Colorado River Compact Transcripts (1922)
The Colorado River compact was negotiated by representatives from the seven states that surround the Colorado River (Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming) and a representative from the U.S. Department of Interior. The negotiations took place over 27 sessions in 1922.
Listed below each section are topics discussed on that day.
Session 1
This session includes a table of contents, the purpose of the meetings, opening statement by Herbert Hoover, statements by Commissioners and State Engineers from the various states.
Session 2
This session includes statements by senators and representatives from Nevada and California.
Session 3
General discussion
Session 4
W.B. Mathews telegram
Session 5
Davis-Carpenter instructed to prepare a report on legal claims against waters of the Colorado River, Ottamer Hamele, of Reclamation Service, is requested to report on setting up permanent board of control
Session 6
Tables are introduce showing water requirements and then revised. There is a discussion of Davis Formula. Drainage statistics of the Basin are discussed. Annual runoffs and principal gaging stations are discussed.
Session 7
Plans and drafts by Hoover, Carpenter, McClure, and Norviel are discussed
Session 8
Merrill letter on Dam at Diamond Creek discussed.
Session 9
Resolution calling for suggested forms of compact and the postponement of acting on the Dam at Diamond Creek.
Session 10
Resolutions passed
Session 11
Recommendations on methods of procedures discussed, Carpenter and Hoodenpyl analysis of compact needs discussed, discussion of diversion between groups of states.
Session 12
More discussion on diversion between groups of states and roll call favoring establishing division between the upper and lower states
Session 13
Division point made at Lee's Ferry, discussion of the average streamflow
Session 14
Maxwell communication (National Reclamation Association) discussion
Session 15
Hoover summary of arguments to date, discussion of flow at Lee’s Ferry.
Session 16
Davis report on flow at Lee’s Ferry, Hoover recaps figures on flow and offers to consolidate views of north-south groups
Session 17
Davis makes statement for northern group states with comments by Norviel, McClure, and Davis. Recap on minimum flow.
Session 18
Hoover reports on rough principles of agreement and motions to adopt various paragraphs are carried, including paragraphs with 7.5 million acre feet for each division.
Session 19
Table of contents for sessions 19-27, discussion of appropriations in excess of 7.5 million acre-feet, including the Gila River, Mexican burden in lower basin apportionment discussed, waters not covered by the compact, Article 8, responsibility for collecting data, Mexican burden equally borne by upper and lower division, no acknowledgment of Mexican rights until established, All-American Canal to change conditions, 200,000 acres irrigated in Mexico in 1922, Mexican burden to come out of lower basin’s 7.5
Session 20
Draft of paragraph about Mexican burden under contract then agreement that upper basin should supply half of the Mexican burden, then talk about the compact articles agreed to
Session 21
Indian rights, protection of rights of states by legal action, discussion of reservoir construction
Session 22
Discussion of apportionment, adoption of article 3, rights of U.S. and of states, discussion by Hoover that Upper Basin has no obligation to control the river.
Session 23
Suggestion to omit 4 million acre-feet minimum flow, discussion of article 3, U.S. is not a party.
Session 24
Defined domestic use, removal of 4 million acre-feet minimum flow, discussion on navigation and power generation, and another draft of the compact was made
Session 25
Preamble, article 1 adopted, definitions, article 3 adopted, navigation clause adopted, control of water within states, future controversies, lower basin rights to come from storage when 5 million acre-feet capacity available
Session 26
Storage of water to satisfy lower basin rights, Gila River, water stored must be within apportionment discussed by Judge Davis, Carpenter says storage is not limited to either basin, Norviel argues that regulation and control of storage should be in control of lower basin no matter where it might be, Caldwell says lower basin should be brought within its apportionment, Hoover says Upper Basin only has to provide 7.5 million acre-feet per year, definition of apportionment stricken, dividing uses or dividing water, apportioning water.
Session 27
Jay Turley appealed, Girand Project discussed, McClure of CA objected to Girand liscense because it is beyond the jurisdiction of the commission, resolution adopted on early construction of a dam, appreciation to Chairman Hoover, Hoover’s response, and the compact is then adopted.
