OCR Text |
Show COMPACT-REPORT BY EMERSON----WYOMING A129 it has been claimed by Imperial Valley that the supply of water at the intake on the Colorado River of the Canal serving this valley has been deficient, and that appropriators in the valley were entitled to more water under the priorities of their appropriations than they were able to obtain from the river. They therefore are of the opinion that they have a right of action against junior appropriators of water above. Any such right or claim they may have would not be affected by the Compact. This article of the Compact provides in effect, however, that such claims would cease whenever storage capacity to the specified amount is created by the construction of a reservoir or reservoirs. Article IX speaks for itself in providing that any State will have the right of court action in enforcing any of the provisions of the Compact, or protecting any right established thereunder. Article X also speaks for itself in providing for the termination of the Compact at any time by unanimous consent, further providing, however, that all rights that might have been established at the time of such termination would continue unimpaired. Article XI provides that the Compact shall become effective only after approval by the seven State Legislatures and by the Congress of the United States. The article further sets forth the method of notification, concerning legislative action, between the several States and the United States. Further provision is made for the disposition and care of copies of the Compact. Through these eleven articles of agreement it is believed that broad basic principles for the equitable apportionment and use of the waters of the Colorado River System will be established. The function of the Compact was not to provide for the construction of any particular project or projects. Its main purpose was to afford the means of clearing the way for any developments that may be practically undertaken at any time in any section of the Colorado River Basin, by removing cause for artificial restriction or interference from other sections of the river. This purpose a treaty between States based upon this form of Compact will no doubt accomplish. It would seem that the interests of the upper States were well protected during the negotiations of the Colorado River Commission by reason of the personnel and qualifications of the four State Commissioners. Colorado was represented by the Honorable Delph E. Carpenter, and New Mexico by Stephen B. Davis, Jr., Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Both of these prominent attorneys have had a wide experience in irrigation law and interstate water matters. Wyoming and Utah were represented by their State Engineers, both of whom are men of large experience in the practical field. The Colorado River Compact as a whole is the result of the labors of qualified legal, engineering, and other talent, all engaged in 77831-48------21 |
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] : |