| OCR Text |
Show -108- Seotion or the National Resources Planning Board* Gentlemen, our office has followed the development of the proposed inter- state compact between the States of Colorado, Nebraska, and Kansas for allo- cation of the waters of the Republican River Basin above the mouth of the Smoky Hill River since its inception. We have done so because of our interest in and responsibility for the coordination of practical plans and projects af- fecting the use of or the control of waters and for their development with other resources» < ¦ . When I speak of "our office" I speak of the Water• Resources Section of the National Resources Planning Board as differentiated from the members of that Board. While the Board, as such, has not had an opportunity to consider the proposed Republican River compact, the water resources Section has given much consideration to the subject of interstate compacts, including this particular »compact. Less -than a year ago we completed an analysis of all of the interstate water compacts, I785 to I9I4I and prepared an analytical table indicating their natures, purposes, and composition. Recognizing that such compacts historical- ly have played an important part in the amicable settlement of interstate con- troversies, and recognizing that they have not always been as successful in their accomplishments as was originally hoped and desired, our objective was to determine vrhich elements were most likely to lead to their success, to provide a practical yardstick by which the likelihood of success of a proposed compact could be measured in advance*. In fact, one of the main causes of our initiating that and related analyses was the rough path along which the earlier Republican River compact struggled. I am pleased to note the very real progress made by the States and, by the Federal Government in the progressive changes incorporated into the presently proposed compact for the Republican River Basin. At the request of the representative for the United States, Mr. Glenn L» Parker, the director of the National Resources Planning Board arranged for Dean F* M« Dawson, our water consultant, to attend the meeting of the Commissioners, which was held in Lincoln, Nebr,, on December 29 and 30, I9I4.2. We were sub- sequently pleased to learn that Dean Daws on had made a contribution toward the basic requirement for further amicable development of the basin; that is, agree- ment among the States, on a basis which is compatible with the interests of the Federal Government. In his opinion, as in mine, the proposed compact repre- sents a notable result of collaboration between the legal and engineering minds of the State and Federal Governments.. It is my understanding that the proposed compact reflects (a) agreement upon facts; (b) agreement upon allocation of waters; and, in my opinion, it reflects also the integrity of the officials involved. In the interest of comity and progress, the Federal and State interests have correlated their con- cerns in va-rious rights. As a part of that process, the States desire that the Federal Government realize and recognize this by enacting into ike law the pro- visions of section 2 of the bill. We rec ognize that this is a new legislative practice in the field of inter- state water compacts, and that it was adopted in this case, among other reasons |
