WSP04864 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r . . N' W en 'W at this meeting. The highlight of tha meeting was a report b~ Mr. A. B. West, Regional Director, Region 4 of the Bureau of Reclama- tion with headquarters in Boulder City, Nevada. The report of Mr. West has been quoted above in its entirety. It is an excellent report and sets forth most of the problems involved and the actions taken by the Interior Department. The report is expanded upon here as a result of discus- sions of various features of the report and to include matters suggested by other people intimately familiar with the situation. In the last paragraph on page 2 of the report by Mr. West you will note that total deliveries to Mexico exceeded the total order by some l8 percent. By a simple process of arithmetic this amounts to 270,000 acre-feet so therefore the total delivery to Mexico was l,870,000 feet rather than the l,500,000 ordered. in addition to this, and not included in the report of deliveries, was an additional delivery in the amount of 40,000 acre-feet which was ordered by the state Department in September of 1961. This order was in the nature of an "Ex Gratia" allowance to Mexico by the state Department. This ordered release had no connection with the salinity of water but was simply to make up for a deficiency which would have existed in the Republic of Mexico due to their ordering excessive amounts of water earlier in the year. It is not believed that the quantity is significant but that the principle to be established is. In a badly deficient water year, such as was ex- perienced last year and considering the low levels to which Lake Mead has been drawn and with particular emphasis on the desirability of having Lake Mead at as high a level as is possible ,at the time of the filling of Glen Canyon Reservoir commences, it would appear that the precedent established is dangerous. Mexico had been forewarned at the beginning of this year that releases would be in the amount of the Treaty minimum and it is within their discretion to call for releases to satisfy their irrigation demands in accordance with limits set forth in the Treaty. It is not felt that it is incumbent upon the United States Government to correct mistakes of Mexico at the expense of water users in the United States, particularly in view of the fact that inadvertent deliveries far exceeded the provisions of the Treaty. On page 3 of Mr. West's report, the last paragraph, please note that at lO a. m. on December l5, 1961, Mexico closed the diversion gates at Morelos Dam. The Alamo Canal through diver- sions at Morelos Dam delivers the domestic water requirements fOr the City of Mexicali, Mexico, a city on the Mexico-California border, of approximately 400,000 persons. The closing of the Information Bulletin #l8 -6- January l2, 1962