BOARD02033

• Board Meeting Date: 5/8/1963
• Description: Minutes
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

I

of consumptive use. However, he went one step
further and defined consumptive use as being the
water diverted, less the waters returned to the
river which would be available for use in the
United States or in satisfaction of the Mexican
Treaty obligation. There are those with the
position that they are a little fearful that
if this is bypassed and returned below Morelos
Dam that this could work to the detriment of
the Wellton-Mohawk Project. The solicitors from
the State Department have examined this proposi-
tion and they do not feel that that is so. Now
there is some difference of opinion between the
attorneys representing the various states as to
whether availability means that it is in the
river or Whether it means that it's in the river
in an amount such that it could all be used for
satisfaction of the Mexican Treaty obligation.
This is something we must pursue further.

Further quoting from the report:

'(6) The bypassed waters and other
waters reaching the limitrophe
section of the river must not
serve to enlarge any Treaty obli-
gation.

(7) A reduction in uncontrolled flows
at the limitrophe section to the
minimum of 900 c.f.s. by lower
Colorado River conservation
measures is recommended.'

I

Here again is the concession to Arizona -
I don't think it is a concession, I think it's
something that we all agree with. Arizona, as
you all know, and California too, is planning
a very comprehensive lower Colorado River proj-
ect \'lhich will provide them with better control
of the lower river. j'le think this is good be-
cause the excess deliveries under the Mexican
Treaty come out of the river, and if they can
cut them back this reflects then in the consump-
tive use in the Lower Basin and reflects clear
on back into the Upper Basin under the provisions
of the Colorado River Compact. So we think this