WSP11122 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

22 <:> w w::.. <:> Now, the treaty, then, does not propose to go up- stream and give to Mexico from storage in Boulder Dam or any other dam 1,500,000 acre.feet of prime water. It proposcs to gct credit for the delivery of all the return flow that appears in the river due to seepage, due to return of drainage water, due to operation of desilting works, and credit itself on. tlle account of 1,500,000 with at least 900,000 acre.feet of water. It leaves, then, from the 1,500,000 not more than the 600,000 of upstream water, and not as much as the original offer in 1929 of water diverted, stored, and earried down to Mexican Lands."' .. Lawson testified that the American negotiators were under instruetions to obtain a treaty whereby the United States would get an aceounting for the large amount of return flow which would flow to Mcxico in any event. Indicating that these instructions had been carried out in the proposed treaty, Lawson stated: Mr. Lawson. In negotiating the treaty, Senator, we had difficulty in persnading the ]I,[exican representa- tives to accept that kind of water that is rccovered flow, drainage water, and return fiow which would re- quire in the future probably some dilution with fresher water of a less alkaline quality. We had no expres- sion from the Mexicans in the negotiations except that at the beginning of the ncgotiations thcy insistcd that the full amount of it be upstream water."" . . . . . Mr. Lawson. We have what we believe are the best terms that can be arrived at with Mexico. We dis- cussed for a week or 10 days the question of return flow. They objected, at first, to giving us credit for any of that retnrn flow. . . . 37 A large portion of the water to be delivered to Mexico was thns to consist of retnrn flow. Because uses on the river 3ri Hearings, pt. 1, at 82. 86 Hearings, pt. I, at 84. 87 Hearings, pt. 1, at 85. r-- I l f r - "---'-~"--~~~'---""~""'~'--'-.-"",-- ., J;, .'1' I'.