OCR Text |
Show CHAPTER VHI 131 each year into the Salton Sea. Undoubtedly when and if water becomes scarce in this area, its use will be regulated much more efficiently than at present. It appears that such practices as lining canals, reducing overordering of water, reusing runoff water, reducing evaporation, and improving channels can be instituted in the future and will effect a substantial reduction in the amount of water needed to satisfy existing California uses. It is impossible to determine exactly how much more efficiently water will be used if the present condition of abundance turns into one of shortage, but it is clear that savings will be such that California's existing uses could be satisfied by substantially less water than is presently diverted" (Footnote 25, page 103, Special Master's Report). The Special Master noted the difficulty of an accurate determination of future supply in a stream system, particularly in the case of the Colorado River; that determination of future supply is at best a prediction-an estimate based on the past. He noted that the evidence presented shows the weakness of the science of hydrology in sustaining a prediction accurate enough to be helpful on the question, and that the difficulty of measuring streamflows, reservoir evaporation, channel losses, incomplete streamflow records, differences as to what past historical records to use, the use of reservoirs for flood control purposes, and the impact of Upper Basin uses on Lower Basin supply, create problems in estimating future supply. California's contention that existing uses in that State will be curtailed under the apportionment proposed in the Special Master's Report is not justified, the Special Master stated, because existing California uses would not be curtailed until use increased in Arizona, Nevada, and the Upper Basin States. Moreover, it would be up to Congress to resolve the equities between California's existing uses and new uses in the Colorado River Basin since no new projects in either Basin which would affect Lower Basin mainstream supply can be constructed in the Colorado River Basin without Congressional action. C.4 Jurisdiction and Justifiability The Master noted that none of the parties in the litigation questioned the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court either over the parties or over the subject matter of the controversies which concern the mainstream of the Colorado River. Moreover, either explicitly or implicitly, all of the parties conceded that it was appropriate for the Supreme Court to exercise its jurisdiction and adjudicate these mainstream controversies at this time. He also noted that there were compelling reasons to justify an adjudication of the various claims to Colorado River waters. A principal reason was that Arizona will not be able to develop the Central Arizona Project without an adjudication by the Supreme Court as to the rights of the several parties to the water in the mainstream and that, without the CAP or a similar project, Arizona will not be able to fully utilize the water which she claims has been set aside for her in the mainstream; that: "...unless this controversy among the three States and the United States is adjudicated, the full utilization of the Colorado River will be indefinitely delayed. Such a result would frustrate the purposes of Congress in authorizing the construction of Hoover Dam and would seriously hinder development of the entire area" (Special Master's Report, page 133). The Special Master noted other reasons why the Supreme Court's jurisdiction should be exercised. These were the potential increase in irrigating lands in existing projects such as in Imperial Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Palo Verde Irrigation District and increased diversions by The Metropolitan Water District, as well as the potential for developing increased uses of mainstream water in Arizona. Hence the need for adjudication of the Arizona claim so that both the California and Arizona agencies could plan future development. The Special Master noted, however, that it would not be appropriate to adjudicate in this litigation controversies over the tributaries of the Colorado River in the Lower Basin, except those that concern the Gila River System (Footnote 1, Special Master's Report, page 129). C.5 Inapplicability of Colorado River Compact The Special Master noted that despite the Colorado River Compact's contribution of some light on the supply of mainstream water, insofar as it regulates the extent to which the river may be depleted by the Upper |