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 41 years, "122 Dern also noted that Utah was hoping to establish control over the bed of the Colorado River, not only to have jurisdiction over potentially significant power sites but to protect the value of the river 'bed as an oil producing area. If the river were declared navigable (something denied by the Compact), Utah would not have to worry about losing control of these resources to the federal government. Once again, the issue of state sovereignty loomed as a major point in Compact discussions and the ratification process. While Californians insisted on the need to have authorization for a dam approved in the form of a Swing- Johnson Bill before they would sign any form of compact, the Upper Basin became increasingly hostile towards the Swing-Johnson Bill, believing that it should be opposed until protection was provided in a signed compact In Dern's view, the controversy "raging over the Colorado River [was] essentialIy between a nationalistic viewpoint and a state viewpoint." We of the West, he stated, "are getting sick and tired of the doctrine that everything in our states that is worth anything belongs to Uncle Sam "123 Carpenter concurred He lamented the fact that Arizona and California could not compose their differences, but he recognized that with Utah's departure from the six-state plan, the Upper Basin had to insist that the Lower Basin ratity the Compact "before we dare let them proceed with any major improvement upon the river out of which any adverse claims might follow." With California proposing for the sake of expediency that the reclamation Service had authority over the Colorado River and could build wherever it wanted regardless of the will of the states, Carpenter believed that the Upper Basin had to present a united front in regard to state sovereignty and in opposition to any federal construction "prior to the complete ratification of the