Page images
PDF
EPUB

8. The National Parks Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 885);

9. Subsection 3 (e) of the Submerged Lands Act of May 22, 1953 (67 Stat. 31);

10. The act of July 23, 1955 (being sec. 4 (6) of Public Law 167–84th Cong.) the act providing for multiple use of the surface of tracts of public lands; and Whereas in the case of Federal Power Commission v. Oregon (349 U. S. 435), known as the Pelton Dam case, decided June 6, 1955, and in a more recent case known as the Savannah River case, the Supreme Court of the United States injected great doubt and uncertainty into the validity of many water-law principles accepted generally throughout the Western States; and

Whereas Senator Frank A. Barrett, of Wyoming, has introduced S. 863, known as the Water Right Settlement Act of 1956, which would again reaffirm, restate, and reinforce the long list of Federal laws enacted by the Congress for the express purpose of preserving the integrity of State water laws: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the water laws committee of the Texas Water Conservation Association in meeting assembled in Austin, Tex., this the 2d day of March 1956, does hereby endorse said S. 863 and companion bills in the House of Representatives and urges the early passage of such legislation by the Congress; be it further

Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to Senator Frank A. Barrett; to sponsors of companion bills in the House of Representatives, and to the Members of the Texas delegation in Congress.

RESOLUTION

[ocr errors]

Whereas it has been the settled rule of law for nearly a century that water rights in Midwestern and Western States are determined by State law, and not otherwise; and

Whereas it has also been the established rule that control and jurisdiction over the waters of streams and rivers have been vested in the several States subject to whatever control the Federal Government has found necessary to exercise in the case of navigable waters in its regulation of navigation under the commerce clause of the United States Constitution; and

Whereas section 210 of the Constitution of North Dakota provides that "all flowing streams and natural water courses shall forever remain the property of the State for mining, irrigation, and manufacturing purposes," and section 61-0101 of the North Dakota Revised Code, as amended, provides that "all waters within the limits of the State belong to the public and are subject to appropriation for beneficial use”; and

Whereas the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the rew cent Pelton case, which virtually divested the State of Oregon of complete

jurisdiction over the waters of the Deschutes River, a nonnavigable stream therein, threatens to jeopardize and impair the control of States in granting and adjudicating rights to the beneficial use of the waters of their streams : Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the North Dakota Reclamation Association, Inc., in meeting niet de assembled this 3d day of March 1956, That Congress be, and is hereby urged,

to definitely and unambiguously recognize the right and jurisdiction of the several States in and to the waters of streams and natural watercourses therein hy speedily enacting into law Senate bill 863 proposed by Senator Frank Barrett of Wyoming and thereby settle for all time, and beyond ques

tion, that the control, use, distribution, and appropriation of the waters of on the streams and rivers is vested in the States, and not otherwise; and be it

further

Resolved, That copies of this resolution be sent to Senator Frank Barrett, Senator William Langer, Senator Milton R. Young, Congressman Usher L. Burdick, and Congressman Otto Krueger.

[ocr errors]

RESOLUTION

Whereas it has been the settled rule of law for nearly a century that water rights in Midwestern and Western States are determined by State law, and not

otherwise; and

Whereas it has also been the established rule that control and jurisdiction over the waters of streams and rivers have been vested in the several States subject to whatever control the Federal Government has found necessary to exercise in the case of navigable waters in its regulation of navigation under the commerce clause of the United States Constitution; and

Whereas section 210 of the constitution of North Dakota provides that all flowing streams and natural water courses shall forever remain the property of the State for mining, irrigation, and manufacturing purposes, and section 61-0101 of the North Dakota Revised Code, as amended, provides that "all waters within the limits of the State belong to the public and are subject to appropriation for beneficial use”; and

Whereas the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the recent Pelton case, which virtually divested the State of Oregon of complete jurisdietion over the waters of the Deschutes River, a nonnavigable stream therein. threatens to jeopardize and impair the control of States in granting and adjudicating rights to the beneficial use of the waters of their streams: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the North Dakota State Water Conservation Commission in meet. ing regularly assembled this 9th day of March 1956, That Congress be, and is hereby urged, to definitely and unambiguously recognize the right and jurisdiction of the several States in and to the waters of streams and natural watercourses therein by speedily enacting into law Senate bill 863 proposed by Senator Barrett, of Wyoming, and thereby settle for all time, and beyond question, that the control, use, distribution, and appropriation of the waters of streams and rivers is vested in the States, and not otherwise; and be it further

Resolved, That copies of this resolution be sent to Senator Barrett and to our Senators and Representatives in Congress.

BOARD OF WATER ENGINEERS,

STATE OF TEXAS,

Austin, March 13, 1956. Re S. 863 Senator FRANK A. BARRETT, Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR BARRETT: We understand that hearings have been scheduled on your bill, S. 863, to recognize and confirm the authority of arid and semiarid States relating to the control, appropriation, use, and distribution of water within their geographic boundaries, and for other purposes.

