OCR Text |
Show COLORADO RIVER LITIGATION 579 if the Secretary, in making apportionments or contracts, deviates from the standards Congress has set for him to follow, including his obli- gation to respect "present perfected rights" as of the date the Act was passed. At this time the Secretary has made no decision at all based on an actual or anticipated shortage of water, and so there is no action of his in this respect for us to review. Finally, as the Master pointed out, Congress still has broad powers over this navigable in- ternational stream. Congress can undoubtedly reduce or enlarge the Secretary's power if it wishes. Unless and until it does, we leave in the hands of the Secretary, where Congress placed it, full power to control, ma'nage, and operate the Government's Colorado River works and to make contracts for the sale and delivery of water on such terms as are not prohibited by the Project Act. IV. Arizona-New Mexico Gila Controversy Arizona and New Mexico presented the Master Avith conflicting claims to water in the Gila River, the tributary that rises in New Mexico and flows through Arizona. Having determined that tribu- taries are not within the regulatory provisions of the Project Act the Master held that this interstate dispute should be decided under the principles of equitable apportionment. After hearing evidence on this issue, the Master accepted a compromise settlement agreed upon by these States .and incorporated that settlement in his findings and conclusions, and in Part IV (A) (B) (C) (D) of his recommended de- cree. No exceptions have been filed to these recommendations by any of the parties and they are accordingly accepted by us. Except for those discussed in Part V, we are not required to decide any other disputes between tributary users or between mainstream and tributary users. V. Claims of the United States In these proceedings, the United States has asserted claims to waters in the main river and in some of the tributaries for use on Indian Reservations, National Forests, Recreational and Wildlife Areas, and other government lands and works. While the Master passed upon some of these claims, he declined to reach others, particularly those relating to tributaries. We approve his decision as to which claims re- quired adjudication, and likewise we approve the decree he recom- mended for the government claims he did decide. We shall discuss only the claims of the United States on behalf of the Indian Reservations. The Government, on behalf of five Indian Reservations in Arizona, California, and Nevada, asserted rights to water in the mainstream of the Colorado River.97 The Colorado River Reservation, located partly in Arizona and partly in California, is the largest. It was originally created by an Act of Congress in 1865 9S but its area was later increased 97 The Reservations were Chemehuevi, Cocopah, Tuma, Colorado Kiver, and Fort Mohave. »8 Act of March 3,1865,13 Stat. 541, 559. |