My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP08807
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
WSP08807
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:49:44 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:17:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.106
Description
Animas-La Plata
State
CO
Basin
San Juan/Dolores
Water Division
7
Date
10/26/1990
Author
Judith Jacobsen
Title
The Navajo Indian Irrigation Project and Quantification of Navajo Winters Rights
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />23 <br /> <br />All the states of the Colorado basin have traditionally felt that they need all of their <br /> <br />compact allocation for state water rights, or prior appropriation rights. This is <br /> <br /> <br />especially so of the upper basin in light of the lower flow than expected. Federally- <br /> <br />reserved water rigbts such as Indian claims are therefore an enormous threat to the <br /> <br /> <br />states. Downstream states are especially fearful lest an upstream state exceed its <br /> <br /> <br />compact entitlement in the course of serving an Indian claim with, in the view of the <br /> <br /> <br />downstream state, its water. Colorado was in just such a position with regard to New <br /> <br />Mexico's use of San Juan water for NIIP. <br /> <br />Section 12(a) of NIIP's authorizing legislation is Colorado's attempt to keep New <br /> <br />Mexico's satisfaction of Winters claims within compact entitlements. The provision that <br /> <br /> <br />became section 12(a) first appears in 1961.64 Felix Sparks, Director of tbe Colorado <br /> <br />Water Conservation Board, proposed it the year before in negotiations with New <br /> <br />annual compact entitlement was 838,000 acre-feet. This figure is based on 11.25 percent <br />(tbe 1948 Compact apportionment to New Mexico) times 7.5 million acre-feet (the 1922 <br />Compact allocation if the Colorado actually averaged something over 15 million acre- <br />feet a year at Lee's Ferry) minus 50,000 acre-feet (the 1948 Compact's allotment to <br />Arizona). Senate Hearinl1 1958, ~ note 17 at 86. This ignores treaty obligations to <br />Mexico. By 1975, Reynolds had revised his estimate to 727,000 acre-feet, based on an <br />average flow of 14 million acre-feet (tbougb again ignoring treaty obligations to Mexico). <br />San Juan-Chama Project: Heariniis on the Existin~ San Juan-Chama Conversion Project <br />in Colorado and the State of New Mexico. and the Effects of the Project on the Fish <br />and Wildlik.Jnhabitants of the San Juan River Basitl before the Subcomm. on Energ;y <br />Research and Water Resources of the Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, <br />94tb Cong., 1st Sess. 93 (1975). If tbe starting point of upper basin entitlement is 4.5 <br />million acre-feet-based on an annual flow of 13.5 million acre-feet--then New Mexico's <br />entitlement, taking treaty obligations to Mexico and Arizona's allotment into account, is <br />just over 500,000 acre-feet, 60 percent of Reynolds's original claim. <br /> <br />64S. 107, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., .smml note 41. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.