Laserfiche WebLink
<br />development above Boulder Dam. But there is nothing In <br />the Ac~s or contracts which subordinates the use of <br />Boulder water for power to its use for irrigation in <br />Mexico, or v~lich contemplates any diminution of the <br />amount of power because of any fu.tu.re use of water in <br />Mexico. On the contpary, the Acts and the contracts were <br />expressly dravVll on the theory that the benefits of the <br />dam were to be enjoyed solely in the United States. <br />Mexico Is receiving great benefits from Boulder Dam <br />in the matter of flood protection, silt reduction, a regu- <br />lated River flow and the resulting possibility of develop- <br />l.lent of additional lands. However, Mexico is in no wise <br />contributinG to any part of the cost of these works. !t <br />would not seem that Mexico should be entitled to water <br />for the additional lands, made possible of development <br />by these worl:s, which would interfere with or result in <br />losses to those paying for the cost of the works. Any <br />troaty made with Mexico should protect these rights and <br />interests of agencies in the United States. <br />In explanation of the foregoing, it should be pointed <br />out that the demand for B01..1.1der power is sli~htly higher <br />in the winter than in the summer, but as this difference <br />is not great it may be considered that the demand is <br />fairly constant throuShout tho year, requiring a con- <br />stant release of water. Furthermore, under the power <br /> <br />- 24 - <br />