My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07342
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07342
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:26:51 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:16:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.300.40
Description
Colorado River Compact
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
5/19/1997
Author
James S. Lochhead
Title
The Perspective of the State of Colorado in 1922 - Did We get What We Bargained For?
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.
/
28
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 />p <br /> <br />~ <br />. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />Colorado River Compact Symposium <br />James S. Lochhead <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />development <br />reasons why <br />development <br />promoted by <br /> <br />. That will <br />upper development <br />will 7not be all <br />need. <br /> <br />serve to illustrate <br />will corne gradually. <br />at once. It will <br /> <br />the <br />~e <br />be <br /> <br />* * * <br /> <br />~e whole theory of the compact is this: ~at the <br />water apportioned to each basin is adequate not only <br />for all of its present uses, But for the increase of <br />development within each basin. <br /> <br />After the Compact was finalized, Colorado <br />emphasized the perpetual nature of the allocation <br />ratification by the Colorado legislature. In his <br />the Compact to the Governor, Carpenter stated: <br /> <br />officials <br />in urging <br />report on <br /> <br />The apportionment to the upper territory is perpetual. <br />It is in no manner affected by subsequent development. <br />It is not required that the water shall be used within <br />any prescribed period. <br /> <br />* * * <br /> <br />Broadly speaking, from a Colorado viewpoint, the <br />compact perpetually sets apart and withholds for the <br />benefit of Colorado a preferred right to utilize the <br />waters of the river within this StaDe to the extent of <br />our present and future necessities. <br /> <br />In his inaugural address in January 1923, newly elected Gov. <br />william E. Sweet agreed with the policy of his predecessor <br />Oliver Shoup, supporting the Compact: <br /> <br />Our present irrigated area in round numbers is <br />three and one-half million acres. We must extend <br />area and thereby increase our agricultural output <br />our rural population, thus building up our towns <br />cities. <br /> <br />about <br />this <br />and <br />and <br /> <br />~e Colorado River Compact . seems to effect a <br />division that ~s fair and at the same time gives to <br />private and public capital that degree of certainty <br />necessary to investment in en~erprises depending upon <br />water supply from that source. <br />7 th <br />14 meeting of the compact Commission, Santa Fe, New <br />Bexicb, November 14, 1922. <br />24 meeting of the Compact Commission, Santa Fe, New <br />Mexico, November 23, 1922. <br />Report of Delph E. carpenter, In Re Colorado River <br />~Ompact, to the Governor of Colorado, December 15, 1922. <br />Senate Journal, 1923, p. 148. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.