BOARD02250

• Board Meeting Date: 8/6/1951
• Description: Minutes and Resolution
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

I

I

43

following those meetings and the adoption of a resolution on the subject by the Com-
mission, he and Mr. Breitenstein, in accordance with the recommendation made by the
Board, had had a meeting with all members of the Colorado Congressional delegation,
to present the action of the Upper Colorado River Commission on the subject and to
obtain the views of the Colorado Senators and Congressmen. He also pointed out that
at a meeting of the Colorado Water Conservation Board held on June 11-12, 1951, Mr.
Breitenstein had presented a written report to the Board concerning the action of the
Upper Colorado River Commission and the conference with the Colorado Congressional
delegates. However, the Director said, this report was presented at the close of the
meeting after the Board had been enr;aged for an entire day on other matters and he
feared that the Board members had not given sufficient consideration to the Breitenstein
report. In view of the fact that the members of the Colorado Congressional delegation
had unanimously taken a different view of the policy a.nd manner of proceedings in this
important matter from that taken by the Upper Colorado River Commission, the Director
urged that the Board now consider this matter further.

Thereupon, Mr. Breitenstein was requested to read his report of June 9, 1951
on the subject which appears in full in themLnutes of the Board on June 11-12, 1951.
(pp. 12, 13, 14 and 15, Vol. III, Board minutes.)

1~. Breitenstein also read the resolution'passed by the Upper Colorado River
Commission on June 2, 1951. This resolution is here inserted in the minutes as follows:

WHE~~S, the Upper Colorado River Commission has given consideration to
the apparent inability of the States of the Lower Basin of the Colorado River
to agree upon their respective rights to the use of the 'r.iter available to the
Lovrer Basin of the Colorado River under the Colorado River Compact of 1922; and,

WHEREAS, this inability to agree aprears to arise principally from con-
flicting interpretations and applications of the instruments which constitute the
law of the River with respect to the following four major points:

(a) Is California entitled to share in the use of the water covered
by Article III (b) of the 1922 compact?

(b) Is beneficial consumptive use of water to be measured by the
'diversions less returns" method or by the 'depletion I method?

(c) How are losses from Lovrer Basin main stream reservoirs to be charged?

(d) Is the surplus which California may claim, to be measured before or
after deducting the quantity that must be delivered to Mexico under
the 1944 Treatyf

And, rnIK~EAS, tho welfare of all the Colorado River Basin States requires
that a determination of such rights be made as expeditiously as is possible:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE I] RESOLVED, by the Upper Colorado River Commission, the
Commission most earnestly suggeqts that the Lower Basin States seek an expeditious
determination of their respective rights to the use of the water available to that
basin under the Colorado River Compact of 1922 and pledges its full and sincere
cooperation in the attainment of such prompt determination. As a means of securing
that determination the Commission suggests: