BOARD01764 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I MR. STAPLETON: MR. SPARKS: MR. CONOUR: MR. SPARKS: I least we have tied it down to these projects. The language, otherwise, was a little broader than we liked. New Mexico had no objection to that. They don't know what this paragraph means either. Section (d) was something that we put in at Santa Fe, and which we have now om tted. On reflection, we don't want this section to be applicable to any water rights whether they occurred before October II, 1948, or after. So we didn't want to imply we were approving this section_to apply to future water rights in Colo- rado. That was added in Santa Fe and we have taken it out since we have returned here." "With the approval of New Mexico at Santa Fe?" "We put it in to begin with and we were a little uncertain of our position on this sec- tion." "I was going to ask you what the word 'established' meant? Since you've taken it out, I'll defer my question." "That goes back to the Compact which some- what defines that - the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact, but your point is good. I don't know, so we decided that we had better not tinker with that too much. We struck that out again. New Mexico - of course as I say, shouldn't have any objection to our taking it out again. Section 8 is a thorny one. It has to do with Indian rights, and we insisted that that had to remain in the Act, except we threw Arizona into the picture too, just for good measure, because that project is not too far from Arizona. That may create some trouble with the Department of Justice and some Con- gressmen, but at least New Mexico feels that that is a good provision. Section (b) remains in there just the way we discussed it with the Board before. We said that New Mexico could never use more water than they are entitled to under the allocation, llt%, even though such water may be there. The rea- son-again, we want all the water we can get in the San Juan to go on down to Glen Canyon to