OCR Text |
Show "It is apparent, therefore, that the contracts held by California for the delivery of 962,000 acre-feet of surplus water are not firm contracts and are contingent upon what further apportionment might be made of waters of the Colorado River system after October 1, 1963. The water available for delivery under these contracts would not only be contingent upon the apportionment that might be made of the surplus after 1963, but it would appear that availability of water might also be contingent upon agreement between the lower basin States as to the division of that part of the surplus apportioned to the lower basin after 1963. The status of the various California priorities in relation to the apportionment of water, as made by the Colorado River Compact and as visualized by the Boulder Canycn Project Act, is shown on a graph which appears on page 61 of my report (p. 1375). It is drawing No. SSC-4. An enlarged copy of that graph is on the easel. "I think the graph plainly portrays the situation as suggested by Senator Wiley, the situation which we have all been aware of for many years. The horizontal line on the graph is intended to divide water apportioned under articles III (a) and III (b) from waters above the line, which are apportioned by article III (c) and are to be apportioned by articles III (f) and III (g), "Below the line there is portrayed the total allocation of 16,000,000 acre-feet, 8,500,000 acre-feet represented by the hatched area on the left of the graph, and 7,500,000 acre-feet by the right hatched bar. "Then, superimposed on the upper left-hand bar is an area representing 962,000 acre-feet of the junior priorities held by California. "Intervening, between that and the straight horizontal line which represents the firm water allocated at the present time, is the so-called III (c) water, or the water which might be apportioned to Mexico from water in excess of III (a) and (b) water. III-137 |