Laserfiche WebLink
<br />509 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />"Governor Bracken of Utah expressed himself <br />as favoring the proposition. It must be remembered <br />in connection with that formula, that the evaporation <br />and the losses of storing water in the storage <br />reservoirs, according to the formula that was adopted <br />in the Santa Fe Compact, is divided approximately on <br />that basis. I think it is divided on that basis; so <br />the losses will be shared on the basis of the right <br />to use water in the Upper Basin. In other words, <br />the Reclamation Bureau estimates that the loss <br />through evaporation alone will be 880,000 acre-feet of <br />water annually and Colorado's share of that would be <br />5l.75~. It occurred to the majority of the Governors <br />that that was a fair and equitable way to divide the <br />profits, if any there be, from the development of <br />power. Then the states could use those profits in <br />building the reservoirs--the participating projects <br />in their respective states. It was part of the <br />plan that whenever anyone state had completed the <br />building of the participating projects in their <br />state, and that is all of the participating projects <br />that would be possible in any state, then the money <br />would be available to the other states until the <br />whole river basin was fully and completely developed. <br />That was the plan. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />"As I say, New Me~ico would not agree to it. <br />When we met here, George Clyde, Commissioner from <br />Utah, joined New Mexico and the vote stood 2 to 2. <br />Wyoming stood steadfastly by Colorado. As a matter <br />of fact, Wyoming was stronger in the position of <br />support than anyone else. But the vote and the <br />sentiment was 2 to 2 and, of course, it would take <br />3 to carry; New Mexico made the proposition in <br />Wyoming that the participating projects in Colorado <br />be given the same treatment as the participating <br />projects in other states. As a compromise, and in <br />order to show some fairness toward Colorado, a <br />revision was made and instead Sf including the <br />forty-two projects which I had suggested, the <br />G~~ission accepted eighteen projects in Colorado <br />t6be included in the Upper Colorado River Basin <br />plan. I was not present, of course, during the <br />adoption of that proposal. I presented the <br />argument for a division of power profits and urged <br />with everything that I could that that plan be <br />