My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07276
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07276
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:26:36 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:13:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.300.40.A
Description
Colorado River Compact
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
9/17/2003
Author
Gregg Hobbs
Title
Inside the Drama of the Colorado River Compact Negotiations: Negotiating the Apportionment
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
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 />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />22 <br /> <br />I understand Mr. Norviel's proposition to be this; that there be a <br />straight race for development for a certain unnamed period. At the <br />end of that period, there will be priority for whatever water has been <br />put to beneficial use. Yet, there is nothing whatever said as to what <br />should be done after that period. We need to have a guarantee of <br />water to each of the individual states. <br /> <br />Mr. Norviel: <br />(addressing Davis) <br />The period of time may be extended, or left to the next <br />generation. <br /> <br />Mr. Carpenter: <br />(rejecting Norviel's proposal, as summarized by Davis, in its entirety) <br />The State of Colorado could not look with favor upon any plan <br />which would degenerate into a mere contest of speed whereby an <br />unfortunate unnatural growth would be forced upon one basin in <br />order to keep pace with what might be a natural development in <br />another basin. Neither can we look with favor upon permanent <br />control by a super-government. Priority is a worthless expression <br />unless enforced. To enforce it would require the intermeddling of a <br />super-power, created, if you please, by surrender of local power. <br />Secondly, when you proceed to reduce the adjustment to one of a <br />definite fixing of quantities, or limitations of use state by state, you <br />proceed to a degree of refinement that is hazardous and calls for <br />knowledge which no man possesses at this time. <br />Proceeding upon that hypothesis or conclusion, it becomes a <br />problem of seeing if it could be worked out on a division basis, with <br />those divisions having been fixed by nature. We have a great <br />catchment basin pouring down into a funnel neck, the canyon. Below <br />that is territory to receive that water. For these reasons, it appears <br />more prudent to strike at the root of the whole problem by looking at <br />allocation based on divisions. <br /> <br />Mr. Emerson: <br />(looking to Hoover to give a signal) <br /> <br />22 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.