Report of the Colorado River Commission of Arizona

              , '... .....1
(1<1.. 'G;J~ ra"do~I·"'e.v:~ ,Cdrl'lt'vtl·~SJ~')tApr""JI1;l.~~FGl~h'~J IQ.2!r,·i
,1teport. . ., i
}
'. IN THE SENATE Sen~te " ,
, Docum~nt No:, 1
'FIRST REPORT
OF THE
COLORADO, RIVER
COMMISSION' OF ARIZONA
Read in the Senate 'October; 27, 1927,
'and Ordered to Be Ins,erted .in :the JournaL
,!f I .' • J'-l
" 'I i 1".1 I",
,SENATE AND., HOUSE.OF ,REPRESENTATIVES, , ' ,!: r , • , " • ': t' ; , ~ I i l !. I ( ;
EIGHTH LEGISLATURE; STATE'~OF ARIZONA:", 'i,'I,
, ;
• , " , "I
, " t ~ t " , .
'l'he,Colorado River Commission btAri:j':ona, which:vill h,~r,e­,.
be ref~r~'ed to as t~le Commission! ~lts ,created un,def" \1~d
the a~thorIty, o~ Substlt~te . House :~~ll, No., 15 (9hanter,?7,),
: the. Regular, SeSSIon of the', E,lgh th:j:;.~fP,s~a ~u~e, , a Xl pr,?ved . ·).V[!a~~h
1927, "for the purpose of eneouraglpgt:a~~ promotmg tp.e'de­,
velopment of ,the Colorado River, and of protecting the rigfits' alid
interests of the State of Arizona in said ri:v,er, and its . tributaries."
No time was fixed by law forthe'subrriissionof reports to the
but in order that the Ijegislature may be fully ad-
'of tIie activities of the' Commission, 'andparti~,Lllarly'in view
facttha t important events, bearingu pont he purpose 'for
the Commission was created, have transpired, and other
:and still more important events are likely soon to occur, ,it ·is c '
.,deemed'advisable to present a report at,this time. "
THE COlvtl\USSION
I
,.The Act creating the Commission pro:vided that.it should be
" 1.'M. t,S" ooCU, "'.E., NT IS.THE'P.." '}r'eRTY.' : .".. U., . ' , Of THE :. M''~".; .". l.'.!U.," '!1:l'VI1t'l\:.I;!l1;, :2 J. ' ' '. ' , u8RIRY:ARc~~;~~ ~!C~'~I~ Or·C26 '52 .
_AIUXOtU', ~.~~_~~ ~/; ".,;.
" " '
composed of eight<members, the Governor 'and three members to .'
be appointed by him; the President of the Senate and one mem­berto'
be appointed by him from among the membership of the
Senate; and the Speaker of the House and one member to be ap~
pointed by him ·from among, the membership of the House. Pur­SRant
to the requirements of this provision the Governor, the
Presiderit of the Senate and the Speaker Of the Honse met in the
Govenor's off~ce on Wednesday, April 6, 1927, pnd, proceeded
'to the organization of the Commission. '
,The Governor announeed ,. the' appointment of H. S. Mc­Cluskey
and ,Thomas Maddock, of Phoenix, and Senator T. S.
Kimball of Thatcher. The President of the Senate announced the
appoiIltment of Senator A. H. Favour" of Prcscott. '1'he Speaker
of .the House announced the appointment of Representative M.F.
Murphy, oL.Globe. Organization of the Commission was com-,
. pleted by the unanimous sclection 'of Governor Geo. W. P. Hunt
'as chairman and Mulford Winsor, President of the Senate, as
secretary. Offices wcre established in the offices and committee
rooms of, the S~nate, and placed under the charge of the secretary.
GENERAL ACTIVITIES'
$ome twenty-odd formal meetings of the Commission have
been held; conferences have been had with representatives of all
of ~he States of the Colorado River ~asin; visits have been paid
by the .Commissioners to the capitals of the several States and to
other citie~ in pursuance of the purposes for whieh the Commis­sion
was created; trips have been made to diffel'cntpoints ~ of
'interest on the Colorado River; investigation by teehn~eal experts
have been' authorized and reports seeured, and surveys, examina-:
tioris and "engineering investigations have been. and' are being
madc, to the end 'that Arizona may have all 'neeessary infornia­tion
with which to support the policy of the comprehensive and,
economical devclopment of the Colorado river.
