OCR Text |
Show 202 UPDATING THE HOOVER DAM DOCUMENTS In addition to the foregoing it would authorize the Secretary to prepare estimates of the long range water supply available for consumptive use in the Upper and Lower Basins; to investigate alternative sources including desalination, weather modification, water renovation and reduction in losses to meet current and anticipated water requirements and in planning works to import water from outside the natural drainage area of the Colorado River system; and water salvage and ground-water recovery programs would be authorized. In the hearings, the Secretary of the Interior commented (perhaps a little prematurely) that 1965 will be regarded as a historic turning point, the year the Arizona-California water feud ended and cooperation began, when the 11 governors of the West began common planning on water problems on a West-wide basis (pages 102 and 103, Serial No. 17). The need for augmentation was seen by Reclamation's water supply analysis, that while CAP would have 1.2 maf available for the first 15 years of its operation, the water supply for CAP would progressively decrease as the Upper Basin's depletions increased. At the end of the payout period, the average water supply available for CAP would be about 580,000 acre-feet. The Upper Basin's water supply figures provided by the Tipton-Kalmbach report were less reassuring. Secretary Udall stated there were three important possibilities for augmentation: (1) desalting; (2) Northern California water; and (3) the mouth of the Columbia River (pages 128, 135, 192 and 206, Serial No. 17). He also stated that CAP was economically feasible without importation (page 202, Serial No. 17). Congressman Saylor noted the applications for construction of coal-fired powerplants which were expected to sell power at rates "...well below what the Bureau of Reclamation has included in its cost of water in these projects..." and suggested that Interior reexamine whether or not in the way of finding a bank account there might be some other methods of financing this matter (pages 218 through 221, and 226, Serial No. 17). This perhaps was the forerunner of the Navajo Generating Station. Congressman Saylor further questioned why Arizona supported a bill which "...subverts the Colorado River Compact, the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Arizona v. California and, in a sense, guarantees to the State of California 4 million 400 thousand acre-feet of mainstream water regardless of what happens..." (see pages 252 through 255, and 311, Serial No. 17). Congressman Udall replied that while Arizona had established legal rights through the Supreme Court action, it wanted water and would accept this method to obtain the long sought authorization for CAP; and that California would be giving up 700,000 acre-feet of water it was now using over its 4.4 maf priority and that its priority was limited to 4.4 maf. H.6.2 Upper Basin Views During the hearings, the Upper Basin States supported authorization of CAP but only under the following principal conditions as stated by Colorado which would protect the Upper Basin: (1) Diversions from the mainstream below Lee Ferry shall be limited when necessary so as not to prejudice development of Upper Basin projects which will be required for the annual consumptive use of 7.5 maf after delivery of 75 maf at Lee Ferry in any period of 10 consecutive years. (2) Concurrently with any authorization of the Lower Colorado River Basin project, there also be authorized the importation of water from sources outside the natural drainage area of the Colorado River system in quantities to meet: (a) Mexican Treaty obligations as a National responsibility; (b) supply the Lower Basin States with that amount of water required for the consumptive use of 7.5 maf; and (c) supply the Upper Basin States with that amount of water for the consumptive use of 7.5 maf. (It was Arizona's view that this condition could only delay any bill since the source of a new water supply was so controversial.) (3) That the primary purpose of the Colorado River Storage Project is to implement beneficial consumptive use of water in the Upper Basin and that Glen Canyon Reservoir will not be drawn below its rated head, except as may be necessary to comply with Article IH(d) of the Compact; i.e., to deliver 75 maf in any 10-year consecutive period. |