WSP12533 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

001571 2002] THE lAST GREENlAGOON 927 than 800,000 af of groundwater and surface water across the southern part of the state.l44 As the Lower Basin states come to grips with the fact that current levels of groundwater pumping are unsustainable, the search for alternative supplies will necessarily include the Colorado. California's situation is even more troubling. While California receives 4.4 maf of Colorado River water in normal years, its historic use has exceeded 5 maf,145. and though irrigation currently consumes much of this water, municipal demand is increasing dramatically.146 Due to the relentless growth of Southern California, the Metropolitan .Water District (MWD), which serves the greatest part of Southern California's population, could face a 2.1 maf annual water shortfall by 2020.147 Increasing water demands in .the Lower Basin states have been assuaged in part by the fact that the Upper Basin has never used its full apportionment and, as a consequence, adequate surplus flows have continued to reach the Lower Basin. Growth in the Upper Basin; however, will eventually cause these surplus flows to disappear. While the Upper Basin currently uses approximately 4.8 maf of its 7.5 maf apportionment, this use is projected to increase by nearly 1.1 maf by 2050.148 These increased levels of Upper Basin water use will virtually eliminate surplus flows in the Lower Basin in normal to dry years. 149 B. Increasing the Pressure: Indian Reserved Rights Indian reserved rights represent another growing source of pressure on Colorado River water resources. The U.S. Supreme Court first developed the federal reserved rights doctrine in Winters v. United States.150 In Winters, the Court held that when the federal government created a. reservation, it impliedly reserved enough water to "fulfill the purposes for which the reservation was made, "151 with a priority date as of the 144. See id. at 56. 145. See PONTIUS, supra note 3, at 26. 146. See id. at 29. 147. See id. 148. See FINAL EIS, supra note 71. at Attachment K. Table K-l (the difference between projected 2002 water use and 2050 water use is nearly 1.1 mai)o 149. Additionally, most studies predict that global climate change will increase annual flow variations, increase evaporation, and reduce the overall amount of water in the Colorado. See Sue McClurg, Climate Change and Water: What Might the Future Hold, WESTERN WATER, May-June 1998, at 9. 150. See Winters v. United States, 207 U.S. 564(1908). 151. See SAX ET AL., supra note 63. at 782.