A'1'TITUDE OF THE COMMISSION
'1'he attitude of the Commissioners toward the .responsipility
, by them assumed was expressed in a publie statement which the
seeretary was authorized; at the first meeting of the Commission,
, to give to the press, as follows:
"A preliminary discussion of general policies 'and methods
of procedure was indulged in. The members of the. Commis-"
sion found themselves in satisfactory accord, and umted upon
the policy of working in unison' for the .welfare of the State
of A.izona. '
"Essential facts will be agreed .uponas the basis for dis-
2
" ,
:'<A~I1:.;'.' '
'<i~3~;ql
'~:"; A''•' ''''f~I ':'.') " h. .
",l cl':21"Z'i?,' . ' , ," .'"". , " " '
i" •• ~ "'2 cussiO'ns, and differences O'f opiniO'n' arising frO'm their, cO'nsid­;
e.e'f'1-, eratiO'n will be irO'ned O'ut in the meetings O'f the CO'mmissiO'n,
;,' "V jn O'rderthat the Commission, acting as' a unit, and presenting
a SO'lid frO'nt fO'r the prO'tection O'f the State's interest and itIe
prO'motion O'f the ColO'rado's develO'pment, may'typify a united
people." , .
ARIZONA PLATFORM
As a preliminary enunciation of. fundamental principles
\'vhich should guide the efforts of the Commission, the following
platform was adopted at an early meeting:
"1. The develO'pment O'f the CO'IO'radO' 'Ri~er, shO'uld be
predicated UPO'n a ,cO'mprehensive plan by means of which the
river's destructive floods may be curbed; and which-ultimately
will insure the utilization 'of all' O'f the river's flO'W for irriga-tion
O'r domestic uses and every foot O'f the rhrer's fall fO'r ,the
creatiO'n O'f hydrO'-electric power. " ,
) , .' ;''''
"2. Such a·' plan ,sh~uldcO'ntempIa:te and 'guarantee,' the
use of all of the' stored waters O'f the CO'loradoRiver on,United
States soil or ,fo.r the use and benefit O'f 'American cities and
towns, and if any rights to waters O'f the Oolorado River shall
hereafter be accorded to' the Republic of MexicO', by treaty O'r'
otherwise, such rights shO'uld Irelate O'nly to' the unregulated \'
normal flow of the main stream, and in' amount not in excess
of that which has been applied 'to bemificialuse in that country.
"3. The right of .the 'CO'IO'rado RiverStates, as of all O'f
the so~called "appropriation" states 'Of, the arid west, as enun­ciated
in their wate.r laws and- recognized in the Federal Re­clarni,
atiO'n Act" and the Federal Water PO'wer Act, to' contrO'I
the apprO'priatiO'n, use' and distributiO'n O'f the waters within
'their respectivebO'rders, shculd nO't be impaired nor mO'dified
exc,ept with the consent and apprO' val O'f, such: States.
'''4. Inwhatever agr~emen;t may b~ reached respecting a
division O'f the waters of the CO'IO'radO' River, O'r O'f that poT,~ ,
tiO'n of such waters available to' the State's of the LO'wer Basin',
Arizona shO'uld be assured such amount as may:benecessary
to' ,reclaim her arid lands which maybe ascertained and deter­m~
ned; by competent investigation, -to be susceptible.O'f practi~
cal re'clamation 'from the ColoradO' River. ' .
" '''.;'
"5; The StatesO'f, the LO'werBasin should have the right
respectively, to cO'nsume for beneficial pu:rp()ses,such O'f ,the
water in the tributary streams flo,wing in thei.!', several States
as can be. put to' use priO'r to' the water entering' the mai;t
channel O'f the Colclrado River.
" \
"6. The fall of the OolO'radO' River, .within' ArizO'na's
bO'undaries, susceptible O'f utiliZation fO'r the creation' O'f vast
stores of hydro-electric PO'wer, is a natural resource, ahdthe
,Tight of ArizO'na to', derive an equitable revenue frO'm. this
resoul!'ce 'shO'uld be recO'gnized." ,.
3
BA.:SIC POINTS .. TO REGULA.;f;ENEGOTL:\TIONS,
4nti'cipating discussions, withrepresentat\ves of the Col'orado· "
River l13asin State~; looking to an ar'nieable und~r~tanding with
rcspeet to. Colorado River problems, seven basic points for the'
regulation of such negotiations ,were agreed upon:
/ (" " ' .
