My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09274
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09274
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:52:26 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:33:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8210.110.60
Description
Colorado River Water Users Association
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
5/1/1947
Author
CRWUA
Title
Proceedings of the 1947 Conference
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Annual Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
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 />. <br /> <br />futt,1.l'e" 'I'hat~s abou.t Ln.z \vhoh.'; \;h1Jlg in a ~lutl:ihell a.s I :'H~t; it: in VV'~~oming~ <br /> <br />MH.MATTHJ1;W: Th.;:mk you, Mr. Rollins. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />In this brIef summi>lty that we attempted to prepare to assist <br />in this discussion. it is not"d in the Wyoming comments. as you ha,ve <br />indicated, that Wyoming appl'(WCS the preliminary draft of the report, <br />particularly the initial prograrn of development that was then suggested. <br />.As far as Wyoming if' concerned, 1 take it that Wyoming would oppose <br />development beyond the initial program in. the States in the Upper <br />Divisiol1 until the compact is negotiated among those State a , and that <br />Wyomin.15 believes that the sub'.compacts should be negotiated separately <br />in. the Uppel' and Lower Basins. I think several States, in theil' comments, <br />have pointed out that the recommendation made in the compl'ehensive <br />report of the Bureau wasn't q1.;ite deal.. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />MR. ROLLINS: Mr. Chairman, I may state that that's <br />the opinion of t.he Wyoming people, and it was our Governor, as you <br />know, who callo!d the first meeting that tried to bring the Upper Basin <br />States together in arranging for a compact, and he was very anxious <br />that that compact be not delayed. <br /> <br />SECRETARY; Could I ask a question, please? Mr. Rollins , <br />this compact. among the Upper Basin States is something that has been <br />talked about a long time, but until your Governor started the process <br />nothing has been done abO\.;t it. This Association recommended strongly <br />that such a compact be made. and certainly everybody should be very <br />happy that it's under consideration and making progress. I wanted to <br />ask if the thing had developed far enough to indicate along what lines the <br />Upper States are thinking of dividing the water. Has there been any <br />consideration of the standard or principle upon which the division will be <br />made? <br /> <br />MIlt. tROLL INS: I think not. I think at any meeting I <br />attended, it has%een discussed. Maybe people have ideas in individual <br />States, but, as far as I know, it has never been developed. <br /> <br />Sl!~CRETARY; I wonder if the idea would grow up that <br />the Upper Basin States should apportion water among themselves along <br />the line of the respective quantities they contribute tt1 t.he stream? Was <br />there anything like that. in the discussion? <br /> <br />MR. ROLLINS; I hardly think so. If that were true, <br />then New Mexico would get v(;ry little development. It seems to me there <br />must be Bome other method used. I think that course win enter into <br />it considera.bly, <br /> <br />SECRETARY; I remember that at a meeting of the Committee <br /> <br />.17- <br /> <br />}, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.