Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />acreages irrigated. power generated. or other benefits to result fran such <br />projects; and. while the Report states or infers that suoh benefits will <br />appear in basin-wide reports in preparation for the importing basins. Colo- <br />rado poitlts olitthat projeots for importiug _ter to .the South, Platte River, <br />a tributary of the Missouri River. were not included in the Missouri River <br />Basm Report. and that the Report on the Arkansas River Basin is said to <br />be in preparation in the .Amarillo offioe, while projeots for importing wa- <br />ter to that basin are being investigated, planDBd and designed in the' <br />Denver office. <br /> <br />14. In further support of the general suggestions outlined in par&.- <br />graph 11. attention is directed, next, to the interstate probleme that <br />are said to await solutions in the Upper Basin. .nlllllely, that interstate <br />relations /lJIlong all States of the Upper Division must be defined. Colo- <br />rado asserts. and suggests the Report De revised to shON, that the physi- <br />cal conditions which generally prevail in the Upper Basin are such that <br />the streamfl~.of the Colorado River and. its m&.jor tribuatries are being <br />used onl~' in the one State in which they are produced by the matura! pre- <br />cipi tation and runoff therein. - and hence there are no pending or threat- <br />ened controversies between adjoining States concerning the uee of such <br />strearnflows; that such controversies as have arieen in the put, 'or are <br />likely to arise in the future, involve a relatively f~minor tributaries, <br />suoh as the ,La Plata River, a tributary of the San Juan River, where an <br />interstate oompaot heretofore has been ratified between Colorado and New <br />Mexioo, , and the Little Snake River, a tributary of the Yampa River, where <br />an interstate oompaot is being negotiated between Colorado and Wyoming; <br />and that similar oontroversies as they may arise in the future are ex- <br />pected to be adjusted when and as they arise. by the two States and their <br />interested citizens, as provided by Art. VI of the Colorado River yompaot, <br />with the aid of and based on the faotual information supplied oy the <br />Bureau of Reolamation and' other State and Federal agenoies. <br /> <br />15. Conoerning the definition of interstate relations in the Upper <br />Basin, as requested by the Report, Colorado admits that a oompaot among <br />the States of the Upper Division, as oontemplated in the Colorado River <br />,Compaot, will eventually be needed to define the relative rights and ob- <br />ligations of the respeotive States, and should be negotiated before the <br />final stage of ultimate development in the Upper Basin is reaohed; but <br />asserts that suoh a compaot is desirable but not praoticable at the l <br />present time, As indioat'ed by the Report. present development in the Up_ <br />per Basin. inoluding allowanoes for projeots now authorized but not yet <br />oompleted, involves the use of but one-third of the quantity ot water ' , <br />heretofore appcrtioned to the Upper Basin by Art; III (a) of the Colorado <br />River Compaot. Before a oompact among States of the Upper Division will J i <br />be needed, to reoognize and proteot existing developments in eaoh State. ~ <br />and define the interests of eaoh in the waters of the Upper Basin await- <br />ing future development. it appears desirable that suffioient additional <br />time should elapse during which projeots might be oonstruoted that would <br />at least d~ub19 the present utilization of water in the Upper Baein. and <br />during whioh the Bureau of Reclamation might oomplete the neoessary de- <br />tailed investigations of all development possibilities. Before a final. <br />and permanent oanpaot among States of the Upper Division oan be negotiated, <br /> <br />