1. That Arizona will accept the Colorado River Compact,
as agreed upon at Santa Fe; New Mexiw, if and when the
sam'e is amended or supplemented to make definite and cer-'
tain the provisions essential to the protection of, Arizona's
rights and requtrements.,
2. That it is imperative that. before regulation of the
Colorado River is undertaken, Mexico be notified tha,t this
country rese:l'vesfor use in' the United States watfJr made
available by sitorage within. the United States, and if possible
. an agreement should be had with that country.
, , ,I
'3. ' That any compact dividing the, waters of the Colorado
River and. its tributaries shall not impair the' rights of the
8tates, under their respective water laws, to control the appro­priation
of water within their boundp"ries which is allocated,
to them. ' ' , , '
4. "That the waters of the tributary streams of the Colo~
rado River 'below Lee's Ferry be reserved to .the States in which'
they, are 19cated. . .. :
5. That th~' waters. of themain Colc,rado' River over and
above the allocation of the 7,500,OOO-acre feet to the Upper
Basin States and any unused pOirtion of the.,water allocat(!d
to the Upper Basin,. shall be legally available to the Lower
Basin' States' of Arizona, . Clllifo,rnia and' Nevada on the follow-'
ing, basis :of division: . . .
!I ,., A .. To Nevada 300,OQQ .. acre feet.
B.IThe remaind~r;ii:ft~r ~uchdeductions as may
be made to care for Mexican lands which may be'
made by treaty, shall be divided equally betwee,n,
. California and"· Arizona; each State' to' decide the
t~tit~or ~he storage and diversIon of waters allocated
'. 6. That the right of the States to secure revenuefrom
and to control the development of' hydro-electric power within
or upon their boundaries' be recognized.
, 7~>That encouragement will .be given, subject t;;) the
above conditions, to either private or. public. development of
the Colorado RiveI!' at an~. site or sites harmonizing with a
comprehensive plan fOT the m~ximum deve,lopment of the
river's irrigational. and power resources: ' .
The 'principles embodied,inboth of' the declarations agreeu ..
upon as above h~ve at all \imes been· substantially adhered to by
Arizona's rep~es~lltative~. ";:, ".' , .
·1
'; '/",1
~,<J
VISITS TOOTIIER STNl'ES'
During the month' of April members of the Coin~issio:h
visited the California Legislature and conferred with the Governor
-of that State. The visit was well intentioned, but no tangible r~~
suIts were gained. .' '.. .:
Later the Commission visited the capitals of New Mexico;
Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, and. conferr:ed with the chief execu­tives
and numerous interested officials and citizens of such States.
During this visit the suggestion of a conference of the Colorado
HiveI' Basin States was advanced by Arizona's representatives,
with the result that a call for a conference, to con velle in Denver,
Colorado, on Augnst22, was issued by the Governors of Colorado,
Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming and .the Governors of Arizona •.
. California and Neveda, together with their Colorado River Com­missioners
and members of Congress, were invited to attend the'
.conference. .
THE DENVER CONFERENCE
The Denver Conference, of which the complete proceedings
. will later b'e available, convened ,on August 22. Its purpose ~as
$tated in the call to be the bringing about of an agreement which­would
result in seven-state ratification of the Colorado River
. Compact and'" permit development of the Colorado Riyer." Ta.
'. Governors of all of the States of the Colorado HiveI' Basin wen
in attendance, together with the Colorado HiveI' Commissioners,
Interstate. \Vater Commissioners, and various advisors of the re­spective
States. There ,were also present a number of United ,States
Senators and Hepresentatives in Congress, including Senator Carl
Hayden of Arizona. Gov. Geo. II. Dern of Utah acted as presiding
officer, with conspicuous ability' and fairness. Except for a recess
'. during the first two .weeks of Scptember, the' Conference was in
" session from August 22 to October 5. It was fraught 'with the
greatest moment, and its. proceedings were of the utmost impor-
.. tanee. .
Full opportunity was afforded by the Conference for. the
presentation of. Arizona·'s position and .claims,and advantage of
the opportunity was taken.to the extent. of the ability possessed
by the members of. the Commission. .