Due to a heavy schedule of public hearings before this board, it will not be possible to have a representative present for the hearings on your bill. Howerer, the Texas Board of Water Engineers is keenly interested in the passage of this legislation.

Although Texas is not a public land State, we endorse your bill and urge the Congress to again restate, reaffirm, and reinforce the long list of Federal laws enacted by the Congress over the past 30 years for the express purpose of preserving the integrity of State water laws, thus removing the great doubt and uncertainty injected into the validity of many water-law principles accepted generally throughout the 17 Western States, by the Supreme Court in the case of Federal Power Commission v. Oregon (349 U. S. 435), known as the Pelton Dam case decided June 6, 1955, and the more recent case known as the Savannah River case.

We would appreciate you placing a copy of this letter in the record of the hearing on S. 863. Yours sincerely,

R. M. DIXON, Chairman, State Board of Water Engineers.

NORTH DAKOTA STATE WATER CONSERVATION COMMISSION,

Bismarck, N. Dak., March 13, 1956. WILLIAM E. WELSH, Secretary-Manager, National Reclamation Association,

Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. WELSH: Enclosed herein, are copies of the resolutions passed by the State water conservation commission at their regular meeting held on March 9, 1956.

The resolutions pertain to the passage of a small irrigration projects bill, and co the Senate bill introduced by Senator Barrett covering State water rights. In he event that we can be of further help to you in these matters please feel free co call upon us. Sincerely yours,

STATE WATER CONSERVATION COMMISSION,
MILO W. HOISVEEN,

Chief Engineer-State Engineer.

RESOLUTION

Whereas it has been the settled rule of law for nearly a century that water ights in Midwestern and Western States are determined by State law, and not otherwise; and

Whereas it has also been the established rule that control and jurisdiction over he waters of streams and rivers have been vested in the several States subject Co whatever control the Federal Government has found necessary to exercise n the case of navigable waters in its regulation of navigation under the commerce clause of the United States Constitution; and

Whereas section 210 of the constitution of North Dakota provides that “all lowing stream and natural watercourses shall forever remain the property of he State for mining, irrigation, and manufacturing purposes," and section 31-0101 of the North Dakota Revised Code, as amended, provides that “all waters within the limits of the State belong to the public and are ubject appropriaion for beneficial use”; and

Whereas the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the recent Pelton case, which virtually divested the State of Oregon of complete jurisdicion over the waters of the Deschutes River, a nonnavigable stream therein, hreatens to jeopardize and impair the control of States in granting and adjudicating rights to the beneficial use of the waters of their streams: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the North Dakota State Water Conservation Commission in meeting regularly assembled this 9th day of March 1956, That Congress be, and is hereby urged, to definitely and unambiguously recognize the right and jurisdiction of the several States in and to the waters of streams and natural watercourses therein by speedily enacting into law Senate bill 863, proposed by Senator Barrett of Wyoming, and thereby settle for all time, and beyond question, that the control, use, distribution, and appropriation of the waters of streams and rivers is vested in the States, and not otherwise; and be it further

Resolved, That copies of this resolution be sent to Senator Barrett and to our Senators and Representatives in Congress.

COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD,

Denver, Colo., March 14, 1956. The SENATE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN : I should like to call your attention to the attached resolution which was passed unanimously by the Colorado Water Conservation Board at its meeting of January 11, 1956. Sincerely yours,

IVAN C. CRAWFORD, Director.

RESOLUTION BY COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD RE BARRETT BILL S. 863

Whereas the United States of America has, from time to time, claimed the ownership of the unappropriated waters of the State of Colorado and other Western States; and

Whereas the State of Colorado has and does deny such claim; and

Whereas the Honorable Frank A. Barrett, United States Senator from the State of Wyoming, has introduced in the United States Senate a bill entitled S. 863 which is designed to confirm and declare that the waters in Colorado and other Western States are reserved for appropriation for beneficial uses under State law and to require that all uses of water by the Federal Govern. ment and its agencies, permittees, licensees, employees, and wards shall be acquired under and in conformity with State law: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Colorado Water Conservation Board does hereby approve the purpose and design of said S. S63 and said board does hereby urge the Congress of the United States to pass and adopt legislation to accomplish the design and purpose set forth in said S. 863.

I certify that the above is a true copy of the resolution passed by the Colorado Water Conservation Board at its meeting of January 11, 1956.

IVAN C. CRAWFORD, Director, Colorado Water Conservation Board.

