Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001475 <br /> <br />decision" ':Vhe Court declined. t~o appor-'cion the wat.e:cs of -the ri.ver <br /> <br />o~c discuss -the di.vision of k)enefi-ts from John Ncu:-tin Reservoir, <br /> <br />but strongly suggested tha't 'the only \Vay 'co se'ctle such controversy <br /> <br />\Vas by in'ters'tate compact. <br /> <br />br);: 'lns ~~"2,]i ver <;;'21:Et.1'?9E,t _E,,,'s _lio_,Rr2Yi?_~onE (~L,'l_.l1ec::r_(}_'!"t ion _.poo}:. <br /> <br />The Arkansas Hiver Compact \Vas nego"tia,~ed from 1945-1948 <br /> <br />by comrnissionsfrom booth states vli'ch participa'tion from a United <br /> <br />states representative, ra'tified by booth state legislatures and <br /> <br />approved by Congress in 1949 for the purposes of settling existing <br /> <br />disputes and removing causes for fu'ture controversy and equitably <br /> <br />dividing and apportioning the \Vaters of the river and the benefits <br /> <br />arising from John Nartin Heservo:Lr. It provided for the Arkansas <br /> <br />I <br />River Compac"t i'ldministra"tion, composed of two irriga"tors from <br /> <br />each s'tate, 'the Kansas Sta"te Eng-ineer and the Director of t,he <br /> <br />Colorado Wat,or Consm:va:l:ion Board, too mee"t regularly and determine <br /> <br />9ag-ing necessary I invest,iga:te violations of the Compact provisions, <br /> <br />adop"t and revol,e Rules and Regulations and prescribe procedures <br /> <br />for 'the administ:cation of the Compact. <br /> <br />The compac"t commission was requested to allocate 10,000 <br /> <br />acre-.fee"l: of sto:cage for recrea"tion purposes by the l'ederal Fish <br /> <br />and Wildlife service, b1.rt it wasn "t given much consideration. <br /> <br />Irrigators in bot,h Kansas and Colo}:ado t:hought i'c would impair <br /> <br />-5- <br />