The.maindiscussions. revolved about the qu~stiori~: (1) of a
division between the State of. Arizona,.California and Nevada of
. the. waters of the Colorado RiVer' System av~ilable to th'eStates
··~f the .. ~ower Di~isron;' (~) .. ~h·~~hnitat~ont.o be placed tip.im ·the
Republ~c of .MexI~q.,as to., Its rlghtto·waters ... of the. Colorado
River; (3) the 'ownership of theStatesdn and to ·ther'bedand
~j
. ",'
I'.,'"
banks of navigable streams; their right to' control the appropria~
tion, distributioll and use of waters within their borders, and to
compensation' for the:: use of their land and water employed in'
feder~l government projects; (4) the extent of the benefitsto
accrue to the States in the, case of 'pow'er development in the ,river
by 'the federal government, arid division of such benefit between
States whose land and waters are jointly used in any such 'de­velopment.
, " , ! ' . '
Briefly it may be. ~aid t1).at questions 2 and 3 were resoh:,ed,
to. the extent that they might be resolved by the Conf~rence, to
the,entiresati~laction of Arizona's representatives and in complet~
accord with tIle views by them. advanced ..
'i'!,':-t':' \""" " " . .
. THEl\;IEXICAN Q1JJ)JSifION
, . - ,J"'''' > 'I', ;' ," . ',' " :,
" A resolution was, adopted by the Conference, declaring ad~
'h~rencc, .oftho seven States of the· Colorado River Basin to the'
poii~ythat waters of the Colorado River storedori American soil
should .b.e for the benefit of American lands and interests ; that
Mexico should acquire no right, legal or mornl; to tIle use
of stlclilltore,dvyaters; requesting the 'President and the State
Department 6£ the United States to, act ,promptly ,in the matter "
, of e££eGting a treatY~with MC,xico which. would define and limit,
th'!it'couiti~ry's riglits in and to the waters o£ the, Colorado'River,
'artdasldngtliat in' the, formation !of any commission for the pur­.
pose of negotiating at treaty .the States '0'£ the Colorado River
.:Ba~in bea,dequately represented;
S'l'ATES'RIGHTS , I
,.'Inrecognitiono£ the prin~iples elllbod,icd in question 3, ,tho
"Pittmap. ,\Re.s~lution,"; so, called from the circumstance, th~t it' Was
introduced and ably championed by Senator Key Pittman of
Nevada, was adopted, after many delays and persistent obstruc-.
tion by the California'representativ'es,; with no' dissenting, vote
except of that State .
. iiJfhe resolution is deemed of such importance that it is here
set forth . in full:
. "WHEREAS, ,it is the, settled ,{aw ,'Of this, country, that
'I' "~he ownership of "and 'domln~on and, 'sqverej~ty, over, lands~,
'covered by navig'able waters withihthe lhnits of the several
States of the Union belong to the respective States within
which they are found, with the consequent right to use orr dis:
, .. ,po·se, of any portion thereof, when. that. can' be done without .
. ....• ";substantial 'im,pairment, of the interests of the public . in" the .
,', iwatars; and. subject 'always to the' paramount right of COl)- '
.: ,gress.:::to 'control their. navigation so far as ;may 00 necessary .
, '(.JRr"",tn!11\ regulation: of: commerce with foreign nations and
, :",among the States, and whereas ' :\ "
":;:.n·~'· .if') ';' ""'~"\" ,'~ 'I~' !Ii,,'" . '
6
... ,.'
