WSP11373 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

00" 8'-r. 1. J L' adj udication by the Supreme COlll't as to the rights of the several parties to the water in the mainstream of the Colorado River. Congress ha~ indicated it will not authorize construction of the Project until right~ to mainstream water are adjudicated; nor can it he financed privately until ~uch right~ are fully estab- li~hed. In short, Arizona'", utilization of the mainstream water which ~he argues has been apportioned to her in the Boulder Canyon Project Act i~ being frustrated by the conflicting claims of the other parties to this suit, This is reason enough for the Supreme Court to exercise its original jurisdiction, If the Supreme Court does not exercise its jurisdiction in this case, Arizona will be faced with a dilemma: Congress will not authorize the Cen- tral Arizona Project until Arizona's right to mainstream water is determined, and the Supreme Court will not determine Ari- zona's right to the water until Congress authorizes the Project." The Master carried the argument one step further: "Without the Central Arizona or a similar project," he said, "Arizona will not be able to fully utilize the water which she claim~ has been set aside fOl' her in the mainstream. Indeed, the evidence indicates that California is already using some of the water claimed by Arizona. By increasing the water uses of existing facilities, California will be able to increase substan- tially her uses of this claimed water in the future. On the other hand, Arizona cannot use the water she claims without the construction of new facilities and she cannot develop new facil- ities unless hel' rights in the water are first established. Thus, refusal of th,,- Supr"-me Court to adj udicate Arizona's rights in the mainstream water will, as a practical matter, have the effect of a decision in favor of California since Arizona will not be able to utilize the disputed water and California wil I. If Ari- zona's interpretation of the Boulder Canyon Project Act. which the United States substantially agrees with, is correct. Cali- fornia has r/" fad!) taken part of the water which was forever apportioned to Arizona, and Arizona can remed~. the oituation only by suit in the Supreme Court." In the past 30 years, said the Master, there has been a "veritable population explosion" in the Low,,-r Basin. With it has COllle a comparable development in industry and agriculture. Hence there has been a rapid expansion of water uses. "But," he said, "the point has now been reached \shere in- creased use of water from the Colorildo River is being frustrated by a bitter dispute as to the legal availability of such water for use in the several states. That dispute is now before the Court. There appears to be sufficient mainstr,,-am water availahle to satisfy the scale of present uses and enough to satisfy some de- gree of expansion. But, because of the rapid development in the Basin, the present need for water, as contrasted with present actual use, far outstrips the supply. Despite the need, it is im- possible to develop further uses of the water becanse of the cloud on its legal availability,"