My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Compacts, Decrees, and Treaties Affecting CO's Water
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1001-2000
>
Compacts, Decrees, and Treaties Affecting CO's Water
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:36:53 PM
Creation date
6/1/2009 2:00:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8461.350
Description
Legislation
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Author
CWCB
Title
Compacts, Decrees, and Treaties Affecting CO's Water
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
6. The Supreme Court Case of Arizona vs. Ealifornia <br />As has previously been stated, the state of Arizona for over <br />twenty years after the signing of the Colorado River Compact in <br />1922, stubbornly refused to ratify the compact. The primary <br />reason for this refusal was the fact that the waters of the Gila <br />River in Arizona were clearly subject*to apportirmment.pursuafit'to <br />the terms of the compact. Arizona had argued during the compact <br />negotiations that the Gila River should not be considered as part <br />of the Colorado River System for compact purposes. The compact <br />became such an explosive political issue in Arizona that no polit- <br />ical candidate dared run for public office without condemning the <br />Colorado River Compact. At least one governor threatened to use <br />armed forces (the Arizona National Guard) to prevent the con- <br />struction of reservoirs on the Colorado River which would benefit <br />California. <br />The substantial agricul.tural industry of Arizona is sustained <br />almost entirely by diversions from the Gila River and by heavy <br />ground water withdrawals, the latter constituting the major source. <br />Aggravated by the drouth period of the 1930's and the expanded <br />agricultural production of the World War II period and since, the <br />state of Arizona has become increasingly alarmed about its rapidly <br />dwindling ground water supply. In such a climate, the state of <br />Arizona began a massive efforC to import waters from Che Colorado <br />River to the Central Arizona Basin. That effort finalized into <br />the project now known as the Central Arizona Project. <br />The authorization and construction of the Central Arizona <br />Pro ct posed a formidable legal dilemma to the state of Arizona. <br />It gd not ratified the Colorado River Compact and had refused to <br />enter into a compact with the Lower Basin states as suggested by <br />Congress in the Boulder Canyon Pro,ject AcC. Arizona attempted to <br />solve this sticky problem by asking the United States Supreme <br />CourC to determine its rights on the Colorado River. The Supreme <br />Court originally refused to accept jurisdiction. Arizona finally <br />decided that it must ratify the Colorado River Compact if it wexe <br />to have any standing in court or in the Congress. This it did <br />during World War II by an act of its legislature on February 24, <br />1944. <br />After this ratification, Arizona renewed its efforts to get <br />congressional, authorization of the Central Arizona Project, which <br />would export water from the lower Colorado River into the Central <br />Arizona Basin. Since there was sti11 no agreement among the <br />Lower Basin states as to how their apportioned waters would be <br />divided among those states, the Arizona effort was strenuously <br />ogposed by California and to varying degrees by the other states <br />of the Colorado River Basin. As a result of this opposition, the <br />House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs on April 18, 1951, <br />adopted a resolution to the effect that iC would not consider any <br />legislation to authorize the Central Arizona Project until the <br />-12-
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.