SENATE JOINT MEMORIAL No. 2 (BY SENATORS ROGERS, BENNETT, BENTLEY, BISHOP,

BELDSOE, BROTZMAN, BROWN, CARLSON, CHEEVER, CHRYSLER, CULIG, DANKS, DEBERARD, DUNKLEE, ELLIFF, GILL, GOBBLE, IIAM, HOCKER, JOHNSON, Kyots. LOCKE, MILLER, MOLHOLM, MOWBRAY, POMPONIO, POWERS, SHULTS, SKIFFINGTON. STRAIN, SULLIVAN, TAYLOR, VELTRI, WEINLAND, AND WILSON, ALSO REPRESENTATIVES MCLAUGHLIN, KEIRY, RUTH CLARK, MARKLEY, TAYLOR, BALL WERTZ, LEHMAN, WYATT, LAMB, STALKER, DAVID CLARKE, ENFIELD, SEIDENSTICKER, KANE, O’KANE, SLATTERY, CALABRESE, MCNEIL, VINCENT MASSARI, BELL, CHELF, AND HAMIL)

MEMORIALIZING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO PASS AND ADOPT LEGISLA:

TION DENYING FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF UNAPPROPRIATED WATER OF NATURAL STREAMS IN COLORADO AND THE WEST AND CONFIRMING THE RIGHTS OF APPROPRIATION THEREOF UNDER THE STATE LAWS

Whereas the United States of America has, from time to time, claimed the ownership of the unappropriated waters of the Western States, including the unappropriated waters of the State of Colorado; and

Whereas the Western States including Colorado deny that the United States of America is the owner of said waters; and

Whereas the State of Colorado by its constitution has declared "The water of every natural stream, not heretofore appropriated, within the State of Colorado, is hereby declared to be the property of the public, and the same is dedicated to the use of the people of the State, subject to appropriation as hereinafter provided.”; and

Whereas it is highly desirable that Congress by legislation confirm and declare that the water of every natural stream in Colorado and other Western States are reserved for appropriation for beneficial uses under the laws of the States and that all uses of the Federal Government and its agencies, permittees, licensees, employees and wards shall be acquired in conformity with and under State law; and

Whereas the Honorable Frank A. Barrett, United States Senator from the State of Wyoming, has introduced into the United States Senate a bill No. S. 863 which is designed to accomplish the above purpose: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate of the 40th General Assembly of the State of Colorado, (the House of Representatives concurring herein), That the purpose of S. 863 be and the same is hereby approved by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado and the Congress of the United States is hereby urged to pass and adopt said leg. islation or similar legislation whereby the claims to Federal ownership of unal: propriated waters in the Western States shall be denied and that the unappropriated waters of Colorado and the West shall be confirmed to have been dedicated to the public subject to appropriation for use under and in conformity with State law; be it further

Resolved, That a copy of this memorial be transmitted to the Secretary of the enate of the United States and the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives i the United States and to each Senator and Representative from the State of olorado and to Senator Frank A. Barrett, Senator from Wyoming.

STEPHEN L. R. McNICHOLS,

President of the Senate. MILDRED H. CRESSWELL,

Secretary of the Senatè.

DAVID A. HAMIL,
Speaker of the House of Representatives.

LEE MATTIES,
Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives.

MOTION RE SENATOR BARRETT'S BILL, S. 863 Whereas the United States of America has, from time to time, claimed the wnership of the unappropriated waters of the State of Colorado and other Westrn States; and Whereas the State of Colorado has and does deny such claim; and Whereas the Honorable Frank A. Barrett, United States Senator from the State f Wyoming, has introduced in the United States Senate a bill entitled S. 863 hich is designed to confirm and declare that the waters in Colorado and other Vestern States are reserved for appropriation for beneficial uses under State iw and to require that all uses of water by the Federal Government and its gencies, permittees, licensees, employees, and wards shall be acquired under and i conformity with State law: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Colorado Water Conservation Board does hereby approve he purpose and design of said S. 863 and said board does hereby urge the Conress of the United States to pass and adopt legislation to accomplish the design nd purpose set forth in said S. 863.

Senator BARRETT. Mr. Chairman, I request permission to insert in he record correspondence between myself and Mr. Marting J. Solosky, regarding a colloquy relating to Indian rights under my mendment to S. 863. (The material referred to follows:)

MARCH 24, 1956. Ir. MARVIN J. SONOSKY, Attorney at Law,

1028 Connecticut Avenue NW., Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. SONOSKY: Your letter of March 23 is received. The matter of 3. 863 conflicting somewhat with Indian rights not obtained under State law vas brought to the attention of the committee on March 19 and at that time

agreed that the words “under State law” in line 22 on page 4 of the revised bill would be stricken from the bill. There was no objection to such action by he subcommittee, although of course the bill was not up for amendment at hat time.

I may say to you that Mr. Rankin, representing the Department of Justice, Ir. Elmer Bennet, representing the Interior Department, as well as every other attorney who appeared before the committee, all agreed that by striking hose words the Indians would be adequately protected.

I can assure you that there was no intention on the part of myself or any of che other sponsors of the bill to interfere with the Indian rights in any way, and we are glad to m

point abundantly clear by striking the words above mentioned. Yours very truly,

FRANK A. BARRETT,
United States Senator.

75335-56--26

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »