OCR Text |
Show INTERSTATE COMPACTS VOLUME IV PRINCIPLES OF EQUITABLE APPORTIONMENT OF THE WATERS OF INTERSTATE STREAMS INTERSTATE WATER COMPACTS CONTENTS PAGE 1. PRINCIPLES OF EQUITABLE APPORTIONMENT OF THE WATERS OF INTERSTATE STREAMS* .................. . . i 1. Equitable Apportionment by Court or Compact . . . , . 1 2. Court has passed upon Sixteen State Controversies over Interstate Waters ••*<••'......... 1 3. Each State is Entitled to its Equitable Share of the Benefits................... 5 1+. Courts Hold there Must be Equitable Limit to Conflicting Sovereignties. ............ k 5» Each State Obligated to Conserve Common Supply of Interstate Stream • •••«..»..»...• 5 6. Existing Economic Development Preserved VJherever Possible.......• . •.......«... 6 7« In Arizona v. California Court Refused to Act in Assumed Potential Invasion of State's Rights « » . 6 2. INTERSTATE WATER COMPACTS**.................... 7 1. Compact Adjustments Preferable to Litigation..... 7 2. The Validity of Interstate Compacts ......... 7 3* Nature of a Compact................. 8 I4.. Basic Compact Procedure............... 8 5» Certain Compact Practices Advisable......... 9 6. Administration •.....•........•••• 10 7» Granting of Judicial Functions to Compact Administrators Questioned. •••.....•••• 10 8, Compact Affords Means of Correlating Federal and State Jurisdictions .«...•••••.•• 11 3. HINDERLIDER, STATE ENGINEER, ET AL., V. LA PLATA RIVER AND CHERRY CREEK DITCH CO. (Decision in the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the Constitution- ality of a Compact). 30I4. U. S. 92........... Ik * Section XII of Report entitled, "Preservation of Integrity of State Water Laws," by national Reclamation Association, October, 19k3t revised to date, ** Section XIII, Report on "Preservation of Integrity of State Water Laws," by National Reclamation Association, October, 19U3* |