OCR Text |
Show CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT 97 livery at Parker Dam or the Mexican boundary, satisfactory for all uses, as Mexico undoubtedly will demand? That would be Arizona's proportion of the 750,000 acre-feet due Mexico from the lower basin. 6. I herewith present a tabulation of uses and depletions of the water allocated to the lower Colorado River Basin. If the items are correct, where can water be obtained for the Arizona project under full development of the Colorado River system? Average annual virgin flows of the Colorado River (1) Main stream at Lee Ferry, 48-year period, 1897-1943_________ 16, 270, 000 (2) Net increment between Lee Ferry and Boulder Dam, being inflow from tributaries less natural river channel losses______ 1, 060, 000 (3) Inflow from tributaries between Boulder Dam and Mexican boundary (except Gila)________......................... 150, 000 Total________......................................... 17,480,000 Existing burdens on river below Lee Ferry (except on Gila River) (1) Water apportioned to upper basin_________________________ 7, 500, 000 (2) Mexico's treaty right (guaranteed minimum)________________ 1,500,000 (3) I Net reservoir losses: (a) Lake Mead___________........................... 640,000 (b) Davis Dam and Lake Havasu..............._....._ 140,000 (4) River channel losses below Boulder Dam (with full river develop- ment).....________________......____________________ 610,000 (5) Conceded by Arizona to California, by Arizona contract, Cali- fornia's prior appropriations that do not exceed her statutory limitation_________________............................ 5,362,000 (6) Conceded by Arizona to Nevada by Arizona contract_________ 412, 000 (7) Conceded by Arizona to New Mexico and Utah by Arizona con- tract...........................................______ 131,000 (8) Projects completed and under construction in Arizona: (a) Yuma project 61,000 acres at 4 acre-feet____________ 244, 000 (b) First unit Gila project; north and south Gila 15,000 acres at 4 acre-feet___........_._............____ 60, 000 Yuma Mesa, 51,000 acres at 11 acre-feet............_ 561, 000 (c) Colorado Indian Reservation, 100,000 acres at 3 acre- feet________________....................______ 300,000 (d) Aggregate uses present projects on Little Colorado, Virgin River, etc____________................... 130,000 (9) Allowance for regulations and unavoidable losses (principally in delivery of 1,500,000 acre-feet to Mexico)._......_________ 300, 000 Total............................_............... 17, 890, 000 Total available water............_...................... 17,480,000 Total present and authorized project____________________ 17, 890, 000 Water permanently available in stream for Arizona project.........._-_..........________________ -410, 000 7. The Bureau's report quite frankly states that this is a "rescue" project, designed to eliminate the threat of a serious disruption of the area's economy. It appears to be an effort to justify approval of the project on grounds other than its merit for reclamation. It is questionable if the Bureau has authority to act on the related social problems. My reading of the law does not indicate that such reasons for creating a $730,000,000 supplemental irrigation project comes within its purview. The water shortage situation in the Salt River Valley is due to Arizona's disregard to the necessity of preventing overdraft on a limited ground-water supply. All of the Colorado River water contemplated for delivery will provide only supplemental irrigation for presently cultivated lands. The diversion will create |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |