OCR Text |
Show Emery: USBR Planning Report, February 1951, No. 4-8a.26-2: Cols. (3) & (4), p. 10, note 3.6 new irrigation, 20.5 supplemental; Cols. (5), (6) & (7), insufficient data; Col. (8), p. 6; Cols. (9), (10), insufficient data; Cols. (11), (12), (13), (14) & (15), p. 6; Col. (16) = (15) -*- (8); Cols. (17) & (18), p. 6. Lyman: USBR Planning Report, October 1950, No. 4-8a.38-2: Cols. (3) & (4), p. 19; Cols. (5), (6) & (7), insufficient data; Col. (8), p. 30; Cols. (9) & (10), insufficient data; Cols. (11), (12), (13), (14) & (15), p. 30; Col. (16) = (15) -- (8); Cols. (17) & (18), p. 30. |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde 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, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |