Page 2

The President -2- July 3, 1962 Neither in the 1944 treaty nor elsewhere has the United States made any commitments whatever as to the quality of water from the Colorado to be delivered to Mexico. The treaty is pointedly silent on the matter. The record shows that efforts to have quality as well as quantity written into it were vigorously resisted. Only this past month Senator Carl Hayden, who was serving in the Senate at the time the Mexican treaty came up for ratification, submitted a statement to our Committee in which the Senator stated categorically that the omission of quality was a carefully considered, affirmative act, and that the treaty never would have been ratified had it contained any. commitment with respect to quality. Senator Hayden stated: "The treaty language, the legislative history before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and floor debates are specific on this point. This increase in salinity was foreseen and provided for in the treaty. The treaty does not guarantee any quality of water and obligates Mexico to take return flow water regardless of salinity." * * * * * * * * * * * "Without this understanding (id est, that Mexico would accept whatever water came from the river) the treaty would not have been ratified." The record shows that the salinity problems about which Mexico has been complaining are not by any means wholly the result of action or inaction on the part of the United States. The full utilization of the Colorado River, just as is the case on all other rivers in arid areas, is predicated upon the use and reuse of water from the headwaters of the river to the point of its final discharge in the sea. Water is diverted, applied to the land, and the excess water over and above that required by the crops returns to the stream. The water returning to the stream brings with it salinity from the soil through which it passed plus the residual from the original water remaining after evaporation andEpson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 24 bit