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 />"fl'om the system above Lee FOlFry," <br /> <br />_ -and then. in Subdivision (a) of 'Article 3, the apportionment is made <br />to the Upper Basin and the Lower Basin, and to the extent that Arizona <br />Hes in the Upper Basins, uses in Arb:ona would be charged against Upper <br />Basin uses. The guaranteed delivery is an obligation, according to the <br />text of the Compact of the States of the Upper Basin. When you come to <br />the definition of the States of the Upper Division, we find that' the ,States <br />are Utah. l'l'ew Mexico, Colorado and Wyoming. So the obligation to <br />deliver water under Article UK (d) o~the Compact refers to the States <br />of the Upper Division. and not to the States which happen to lie within the <br />Upper Basin. <br /> <br />CHAIRMAl'l': That would be the natural position on the <br />San Juan. and I was then wondering about the !lb.ip. how they are going <br />to settle on that, I see they have the Virgin-Boulder Division~ they have <br />the San Juan-Virgin Division, and so on, that are below Lee Ferry. It <br />complicates the matter just a little bit. but if they are perfectly willing <br />to share their burden of obUgation, weare perfectly willing -- <br /> <br />MR. HOWARD: By :reason of the definition of terms. the <br />statement I made awhile ago, that Arizona would participate in the obligation, <br />is not strictly true, because it's the obligation of the State of the Upper <br />Division not to deplete the flow at Lee Ferry below 75 million acre feet <br />of water each ten years, Arizona did not join in the obligation to deliver. <br /> <br />CHAIRMAN: That's the attitude they have taken, It <br />doesn't look like a square deal. <br /> <br />MR. HOWARD: That's the text of the Compact. <br /> <br />CHAIRMAl'l': I see. The fellows that wrote the compact <br />didn't have a very clear. broad view of the history of the whole country. <br />11m afraid. If hel s a part of a company, he shares in the liabilities as <br />well as the assets. <br /> <br />MR. ELDER: <br /> <br />Have you heard of preferred stock? <br /> <br />CHAIRMAN: <br /> <br />Yes. and I've seen it too. <br /> <br />MR, MATTHEW: Any further discussion in regard to <br />Arizona's comments, or any questions? <br /> <br />SECRETARY? I think, Mr. Chairman, that California <br />should make it plain that California doesn't entirely agree with Arizona's <br />statement of its claim, Because it is so obviously apparent, it doesn't <br />need argument, <br /> <br />MR. HmOS: <br /> <br />I suggest you strike the word "entirely". <br /> <br />-49- <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />j <br /> <br />,)~:: ~,}. <br /> <br />-" <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.