My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP00291
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
WSP00291
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:13:35 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 9:37:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8278.400
Description
Title I - Mexican Treaty
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
3/1/1962
Author
IBWC
Title
Mexican Water Treaty -Appendix B - Water Quality A Missing
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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 />.' <br /> <br />Department that Mexico. would have to take the water as is even if useless, he <br /> <br />was cancerned aver the possibility af this treaty being braught be fare a caurt <br /> <br />of international arbitratian and that court establishing a standard of salinity <br /> <br />which would prove disasterous to. the states of the Colarada River Basin. At <br /> <br />tllis paint Senatar Downey was advocating that Mexico be given 750,000 acre- <br /> <br />feet from Lake Mead plus the return flow. On 3176 Senatar Dawney painted <br /> <br />out that he wauld not have this quality questian apen to the passibility that <br /> <br />at some future time, we might be faced with the requirement af furnishing <br /> <br />Mexico water af the" present quality or an amaunt equal to that, or all of <br /> <br />it aut of Lake Mead. . ." This wauld be disaster. <br /> <br />Senator McFarland discussed the quality questian in the fallawing <br /> <br />language at pages 3307-08: <br /> <br />"Mr. MC FARLAND. Mr. President, I shauld like to. com- <br />plete my explanation on this fD int. I say they do. nat have such <br />pratection, far the reason that if the quality af water were men- <br />tianed in the treaty, Mexico would withaut question want quality <br />defined and spelled out. It w1l1 be noted that the treaty provides: <br />"Such-wa ters-sh'aU-be-made-up-of-the-w a ters-af-said-ri ver-w hat--- --~ <br />ever their arigin.' This pravisian, in my opinian, would give us <br />a great advantage, in that we would receive credit for all return <br />flaw and seepage water which wauld get into the stream. No <br />objection is there made to. the quality af such seepage and return <br />waters. <br /> <br />"The number af acres which Mexico. irrigates with the waters <br />she receives under the treaty is a matter entirely in Mexico.' s <br />hands. And when we talk about usable water as far as the salt <br />content is concerned, this is a relative term. Water can be used <br />with salt cantent up to. at least 3,000 parts per millian if sufficient <br />quantity is used to wash the salt an lhraugh the land, but the less <br />salt the more usable the water. <br />"There is nothing in the Calarada River compact which provides <br />far the quality of the water to. be de livered by the upper-baSin States <br /> <br />B 42 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.