WSPC03626 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

OOH3g -6- " acreages irrigated, power gene['ated, or other benefits to result from such projects; and, while the Report states or infers that such benefits will appear in basin-wide reports in preparation for the importing basins, Colo- rado points out that projects for importing water to the South Platte River, a tributary of the m ssouri River, were not included in the llissouri River Basin Report, and that the Report on the Arkansas River Basin is said to be in preparation in the Amarillo office, while projects for importing wa- ter to tl1at br,sin are being investigated, planned and designed in the Denver office. <, 14. In further support of the general suggestions outlined in para_ graph 11. attention is directed, next, to the interstate prob lems thnt are said to await solutions in the Upper Basin, n8lllely, that interstate relations lUllong all States of the Upper Division must be defined. Colo- rado asserts, and suggests the Report be revised to show. that the physi- cal conditions which generally prevail in the Upper Basin are such that the streamflows of the Colorado River and its major tributaries are being used only in the one State in which they are produoed 0/ the natural prE!- cipitation and ['unoff therein" - and hence there are no pending or thr'eat- ened c ontrover sies between adj oining State scone erning the use of such streamflows; that suoh controversies as have arisen in the past, or are likely to arise in the tuture, involve a relatively few minor tributaries, such as the La Plata River, at ributary of the San Juan River, where an interstate compact heretofore has been ratified between Colorado and Hew NeXico, and the Little Snake Ri vel', a tributary of the Yampa River, where an interstate compact is being negotiated between Colorado and Hyoming; and that similar cont['oversies as they may arise in the future are ex,. pooted to be adjusted when end as they arise, by the tvc States and their interested oitizens, as provided by Art. VI of the Colorado River Compact, with the aid of and based on the factual information supplied by the Bureau of Reclamation and other State and Federal agencies. 15. Concerning the definition of interstate relations in the Upper Basin, as requested by the Report, Colorado admits that a compact 9Jllong the States of the Upper Division, as contemplated i,n the ColoradO River Compaot, will eventually be needed to define the relative rights and ob,. ligations of the respective states, and should be negotiated before the final stage of ultimate development in the Upper Basin is reached; but asserts that such a compact is desirable but not pre.cticable at the 'present time. As indicated by the Report, present development in the Up- per Basin, including allowances for projects now authorized but not yet completed, involves the use of but one-third of the quantity of water heretofore apportioned to the Upper Basin by Art. III (a) of the Colorado River Compact. Before a compaot 9l1long States of the Upper Division wi 11 be needed, to recognize and protect existing developments in each State, and define the interests of each in the waters of the Upper Basin await- ing future development, it appears desirable that sufficient additional time should elapse during whi<th projects might be constructed that would at least double the present utilization of water in the Upper Basin, and during ,which the Bureau of Reclamation might oomplete the neoessary de- tailed investigations of all development possibilities. Before a final and permanent compact among States of the Upper Division oan be negotiated, .;' . { ~) ..r , h' ,