My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP05673
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
5001-6000
>
WSP05673
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:19:24 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:11:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8210.140.20
Description
Colorado River Basin Organizations and Entities - Colorado River Basin States Forum - California
State
CA
Basin
Western Slope
Date
5/1/1969
Author
Myron B Holburt
Title
Annual Report For the Calendar Year 1968
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Annual Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />2lS;: <br /> <br />EXISTING RIGHTS <br /> <br />II <br />I <br /> <br />Litigation <br /> <br />All of the Board's functions are generally <br />related to the responsibility of protecting Cali- <br />fornia's existing rights and interests in the Colo- <br />rado River. However, some functions are more <br />specifically associated with the overall task of <br />protecting existing rights and these activities, <br />covered under the subject headings of litigation, <br />water supplies and deliveries, river management, <br />and power production, have been grouped in <br />this report under this section. <br /> <br />Arizona v. California. The staff continued <br />its technical assistance to the Attorney General <br />of California with regard to Arizona v. Califor- <br />nia post -decree proceedings. Activities during <br />1968 included the analysis of present perfected <br />rights claims by the various parties which were <br />submitted in 1967 in response to Article VI of <br />the decree. As defined in Article I(G) and (H) <br />of the decree, "present perfected rights" are <br />rights to mainstream waters acquired under state <br />law and measured by the extent of consumptive <br />use prior to June 25, 1929. They also include <br />all mainstream water reserved for federal estab- <br />lishments (primarily Indian reservations) prior <br />to that date, regardless of use, if any. <br />Present perfected rights remain an important <br />issue even though P.L. 90-537 gives existing <br />mainstream water contractors priority 9ver the <br />Central Arizona Project, with California's pri- <br />ority limited to 4,400,000 acre-feet per year. <br />Present perfected rights affect water shortage <br />allocations if the supply of the mainstream ever <br />falls below the protection levels contained in <br />P.L. 90-537. It also recognizes specific rights of <br />individual agencies under the Supreme Court <br />decree. <br />Early in 1968, each of the various parties sub- <br />mitted to the United States Department of Jus- <br />tice, as requested, drafts of opposition to the <br />present perfected rights claims. After analysis <br />of this information, which was made available <br />to each affected party, it was apparent that there <br />were major differences of interpretation of the <br />Supreme Court decree. <br /> <br />An interstate meeting was held at the office <br />of the Regional Solicitor of the Department of <br />the Interior on March 12, 1968, for the purpose <br />of discussing differences in present perfected <br />rights claims and opposing views. It was con- <br />cluded that an engineering-legal fact finding <br />committee should be established ro compile, <br />analyze and tabulate available data, facts and <br />theo'ries'regarding present perfected rights. By <br />listing all relevant facts and figures, with range <br />of differences, agreement on principles should <br />become feasible. <br />Subsequently, California representatives pre- <br />pared a memorandum describing the agenda and <br />procedures to be followed by the fact -finding <br />committee. The memorandum was approved by <br />all parties and an organizational meeting was <br />held on December 14, 1968. <br />The Board staff continued to review and <br />analyze the data submitted periodically by the <br />United States to all parries as required by Ar- <br />ticle V of the decree. That Article requires the <br />Secretary of the Interior to prepare and main- <br />tain records of uses from the mainstream for <br />each user in the states of Arizona, California, and <br />Nevada and of other hydrologic data relating <br />to river operation. <br />It has been found that the submissions by the <br />United States in response to Article V continue <br />to contain inconsistencies and quesrionable ac- <br />counting procedures. As in the past, these find- <br />ings by the staff have been fonnally reported <br />to the United States by the Attorney General <br />of California. It is hoped that these differences <br />will eventually be resolved by negotiations <br />among the various panies involved. <br />On May 30, 1968, the Secretary of the In- <br />terior wrote letters to the Governors of Arizona, <br />California, and Nevada requesting approval for <br />an amendment in the Supreme Court decree in <br />Arizona v. California that would allow the <br />Havasu Lake National Wildlife Refuge (in- <br />cludes Topock Marsh) to increase its diversions <br />from 41,839 acre-feet per year to 80,276 acre- <br />feet per year without increasing the permitted <br />consumptive use of 37,339 acre-feet per year. <br /> <br />21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.