The Coconino sun., 1925-01-16
TO COMPACT OR NOT TO COMPACT


It may be little early to prophesy what action
the state legislature, conVening last Monday, will
take on the Colorado river compact admittedly
the most important question to come before It;
but there seems to be good prospect of ratifca-
ton of the pact probably with some string tied to
the ratification calling for preliminary side
compact with California to determine the respec-
tive rights of the two states.
Just now there seems to be a trend in favor of
the bill sponsored by Senator Sims of Cochlse,
providing for ratification when Nevada, California
and Arizona agree that Nevada shall have 100000
acre feet Of water reserved for her use, the bal
ance of the allotment made by the Santa te COM
pact to the lower basin states to be equally dl-
vded between Arizona and California; and when
the federal government recognizes the fight of
Arizona to tax power development of the Colorado
river.
On the other hand, there is doubt expressed
over any possibility of getting any such agree
nent with California as proposed IN the SIMS bill.
IN the meantime, other developments come
thick Colorado is about to bring suit in the U.
s. supreme court for adjudication OF the rights OF
the six of the seven Colorado river basin states
that have signed the compact IN the event the
Arizona legislature does not ratify the compact
this year. In short, Colorado will ask that the
supreme court, in case Arizona does not put its
signature TO the compact along with the other SIX
states take original jurisdiction and tell each
state of the seven what it can and cannot have.
Colorado proposed step, asserted that it dldnr
alarm him any.
1t is also asserted that Colorado will ask for
more water than allotted in the present compact
if The matter comes before the supreme court, or
in any event unless the pact is ratified by Afl-
iona this year. IN this connection it is reported
that in Colorado an immense tunnel IS being
rushed through mountain range to utilize addl-
ti0nal water from the upper basin of the Colorado
and thus give Colorado a stronger position IN re-
questng more water than it would get from the
Santa Fe compact.
How complicated it all is becoming, and how
simple it all would have been if the pact had been
ratified two years ago, as it was by the other SIX
states and should have been by Arizona AS in
deed it would have been by Arizona but for the
stubborn and SO far never clearly understood nor
satisfactorily explained opposition OF Governor
Hunt.
The governors message, reported il part in
this issue, calls for an appropriation for an eX-
tensve river survey-ln other words a further
-freeZes-over delay Of action on the com
pact The Sun is inclined to agree with the gov
ernor in his belief that Boulder Canyon is not a
feasible site for dam, at least not for the first
dam and that the first one should be built at
Glenn canyon. But the present compact does not
specify where the first or any Of the dams shall
be built So why not ratify the compact and let
the United States government or whoever builds
the dam decide where it shall be built? This river
survey already has been made. The state would
gain nothing by making another survey, IN fact
would be put to unnecessary expense and defer
by at least two years, perhaps longer the develop
mt Of the river and the prosperity its develop
ment will bring to Arizona.
Fortunately all the governor can do is recon-
mend. The matter rests entirely with the legis-
lature. The governors advice is grattuous and
may be taken for what it is worth or ignored en-
tirely. He will not be called upon to sign the
legislatures ratification of the compact; nor can
he veto it.
The governor has used much obscure language
in discussing the pact. But the whole thing is
up to the legislature. On that body rests the sole
responsibility for ratification rejection of the
compact.