Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001450 <br /> <br />from the multi-billion dollar CAP begin to pour into the <br />Phoenix area, ultimately to fill its swimming pools and wash <br />its cars,71 at a time when only two, Dolores and Dallas <br />Creek, of the five projects, authorized as a gyig pro gyQ by <br />the Colorado River Basin Project Act are nearing completion, <br />two, San Miguel and West Divide, have been suppressed, and <br />the fifth, Animas-LaPlata, may be the sole survivor under the <br />Reagan Administration's demand for cost-sharing strategies.72 <br />Opposition from Lower Basin interests may also have <br />widened this disparity. Southern Californians waged a <br />campaign against both the Colorado River storage Project Act <br />and the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project authorization act73 that <br />impeded their advance through Congress. Uncertainty about <br />the amount of the Upper Basin's apportionment may also <br />contribute to the problem. It may take 2S or more years to <br />complete a water project.74 Development cannot actually <br />begin until the necessary water rights have been obtained. <br />Doubt about the sufficiency of the .existing water supply <br />deters progress. For instance, New Mexico's-San Juan-Chama <br />project, See 43 U.S.C. ~620 (1976), suffered considerable <br />delays while the Bureau of Reclamation determined whether <br />enough water from New Mexico's share of the Upper Basin's <br />apportionment remained to operate the project.7S <br />The future will force restrictions on the Lower Basin, <br />too. Now that the CAP is functioning California already must <br />scale back its delivery contracts with the Secretary of <br /> <br />-25- <br />