Title |
State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Imperial 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 : the United States of America and State of Nevada, interveners : State of Utah and State of New Mexico, impleaded defendants : report / Simon H. Rifkind, special master |
Creator |
United States. Supreme Court |
Subject |
Water rights; Water consumption; Rivers |
OCR Text |
Show The record of this action is another chapter in the long history of controversy relating to the Colorado River. Suit was initiated by Arizona on August 13, 1952, by filing a motion for leave to file a bill of complaint against the State of California and seven public agencies of the State.1 On January 19, 1953, the motion, unopposed, was granted. |
Publisher |
[Washington, D.C. : U.S. Supreme Court, 1960] |
Contributors |
Rifkind, Simon H. |
Date |
1960-12-05 |
Type |
Text |
Format |
application/pdf |
Digitization Specifications |
Image files generated by Photoshop CS from PDF files |
Language |
eng |
Rights Management |
Digital Image Copyright 2004, University of Utah. All Rights Reserved. |
Holding Institution |
UNLV Libraries, Special Collection, 4505 Maryland Pkwy., Las Vegas, Nevada 89154 |
Source Physical Dimensions |
ix, 433 p. ; 27 cm |
Call Number |
KFA2847.5.C6 A337 1960 |
ARK |
ark:/87278/s61835d5 |
Setname |
wwdl_azvca |
ID |
1120114 |
Reference URL |
https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s61835d5 |
Title |
page 115 |
OCR Text |
Show 115 recognizes that the Upper Basin depletion at Lee Ferry will not exceed, under existing and presently authorized projects, 3,840,000 acre-feet per annum.48 Thus unless Congress authorizes new projects, even on California's own assumptions, her existing uses cannot be endangered. It is for Congress to determine the limits of new construction in the Basin and thus the extent to which California's existing uses risk curtailment. 3. Conclusion On the basis of all of the evidence and argument presented in this case, I am convinced that California's apprehension of "chaotic disaster" resulting from the recommended decree is unfounded. Existing California uses are in no danger of curtailment unless and until many vast new projects, some of which are not even contemplated at this time, are approved by Congress and constructed. And even if these projects are eventually constructed, there may well be enough water apportioned to California to satisfy the scale of her existing uses, although greater efficiency may be required. This being the case, there is no justification for California's argument that the legal conclusions discussed in Part Two should be modified because of equitable considerations. C. Tables For the convenience of the Court, I append on the following pages several tables showing the erratic flows of streams in the Lower Basin and the annual losses from reservoir evaporation and other causes. "California's motion to reopen the trial for the taking of evidence of depletion of the Colorado River at Lee Ferry by the Upper Basin, p. 24. |
Format |
application/pdf |
Source |
Original Report: State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Imperial 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 |
Resource Identifier |
126-UUM-COvAZ-SMRP_page 115.jpg |
Setname |
wwdl_azvca |
ID |
1119866 |
Reference URL |
https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s61835d5/1119866 |