Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br /> <br />2. <br /> <br />"Whichever way Congress acts, in other words, it cannot <br />avoid favoring one use of water over another, one type <br />of water user against another. <br /> <br />In short, the congressional problem is a political <br />one, in the highest sense of the word--that of distribu- <br />tion, or setting the standards by which distribution is <br />to be made, of the available water supply among the <br />various uses to which it can be put." <br /> <br />For convenient reference, Sec. l(b) of the Flood control Act <br />is quoted below. <br /> <br />"(b) The use for navigation, in connection with the <br />operation and maintenance of such works herein authorized <br />for construction, of waters arising in States lying wholly <br />or partly west of the ninety-eighth meridian shall be only <br />such use as does not conflict with any beneficial consump- <br />tive use, present or future, in States lying wholly or <br />partly west of the ninety-eighth meridian of such waters <br />for domestic, municipal, stock water, irrigation, mining <br />or industrial purposes." <br /> <br />3/ Congress specified the federal development of the waters of <br />the Missouri River basin by the provisions of Sec. 9 of the Flood <br />Control Act of 1944. The degree to which such federal development <br />might pre-empt all of these waters for the federal projects purposes <br />was ~he sUDjec~ or mucn ~es~~mony ana argumen~ Derore ana among <br />Congressional Committees, House and Senate, handling the legislation <br />(H.R. 4485, 78th C0ngress, 2nd Session). It is difficult to conceive <br />how inclusion of the so-called a'Mahoney-Millikin amendments (Sec. 1) <br />in the Flood Control Act of 1944 can have any other meaning than <br />exclusion of water used, present and future, for purposes enumerated <br />in Sec. l(b) from the waters to be controlled and used by the federal <br />developments. Congress has declared this federal policy in the 1944 <br />Act and has repeated it many times in subsequent federal project <br />authorizing Acts. <br /> <br />Congress, itself, has granted prior rights for non-federal-pro- <br />ject irrigation use of Missouri River basin waters over use of these <br />waters by authorized federal projects. <br /> <br />4/ This has been the understanding in the Missouri River basin <br />since 1944. In annual operating plans for the Corps Missouri River <br />reservoirs, the Corps makes allowance for upstream irrigation and <br />other depletions as part of the determination of the annual water <br />supply to be regulated through these reservoirs for federal projects <br />purposes. General Gerald E. Galloway, Division Engineer, Corps of <br />Engineers stated this criteria as follows (presentation to Missouri <br />Basin Inter Agency Committee, September, 1957. Helena, Montana): <br /> <br />"In these basic long-range operation planning studies, <br />certain general over-all priorities were observed. Flood <br />control operation, of course, is not a use of water and <br />requires only that adequate storage space will be available <br />whenever it might be needed. This requirement has been <br />observed. In requlatinq water for ~~l the actual water <br />uses. provision is first Inade for t~e requirements for- <br />