OCR Text |
Show ARIZ. EXH. NO. 55 Appendix 205 THE COLORADO RIVER COMPACT: ANALYSIS BY HON. HERBERT HOOVER (Extract from the Congressional Record, January 30, 1923, pp. 2710-2713; part of extension of remarks of Hon. Carl Hayden,. Representative from Arizona) Department of Commerce, Office of the Secretary, Washington, January 27, 1923. Hon. Carl Hayden, I louse of Representatives, Washington, D. C. My Dear Mr. Hayden: Referring to your letter of January 9 addressed to the Secretary, inclosing questionnaire on the Colorado River compact, I am requested by Mr. Hoover to forward to you his answers to the questions which you propounded. Very truly yours, Clarence C. Stpjtson, Executive Secretary, Colorado River Commission. Question 1. What was the reason for dividing the drainage area of the Colorado River and its tributaries into two basins, as provided in Article II of the Colorado River compact? The reasons were: (a) The commission, upon analysis, found that the causes of present friction and of major future disputes lay between the lower basin States and the upper basin States, and that very little likelihood of friction lay between the States within each basin; that the delays to development at the present time are wholly interbasinal disputes; and that major development is not likely to be impeded by disputes between the States within each basin. And in any event, the compact provides machinery for such settlements. (b) The drainage area falls into two basins naturally, from a geographical, hydrographical, and an economic point of view. They are separated by over 500 miles of barren canyon which serves as the neck of the funnel, into which the drainage area comprised in the upper basin pours its waters, and these waters again spread over the lands of the lower basin. A31 |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |