AZ vs. CA:25 California Exhibits, Vol. XXV; Nos. 7501-7859

page 10

- 10 - states drafted and procured the insertion of the protective sections referred to. These sections were not needed as to California and Nevada, the other states of the Lower Basin, for the simple reason that the states of the Upper Basin were already protected as against them by the Compact itself. The provisions were needed as against Arizona alone. The average of 7,500,000 acre feet per year, that the upper States must turn down, assures to the lower Basin States part of the 8,500,000 acre feet that is apportioned out of the entire River System to that Basin. The River System is made up of the main stream and all its tributaries in both Basins, including the Gila. The water for which Arizona seeks a delivery contract from the Secretary, who must contract only in compliance with the Compact, is part of the very water the Upper States are required, by Article III (d) of the Compact, to turn down to the Lower Basin, inclusive of Arizona, to make it possible for that Basin to realize its apportionment. Article III (d) of the Compact does not create any title or apportionment. The apportionment to the Lower Basin is not made by Article III (d), but by Article III (a) and (b), and is out of the entire river system, inclusive of all tributaries. Arizona therefore puts herself in the unseemly position, as will appear presently from an analysis of her proffered contract, of wanting to take part of the water the Compact obliges the Upper States to give up, but of being unwilling to let them keep the part the Compact provides they may retain. Yet the Project Act requires that Arizona and every one else wanting water from the Secretary must take it subject to the Basin allotment made by the Compact. The Compact apportions water only between Basins and not among the States belonging to either Basin. If