BOARD02283 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I 47 He stated that Mr. Bishop, Commissioner from Wyoming, had introduoed in the meeting at Rook Springs, Wyoming, the resol~tl~n ~f the Green River Development Assooiation that pending the negotiati0u ratifioation and app~oval of a oompaot, there should be no development of any kind of Colorado River water resouro~s and that all projeots now under oonstruction should prooeed no further until suoh a compaot had been made. He said .that he had taken a violent exoeption to that position and it was his impression that none of the other Commissioners, agreed with Commissioner Bishop although Utah may have, been sympathetic. He pointed out that the engineering oo.mlli ttee appointed: by the Commission had been very aotive and was making real progress; and that no further meeting of the Commission would be he Ie!:: ,mtil the engineering oommittee was ready to make a report. The next meeting of the Commission will be held at Denver, Colorado. Direotor Stone further pointed: out that, exoept for the oompaot hearing at Grand Junotion, Colorado, the presentation made by looal .interests in the other States failed to appreoiate that one of the important tasks whioh the Commission must perform is to make deliveries at Lee Ferry. Local interests in the other states disoussed extensively the division of.the water apportioned by the Colorado River Compaot to the Upper Basin but seemed to be unaware of' the equally important task of providing for a determination of the respeotive obligation of the four States of the Upper Division to make deliveries: of water at Lee Ferry to oomply with the Colorado River Compaot. Following the report by Direotor Stone, Mr. Patterson and Mr. Merriell made a supplementary report respeoting the work of the engineering oommittee appointed by the Colorado River Basin Compaot Commission. Hanry C. Vidal, Chairman of the Colorado Commission on the Arkansas River Compaot Commission, made a report on the status of the compaot negotiations between Colorado and Kansas on the Arkansas Ri~er. He stated that there was considerable doubt, of Ii oompact being negotiated for submission to legislatures of the two states for consideration at their next ses&inus. He said that the Commission had met sorre serious difficulties because of the attitude of various government agencies, partioularly the Corps of Engineers, and must resolve questions whioh have been preoipitated by those agenoies. He stated that Harry B. Mendenhall of Colorado and W. E. Leavitt who were appointed by the'respeotive Gov~rnorg; of Colorado and Kansas to negotiate for an interim agreement respecting the storage in, and release of water from, John Martin Reservoir for irrigation, did enter into an agreement whioh would probably require some "reworking over by them." C. L. Patterson, member of the Arkansas River Compaot Commission for Colorado, stated that the engineering oommittee, appointed by the Co~~sio~,~_ will hold a "'seting on January 6th to prepe.re' oopies of the twenty~~e:ven: .~....~ ;~"._ tabulations of basic information which have been agreed upon by i;he, ,connl11ttee 0.. .,' <. ~' ...... ~ . - ~ ...,: . ~ TJ:1ereupon, it was pointed out that at the last Board ~&eting"-it was ., l understood that at the present meeting the Board would attempt ;11,0 agr.ee upon -t;;he ~ F seleotion of the plaoes in Colorado where the next intensive st~!~S' and invest~~ gations would be carried on by the U. S. Geologioal Survey under~~,coopar~ti~e' agreement between the state and the U. S. Geological Survey. ~ . --'''''''?'!'l'Tl1,'''