Page 5

In summary, the water-supply problems of the Pacific Southwest are not new problems; rather, they have existed since prehistoric times. Ancient civilizations are known to have flourished in the area before the time of Christ, only to fail and disappear through their apparent inability to cope with the vagaries of the local water supplies. Modern civilization, on the other hand, has managed to grow and develop in the area by the application of engineering principles to the problem, and by virtue of having the vision and foresight to apply these principles when needed. Effect of the Decision in Arizona v. California, et. al. Prior to 1951, the conflicting claims of the States of the Lower Colorado River Basin impeded Congressional consideration of legislation to authorize construction of projects to divert Colorado River water in the Lower Basin. On April 18, 1951, the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs of the House of Representatives adopted a resolution that bills relating to the proposed Central Arizona Project "be postponed until such time as use of the water in the Lower Colorado River Basin is either adjudicated or binding or mutual agreement as to the use of the water is reached by the States of the Lower Colorado River Basin." In August 1952, Arizona filed an original action against California and certain of its political subdivisions in the United States Supreme Court seeking a judicial determination of their relative rights to Colorado River water. The State of Nevada and the United States intervened and the States of New Mexico and Utah were impeded as parties. The Court appointed a Master who heard the case, made findings and conclusions, and submitted a Report and Recommended Decree to the Court. On June 3, 1963, the Court announced its opinion in the case of Arizona v. California, et. al. This opinion, which is to be followed by a formal decree, appears to clear the way for the development of a comprehensive plan to meet the present and future needs of this fastest growing region in the Nation. Though California has been permitted by the Court to file a petition for rehearing and though a decree is yet to be formulated, for the purposes of this report, it is assumed that the Court's opinion delineates the rights of the States and the United States to take water for existing and new uses. The Court said that the Boulder Canyon Project Act (43 U. S. C. 617, et seq.) embodies a comprehensive scheme for apportioning among California, Arizona and Nevada the mainstream waters of the Lower Colorado River. Under the comprehensive scheme, the first 7,500,000 acre-feet of mainstream water is apportioned, 4,400,000 acre-feet to California, 2,800,000 acre-feet to Arizona, and II-5Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 14,161,920 byte