AZ vs. CA:25 California Exhibits, Vol. XXV; Nos. 7501-7859

page 433

REAUTHORIZING GILA PROJECT 433 Mr. Phillips. Now, coming back to this question I asked Mr. Carson last night: As I get it, Mr. Carson, you say that the users of Gila water in New Mexico are using III (a) water, and the users of Gila water in Arizona are using III (b) water. Is that right? Mr. Cabson. They are using apportioned water m Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, and I think Nevada-they use very little-water-and California, dut of the 8,500,000 acre-feet. In Arizona we are using a little in excess of the 1,000,000 acre-feet apportioned to the lower basin by article III (b) of the Colorado Kiver compact. That means, then, as I see it-and this is the only place this has any application, as I say again-of the over-all basin use in the entire lower basin, we are limited by the compact to 8,500,000 acre-feet. We having used 1,000,000 acre-feet of III (b) water, or any other water of this apportioned water out of the Gila in Arizona, then it must follow, it seems to me, that the uses in the other States are part of the apportioned water; whether you call it III (a) water or III (b) water, it limits the use in the lower basin of the apportioned water. Therefore, as Mr. Baker will show you, when we are figuring our water supply in Arizona, we deduct from that which is deliverable to us as a firm right at Boulder or Lake Mead any excess over 1,000,000 acre-feet that we ourselves use of the Gila, that which is used in Utah and New Mexico, and our 2,800,000 acre-feet is reduced to that extent.