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 185 |
OCR Text |
Show 185 fornia's use of water diverted from the Colorado River without excluding the water supplied from the Bill Williams River. For these reasons I have concluded that the limitation on California's consumption of water from the Colorado River contained in Section 4(a) of the Project Act and the correlative apportionment of this water among Arizona, California and Nevada effectuated by the water delivery contracts, which apportionment is discussed infra, apply only to water diverted from Lake Mead and from the mainstream of the Colorado River below Lake Mead. Hereafter, reference to the "mainstream", except where otherwise specifically indicated, means Lake Mead and the Colorado River downstream from Lake Mead within the United States. The limitation on California is measured at points of diversion. The foregoing conclusion leaves open the question of the points of measurement for the application of the California limitation. The United States, as will more fully appear, once suggested Lee Ferry as the point of measurement. I come to a different conclusion. The language of Section 4(a) of the Project Act makes plain its intention that the limitation on California's use of water from the Colorado River is to be measured in terms of consumptive use of water, which is defined as diversions from the River less return flow thereto. Thus Section 4(a) provides: ". . . the aggregate annual consumptive use (diversions less returns from the river) of water of and from the Colorado River for use in the State of California . . . shall not exceed four million four hundred thousand acre-feet . . . plus not more than one-half of any excess or surplus. . . ." |
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 |
197-UUM-COvAZ-SMRP_page 185.jpg |
Setname |
wwdl_azvca |
ID |
1119937 |
Reference URL |
https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s61835d5/1119937 |