Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00144') <br /> <br />Ibid. <br />Congress also believed that the Mexican ~ater Treaty had <br />conceded too much because of miscalculations by the American <br />negotiators of the amount of water available, a Federal <br />interest in exchanging Colorado River water for Rio Grande <br />water, and a desire to improve military ties with Mexico and <br />to coax it and other nations into joining and supporting the <br />united Nations through leniency in the Treaty terms.34 Thus, <br />the Act declares "that the satisfaction of the requirements <br />of the Mexican Water Treaty from the Colorado River consti- <br />tutes a national obligation." 43 U.S.C. filS12. Congress <br />warned that, absent augmentation, "the unresolved issue <br />... of whether consumptive use of the water from the Gila <br />River in Arizona ... should be counted when computing the <br />amounts of water that may have to be supplied by the Basin <br />states to fill deficiencies to Mexico"3S might well precipi- <br />tate litigation. The Act declares that the seven Basin <br />states would be relieved of the Mexican Treaty duty as soon <br />as an augmentation plan for an additional 2.S m.a.fr had been <br />implemented. Ibid. <br />California recovered from the Congress much of what it <br />had lost from the Supreme Court. The Act directs the <br />Secretary of Interior to administer the CAP so that Califor- <br />nia never receives less than 4.4 m.a.f. 43 U.S.C. ~1521(b) <br />(1976). In effect, then, the Lower Basin's burden under the <br />Mexican Treaty was shifted back to Arizona as the price of <br /> <br />-15- <br />