My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP04180
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
4001-5000
>
WSP04180
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:54:06 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:11:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.300.40.A
Description
Colorado River Compact
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
11/22/1922
Author
Co. R Compact Comm.
Title
Minutes of Colorado Compact Commission - Meeting #22
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.
/
34
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 />158 <br /> <br />I,m. C,illPEHTER: It haD been frequently argued in other courts '00 the <br /> <br /> <br />same effeet, has it not? <br /> <br /> <br />];JR. JLu.mLE: Not with any Great frequency. <br /> <br /> <br />I,m. C:"RPENTEll: Tho federal court of Nevada had a case in nhich that <br /> <br /> <br />same argument was presented and which. turned it dowl1, did it not? The <br /> <br /> <br />Carl1ey Case?; Or just waved it aoide saying it served as useful purpese? <br /> <br /> <br />I;lli. rL\.EELE: I don I t thinl, it ..rao decided in. that case. <br /> <br /> <br />CrL'.ITm,UI HOOVER: .\.s to irriGatien works, in vrhat way could this <br /> <br /> <br />compact interfere vrith the progress of irrigation ,works construction? <br /> <br /> <br />MR. JL\BELE: It might be argued from the compact that the United <br /> <br /> <br />States was required in the eonstruction of fedoral irrigation norks to <br /> <br /> <br />follow impli.citely the direction of each state. It ..rill bo subject to the <br /> <br /> <br />whims of each state. For instance, if it desired to make an appropriation <br /> <br /> <br />of water, to take a caae that has already been passed upon, showing the <br /> <br /> <br />attitude bf the states, an appropriation of water in Southern Colorado <br /> <br /> <br />that couldn't be used in the State of Colorado but it could be benefieially <br /> <br /> <br />applied in the State of Nerr Mexico. Under this compact the Governmont <br /> <br /> <br />would be at the mercy of the ,State of Colerado as:to that diversion. <br /> <br /> <br />CJ1\.OOi[AN HOOVER: 110uld it be any more so than it was before?; <br /> <br /> <br />~Ul. JLU~ELE: Well, I think so, yes, because ~ssuming that this <br /> <br /> <br />cempllCt gives up the claim of the Unitod Statos to the unappropriated <br /> <br /> <br />waters of the bas.in it vrould be. <br /> <br /> <br />CI1\.TIUfu\.N HOOVER: But it would rest on that plaim, would.it net? <br /> <br /> <br />It would rest upon the question of the ownership of unappropriated vrater. <br /> <br /> <br />MR. JL\BELE: That would be always an important factor. <br /> <br /> <br />CHAIRIL\.N HOOVEll: And have you any idea 1'lhere the federal Tlater Power <br /> <br /> <br />Act would bo infringod by this? <br />MR. rL\MELE: As. the federal water power act 'now stands I don't th:i.nk <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />111 <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.