My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP12626
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1-1000
>
WSP12626
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:17:04 PM
Creation date
8/6/2007 1:28:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8210.110
Description
Colorado River Basin Organizations-Entities - Colorado River Water Users Association
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
12/16/2002
Author
Gail Norton
Title
Honorable Gail Norton - Secretary of the Interior - Speech to the Colorado River Water Users Association - Las Vegas NV - 12-16-02
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.
/
7
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 />GOn3fl4 <br /> <br />The basin is experiencing one of the most significant drought cycles in modem history. This year <br />produced the lowest Colorado River flow on record, at just 25% of the 30-year-average flow. <br /> <br />Total natural runoff in the Colorado River Basin during 2002 water year is estimated at 7 million acre- <br />feet. To put this' in context, total demands for Colorado River water, including losses. over this same <br />period was approximately 15~ million acre-feet. These demands were met by reducing storage in the <br />Basin by more than 8Yl million acre-feet in this period. <br /> <br />In 2002 California will use approximately 5.2 million acre feet - which m~ that California could be <br />seen as using 75% of the water that the Basin produced. <br /> <br />At the same time, the Basin states are also experiencing population growth. As a result, states like <br />Arizona and Nevada, that once did not use their full Colorado River apportionments, now do. <br /> <br />Over the last decade, the Department and the seven basin states painstakingly negotiated an historic <br />agreement on Colorado River water use. <br /> <br />The principal issue of the negotiations was how to achieve certainty that California would actually reduce <br />its overuse of me Colorado River. .The agreement that emerged is embodied in what is known as the <br />"Interim Surplus Guidelines." <br /> <br />This agreement is non-partisan~ as demonstrated by the fact that my predecessor~ former Interior SecretaIy <br />Bruce Babbitt, negotiated and approved the Guidelines. After careful review when I took office, I <br />endorsed the agreement, and decided to stay the course. That was the right decision then, it is the right <br />decision now. My staff and I have been working for more than a year and a half to keep the process on <br />track. <br /> <br />This seven-state agreement gave California a choice for reducing its Colorado River overuse: <br /> <br />California could take specific actions to reduce its Colorado River water use to 4.4 million acre-feet by <br />the year 2015. In r~ California would receive enhanced access to surplus water during a 15 year <br />interim period. This is known as the <'soft landing" for California. <br /> <br />Alternatively, if California didn't take required actions, it would immediately lose enhanced access to <br />surplus water, beginning January 1, 2003. This is known as the "hard landing" approach. . <br /> <br />California's choice will be determined by whether California water entities sign the Quantification <br />Senlement Agreement before January 1st. At this time, it appears that California's Imperial Irrigation <br />District has decided not to execute the QSA. <br /> <br />This QSA is extremely important to the basin states and to the Department. The QSA quantifies <br />California agricultural water entitlementS - a matter that has been unresolved since 1931. <br /> <br />Without a clear understanding of each entities' portion of California's agricultural entitlement, it will be <br />very difficult to transfer water from California's agricultural users to its urban users. These transfers may <br />be the only solution for California to live within its 4.4 million acre-foot limit. Here's why. <br /> <br />California's agricultural users have a priority right to 3.85 million acre-feet of this apportionment, and the <br />small remainder is all that is left for Southern California cities serving more than 17 million people. <br /> <br />CRWUA -Dec. 16,2002 <br /> <br />Page 2 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.