- -----"-c----:----------:------~
"It is the gettled law of this country that subject to the
settlement 'of controversies between them by interstate com­pact,
or decision of' the Supreme Court of the United States
and subject always to the paramount right orf Conglres,s to
control the navigation of navigable streams so far as may be
necessary, for, the regulation' of commerce with foreign na­tionsand
a'mong the States, the exclusive soYereignty over
all of the waters within the limits of the several States be­longs
to, the respective' States within which they are found,
and the sovereignty over waters constituting the boundary
between two States is equal in each of such respective States,
and w)i'ueas:
"It is the sense of this conference that the exmcise by
the United States Government of the delegated constitutional
authority to cont.rol navigation for the regulation of interstate
and foreign commerce does not confer upon such government
the'use of waters fool' any other purposes which are not plainly
adapted to 'that end, and does not divest the States of -their
sovereignty over such waters: for any other public purpose
that will not interfere with navigation. '
"THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That it is th';) sense
of, this conference ·of governr"rs and the duly authorized, and
,appointed commissioners of the, States of Arizona, ,California,
Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah and Wyoming, constitut­ing
the Colorado River Basin States, assembled at Denver,
'Colorado, this 23rd day o'f September, 1927, that: .,
"The rights of the Sta,tes under such settled law shall, be
maintained. ' ,
"The States have a legal right to demrmd and: ;receive
compensation for the use of their lands and watersl except
from the United States for the, use of such lands and waters
to regulate interstate and foreign commerce. , ,
"The State or States upon whose land a dam and reservoir
is built by the United States Government, or whose waters, are
used in connection with. a dam built by the, United States gov­ernment
to generate hydro-electric energy are entitled to the
prefenred ,right, to acquire the hydr·o-electric energy so gen­erated
or, to acquire the use of such dam and reservoir for the
.generation of hydro-electric enmgy,upon undertaking to pay
to the United States Government the charges that may be
made for such ,hydro-electric energy or for, the. use of' such
dam and reservoir to amortize the government investment,
together with interest thereon, or in lieu thmeof agree upon
any other method of compensation for the use of their waters.",
, ' '," '>',
DIVISION OF WATER
No final determination was arrived at 'vitl~ respect to' a
division of "water, but. mueh progress was made, il1. that direction
and there' was a closer approach to bringing the claims of Cali-'
fornia and Arizona into accord than heretof.ore. : 'rhis .question
w~s .very much simplified by"concessions,. on the part of ,the
Governors and Commissioners representing the Upper Division
7.,
-~====~__~ I ___~ ----~-~.--~-M-;-"--*---------------~~---
)
I.
States;::o"f the theory that all of the water physiciallY availableiri
the Lo\ver Basin, whether allocated or not, might he appropl-iated
and used, in the Lower Basin, without prejudice~ to the rights of
the States of the Upper Basin. This theory was regarded by
Arizona's rcpresentatives as of ..vital importance, since without it,
there would not be sufficient water to supplytlle obvious needs
,7~'{)f the States of the Lower Basin, and therefore no alolid founda­•
tion upon which to predicate an agreement.
THE CALIFORNIA PROPOSAL
California's representatives .first proposed that the division
of water be left to a board of engineers composed of a representa­tive
of each of ,the seven States and two representing' the federal
government. The futility of this "plan of procedure was easily
, sllown. California then offered the proposal that after first giving
to each ,State an amount of water sufficient to take care of present
"vested rights, and 300,000 acrc-feet to Nevada, ,the main ,stream
tlienbe divided equally between California and Arizona, and that
ArIzona's tributaries, to the extent that they can be utilized by
diversion from such tributaries, before their waters hnter the main,
channel, be given to Al'izona. Discussion disclosed that a division
of ' the waters of the main channel, after deducting present vested
rights, and particularly as' such rights are claimed' by California,
would be preponderantly in California's favor. It also developed
that Arizona's tributaries would be expected to bear the bulk of
tho' Mexican burden if any water is given to that country by ,
treaty.
ARIZONA'S PROPOSAL
" Ai:izona's representatives proposed an equal division of the
~aters of the main channel, between the States of California and
Arizona, after the allocation of 300,000 acre-feet to Nevada, and
the, retention for Arizona's use of the waters of her tributaries,
the ""'Mexican burden to be supplied out of the main stream if any
water is given to that country by treaty.
, "
Nevada, whose rights were conceded both by Arizona and
Cillifornia, took little' or no part in ,the discussion of, water 1i v,ision. '
I ',1
'"" , :' 'PROPOSAL OF UPPER DIVISION GOVERNORS
,MteF listening to the presentatiOn of the vieWs' o£,'Arizori'a's
ittfdbali£o'i'nia's'representatives; and: a'period' ofnrgotiation COIl­'
du6t~tl:in' eXechtive' ses~i~ns, ltlle 'gover'norsof'tHe 1:Jpper'Division
~"
" --~--~~~:-----~--~~--~----~~~~~~--~ir-~"'~~""';~"~"'
,",\ '
<' ',' .~ , J'
:,~fJubmitted to Jhe COllference 'a ,proposal to allocflh~ .to N cvada
':',300,000 acre-feot; to California 4,200,000 acre-feet; to Arizona
a,ooo,OOO acre~feet; all otherw~lter flowing in' the main channel
be divided equally between Arizona and California, and Ari­
·';zona's tributaries to be given to Arizona. It was not altogether
'i(llear,. in this 'proposal, where' the )Iexican burden would fall. •
After careful consideration, not only of the qneation of water
division but as well <if all' phases of the practical sHuation,Ari~
zoIla's representatives 'presented an acceptance of the Governor 'II
,proposal,' qualifying it with language which made it' clear that
'Arizona's tributaries would be immune from the burden of supply-ing
water to Mexico. California's representatives rejected the
'Governors' proposal,demanding a definite allocation of not less
than 4,600,000 .. acre-feet of water and in effect placing the. major
portion of the Mexican burden upon Arizona's tributary waters.
