My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC00493
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
12000-12999
>
WSPC00493
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 10:50:06 AM
Creation date
10/9/2006 2:13:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.100.10
Description
Colorado River - Interstate Litigation - Arizona Vs California
State
AZ
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
6/3/1963
Title
AZ Vs CA - Determination of Rights of States of the Lower Colorado River Basin to Waters of the Main Stream of the Colorado River - Opinion of the Supreme Court of the US - RE AZ Vs CA
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
100
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />002192 <br /> <br />18 <br /> <br />ARIZONA v. CALIFORNIA. <br /> <br />out knowing what water Congress wanted apportioned. <br />Under California's view, which we reject, the first <br />7,500,000 acre-feet of Lower Basin water, of which Cali- <br />fornia has agreed to use only 4,400,000, is made up of both <br />mainstream and tributary water, not just mainstream <br />water. Under the view of Arizona, Nevada, and the <br />United States, with which we agree, the tributaries are <br />not included in the waters to be divided but remain for <br />the exclusive use of each State. Assuming 7,500,000 acre- <br />feet or more in the mainstream and 2,000,000 in the tribu- <br />taries, California would get 1,000,000 acre-feet more if <br />the tributaries are included and Arizona 1,000,000 less.a. <br />California's argument that the Project Act, like the <br />Colorado River Compact, deals with the main river and <br />all its tributaries rests on ~ 4 (a) of the Act, which limits <br />California to 4,400,000 acre-feet "of the waters appor- <br />tioned to the lower basin States by paragraph (a) of <br />Article III of the Colorado River compact, plus not more <br />than one-half of any excess or surplus waters unappor- <br />tioned by said compact. . .." And Article III (a), <br />, . <br />referred to by ~ 4 (a), apportioned in perpetuity to the <br />Lower Basin the use of 7,500,000 acre-feet of water per <br />annum "from the Colorado River System," which was <br />defined in the Compact as "that portion of the Colorado <br />River and its tributaries within the United States of <br />America." <br />Arizona argues that the Compact apportions between <br />basins only the waters of the mainstream, not the main- <br />stream and the tributaries. We need not reach that ques- <br />tion, however, for we have concluded that whatever waters <br />the Compact apportioned the Project Act itself dealt only <br />with water of the mainstream. In the first place, the Act, <br />in ~ 4 (a), states that the California limitation, which is <br /> <br />.. Also, California would reduce Nevada's share of the mainstream <br />waters from 300,000 acre-feet to 120,500 acre-feet'. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.