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 264 |
OCR Text |
Show 264 particular time all the water reasonably necessary for its agricultural and related uses as against those who appropriated water subsequent to its establishment. However, such a limitless claim would place all junior water rights in jeopardy of the uncertain and the unknowable. Financing of irrigation projects would be severely hampered if investors were faced with the possibility that expanding needs on an Indian Reservation might result in a reduction of the project's water supply. Moreover, it would not give the United States any certainty as to the extent of its reserved rights, which would undoubtedly hamper the United States in developing them. Since, under the Arizona theory, United States water rights vary with changes in Indian population, the planning of works to serve future needs would be difficult because the United States could never know whether sufficient water to operate the works economically would be legally available. The other possibility, which would avoid the serious disadvantage of creating uncertainty as to the extent of the reserved rights, would be to predict the ultimate needs of each Reservation and to decree that much water for its future uses. The shortcoming of this solution, however, lies in the difficulty of predicting the future needs of Indian Reservations. Failure to foresee expanding requirements would result in a forfeiture of the Indians' water rights and would stultify development of the Reservations. Whether it is ever possible accurately to predict the future needs of an Indian Reservation, it is clearly not possible in this case where the attention of the parties has been directed to a great many complex and important issues quite apart from those relating to the Indians. Whatever might be possible in a case involving solely the issue of the reserved rights of a |
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 |
276-UUM-COvAZ-SMRP_page 264.jpg |
Setname |
wwdl_azvca |
ID |
1120016 |
Reference URL |
https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s61835d5/1120016 |