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 />"Now, the treaty, then, does not propose to go upstream <br />and give to Mexico from storage in Boulder Dam or any other <br />dam 1,500,000 acre-feet of prime water. It proposes to get <br />credit tor the delivery of all the return flow that appears in <br />the river due to seepage, due to return of drainage water, due <br />to operation of. de silting works, and credit itself on the account <br />of 1,500,000 with at least 900,000 acre-feet of water. It <br />leaves, then, from the 1,500,000 not more than the 600,000 <br />of upstream water, and not as much as the original offer in <br />1929 of water divcrted, stored, and carried down to Mexican <br />lands." <br /> <br />3. On page 84 Sonator Downey asked whether the Mexican representa- <br /> <br />lives agreed that there would be 900,000 acre-fcet of return flow plus 600,000 <br /> <br />of "fresh water" for Mexico under the treaty. Mr. Lawson's reply was: <br /> <br />"In negotiating the treaty, Senator, we had difficulty in <br />persuading the Mexican representatives to accept that kind of <br />water that is recovered flOVl, drainage water, and return flow <br />which would requiru in the future probably some dilution with <br />fresher water of a less alkaline quality. We had no expression <br />from the Mexicans in the negotiations except that at the begin- <br />ning of the negotiations they insisted that the full amount of it <br />be upstream water." <br /> <br />At this point Senator Downey sought to determine whether Mexico might accept <br /> <br />__a_guarantee of 60.0,000 of fresh water _plus all there.turn flow withollt regards <br /> <br />to the amount of this return flow. On page 85 Mr. Lawson stated: <br /> <br />"We have what we believe are the best terms that can be <br />arrived at with Mexico. We discussed for a week or 10 days <br />the question of return flow. They objected, at first, to giving <br />us credit for any of that return flow. But we have, we believe, <br />with the reports on record, a very definite idea what that return <br />flow will be, from various engineers, in their own opinion, and <br />from our own individual studies." <br /> <br />Mr. Lawson in replying to whether the State Department would be willing to <br /> <br />reconsider negotiating with Mexico over the quantity of water Mexico was to <br /> <br />receive, stated on page 85 as follows: <br /> <br />B 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.