. At the time the Conference recessed on October 5, this status
.,of the proceedings, so far as it related to the divisioll of water,
'was not altered.
POWER BENEFITS
I No determination was arrived at regarding Iluestion 4, in,
,eluding the extent of the benefits to accrue to the States in the'
·case ~f po,ver development on the river by the federal g()vernment,
!and divi~ion of such benefits between States whose lands and
waters are jointly used in. any such development. Substantial
accord was reached betwee:p the' States of Arizona and Nevada,
tm,t California rejected the theory of the right of States.toa
revenue from power dEweloped within their borders by the federal
government. One California repr9sentative offered a proposal
that, although the principle could not be recognize!l, California
would agree to the payment of four-tenths of a mill per kilowatt
,hout',to be divided between Arizona and ,Nevada ,in the event of a
'power development on the boundary of' these two States, and to
'continue until completion of amortization payments to the gov­ernment,
after .which the. benefits from the creaHon of power
'should be divided equally between Arizona, Nevada ctlld California.
,rrhissuggestion was not concurred in by the other, California
representatives.
, ARIZ()NA'S FINAL STATEMENT I ,1,
,1" .. "
',.I •
~~efq:re, ,the " donfeI;~nce,,'rece~sed .·on Oct(}ber 5'1. ;thc; ,', Arizona
. COll1muiissioIl 'presented the following! statement'for! the 'record :,
9:r
--"----- -~----~-------'--------~'----~~:.......--,-, --,._--------------------------
, .
"'1101 the GQvernQrs Qf the.
States Qf the Upper DivisiQn,
. CQIQradQ RivM' Basin: .
"Gentlemen :'
"The lawful'· representatives of. the State' Qf ArizQna.
members Qf the ColQrado River CQmmissiQn Qf said State,
and their advislOrs,' in attendance UPQn the cQnference' called
by you and cQnvened at the' City of. Denver, CQIQradQ, Qn
July 22, 1927, deeply,regret'that the full purpose of the con­ference,
to bring 'about an agreement whichwQuld result in
cQpl,plete ratificatiQnby seven States of. the, OQIQradQ River
CQlll)pact, and sQlution Qf the. ColoradQ River prQblem, has' nQt
been effected. . .
"Such . agreement not having been~ reached, we desill"e at
. this time to· state CQncretely ArizQna's, PQsition, as taken. by
her representatives at this cQnference .and disclQsed by the
recQrd,' in a sincere and earnest effo.rt tQ accomplish the· pur-pOises'
thereof. '
"We hOld that ArizQna PQssesses the'iand and the natural
facilities tQ economically, utilize within her bQrders a· very
large prQPo.rtiQn, if nQt all, of the waters Qf the CQIQradQ
River System available for, irrigatiQnal use in the LQwer
Basi.n; that as a matter of justice, right and equity, if the law
Qfprior approp,riatiQn is tQ be superseded by a CQmpact, she
is entitled tQ the undisturbed,' undisputeqand unlimited use,
tQ the extent that such use is feasible,of the wllters .Q,£. her
tributary streams; just as the State Qf :CaIifQrnia is entitled
tQ and has the use Qf the water Qf hers~reams,. and that she
is equally entitled to at least onc-half Qfthe flQW Of the main
stream of the CQIQradQ River available fOil' us,e in the States
of the Lower DivisiQn, after due,. allowance is madefQr the
practical irrigatiQnal Irequirements Qf the Stale Qf Nevada.'
