WSP09873 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ I r - Inlld~ within its IJol'del'S, inchHlillg' the bctl:-; of strealll:'; and other \\'ater8.- (Citing cases). ... .. * Tt lIlay rlet..t~l'lIIine for itself whetlwl' the I~Olll1l1011 law rule in respect tn riparian l'igut:'5 01' that. doc- trine whit-h obtains ill tbe uricl regions of the "'est of the appro- priation of waters for tbe pUl'vo~es of irrigat.ion sball contrul. COllgl'e~~ ('an not cnfol'ce either rule upon a.ny Stnte. .. ... .. One ral'dinal l'ule, undl'rlrin~ all the relations of the States to each otheI'~ is tlInt of the~ equality of right. Eatl1 State stands on. the same Je\"el with all the rest. It can impose its own legisla- tion 011 110 one of the others. and is bound to ~'ield its own \'iews to none," (.Kansas v. Colorado, 206 1:'. S" 46, 87,97.) In concluding the abo\"e deci~ion, the Supreme Court tlis- missed the case without IJrejudice to the right of Kansas to institute new lll.()teedings~ "whenever it :;;hnll apear that through a material increase in the depletion of the watel's of the Arkawms by Colorado" .. .. the substantial interests of Kansas are Leing iI;jul"cd to the extent of destroying the cfjuitable apportiunme.nt of the benefits hetween the two States resulting from the /low of tbe l~ ,-er." (~UG U. S., 46, 117.) The United States has large interests in the form of puhlic land!"i.witbin the Colorado River area, and has already COll~trlletcd large irrigation works near Yl1ll1a~ Ariz., and is engngerl in irri- gation of large areas alollg the luwer portion of the strenm and in tile vicintv of the Salton Sea. The seven Colorado River States hm'e all'ead~" enacted legi8lation authorizing a commissioner for each of the States, to meet with a representatin~ of the United States, for the IHIrpose of formulating and entering into a COIn- pad 01' agreement reSIJeeting the future utiliza tion aml disposi- tion of tbe wateI'S of tbe Colorado Rivel' nnd its trihutal'fes, Any such compact will be of no binding force or eft'ect. until ratified by the legislatures of each of the States and by the Cungl'e~~ of the United States. The :;;e\"en State so\'ereignties hnve legislated. The gm"cl'llOl. of each has appointed a ('unH1Ii~sioller ptll'~llant to the legh;Jation. The gm'eruOI"S have colledivel;v waited upon the Presiuent and presented their written request for national legir-:;- lation authorizing the appointment by the President of a }"C'l'l'e- Rentati\"e for the United State~. (Note: Since the foregoing memoralH]Ul1l was written the U. S. Supreme COUl't dedded, in 'Vyoming v. C(Ilol'ado, tbat in cases between two States both of which I'ct'ognize the dodllne of prior appropriation as a matter of loeallaw.. the Court will apply the fundamental principles uf the doctrine in the allocat.ion uf the waters of a river' cumlllon to the 'h...o States and will so apportion the dependable ,i:lseragc annua.l flow between the States tha.t the oluer cstahliHhetl uses in lwth Stutes will ref~eive til'~t protection. The doctrine so nnnollD(.'cd leaves the \Yestern Stntes to n rindr:," and a eontest of Hpeed for future development. The [ ~H ] .