My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP01657
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
WSP01657
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:32:07 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:35:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.300.40.A
Description
Colorado River Compact
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
4/2/1922
Author
Colorado River Com.
Title
Hearing of the Colorado River Interstate Compact Commission, Cheyenne Wyoming April 2 1922
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.
/
65
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 />.1 <br />w,,_- <br /> <br />-' <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />1 tnink 'l/yomin{1; would prefer some method of that kind. <br /> <br />While we wish to cooper~te on this sub~ect, we don't want to be <br /> <br />hasty. We don't want to tl1row amly DEl' birthriGht, and we don't <br />want to have a Commission, on inade~uate facts and data, dis- <br /> <br />pose of it for us. ~he question will come back to all the <br /> <br />people of all the stctes before it is enacted into a law. <br /> <br />With these feg generbl sU6bestions that I have made, I will <br /> <br />call upon a number of citizens of '.V,yoming, who have more inti- <br /> <br />mate knowlede,e of the Green River Va.J.ley, to s}leat.: in more de- <br /> <br />tail concerning the facts. <br /> <br />j,ffi. HOOVEj-~: <br /> <br />Q. You have spoken of the dlfferent rules of law, or theories <br /> <br /> <br />of law, which have been applied to WGter rithts and of the gen- <br /> <br />era 1 adoption of the rule of prior appropriation throughout the <br /> <br />West. As I understand it, originally the point of prior ap- <br /> <br />propriation was a matter of application. In other words, the <br /> <br /> <br />filing ot a claim gave the pr,iority and by dep'ees that has <br /> <br /> <br />been converted, at least in some of the st&tes, into actual <br /> <br />prior application to benefici81 use. Do you think that in the <br /> <br />development of that rule, - that it is in the right direction,- <br /> <br /> <br />that the priority of appropriation should rest on the time of <br /> <br />beneficial application x8ther than tbe filint of claim? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.