Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />STATES' <br />PERSPECTIVES <br /> <br />determination, as did many things, of A.P. Davis, the <br />head of the Reclamation Service, and Interior <br />Secretary Albert Fall. In December of '21, sensing the <br />futility of the state of Nevada's position, Scrugham <br />wrote a confidential memo to the members of the <br />southern Nevada delegation: "In case the federal <br />agency is decided upon as the best organization for <br />handling the work, it appears unlikely that the state <br />of Nevada will be able to enforce either taxation or <br />rate regulation in the power project." <br />In December of that year, the Nevadans attended <br />two meetings in California. The first was in Riverside <br />and the second in San Diego with Secretary of the <br />Interior Fall. <br />Reporting on <br />those meetings, <br />Gov. Boyle sent a <br />memo to the <br />development <br />commISSIOn <br />stating, "Secretary <br />Fall at the San <br />Diego conference" <br />- which was the <br />official one - <br />"declared flatly <br />that the govern- <br />ment had never <br />relinquished its <br />righrs to either the <br />Colorado or Rio <br />Grande rivers, and what might be done on the <br />Colorado would be done by the federal government. <br />Since the government is the only agency which <br />proposes the construction of large works at Boulder <br />Canyon, there appears to be done all that we can do, <br />except to promote the activities of the Department of <br />the Interior in this respect. I can assure you that no <br />stone has been left unturned to protect our interest in <br />the matter, nor is there any likelihood whatever of <br />any other agency than the government being permit- <br />ted to operate on that stream." And that is certainly <br />consistent with a lot of things that happened. <br />I would just add as an aside, because of some of <br />the seven states' meetings that I've attended in the last <br />several years, a quote out of a letter from Scrugham <br />to Hoover. When he wrote, he said, "At the recent <br />meeting of the Colorado River Commission in <br />Washington, there appeared to be a regrettable lack of <br />coordinated constructive ideas, for which deficiency <br />each of the state commissioners was partly respon- <br />sible. The situation was not particularly clarified by <br />the rhetorical contributions from the various senators <br />and congressmen who met at your invitation on last <br />Sunday night. And in view of the urgent necessities of <br /> <br />The people in northern <br /> <br />southern Nevada, and <br /> <br /> <br />Nevada never understood <br /> <br />Nevada representative to <br /> <br />SYMPOSIUM <br />PROCEEDINGS <br />MAY 1997 <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />we definitely would <br /> <br />not send any northern <br /> <br />represent our interests. <br /> <br />- Richard Bunker <br /> <br />the case, I take the liberty of presenting the attached <br />suggestions for your consideration." <br />That would basically conclude Nevada's position. I <br />would only say that in retrospect, something that is <br />true today would have been true in 1922. And that is <br />that the people in northern Nevada never understood <br />southern Nevada, and we definitely would not send <br />any northern Nevada representative to represent our <br />mterests. <br /> <br />ROBERT KING, CHIEF OF INTERSTATE <br /> <br />STREAMS FOR UTAH <br />Utah recognized the issues facing the seven states, <br />particularly in the Lower Basin - Boulder Canyon, <br />the flooding problems in 1922. I did a little research <br />and I'd like to present Utah's perspective. A lot of this <br />is drawn from the hearings that were held in Salt <br />Lake City on March 27 and 28, 1922, by the <br />Commission. <br />I'd like to start with a quote from Utah's governor, <br />Charles R. Mabey, and as an aside, we have a relative <br />here [at the symposium], Jack Barnett, who many of <br />you know. Mabey is his great uncle, and this is part of <br />his statement to the Commission: "Exactly three- <br />quarters of a century ago, the Mormon pioneers came <br />into this valley and turning aside the waters of the <br />mountain streams, founded Anglo-Saxon irrigation. <br />Every season since that July day of 1847 has wit- <br />nessed the steady growth to this system of soil <br />cultivation through the arid West. In due course, <br />settlements sprang up and cities came into being, <br />each having as its chief support some such supply of <br />the refreshing fluid. This commonwealth is a direct <br />result of irrigation. Wirhout it, a civilized people <br />could not possibly exisr in this region. <br />"From that humble origin proceeded the develop- <br />ment of the agricultural resources of 17 of the <br />Western states - some to a greater and some to a <br />lesser degree. ... This people have regarded such <br />successes with the pride of a fond parent witnessing <br />the triumph of a loved offspring." <br />These sentiments were further echoed by state- <br />ments by Dr. John A. Widstoe, the prominent Utah <br />businessman and civic and religious leader: "Coinci- <br />dent with the settlement of Salt Lake City, groups of <br />men and women were sent out to settle other <br />available places. Northward into the high and snowy <br />Bear Lake Valley and southward into the Valley of the <br />Muddy, and into San Bernardino, settlements were <br />established from east to west, from mountain to <br />mountain, and from the north to the south, from the <br />rim of the Great Basin to the Pacific Ocean - there <br />was an almost simultaneous pioneer development. <br />The country in which the pioneers had settled was <br />