WSPC00493 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

002194 20 ARIZONA v. CALIFORNIA. herself and California, which would give each State 3,600,000 acre-feet out of the first 7,500,000 acre-feet of mainstream water. California rejected the proposed equal division of the water, suggesting figures that would result in her getting about 4,600,000 out of the 7,500,000. The Governors of the four Upper Basin States, trying to bring Arizona and California together, asked each State to reduce its demands and suggested this compromise: Ne- vada 300,000 acre-feet, Arizona 3,000,000, and California 4,200,000.42 These allocations were to come only out of the mainstream, that is, as stated by the Governors, out "of the average annual delivery of water to be provided by the States of the upper division at Lees Ferry under the terms of the Colorado River compact." The Gover- nors' suggestions, like those of the States, explicitly re- served to each State as against the other States the exclu- sive use of her own tributaries. Arizona agreed to the Governors' proposal, but she wanted it made clear that her tributaries were to be exempted from any Mexican obligation." California rejected the whole proposal, insisting that she must have 4,600,000 acre-feet from the mainstream, or, as she put it, "from the waters to be pro- vided by the States of the upper division at Lee Ferry under the Colorado River compact."" Neither in the States' original offers, nor in the Governors' suggestions, nor in the States' responses was the "Colorado River Sys- tem"-mainstream plus tributaries-ever used as the basis for Lower Basin allocations; rather, it was always mainstream water, or the water to be delivered by the upper States at Lee Ferry, that is to say, an annual aver- age of 7,500,000 acre-feet of mainstream water. With the continued failure of Arizona and California to reach accord! there was mounting impetus for a con- 1" .. i 42 See 70 Congo Rec, 172 (1928). .. Hearings on H. R. 5773, supra note 25, at 30-31. .. ld" at 402.