WSP10883

• File Number: 8215.100
• Description: Other States Water Issues - California
• State: CA
• Basin: Statewide
• Date: 9/17/1954
• Author: Irrigation Districts
• Title: Reasonable Use by Reasonable Men
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

rate. precise knowledge of the problems assigneo 0 0 2141.f the seven organizations making up the Staide
them. By way of example, from the standpoint of Southern Water Problems Committee. .
California it would be e catastrophe to at this time or in the . Although the proposals vary in approach and in method.
,/f near future abolish the Colorado River Board which is in of organization, all are aimed at rai.ing water to a cabinet
the middle of a desperate fight with Arizona, Colorado, status, and to accomplish c1o.er administrative coordina-
the United States government and possibly other states, tion among the various boards, agencies, commissions and
to protect the allocation of Colorado River Water arising divisions mentio.ned earlier. '
out of the Colo~ado River Compact of 26 years ago. The It is ImperCltive that, in order to effectively turn
sa.m~ ca~. be said for some of the other ~oard.s and com- the extensive existing and prepared plans from
mISSIons In the fields of endeavor placed on their charge. blueprints into reality, that California must first
put Its admil\istrative house in order. This should
be done at tbe 1955 session of tbe Legislature If
possible. Every effort should be made to write a
bill and get It passed so California can make a
start on solving tbe many difficult and controver.
sial problems related to water.

The need is also apparent for the centralization of the
construction of water projects under a reorganized Water
Project Authority. At present the Authority is composed
of the Director of Public Works, Chairman, the Attorney
General, State Controller, State Treasurer and the Direc-
tor of Finance. All of these officers are al;eady burdened
with the responsibilities of their offices and should not be
called upon to perform .such complex and important work
in ad~ition. Senator Edwin J. Regan has proposed an
authOrity composed of full-time salaried engineers ap-
point~d by the Governor for ;terms of from 8 to 10 years.
1 Se~lous study ~hould be. gIven to such proposals with
the vIew to e.nact'ng .them onto law at the earliest possible
date without creating an autocratic State Water Bureau
or Authority.

Those of you who have followed the problem closely
know that on the .recommendation of the Joint Interim
Committee on Water headed by Senator Howard Wil-
liams and with the assistance of the Legislative Counsel
there was prepared Assembly Bill 863 which would have
accomplished the cabinet status and orderly arrangement
of a Department of Water Resources. Assembly Bill 863
passed both. houses of the Legislature but did not go to
the Governor because he had indicated that he would veto
the bill. The reason was that the proposal took from the
Attorney General his exclusive power of representing the
State as legal adviser and in his place substituted an inde-
pendent State Water Attorney.
There were strong reasons given by the Interim Com-
mittee for including a State Water Attorney and some
equally strong reasons why the Attorney General should
retain his exclusive jurisdiction. This phase of legislation
must be carefully reviewed and here again the knowledge,
experience, and recommendation of the 35 official repre-
sentatives of the State-wide Committee on Water Prob-
lems will be valuable in reaching a proper solution.
By way of summary, from tbe natural viewpoint
of supervisors, citizens, and representatives of the
"counties of origin" it must be said that it is one
thing to ascertain wbat tbe law of water I, In

."cALIFORNIANS SHOULD BE ALERT TO INCREASING
// CRISIS OF THE COLORADO RIVER CONTROVERSY
With respect to tbe long-standing and increas-
ingly complicated Colorado River controversy, tbe
people of this State must realize to a greater extent
tbon tbey now do tbat California is In a desperate
legal and political fight to protect its share of tbe
Colorado River Water.
While currently a part of the problem is in the hands of
the Supreme Court of the United States and thE> master
appointed by that court to ascertain the facts to aid the
court, ev.ary Californian who is interested in the future of
his State should be alerted to the political threat con-
stantly arising in Washington, D.C. As late as September
/772, 1954, Congressman Harry Sheppard of San Bernardino
. County, in an Associated Press dispatch, reported "that
spokesmen for several Colorado River Basin State. have
continued a slanderous and malevolent campaign against
water agencies and officials of California:' Congressman
Sheppard stated that officials of Colorado, Utah, Arizona,
Wyoming and New Mexico have for years "stormed Capi-
tol Hill with fantastic and costly water and power projects,"
such as the Central Arizona Project and the upper Colo-
rado River Storage Project.
{It is clear, of course, that the approval by the Congress
of any such projects wou. Id seriously da.mege California'.
right to the waters of the Colorado River, waters which
~afifornia must have. waters which we own under the
original Coloredo River compect, waters that the ME>tro-
politan Weter District and the taxpeyers of Southern Cali-
fornia have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to develop
and bring into Southern Celifornia in order to serve this
vast and ever-expanding industrial empire. .
It must bE> remembered thet the Colorado River project
is of great importance to all of California-South, Central,
or North. The tendency for people in the north is to think
of it in terms of Southern Californie only. Under the "legal
concept of most beneficial use" the more water from the
Colorado, the less will be needed from the river systems of
the North.

RECOMMENDATION FOR LEGISLATIVE ACnON
IN 1955
Proposels directed toward creating a Department of
Weter Resources are being prepared for the coming ses-
sion and will receive the careful attention of the 35 mem-

16

.

"

17