OCR Text |
Show -7- given to claims advanced in behalf of other programs of Colorado River development, and to the serious and permanent impairment of Arizona's rights and vital interests; (b) disagreement and possible misunderstanding as to the meaning, purpose and effect of certain provisions of the Colorado River Compact, which would seriously affect the extent and availability of Arizona's water supply for the future reclamation of such of her arid lands as may practicably be rendered productive through the application of the waters of the Colorado River; (c) the belief, shared by many, that the facts with respect to Arizona's needs and requirements were not sufficiently known and understood to justify agreement upon the quantity of water to be allocated to the State under the terms of an agreement between the Colorado River States. Your Memorialist submits that these questions constitute fundamental issues, which are entitled to fair and deliberate consideration and accurate determination. In further substantiation of the assurance which here is given, that Arizona has not intentionally been derelict in the performance of the duty which it owes to itself, to the Southwest, and to the Nation, to contribute to a constructive solution of this great problem, your Memorialist recites the following historical facts: 1. The Colorado River Compact, signed by the representatives of the several States and of the United States, at Santa Fe, New Mexico, on the 24th day of November, 1922, was by the Governor of Arizona laid before the Sixth Arizona Legislature at its regular session in January, 1923. It was given the most serious consideration, and was made the subject of earnest debate. Largely for the reasons enumerated in a preceding paragraph efforts to approve it were unsuccessful, and non-conclusive action was had. |
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. |