WSP04958 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 33 In theory, Carpenter agreed with Davis. Their principal difference was over the length of time the Upper Basin would need. The time limit must be so broad [said Carpenter] and so long that it will .. not force any unnecessary development in any section in order to keep pace, and if that is provided, and adequate time is given, then the Compact might run for a certain term of years, and continue thereafter until a call for revision should be made by a majority of the states. . . . I see no objection to a time limit, but that time limit should not be short. 89 During testimony before the Senate Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation in October 1925, Carpenter increased his estimate of the time needed to 150 years and when Senator Hiram Johnson asked him if that estimate might reach 200 years, he responded that it would depend on "the press of population and the improvement of transportation. ,,90 The Upper Basin also needed assurance that lower basin states understood that the Gila River was included as part of the Colorado River system and was subject to the terms of the Compact. Many Arizonans believed that the Gila River belonged exclusively to Arizonans and should be exempt from the Compact, but Carpenter pointed out that Colorado could use the same reasoning to exempt the San Juan, Dolores, White, Yampa and Grand rivers from the Compact.9t Fortunately, Arizona Senator Carl Hayden agreed with Carpenter. Although very suspicious at first, Hayden came to the conclusion that the Compact could not possibly interfere with Arizona's utilization of the Gila River, while Arizona's ratification of the Compact would be a positive step in getting the government to build useful storage reservoirs. 92 Unable to influence a majority of the state's legislators, however, Hayden had to admit defeat, but Carpenter continued to press his case long