OCR Text |
Show Mr. Pittman. I will interject a statement if I may which may to some extent help the Senator from Washington. If I am in error the Senator from Arizona of course will correct me. There are 7,500,000 acre-feet of water allocated to the lower basin States and which may be used by Arizona, California, and Nevada. There are 1,000,000 acre-feet which also may be appropriated by the lower basin States. The provision of the seven States compact is a very queer one. In drawing the provision permitting a treaty between Arizona and Nevada and California we treated that 1,000,000 acre-feet, as I recollect, as unappropriated water. Then, we limited California by requiring as a condition precedent to ratification, that California through legislative action should surrender sovereignty over all of the 7,500,000 acre-feet in excess of 4,400,000 acre-feet and should not allow any water in excess of that to be taken out of the river for California. It was probably the intention at the time to include the 1,000,000 acre-feet in the restriction, but it was not done. As I understand, Arizona would have been perfectly satisfied at one time with the limitation of 4,400,000 acre-feet to California out of the allocated waters and an equal division of the 1,000,000 acre-feet. Mr. Hayden. Exactly so. Mr. Pittman. As the Senator knows, I was anxious in all the conferences to bring about an agreement that |
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. |