WSP09208

• File Number: 8103.300
• Description: Arkansas River Compact - Jean S Breitenstein File
• State: CO
• Basin: Arkansas
• Water Division: 2
• Date: 1/14/1944
• Title: Analysis of S 1519
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

"'.'
f~: "
'.; .: ......J

,',

"
/.:-....
..' . ~ .
/j>':~'
.......

002268

-6-

f'or the proteotion of navigation and the tl.l1eviation of flood conditions.

Although this legislation proposes a hard and fast rule respeoting the
relative potential water Wles, this decision further held,

"The reason for judicial oaution in adjudicating the relative
rights of states in'suoh cases is that, while we have jurisdiotion of
such disputes, they involve the interests of cuasi-sovereigns, ' present
oomplicated and delicate questions, and, due to the possibility of
future change of 'conditions, neoessitate expert administration rather
than judicial imposition of a hard and fast rule. Such controversies
may appropriately be oomposed by negotiation and agreement, pursuant
to the cC!l1paot olause of the Federal oonstitution. We say of this
oase, as the oourt has said of interstate differenoes of like nature,
that suoh mutual aocommodation and agreement should, if possible, be
the medium of settlement, instead of invooation of our adjudioatory
power. n

Another paragraph of the opinion stated,

"The lower etate is not entitled to have the stresm f'low as it
would in nature regardless of' need or use. If, then, the upper state
is devoting the water to a beneficial use, the question to be deoided,
in the light of existing oonditions in both states. is whether, and
to what extent, her aotion injures the lower state' and her oitizens
by deprivin~ them of a ,tike, or an eoually valw.ble, beneficial use.",

I

The opinion oonol uded that Colorado's uses of the waters of this stream
had not worked a serious ,detriment to the substantial interests of Kansas and
the Court enjoined further proseoution of present suits, instituted by Kansas
ditoh interests against individual ditoh companies in ~olorado.

A fixed legislative polioy, dedioated to the primary proteotion of speoified
uses of water in one seotion of a river basin as against uses in another seotion
is dangerous as evidenced by the following language of the Court,

"On this record there can be no doubt that a deoree suoh as the
Master reoommends, * * * would inflict serious dalllllge on existing
agrioultural interests in Colorado. How great the injury would be
is difficult to determine, but oertainly the proposed deoree would
operate to deprive some citizens of Colorado, to some extent, of their
means of support. It might indeed result in the a bandorunent of
valuable improvements and aotual migration from fams. Through
praotioe of irrigation, Colorado's agrioulture in the basin has grown
steadi ly for fifty years, With this development h/l.s gone a large in-
vestment in oanals, reservoirs, and farms. The progress has been open.
The faots were of oonunon knowledge,"

It should be understood that nothing in this statement is intended to de-
preciate in any sense the work of the Corps of Army hngineers. But the authority
of the Army Engineers to study, oonstruot and operate projects for the prevention
of floods and the rnaintenanoe of navigable oapaoit1es in these river basins, as