Nevertheless, fOil', the purpQse :of effecting-'an agreement at
this time, and out Qf consideratiQnfQr the uritiring efforts Qf
the Governo,rs of the States Qf the' Upper DivisiQn tQ bring
about sUich an agreement,. aild in deference tQ their judgment
as. tQ what under the circumstances WQuld be fair and reaSQn-,
able,'. we have accepted, with: certairiinterpretations 'Qf lan-
. guage relatingtbthe'immunizatiQn of 'Mizona's'tributaries
against depletiQn. fOil' the, benefit· of ,MexicQ, the proposal.of
the .GQvernQrs. Qf the States of the Upper' Division submitted
Qn September '19, 1927, whichs,aid proPQsa~, 'SQ. interpreted,
WQuld allocate to the State of. CalifQrnia' 4,200,000 acre-feet ·of
wator,per annum; tQ 'ArizQna 3,000,0'00 acre:feet and tpe right
to .. the use Qf such Qf the waters Qf her. tributaries' as may
be diverted therefrQm! fOil'. beneficial .use, and. would divide the ,
unallocated. flow Qf the river, available, fOil' the I,lse of· :the .
Lower Division States, equally betweeil" All"izQJ;1a' and (:;ali-fornia
.. , ' ' ...
We .hQld with the Nevada resQlutiQn presented to thi~ CQn­ference
·by United States SenatQr Key Pittman,. and cQncurred
in by the GQvernors and representatives Qf. all of the States
Qf the Colo.rado River Basin except Calif Qrnia, , that "the
States have a legal right tQ demand and receive uoinpensatiQn
for the use Qf their lands, and· waters . * ~, used in CQnnec­tiQnwith.
a dam built by the'United States Go,veiimie'nt'to
genorate. hydro-electric energy '* *.". In pursuan~eof .that ,
10
, ' ' . \
right we respectfully' insist that. Arizona is entitled to compen­sation
for such of her lands and waters . aSi may be uSE)d in any
development by the~ United Btates Government for the genera~ .
tion of hydro~electricpower atany point on the ColoradoRiv~r .
within Arizona or. O'n the boundr.ry between' Arizona and an­other8tate.
We have agreed-indeed, ,proposed-,-that such
'. cOmpensation or' revenue should be limited to' the amount the
Btate would derive were the development taxable, by the usual
processes, under State law." .
In the specific case of a.·develop~ent in which the waters
and the lands of the States< of Alrizona and Nevada .would be
involved, but a much greaterpropottion of the fall of the
river, necessary for the generation of hyaro-electric power,
lies in the former State, we believe that an equitahle and fair
method of· division of revenue would' be upon the basis of fall,
in the respective States. We realize, ho,wever, the importance
of a method which would be uniform in all of the States of
the, Colorado River Basin, and have agreed upon. the recom­mendation
of the Governors 'of the States of the Uppar Divi­s,
ion and upon the condition that this method shall be ac­.
cepted by the other States whose borders join Arizona, to an
equal division of the benefits to be derived from any hydro­electric.
development between the States of Arizona and
Nevada. Also, we have repeated the suggestion and again
pil'opose, that· the. co:m(pensation or revenue· to' the States from
such development should be at least the equivalent of the
amount the States would derive in taxation levied unde;r' the au­tliority
of their own laws. As a measure of arriving at such
revenue we have proposed that the payment to the States
shall be a minimum of one mill per kilowatt hour of power o'r
power privileges sold or leased. For the details of this' pro­posal
reference is. made to the "Memoranda of Arizona's
views with ,respect. to an agreement between the States of
Arizona, California and Nevada," which is appended hereto
and made a part hereof. One mill per kilowatt hour divided
as above is the equivalent of $3.28 per annual horsle power to
each State.
"The re.presentatives of .furizona came to' this conference
earnestly desiring an equitable agreement, between the States
and committed to the policy of exerting every reasonable ef­fort
to that end. 'Whatever disappointment we may have
suffered by reason of the attitude of the ,repres1entatives OIf the
State of California, such still is our desire and our policy."
RECESS TO NOVEMBER 7
011 October 5,a recess was taken to November 7. At the'
present time, hciwever,a movement is on foot for conferences on: ~
power .between representatives of the States. of California, Nevada '"
and Arizona, and a short postponement of the general conference
is considered likely ..
The Commission hopes that through the medillm of earnest
negotiations an agreement may be .reachedwhich will fully protect
• the rights of Arizoria, and of all the States of the Colorado River'
Basin, 'and result in the development of the river.
