AZ vs. CA:24 California Exhibits, Vol. XXIV; Miscellaneous

page A98

A98 appendix 210 ARIZ. EXH. NO. 54 States to a rivalry and a contest of speed for future development. The upper State has but one alternative, that of using every means to retard development in the lower State until the uses within the upper State have reached their maximum. The States may avoid this unfortunate situation by determining their respective rights by interstate compact before further development in either State, thus permitting freedom of development in the lower State without injury to future growth in the upper. (By the attached compact thj objectionable features of leaving the destiny of the States to a wild scramble in a contest of speed for first development are avoided. The future uses within the upper State, according to its growing necessities, are protected without interfering with a similar growth in the lower State. Each State may proceed in an orderly manner in pace with the normal course of events, free from any cloud of threatened penalties.) SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT OF DELPH E. CARPENTER, COMMISSIONER FOR COLORADO, COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION (Printed in full in Senate Journal (Colorado, 1923, pp. 888-895, inclusive) as a part of the proceedings in re second reading of Senate Bill 410-"a bill for an act to approve the Colorado River Compact") (Original report printed in Senate Journal of January 5, 1923, pp. 75-86, inclusive) Denver, Colo., March 20, 1923. Senator M. E. Bashor, Chairman, Senate Committee on Agriculture and Irrigation; and Hon. Royal W. Calkins, Chairman, House Committee on Agriculture and Irrigation, Denver, Colo. Gentlemen: Pursuant to your request I respectfully submit the following observations respecting certain provisions of the Colorado River Compact: First and foremost, it should be ever kept in mind that the intent of the compact is to be ascertained from a consideration of the entire instrument and that each clause must be considered in connection with other clauses. Art. Ill, par. (b): Paragraph (b) of Article III does not authorize a cumulative increase of beneficial consumptive use of waters to the extent of 1,000,000 acre-feet per annum. This paragraph means that the lower basin may increase its annual beneficial consumptive use of water 1,000,000 acre-feet and no more. Paragraph (a) of said article permanently apportions to the lower basin the annual beneficial consumptive use of 7,500,000 acre-feet