<br />136
<br /> Table 3 (continued)
<br /> Anticipated
<br /> Scheduled Scheduled 1983 Co\. (4)
<br /> 1981 1982 Scheduled Minus
<br />Month Delivery Delivery Delivery Co\. (3)
<br />(I) (2) (3) (4) (5)
<br />Ocr, 57,209 56,398 56.750 351
<br />Nov. 54,519 55,857 56,750 892
<br />Dec, 102,834 107,548 114,572 2,857
<br />Total 1,700,000 1,500,000 I, 700,000 200,000
<br />
<br />r-
<br />0')
<br />0-"
<br />N
<br />Cl
<br />Cl
<br />
<br />The above was taken from an Upper Colorado River Commission
<br />memorandum of January 17, 1983,
<br />14, 43 U,S,CA, Sec. 1512,
<br />15, 43 U,S,CA, Sec, 1511.
<br />16, 43 U,S,CA, Sec, 1552,
<br />17, Acr of 6 July 1866, Chap, 262, 14 Srat, 251.
<br />18, Hunter v, Uni"," Sw<es, 388 F. 2d 148, CA. 9, Ca\. 1967,
<br />19, Meyers, "The Colorado River," Swnford Law Re<'icw 19 (1966),
<br />p, 1.
<br />20. This concept that appropriated water would have to yield to the
<br />obligations of the Mexican treaty is discussed in some detail in Meyers "The
<br />Colorado River."
<br />21. Pre""" v, Greenaux, 19 How, I, 15 L. Ed, 572 (1857),
<br />22, 43 U.s.C Sec, 1512,
<br />23, 657 F. 2d 275 (1981), See al"" Richard Hennig and Janice Olson,
<br />"The Colorado River Salinity Problem-Old Approaches to a New Issue,"
<br />Land and Water Review 11 (1976), p, 459; N, A, Evans, "Salt Problem in
<br />rhe Colorado River," Narural Resource> Journal 15 (1975), p, 55,
<br />24, 33 U.s.C Secs, I3I3(a)-(e) (1976 Supp, III 1979),
<br />25, 43 U,S,C Sec, 1591 (1976 and Supp, III 1979),
<br />26, 42 U,S,C Sec, 4332(2)(E) (1976 and Supp, III 1979),
<br />27, 54 Srat, 774,
<br />28, Clyde "Legal Aspects of the Colorado River," p, 26,
<br />29, 103 s, Cr, 539 (1982),
<br />30, 304 U,S, 92 (1938),
<br />J l. A series of articles deal with such peculiar problems which relate
<br />to only part of the states. Article X recognizes the La Plata River Compact.
<br />entered into between the states of Colorado ~nd New Mexico in 1922. Article
<br />
<br />,
<br />,:
<br />
<br />RESPONSE TO PROLONGED DROUGHT
<br />
<br />137
<br />
<br />~;
<br />
<br />XI deals with the waters of the Little Snake River, which was a problem
<br />relating exclusively to Colorado and Wyoming. Article XII rel~tes to the
<br />consumptive use of water from Henry's Fork, Beaver Creek, Burnt Fork,
<br />Birch Creek. Sheep Creek, and their tributaries. These ~re of concern to
<br />Wyoming and Utah. Articles X, XI, and XII all provide that water used from
<br />the particular tributaries named shall be charged against the srates under the
<br />apportionment made by Anicle III.
<br />32. Upper Colorado Rit'eT Basin Compact Cummisslon Record, yol. 2, pp.
<br />76 and 80, .
<br />33, Ibid,. p, 80,
<br />34, Meyers, "The Colorado River," p, I.
<br />35, Edward W, Clyde, "The Colorado River DeclSlon- I 963," p, 299,
<br />See, also, Frank J. Trelease "Arizona \'. California: Allocation of Water Re-
<br />sources to People, States, and the Nation," The Supreme Court Ret.:iew (1963),
<br />p, 158,
<br />36, Ca!. Srat, 1929, chap, 15, p, 67,
<br />37, 43 U,S,CA, Sec, 1521(b),
<br />38, 438 U,S, 645 (1978),
<br />.19, 96 Utah 403, 80 p, 2d 454 (1938),
<br />40, See also Spanish Fork West Field ITT, Co, v, District Co",r, 99 Urah
<br />527, 104 p, 2d 353 (1940),
<br />41. 373 U,S, 546 (1963),
<br />42, 438 U,S, 645 (1978),
<br />43, 304 U,S, 92 (1938),
<br />44, Clyde, Conflicts Between !he Upper and Lawer Basins on rhe Colarado
<br />River.
<br />45, Alabama v. Texas. 347 U,S, 272, 273,98 L. Ed, 689, 693, 74 Sup,
<br />Cr, 481 (1954), reh, den, 347 U,S, 950. 98 L. Ed, 1097, 74 Sup, Cr, 674
<br />(1954), See also United Swccs v, City and County of San FralU:isco, 310 U,S,
<br />16,84 L. Ed, 1050,60 Sup, Ct. 749 (1940), Ivanhoe ITTig, Dut. v, McCracken,
<br />357 U,S, 275, 2 L. Ed, 2d 1313, 78 Sup, Cr. 1174 (1958),
<br />46, United S"'CC, v, Gerlach, 339 U,S, 725 (1950); F.P.c. v, Niagara
<br />Mohawk Power Co., 347 U,S, 239,
<br />47, See Ivanhoe ITT, Co, v, McCracken, 357 U,S, 275 (1958); United
<br />Sw",s v, Public Utiliry Comm., 355 U,S, 534 (1958),
<br />48, Ari~ona v, California, 373 U,S, 546 (1963),
<br />49, SporMse v, Nebraska. 1025, Cr. 3456 (1982),
<br />50. See Felix Frankfurter and James Landis, "The Compact Clause of
<br />the Constitution-A Study in Interstate Adjustments," Yale Law Journal 34
<br />(1925), p, 685, Clyde, Conflicts BerU'een the Bl1.Iim of the Colorado Rit'CT; S""e
<br />
<br />:,
<br />,.
<br />
<br />,
<br />;,i
<br />;."
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />~ 1
<br />!:
<br />r
<br />
|