Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001480 <br /> <br />Isn't what is meant by Article III is, an appor- <br />tionment is not perfected until the water passes <br />Lee's Ferry and no claim could be made that the <br />fulfillment of that apportionment has been had <br />until the water does so pass.144 <br /> <br />In this respect Caldwell also observed: <br /> <br />I think for a practical matter we are almost making <br />two rivers out of one in the Colorado River, to <br />meet a practical situation. We are dividing it at <br />Lee's Ferry, keeping part of it above and part of <br />it below and I believe that would be the popular <br />conception of it at least, and I believe it is the <br />accurate conception.14S <br /> <br />Second, Paragraph (d) served to establish that the Upper <br /> <br />Basin was not obligated to furnish water to satisfy the Lower <br /> <br />Basin's Paragraph (b) apportionment. That water was to be <br /> <br />supplied by Lower Basin tributaries. <br />Third, Paragraph (d) was preserved in the hope that it <br /> <br />would lend support to a future campaign by the Upper Basin <br /> <br />for major storage dams. <br /> <br />The Upper Basin Commissioners <br /> <br />emphasized repeatedly during the Compact negotiations that <br /> <br />they felt entitled to a dam or dams similar to what the Lower <br /> <br />Basin was then avidly pursuing and that some day the Upper <br />Basin would seek them.146 In recent years, of course, the <br />Glen Canyon and other<Upper Basin dams were to have been <br />administered to help it meet its Paragraph (d) duty, and the <br /> <br />... <br /> <br />Compact commissioners appear to have foreseen that function. <br /> <br />Fourth, the Commissioners may have retained Paragraph <br /> <br />(d) to clarify the Upper Basin's right to divert all the <br /> <br />water of the River, if it could do so, without the necessity <br /> <br />of measuring every diversion, just so long as the return flow <br /> <br />-55- <br />