Laserfiche WebLink
<br />" <br /> <br />.~ <br /> <br />the 16,000,000 acre-feet allocated by the compact and after qeducting <br />from the surplus the Mexican apportionment, This compact was ex- <br />p"fE,ssly approved by the Congress in the Boulder Canyon Project Act, <br />approved December 21, 1928. Presumably then, the Mexican allo- <br />cation of 1,500,000 acre-feet per year will be supplied from the <br />amount of approximately 2,000,000 acre-feet which is estimated to <br />be the surplus after the compact allocat~ons, totaling 16,000,000 <br />acre-feet, have been supplied. If, however, the surplus should <br />be insufficient for this purpose, any deficiency must be supplied <br />equa lly by the upper and lower basins. One of the conditions of <br />the Boulder Canyon Project Act was that California should agree to <br />limit her uses to 4,400,000 acre-feet a year plus not more than <br />half of the unallocated surplus, which, under the terms of the com- <br />pact, cannot be allocated until after October 1, 1963. <br />"If, therefore, there should be any infirmity in the California <br />contracts, it existed at the time the contracts were made and solely <br />by reason of the fact that the contracts encroach upon the surplus <br />to the extent of 962,000 acre-feet a year. Bearing in mind the fact <br />that the contracts are made subject to the Colorado River Compact <br />and the Boulder Canyon Project Act, and subject to the availability <br />of water thereunder for use in California, the committee does not <br />believe that there is any threatened impairment of the contracts in <br />the legal sense, nor that California has any just cause for complaint. <br />Furthermore, the committee believes, on the basis of the consensus of <br />engineering testimony, that any possible impairment of these contracts <br />in the physical sense is quite remote in point of time and depends <br />upon a number of extremely hypothetical factors and conditions which <br />may never assume any real importance and which have little or no <br />weight against the manifold advantages of the treaty." <br /> <br />'['he-Minority-View s-were-pres ented-a s-Part-2-0r-the-reporr:-Th e-Minority-sa1d-a l <br /> <br />pages 1 and 2: <br /> <br />"I. ALLOTMENT OF COLORADO RIVER WATER <br /> <br />"The treaty is said in the majority report to allot to Mexico a <br />minimum of 1,500,000 acre-feet of water per annum. Such allot- <br />ment is guaranteed and will constitute a first right on the river. <br />It is to be delivered according to a prescribed schedule. Water <br />reaching Mexico outside the schedule, even if used by Mexico, <br />will not be credited on the treaty obligation of the United States. <br />"The allotted amount is double the amount that Mexico could <br />or did use from the natural, unregulated flow of the Colorado River <br />prior to the construction of Boulder Dam. The peak annual use of <br /> <br />-4- <br />