OCR Text |
Show COMPACT----REPORT BY CARPENTER----COLORADO A105 the lower basin is designed to lift the ban upon the diversion of the low-water flow from the upper tributaries after the construction of such a reservoir, which will be filled from the floodwaters, but which is to be charged against the allotment of the lower division as specifically provided in paragraph (a), Article III. This provides conclusively against the supposition that the stored waters are not to come out of the allotment to the lower basin. "The assumption that paragraph (b) of Article III has no limit is its own refutation on account of the absurdity of that assumption. It would in a few years, if so construed, absorb more than the entire flow of the river, which reduces the assumption to an absurdity. Furthermore, the language is specific as the apportionment is for the consumptive use of 1,000,000 acre-feet per annum and cannot be construed to mean 2,000,000 acre-feet per annum or any other amount." (Note.-The Colorado Legislature also had before it, during the debates in re approval of Colorado River compact, the report of Herbert Hoover, representative for the United States, the same being Document No. 605, 67th Congress, 4th session, House of Representatives; also extension of remarks of Congressman Carl Hayden, of Arizona. See Congressional Record, January 30, 1923, Sixty-seventh Congress, 4th session.) |
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] : |