WSP09378

• File Number: 8200.200
• Description: Colorado River - Basin Hydrology
• State: CO
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 4/9/1993
• Author: CRWUA
• Title: Colorado River Profiles
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

~3~ CRWUA
I!
as a replacement. The per- had assumed a dependable effort would be made to working together for the ';1
11
manent solution, however, flow down the river of claim water, being used pri- good of all.
,. involved construction of a 18 million acre-feet each marily by California, that "
huge desalting plant at year, there had been many was intended for use in the Arizona v. California
Yuma, Arizona. In 1992, "drier than normal" years upper reaches. VVith February 24, 1944. The
this plant began operation - if, indeed, they had not VVyoming, Colorado, Utah uneasy truce between
at one-third capacity. been actually closer to a and New Mexico exerting California and Arizona
longer-period normal than pressure to approve devel- along the lower Colorado
The Upper Colorado River . their shorter-period esti- opment of that water and as that had lasted for nearly a
Basin Compact of 1948 mates had shown. a result of the lack of decade was shattered. ^;
In contrast to the lower Since the residual amount dependability of the river's VVith the Mexican treaty
basin where California's available each year for the flow, Congress in 1956 almost ironed out and 1.5
Congressman Phil Swing upper basin was variable, passed the Colorado River million acre-feet of water
and Senator Hiram those states agreed to Storage Project Act. This destined to be guaranteed to
Johnson had had to be per- divide water amongthem act authorized the construc' Mexico and with California
sistent men to see the on a percentage basis, with tion of four major storage increasing itS use of the river,
Boulder Canyon Project one exception :- Arizona dams on the upper Arizona took historic steps
Act become reality, upper would receive 50,000 acre- Colorado River and its trib- to protect its interests. Three
basin negotiators had no feet for its small upper utaries - Glen Canyon on measures approved by the
need for such tenacity. basin area. As for the rest, the main stem of the Arizona Legislature that day
VVhereas, California, Colorado would lead the Colorado at the set the two states on a colli-
Nevada and Arizona had list of allotments with about ArizouaJUtah border, sion course - the stakes:
not been able to reach 52 percent; Utah with 23 Navajo on the San Juan title to more than' 300 billion
agreement among them- percent to provide its grow- River in New Mexico, gallons of water (about 1
selves on the allocation of ing cities and farms and Flaming Gorge on the' million acre-feet) annually
the lower basin's use of the VVyoming with a 14 percent Green River on the from the Colorado. A pro'
flow of the Colorado (and, share followed in order; and Utah/\Vyoming border, and longed legal battle would
in fact, would not do so for New Mexico would have the VVayne N. Aspinall drag on for nearly 19 years
many years to come), about 11 percent for its Storage Unit which consists before it would be settled by
apparently, there was little uses. of three dams and reser- the nation's high court.
conflict among upper basin It was time to move on to voirs - Blue-Mesa, In the first of the mea- .
states. This was the case the developmeut of these Morrow Point and Crystal sures, the Legislature
despite the fact that, in supplies. - on the Gunnison River approved a contyact with the
apportioning use of upper in Colorado. federal government for 2.8.
basin waters, agreement The Colorado River These dams and others million acre-feet a year; a
was needed not only from . Storage Project Act _ which subsequently have contract that California dis-
the four upper basin states, It was the 1950s and in been authorized hold sur- puted. Then, after a delay of
but from Arizona as well the lower basin, Lagi1n~ . plus water that wet winters nearly 22 years, ArizOn,a rat-_
for though the Grand Dam, Imperial bam and provide foruse in dry years ifiedthe 1922 Colorado
Canyon State receives most theAll-American Canal . when supplies are meager. River Compact. Finally, it.-
of its Colorado River water into Imperial Valley, Parker This allows the upper basin appropriated $200;00010'
from the lower basinenti- Dam, Davis Dam and to develop use of its river conduct surveys for an aque-
tlement, a small portion of Hoover Dam - federal apportionments while duct to carry water from the
the state falls in the upper projects all- were already assuring a full allocation to Colorado to the Phoenix
basin area. in place. In addition, the the lower basin. area.
Colorado, New Mexico, Colorado River Aqueduct, As part of the 1956 act Two years later, the
Utah and VVyoming repre- which, through and at subsequent times, Central Arizona Project
sentatives were joined by Metropolitan VV ater Congress has authorized (CAP) was proposed, a joint
that of Arizona in meeting District, had been funded the construction of partici- effort of Arizona and the
with the president's entirely by the large popu- pating projects to build the federal Bureau of
appointee who would rep- lation of Southern facilities necessary to move Reclamation. California "
resent the federal govern- California, had been in the water to the municipali- spearheaded the fight
ment. Preliminary sessions operation for more than a ties, industries and agricul- against the CAP in
began in July of 1946 and it decade. \Vhile only limited tural interests for which it is Congress, and as long as title
was little more than two development had taken intended. Each of the major to the river's water was dis-
years before the group place in the upper basin, dams produces hydroelec- puted, the project was
gathered in Santa Fe, New states there were anxious to tric power which benefits
Mexico in October of 1948 catch up with those in the customers throughout the
to execute an agreement lower basin, fearing an western states. It is a pro-
among the five states. gram of water and power
Since 1922 when the ~~
Colorado River Compact

*
1