Laserfiche WebLink
h : t <br /> m <br /> v <br /> ?w8 0 <br /> 0 <br /> 0 <br /> m <br /> 0 <br /> D:I <br /> 1 . <br /> Now, in spite of that decision, it is true that both <br /> these federal laws were discussed and some subsequent compacts <br /> have proceeded on the term of beneficial consumptive use and <br /> it is from a scientific standpoint probably the better language, <br /> ► <br /> but from a practical standpoint to get rid of interstate <br /> controversies it is very difficult to handle. <br /> MR. VIDAL: We are now trying to get over the hurdle <br /> of possible conflict with the Federal Power Commission and <br /> the government. We think we have solved it by reference and <br /> using the same language as in this act, repeated and adopted <br /> in subsequent acts. We use the term beneficial consumptive <br /> use. But in the making of the compact can' t we solve any <br /> question of that kind by defining the term for the purposes <br /> of the compact between the states? <br /> MR. IRELAND: I raised that point yesterday. <br /> MR. VIDAL: Can l t you define that term that by benefi- <br /> cial Consumptive use we mean so and so? <br /> MR. IRELAND: Ask the engineers what is the real dif- <br /> ference, as you see it, between beneficial use and beneficial <br /> consumptive use. <br /> MR. PATTERSON: In the Republican River Compact their <br /> definition is the same, but in one case they are defining <br /> beneficial use and in another case beneficial consumptive use. <br /> I always felt there is a difference. I think there is a <br /> difference. Beneficial use can mean the quantity of water <br />