My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09929
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09929
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:56:34 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 4:01:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.700
Description
Colorado River Basin - General Publications
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
5/4/1979
Author
Comptroller General
Title
Colorado River Basin Water Problems - How to Reduce Their Impact - Report to the Congress of the United States
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.
/
150
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 />0008JS <br /> <br />a~ount is the storage considered sufficient to neet future <br />releases to the Lower Basin without impairing the Upper <br />Basin's consunptive uses. Also, the criteria state that <br />after the Central Arizona Project becomes operational, the <br />Secretary shall determine when water supply is insufficient <br />to satisfy annual consunptive use requirements in the Lower <br />Basin. However, they do not state what water supply conditions <br />must exist in the river arid storage reservoirs that would <br />cause the Secretary to declare a water shortage, nor do they <br />state how the Secretary would make releases from Lake Mead <br />during a water shortage. <br /> <br />These conditions have never been formally stated or <br />quantified because the Bureau has never been able to reach <br />an agreement on them with the basin States. The Upper and <br />Lower Basin States disagree over the amount of Upper Basin <br />storage to be retained and their respective obligations <br />in supplying the Mexican treaty allocation. (See p. 10.) <br /> <br />The Bureau net with the seven basin States in June 1978 <br />to instigate studies addressing reservoir operating criteria <br />and oth~r issues, but the States said that such studies would <br />be premature ,at that time. For example, Arizona believes <br />that a shortage will not occur for many years and that more <br />specific operating criteria can best be decided closer to <br />the time the shortages occur, as decisions can be based on <br />conditions pertinent at that time. <br /> <br />r <br />~ <br /> <br />Since Bureau officials could not reach an agreement <br />with the seven basin States, they believe the States would <br />bring suit if specific criteria are set and that it is better <br />to remain flexible on these matters. These officials prefer <br />waiting until firm operating criteria can be agreed upon by <br />the seven basin States or until a water shortage necessitates <br />an agreement. If legal action is brought after a shortage <br />is imminent, however, mitigating actions may be delayed while <br />the suit is pending. <br /> <br />If the Secretary waits until a shortage occurs, he and <br />the State water officials may be forced to nake decisions on <br />a crisis basis that are not in the best interests of the <br />States, Nation, or basin as a whole. Water officials respons- <br />ible for planning solutions to future shortages need to know <br />how much water will be available for use in both sub-basins <br />and the States so proper decisions can be made. If plans <br />are made without information on the operating criteria, <br />projects may be built that are not needed or that will never <br />have sufficient water to meet project purposes. Water users <br />also need to know what the operating criteria will be, so <br />their plans can be based on reliable water supplies. Very <br /> <br />18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.