OCR Text |
Show stead of 4,200,000 acre-feet." Arizona would not yield more. Then, we came back here, and, while no agreement was reached and never has been, and there is no provision in the bill with regard to the division of water, in a meeting that was held in my office between friendly representatives of California and friendly representatives of Arizona and the Nevada delegation it was discovered that there was another paragraph of Article III, which is (b), which reads as follows: (b) In addition to the apportionment in paragraph (a), the lower basin is hereby given the right to increase its beneficial consumptive use of such waters by 1,000,000 acre-feet per annum. In other words, we discovered that there were 1,000,000 acre-feet of water more to divide than we had discussed at Denver. Then we said, "Divide that 1,000,000 acre-feet between California and Arizona." What is the result? California will get 4,700,000 acre-feet, which is 100,000 acre-feet more than she finally insisted on at Denver; Arizona will get 500,000 acre-feet more than she insisted on, and Nevada would get exactly the same as originally planned. So there is plenty of water there. While that tentative agreement was reached, between certain representatives of the three States after the bill was reported out of the Senate, because this extra million feet was not discovered until after the bill had been reported, for one reason and another, we have the deadlock which we find here. I am not here for the purpose of criticising anyone as to why this deadlock exists, but it does exist, and it may continue notwithstanding how close we are to reaching a compromise. Therefore, we should pass this joint resolution*' as a safety measure. *Cal. EaIi. Nu. 2000. |
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] : California exhibits. |