My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Transcripts of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 09/13,14,15,16,17/1948
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
7001-8000
>
Transcripts of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 09/13,14,15,16,17/1948
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/25/2014 4:08:29 PM
Creation date
11/18/2014 1:16:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Fifteenth Meeting of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 09/13,14,15,16,17/1948 Colorado Springs, Co.
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Author
Commissioners
Title
Fifteenth Meeting of the Arkansas River Compact Commissions 09/13,14,15,16,17/1948 Colorado Springs, Co.
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
156
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
m <br /> 0 <br /> 0 <br /> 0 <br /> Q n <br /> 6 0 <br /> we have amended the transfer statute time and again. In <br /> the illustration I gave, the Supreme Court ruled repeatedly <br /> that they oould not consider that abandonment---which was Z <br /> idiotic, but they ruled that way--and the statute was amended <br /> to give the court jurisdiction to consider abandonment. <br /> I do not see why we could not provide that in a �I <br /> proceeding for transfer notice should not be .given to the <br /> Administration, and I do not see how else it could be <br /> given. We could not provide that we skip all the Kansas <br /> ditches. <br /> MR. ARM: No, that is not praotioal. <br /> MR. VIDAL: That is the converse of the proposition <br /> ekeept the Colorado court would require notice to all of <br /> the ditches in 67 and all of the ditches in l7. <br /> MR. ARN: Of course, we started out in the discussion <br /> of this matter with this premise, that there could not be <br /> any transfer and there is never any requested unless <br /> everybody was agreeable to it. I mean basically that is <br /> the premise, because if there are any rights affected the <br /> transfer would not be made anyway. I think that is the <br /> idea we had in the proposition--- <br /> CHAIRMAN KRAMER: I did not hear that last. <br /> MR. ARK: I say, if that is the situation, it would <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.