The Coconino sun., 1923-07-06

for without treaty any attempt to
develop the river viii be met by OBJ
structive litigation.
Turning to the political phase Of
the question, the speaker said the de-
velopment of the Colorado river is q
national matter in which, to be sure,
the seven states should participate
and cooperate. Congressional legis-
lation has made the development a
national matter The program Of de-
velopment through the national gov
ernment can only be achieved through
the cooperation of every western SEN
ator and representative and that may
only be brought about through mu-
tual treaty.
Laying aside the insignificant in
ternational side of the matter, the in
terest of the national government in
the river is that of owner of the river.
Forgetting the legal obstacles that
might be raised by states jealous of
their rights and the opposition of
political objectors, there can be no de-
velopment on the Colorado river with
out the cooperation Of the federal
government, and the federal govern
ment has announced that there can be
no development pending an agreement
between the states having rights in the
waters of the river.
It is waste of tremendously val
liable time to put forward plans for
agreement other than those embodied
in the pact. The only possible thing
for Arizona to do is to play the game
in exact accordance with the condi-
tions and rules laid down by the pact.
The compact is merely an agreement
allocating the waters of the river, on
the basis of thorough surveys al
ready made by the u. S. government,
between the upper basin states-Col-
orado. Wyoming, Utah and New Mex
ico-and the lower basin states--Arl-
zona. California and Nevada.
It allocates to each basin, upper and
lower, 1900, ,00O-acre feet Of water a
year. But it provides that should
there not be enough in any year 70
furnish that amount to each basin, the
upper basin shall cut down its use to
insure delivery to the lower basin OF
the full 100000 acre-feet a year. 1t
also provides that should the upper
basin use less than the above stated
amount year, whatever it does not
use shall go to the lower basin.
Furthermore, though it will be seen
from the foregoing that the lower ba-
sin, of which Arizona is a part, gets
the advantage of ALLEGATION, the lower
basin in addition to the guaranteed
7 100000 acre-feet year gets all
seepage and all tho waters of the Lit
tie Colorado, Virgin, Gila and Bill
Williams rivers.
ssThe lower basin gets the advantage
of every doubt and every contingency"
the speaker said.
But the rights Of both basins are
amply safeguarded because the water
allocated exceeds any possible need.
But if there are objections, it looks
like they should be from the upper
basin states rather than from those
of the lower basin.
Still, said Mr.. Winsor, there are
some within this state, which has more
to gain than any other, who object to
the ratification of the pact.
The speaker alluded to the oft-heard
phrase, "presefye Arizona's rights for
posterity," a favorite with objectors
to ratification.
'sDoes this mean leaving our rag
ing floods to posterity z" he asked.
Does it mean letting our arid lands
lie unproductive? Does it mean leav
ing to 'posterity' the potentialities of
power still to be realized?
Then he caused laugh when he
asked who would be Arizona's "pos-
terity" a hundred years from now,
when Utah people may perhaps be
Arizonans Californians and
CalifoInians New Mexicans. There
will be a hard time identifying our
posterity, he said, and we may as
we'll dismiss the question with What
the hell's the use ~
What do we get out Of ratification
of the pact?
Speaking for Arizona alone, we get
insurance against obstructive litiga-
ton; opportunity for a great construc-
tive program within our own borders;
powerful cooperation in place Of an /