BOARD00822

• Board Meeting Date: 4/27/1953
• Description: Minutes and Resolution
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

16$

The Board of Directors is composed of one from each State.
In this connection I acted as Director from Colorado at the
Conference in St. Louis with th~ definite understanding that I
was making a report of the meeting to you and that the decis~ -
ion relative to Colorado's participating in the Conference in
~he future and the designation of a director would be subject
to your action or that of the Colorado Water Conservation Board,
if the matter is referred to them. I recommend that the Colorado
Water Conservation Board follow the activities of this Conference
and that they designate directly or via your office the official
member of the Board of Directors. Conditions which have arisen
since this meeting in St.- Louis make it impossible for me to
serve, and frankly, I feel that a member or the Director of the
Water Board should be ColoradO'S representative. As mail is"
received with reference to the" Conference, will forward same to
the Water Board for handling, if it meets with your approval.
In the announcement of December 18, it is to be noted that
the sub-com~ittee, appointed to prepare a recommended land and
water policy, included John G. Will, Secretary and General Counsel
of the Upper Colorado .River Basin Commission. It is to be noted
that Will is the only representative on this Co~nittee from the
Upper Basin States. Unfortunately California's representative,
Arvin B. Shaw, passed away late in January and Mr. M. J. Dowd of
the Imperial Valley represented California on this Committee.
The Committee met February 7 through the lOth and the
report submitted February 10 to the general Conference, you will
note, contained a minority report written by ~r. John G. Will. -
Mr. Will after serving on this Committee had to leave for Washington,
D. C. and the burden of presenting Colorado's position at the
Conference fell to my lot. I was forced to concur with most
of Mr. Will's objections to the report as drafted.
California had twelve strong men at this Conference, but
their actiOnS were dominated by the Imperial Valley interests
to the degree ~hat other members of the delegation apologized
to the writer for the action of their representative on the
Com~ittee~ Most of the California delegation resented the in-
jection of the Colorado River fight into the work of this Com-
mittee. .
You will note tha't the report of the Land and Wa'ter Policy
Committee, as amended and adopted February 12, contains many re-
visions made Qn the floor of the Conference and that the sub-
stitut~ Pages 11 and 12 delete the comments of John G. Will.
The amended report also deleted all asterisks shown on the various
pages of the report which indicated reference to Mr. Will's minority
report.

I

I