AZ vs. CA:20 California Exhibits, Vol. XX; Nos. 4050-4092

page 30

-30- of the Missouri River Basin above Sioux City in excess of that now authorized by existing law', is not adequate since existing law does not specifically define the quantitative demands that may be made upon the water resources of the Missouri Basin for present or future projects on, or for the benefit of, the lower river and surrounding territory." As adopted by the Congress, section 1 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 provides, consistent with the views thus expressed by the Secretary: "The use for navigation, in connection with the operation and maintenance of such works herein authorized for construction, of waters arising in States lying wholly or partly west of the ninety-eighth meridian shall be only such use as does not conflict with any beneficial consumptive use, present or future, in States lying wholly or partly west of the ninety-eighth meridian, of such waters for domestic, municipal, stock water, irrigation, mining, or industrial purposes." (2) Statement in the report of the Regional Director, Region II, Bureau of Reclamation, dated December 1, 1947. In paragraph 70 of his report to the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation dated December 1, 1947, on a comprehensive plan for water-resource development, Central Valley Basin, California, the Regional Director of Region II of the Bureau of Reclamation at Sacramento, California, stated: "70. In conducting irrigation investigations and constructing and operating projects throughout the West, the Bureau of Reclamation fully recognizes