PROPOSED LEGISLATION EVOLVED. NONE OF THE DRA~TS COMPLETELY SATISFIED ALL INTtR- <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />ESTS. As A RESULT, SEVERAL BILLS WERE INTRODUCEO IN BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS TO AuTHORIZE <br /> <br />THE PROJtCT; auT THEY ALL DI~FERED IN VARIOUS SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF PRIMARY INTEREST TO <br /> <br />CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL GROUPS. <br /> <br />INCLUDED IN THE BILLS INTRODUCED IN THE SENATE WAS A "BARE-aONEsll Bll.l SuBMITTE:D BY <br /> <br />SENATOR HAYDEN FRO~ ARIZONA. THIS BILL. LABELED S. 1004, WAS ALSO FAVORED 8Y THE FEDERAL <br /> <br />ADMINISTRATION. IT PROVIDED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CAP BUT 010 NOT, AS INTRODUCED, CONTAIN <br /> <br />MANY O~ THE PROTECTIVE PROVISIONS DESIRED BY THE OTHER SIX STATES AND WHICH WERE CONTAINEC <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />IN H. R. 4671. THE ONE BILL THAT MOST NEARLY RErLECTEO THE 1966 SEVEN-STATE AGREEMENT WAS <br /> <br />H. R. 3300 INTRODUCED IN THE HOUSE 8Y CONGRESSMAN WAYNE ASPINALL. <br /> <br />HE:~RINGS WERE HELD ON H. R. 3300 AND COMPANION BILLS BY THE HOUSE Sua-COMMITTEE ON <br /> <br />IRRIGATION ANO RECLAMATION IN MARCH 1967. THE SENATE COMMITTEE, AFTER HEARINGS HELD IN <br /> <br />MAY, REPORTED s. 1004 OUT OF' COMMITTEEj AND IT WAS PASS EO BY THE F'ULL SENATE. No VERSION <br /> <br />-28- <br />