Imperial Valley press., 1925-02-05
b. WILLIAM T. GARR

BY WILLIAM r. CARR
Vice Prt Sidelt Boulder Dam Assn.
In this week S mtic!c, the writer
had puposcd dealing with the in
coption and development historical
lv Of the Boulder Canyon PROJECT.
Recent happenings, however. make
il more tincIv to cou~idcr the so
called Colorado river compact and
..s relationship TO the prof r..
Constant rcitoration has served
to create thc impression, entirely
uniustificl. that the ratification Of
;hc compact by the Arizona 9iqla-
tro is a condition precedent, the
sine qua non, to am develop
mcut in the lower Colprado river
basin. This idea has BON used
with extraordinary effectiveness as
= wcirW AVID ground for delay.
Th" compact, as j, generally
known, seeks TO appol.iou and di-
vide the waters Of the Colorado be
tween the upper basin states con
sistiug Of Colorado, New Mexico,
Utah and Wyoming, AMI the lower
basin states comprising Arizona.
'3lifofniH and Nevada. Il WIS ne
gc:iatcd by rcprcs natives Of
these seven states and the United
States, signed at Santa Fp ON No
Fcnfb"r -, 100, and promptly ap-
proved .hv th' legislatures of al
III" ,ignatory .'atcpwith the cxccp-
ton Of Arizona. 70 bcccmc cffcc-
tive if mu"t be approved by Ari-
zora
Under the law rs declared hv the
United States Supreme Court in Il
case arising between Caloraio and
Wyoming, priority Of appropriation
aHd use of the waters Of an inter
state rjv r such as the Colorado
gives priority Of right Irrespective
OF state Ines The economic de.
N"'oumcut Of the lowe basin
''atcH is mote advanced than is
that Of tine upper basin tates. Pres
nlt conditions in the lo,qer tasin
'ns,ity great projects from which
: permanent water rights may arise.
IKE upper states. fearful Of rights
10 the Wa',r Of the Colorado being
thus created rrriuirial IL theu
development in IT," future. insist
'h@' before there Ee Hav further
development in the lower basin.
lLc:r right. mass, b. a.a.rt .ael
aDd defined.
Compact Not Only Mcaus
such protection rev le afforded
hF q compact or agreement te-
tWo0a hr states This. howcy. /.
is hot he ".lr o. exclusive Ho@as
ot extending .Jch protection.
Congress. in authorizing Il maiol
/ dr"'.opma: 'u tha lower rive
~tch as III, Boulder Cpvon pro-
j.ct. can accomplish th. same end
Nv .a appropriate provision making
the t"r~s of The compact govern As
- amy rights arising out OF the
project. 1t can do Ibis bcc1usr the
United States owns the hand where
the dana win hc bui',. power plant,
constructed, aud across which canals
70 utilize va'.r FROM the rive. mast
he rua. As ,ouerss nay refuse
I" aIIuw tie property of the init
cd states 20 h' used for any such
purposes. il may allow its u~n upou
terms and conditions by which the
upper states W;H b. ext aided full
protection. .N'd Obi, is just what
'ho Proponents of Boulder Cauvon
legislation lave suggested auJ urg-
ed, uamc'y that q provision he in
sorted i'm the bill making all water
ri%hts growing out Of the raojcrf
subject to tar tcrmt expressed in
d." Colorado river copu.et rs Sign
cd at- Santa lie.
The NOR, libcral minded repro
>""'HivrS OF the upper states fran;
Is rcr""HiZr that F. is competent
for cou&.c. IT, insert sach pro
vision wl .bat 1t viii he effective.
>I thy ..otc>s 10 fear is that
cou4.c may repeal t.,.lJw cztend-
ing ,G,h protection. Is such tspgal
would hr.ay act Co.; haJ faith, tAeir
I'g joc- not seem 10 u.Ve aav
real hayis. i.ul tlr, also say that
thc compact taa ho"ome IL politieal
is,@c ~ ;hr uppc. ta-.u (Which is
truce and ,hcy dp not care to he
quoted or to take any position i'm
consistent win urging the compact
Thcrr is nothing ne" in the
theory the. the todo,al government,
in connection with granting priyi-
lc&cs ia respect to the public do
main, may thus control the use of
ANLtn mn - .--.-I -l...,.. .. - -.