11
- ....
v,',
I f
i
Wille cvcut thai such au ag,cc",cn' cannot he icachcd att -this time, all the power the CommiSlIdon can exert 'will be 'brought :,/'.
-to bear to secure recognition of this State's ,rights in any lcgislti- ,
tion bearing upon the subject which may, be enacted by Congress; , :,1
li'ailillg ,that, and as a' last 'resort only, recour.se,will be had to, , I
·,theeourts. ',',I
Respectfully submitted, '
COIJORADO RIVER COMMISSION OF,' ARIZONA.
" ':"\:.
,', .:
:' ',. ': I
GEO. W. P. I~UN'l\ Chairman
lfUIJFORD WINSOR, Secretary:
., ':, . I ~! _ j
,t
. ',:: ~ ! , ) . ': lIt· : l : 'I ': i ; (~ )' ' " : ! .I. '
I
!
I
,,,!
If I~ " \
APPENDIX A.
EIGHTH' LEGISLATURE'
FOURTH SPECIAL SESSION
. STATE o'F ARIZONA.
SENATE CO~CURRENT RESOLUTION NO.1
. .
Adopted in Sen~te November 1, 1927;
(, i \
Adopted in H.ouse Nove;'nber 2, 1927, and
filed in the office of the Secretary of State.
Introduced by Mr. Donnelly of Pima County.
WHEREAS, the. Colorado River Com~ission of Arizomr.
was created by Act of the Eighth Legislature (Chapter 37,
Session Laws, Regular Session), approved March 7, 1927,
"for the purpose of· encouraging and promoting. the develop,,:
ment of the Colorado River, and of protecting the rights­and.
interests of the State of Arizona in said river and its
tributa,ries"; and,
, W,HEREAS, on April 6, 1927, the said Commission met­and
duly organized, and from and after said date has 'func­tioned
in accordance with law; and
. WHEREAS, the task . assigned to said Commission is.
of .thegreatest proportions and its fulfillment f.raught with
. yital importance to the State o~ Arizona; and'
WHEREAS,the difficulties by which the saidCommis-·
sion is. confronted, in the performance of the duties assigned
it, . are extremely difficult if not indeed almost impossible,
by reason of the great political power ,and influence exclI'cised'
by the State of California, and the facilities possessed by
said State for the dissemination 'of propaganda and the' ex­treme
activity with which, during the past s.everal years it·
.has disseminated propaganda' in faV'Or of legislation in.
Congress inimical to Arizona's interests and violative of the
sacred rights of the States of the' American Union; and
I
.. WHEREAS, it is, the belief of. this Legislature that the,
members of said Commission have labored loyally, . faith­fuBy
andunti;ringly in the in'\ierest Ipfl Arizona, and. hI
the face of tho g;reat obstacles and difficulties referred to have
achieved remarkable success, if not as yet in the bringing­about
of an agreement which will facilitate the development'
of tlte Colorado River, at leas.t in the correction of much or
the. misunderstanding which has prevailed with respect t{)<·
Arizona's attitude,)n the enlistment of powerful st~pport;.
~3
, , I., '
.for Arizona's·.contentions and' in the creation of widespre~d
sympathy for . Arizona's just claims.; now therefore·
.' ..'
BE . IT RESOLVED; by. the. Senate of·. the Eighth Legis­latulre,
the House concurring, that it is the sense of this body
that the Colorado River Commission of Arizona, and. its
several members., are entitled to the .warmes.t congratula'-
. tions and commendation for the ability, the energy, and the
loyalty they have displayed in the penormiance of .. their .
. duties; and be it fwrther
, ,'I"
··RESOLVED, that the Legislature,' of Arizona hereby
heartily. endorses . the work which thus· far has been performed
by the said Commission,. and express.es the utmost faith and"
confidence that the Oommission's further . labors rwill" be
ma;rked by similar. courage; fidelity ;' and skill, and that Ari­zona's
rights and interests.,. and the rights of all of the· states
of the Union a~", they are affected· by. the. questions involved
in the development of the Colorado River, will be effectually
." defended. and' protected; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the LegislatuLte 6f Arizona hereby
calls upon all loyal citizens of Arizona .. to st,rongly support
and second the' efforts of the said Colorado' River Commission,
of Arizona, . to' the end that the world may 'be shown that in
this conflict, in which rights most sacred to .the Ame,rican
people .arc at stake, they are a united people. . \
14