Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001474 <br /> <br />stat,es and was never. submit,t:ed 'to ei,the:c legislature. <br /> <br />Finally in 1928, Colo:cado too1~ action against Kansas in <br /> <br />the Unit:ed S'tates Supreme Court. The compact nogo,tia'tions had <br /> <br />failed and rights of colorado wa'cer users needed protection <br /> <br />against addit:ional suit,s by Kansas ':Jate,r users and by having its <br /> <br />water rights confirmed. Fur.thermore, Color.ado believed that the <br /> <br />quantit.y of usable wat.er in Kansas had not diminished since t.he <br /> <br />Decision of 1907. l"iany ex-tended hearings wer.e held, covering <br /> <br />nearly a ten-year per.iod, which result.ed in accumula'tion of a mass <br /> <br />of evidence. <br /> <br />Wnile the !C.s>lor:...ao.o _.Y.E..,-_.Karl..@.D30 case was pending in the <br /> <br />St1,preme Cour-t, Kansas and Colorado en'tered into an agreement. <br /> <br />called t.he Stipulation of J.933, which p):ovided that: bo,th st.ates <br /> <br />use their influence in Congress 'to obt.<:lin const.ruc,tion of a dual- <br /> <br />pur.pose reservoir by the united S'tates ,and agTee 'to t.he alloca'tion <br /> <br />of water stored (60'/0 for Col.orao.o and 4,0'/0 for Kansas). The res- <br /> <br />ervoir opera'tion would be adminis'cered by the Uni.'ted sta'ces and <br /> <br />would not: distur.b the status quo of diversions of w:ater from the <br /> <br />Ar.kansas River. 'fhis agreement led to Congressional atl'thor.ization <br /> <br />in 1936 for construction of John Mar.tin Dam and Reservoir. <br /> <br />The Supreme Court's decision in the case of folorado vs. <br /> <br />l\c\l1sas in 1943 was in favor. of colorado and affirmed its previous <br />---.---. . <br /> <br />-,4- <br />