AZ vs. CA:12 California Exhibits, Vol. XII; Nos. 1350-1383; 1400-1446; 1501-1518; 1601-1603; 1701-1703

page 50

-50- beneficial consumptive use of the waters of the Gila River, but the language, when considered in connection with other provisions of the Act, is susceptible of an interpretation which would be detrimental to this State, and besides, in the absence of a three-State agreement, it is of no effect whatsoever. The amended language of section 1, which declares that water stored by the proposed dam is for beneficial uses exclusively within the United States, is a provision of much importance, since inferentially at least it is a notice to Mexico that her rights cease with the exhaustion of the normal flow of the river, but it seems likely that the benefits of the provision are nullified by the concluding paragraph, which states that "nothing in this Act shall be construed as a denial or recognition of any rights, if any, in Mexico to the use of the waters of the Colorado River system." The Secretary of the Interior is directed to report within three years on the Parker-Gila Valley project in Arizona, but this manifestation of interest in Arizona poorly compares with a $43,000,000 appropriation for a California project immediately across the river, and in any event will prove of little use if Arizona is left with a modicum of water inadequate for her requirements. The All-American Canal is eliminated as a burden upon power revenues from Boulder Dam; $25,000,000 of the Federal appropriation is assigned to flood control, to be reimbursable with interest out of surplus revenues in which the States of Arizona and Nevada are permitted to participate, and other amendments favor the charging of a reasonable price for power, but there is still no assurance that there will be any surplus revenues, or if any,