page 66

Metadata

Title
page 66
Is Part Of
http://digital.library.unlv.edu/u?/dig,8
Full text
66ratified by only six, but these amendments are designed to give effect to that compact so far as six of the States are concerned when ratified by the States, and the six which are enumerated are the States of California, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico.The fifth class of amendments is a class designated to postpone the water appropriations connected with this project--postpone them in their making--until after the ratification of the compact, because if they are postponed until after the ratification, then it follows irresistibly that they would be subject to it, whereas there might be some doubt as to whether they would be subject to it if made before.The sixth class of amendments is one which is designed to confine the use of the water of the project to those States which shall ratify but which leaves it open for all of the States to come in and ratify.I consider that the amendments of this sixth class are indispensable. I notice that Secretary Hoover in the statement which he made to this committee a few days ago urges that the uses of water be confined to those States that ratify.I say that in my judgment this class of amendments is indispensable, and for this reason: Unless these water uses be confined to the States that ratify, then we have no compact to protect the city of Denver against uses in a State that does not ratify, and the only reliance that we could look to for our protection in the case of water users in a nonratifying State would be these other amendments subjecting the project in its administration to the Colorado River compact, amendments that purport to control Federal rights of way on Federal lands, and as to these amendments, as I have already indicated, we have not sufficient assurance of their legal validity. Their validity is involved in doubt. But we know, gentlemen, that if the water uses connected with this project be confined to the States that ratify, then we have the protection of the compact as to the States that do thus ratify.I understand, for instance, in connection with this particular project that there is a good site for a power plant on the Arizona side and a good site upon the Nevada side. I do not know where the plant will be built, but if the plant should be built on the Arizona side and without Arizona ratifying the compact, then the draft of that plant upon the river system being an enormous one might- for we do not know what the interstate law would be-might be a priority against later uses in the upper States, and if a priority, then we are at the mercy of the water uses connected with this project, and our future, so far as it is dependent upon the utilization of further water supplies from the system, would be ruined; therefore we must confine all water uses to ratifying States, but, in justice to any which do not ratify, we must leave the door open in order that they may enter.Now, I call attention particularly to the fact that none of the amendments which have been drafted exclude the State of Arizona from the use of electrical energy. To have excluded her from the use of electricity would have been nothing short of persecution. It would be a limitation which would not be needed to protect interests in the upper basin, because the only thing we need to have to protect us is a limitation upon the quantity of water which may be consumed in a nonratifying State. We need no limitation upon the

Cite this Item

When linking to this object, please use the following URL:

http://digital.library.unlv.edu/u?/lv_water,2356

Tags

Comments

Subscribe to recent comments

There are no comments yet. Be the first to comment below!

Comment on this object