WSP03738

• File Number: 8410.200.60
• Description: Basin Multi-State Organizations - Missouri River Basin Commission - Reports
• Date: 1/4/1974
• Title: Technical Report of the Federal Legislation Group - Joint Federal-State Subcommittee Meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee on Water Marketing
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

'.:

(

(

I
I
II

I,
i:
'I
I,
i
!
I
I

and re[:ulation and not under either the collective or the conflicting
views of Montana and Wyo~ing and Colorado and other States?

"Governor Sharpe. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I think I pointed that
out in ny statement.

"Senator Overton. I thin1, you did.

"Governor Sharpe. I pointed out that it has got to be nationally
controlled, and all th,lt you lleed to do is to look at 'the history
of 1iti[:ation beDJeen Colorado and Kansas and Nebraska and other
St,E.tcs over, not this Hater, but some of it over this, [Lnd the
conflicts they have had in the pRSt. If the Federal Goverrur.ent does
not control it you simplv could not have any practicable application
of the doctrine of State rights, at all.

"If the doctrine of State rif;hts controls--for instance, suppose
that Hantana should "sSNt that they have got the absolute ri8ht to
the first appropriation "nd use of the "ater that arises or is flowing
in nn ~ntcrstate stream in Hontan.:!; they could, if they lvould, and
could do it practical1:1, shut the entire river flo\" off Rt the
boundary line of Nont<lna. If you carry the State-rights doctrine
to the le~al possibilities, they could. \-1e11 , immerlip,tely I
Rpprehenrl that Horth Datota "ould put up a terrific ohj ection to that,
Rnd North Dakota, carrying the doctrine of State ri!jht:s to "hat it
means could absorb every ounce of Missouri, River water that it could
find in North Dai,ota, shut it off at the south boundary, and deprive
South Dakota of any Hissouri River 'vater.

"He all kno;.' that that is sinply absurd. It juc.t could not be
done, and the absurdity of the doctrine proves its f"Uilcy or its
:f.neffcctivcness. Yeu ha'.rc p,ot to have n p,Jrc!~.ount cont)"ol over
inters t<1 te .s trc.Clr:~3, and the Cons ti tu tioH has wisely T.l~de it in the
Uni ted States Government, and some of llS are goinR to have to hicld
our personal desll:es and interests to the r,eneral benefit of the
whol", valley, as this C""gress \Jill prescrihe "hat they think it is."

CbvcrnOl. S.1::1 C. Ford of ~'~ont~na at p. 5!~4:

IlSena tor O'J"~r ton.
the right to use it for
control.

Of course if- you have the \.J'atc.r you have
irrigat:I.oi1 purposes, unless you mean State

"Governor ford. No; I am not tall:.inh about State control;
nlt:houf,h I do think th3t the provisions of the nO'''''Hl,"ent Hhich has
just been off",red and ",hich give to the State son'e \'oice or illl
opportunt t)~ to he heJnl :f.n th~ -dcvclop':lcnt of plans, s tucl1.cs, an,l
invcstif..i'ltions, is L'1 ~.oocl one anrl ,....ould have. a tendency to lessen
controversies such as \.Je have here. . . .11

2

~'~ .
,