WSP12076 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

22 actually put together in a rather exhaustive collection of data known as the "Engineering Committee's Final Report." TI1e only statistics presented in this summary in Meeting Five concerned the figures of present irrigated acreage in each Upper Basin state. This estimation alone is revealing of Colorado's dominance of Upper Basin usage. As of 1.949, Colorado was irrigating substantially more than the other four states combined were irrigating.75 Other figures contained in the Final Report, to be discussed later, also testify to the extent of Colorado's contribution to and usage of the Colorado River. O~e of t11e first issues taken up in the meeting was also brought up by Mr. Riter. He expressed apprehension about the possible dire effects of a miscalculation by the engineers of measurements of current man-made depletions on the Colorado. An overestimation of this figure, he said, would consequently lead to an overestimation of the river's virgin flow. TIle virgin flow at a partiCUlar point of the stream is the sum of the actual measured flow and the current depletions by man. An overestimation of these depletions, then, would also lead to an overly optimistic estimation of any surplus waters, which consist of unused ,vaters to be sent downstream to fulfill the Lower Basin and Mexican obligations. Thus, one or more of the regions of the basin would nec- essarily be affected in receiving less water to \;ork wi th than promised or estimated. This uncertainty of water measurements by the engineers and the unpredicta- bility of the flo', of the Colorado were two of the factors that led to discussion of apportioning the water on a percentage rather than an acre-foot basis. Breitenstein of Colorado brought up this question which he saw as one of the most important that the Commission would have to anEwer. HE pointed out the error of the negotiators of the Colorado River Compact in accepting an inflated