| OCR Text |
Show which would preclude later use of the water in the upper basin. The law respecting rights to the use of waters of interstate streams was not well settled. Each of the various States claimed exclusively the right to regulate the appropriation of water within its boundaries. At the same time claims were made that the Federal Government had jurisdiction over the waters of interstate streams. It was argued that no reasonable regulation of the flow of the Colorado River by storage appeared to be feasible except with the approval and the control of some authority higher than the States and that the Fed- eral Government logically should carry out that regulation. The lower river was or had been navigable and therefore was subject to jurisdiction by the United States. At the same time, the desire prevailed to obtain Federal aid in financing the huge multiple-purpose projects considered neces- sary for tfcie utilization of the stream flow of the lower Colorado River. An agreement between the various factions was essential before comprehensive work in the river could proceed. Each State approached the prob- lem individually. The conception of a division of water as between the upper and lower basins, which was finally adopted, instead of an apportionment among the individual States, crystallized slowly. The common desire for a solution gained momen- tum and finally resulted in an interstate compact. The lower basin States favored a compact be- cause they wished to enlist the support of the upper basin States in securing legislation by Con- gress for main stream developments which were urgently needed for further expansion in the lower basin. States in the upper basin favored a com- pact because they desired to feel secure in their rights to further development of water uses, believ- ing that they would be deprived of such rights by prior appropriations and uses downstream if they did not enter into a special agreement. The States of both areas desired to retain con- trol of water rights within their respective boundaries and thus were willing to enter into an interstate agreement to avoid the complete Federal control of the Colorado River that otherwise pos- sibly would, result. Another significant motivating factor leading up to the Colorado River Compact was the desire of the people in the Colorado River Basin to give agriculture priority over power in the use of water. The signing of the Colorado River Compact in 1922 cleared the way for legislation authorizing construction of major projects. It removed the cause of rivalry between the upper and lower basins. Prior construction in the lower basin would create no prior right to the use of water in that basin as against the use in the upper basin. This left the upper basin free to carry out its program in the manner and time required and marked the begin- ning of what can be termed the second stage of development. This second stage is marked with a series of Fed- eral legislative acts giving congressional approval and authority to undertake major development on the Colorado River. Of primary importance was the Boulder Canyon Project Act of 1928,3 author- izing major works such as Hoover Dam, Ail-Ameri- can Canal, and the repayment of such works out of revenues derived from the sale of water power or electric energy at Hoover Dam. These sales are being accomplished under terms of several water and power contracts. Subsequently, there was passed the Boulder Canyon Project Adjustment Act, signed by the President in 1940.4 This act, among other things, established the Colorado River Development Fund from revenues attained at Hoover Dam for expenditures up to $500,000 each year to 1987. These funds are allocated to basin States and are used by the Bureau of Reclamation in preparing plans for the Colorado River system. A treaty between the United States and Mexico was signed in 1944, relating to the division of the waters of the Rio Grande, Colorado, and Tiajuana Rivers. With respect to the Colorado River, the treaty was a definition of the right of Mexico to use Colorado River water previously recognized by the Colorado River Compact. Within the second stage came the first major structure in the basin. On the lower river, Hoover Dam, of unprecedented height and power output capacity, was followed by the great works at Im- perial Dam, the heading of the All-American Canal. There followed Parker Dam at the intake of the Colorado River Aqueduct, leading to Los Angeles. Davis Dam was then built to close the final link in the control of the lower channel. Other works such as Bartlett Dam on the Verde River were also completed in the lower basin. In the upper basin, the 13-mile Alva Adams tunnel was driven through the divide into eastern Colo- rado, and a number of storage reservoirs of mod- 8 Act of December 21, 1928, 45 Stat. 1060, 43 U. S. C. 617 et seq. * Act of July 19, 1940, 54 Stat. 774. 456 |
