9407 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

STATES' PERSPECTIVES still a great fear that this could happen again. The first driving force from California's standpoint was to get physical control of the Colorado River and stop the possible breakout of the river back into the Imperial Valley. The second issue was a firmer irrigation supply. During low-flow months and dry years, there simply wasn't enough water in the river to irrigate the lands they were trying to irrigate in Imperial and Palo Verde. The second purpose was to firm up the water supply through storage. And then the third purpose, which was just evolving, was hydroelectric power. The urban areas were starting to electrify and were realizing that the river was a potential huge source of hydroelectric power. So you find the city of Los Angeles starting to look at hydroelectric power in the Colorado. The one thing that fascinated me that I didn't see in my research was any indication in 1922 that the urban part of southern California was looking at the Colorado River as a source of water. This was a real surprise, and I've asked several people, "Have I missed something here? Are there references that would indicate that the city of Los Angeles or the other cities were starting to look at this?" And as best I can tell, during the Compact negotia- tions itself, water supply for urban southern California was not part of what they were trying to accom- plish. However, very shortly thereafter, within less than a year, William Mulholland, who had put together the city of Los Angeles' system from Owens Valley, less than a year later did have surveys underway out on the Colorado River for the purpose of selecting an aqueduct route. It's apparent that there was a great deal of study and investigation going on for alternative sites for high dams, different configurations, and then just immediately following came the issue that southern California was going to need more water, and they started to work on alternative aqueduct alignments. The basic purpose of the Compact from California's standpoint, was to clear out the interstate conflict issues and allow the Boulder Canyon project The basic purpose of the Compact from California's standpoint, was to clear out the interstate conflict issues SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS MAY 1997 o and allow the Boulder Canyon project to go forward. - David Kennedy to go forward. I saw an interesting expression - we think of equitable apportionment - in one of these early documents: "equitable relationship." It was apparent that the states recognized they had to make peace among themselves before Congress would go forward and authorize this huge federal project and allow these purposes to be met. Basically, from California's standpoint what we were trying to accomplish was peace on the Colorado River so that the projecr could go forward. Jerry asked that we look back and ask ourselves "What might have been done differently? What has happened in the intervening time that's turned out very differently, and what might we have done differently if we'd known all of this?" Certainly two things - one of them was alluded to earlier. The river's about 20 percent smaller than was thought when the Compact was signed. So instead of having a surplus from which the additional needs could be met, we now find ourselves facing at some time a shortage and the surpluses are just simply not going to be there at a future time. The other surprise to California was when the Arizona case came down in '63 and '64 that we found out that the Lower Basin meant only the main stem - it did not mean the tributaries. And this was a big surprise. Now, I'd ask myself and I've asked a few others, "What would we have done differently if we'd known these things?" And frankly, it isn't clear what we'd have done differently. What we were focused on was trying to get these projects built. And it isn't clear that we could have brought into it any meaningful different negotiating position and gotten anything because we essentially accomplished what we were trying to accomplish. Now of course that's one person's views. It would be interesting to hear from other Californians as to either something I've missed in this research or some alternative way of looking at this. But it's certainly been a fascinating project to work on. RITA PEARSON, DIRECTOR, AroWNA DEPARTMENT OF WATER REsOURCES I had a great deal of fun researching this topie. And it really culminated two weeks ago when I got to meet Mike Ely for the first and last time, as it turned out. We had a delightful conversation. He was sharing his anecdotes about the history of the Compact negotiations, his father's involvement. And he reminded me that many Californians have represented Arizona, and likewise, many Arizonans have represented Californians in the Colorado River issues, which is really quite a remarkable feat in and