8013 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Colorado River Basin Study I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Table 4.-Annual water use (1,000 aft in the Upper Basin, 1981-1985, 1990 State Apportionment' 1981-1985 average2 1990 Arizona 50 42 423 Colorado 3,079 1,994 2,2064 New Mexico 669 377 4454 Utah 1,369 657 7374 Wyoming 833 332 4224 Total 6,000 3,402 3,852 , For planning purposes this assumes the total Upper Basin entitlement is 6.0 maf, of which 50,000 af is the Upper Basin allocation to Arizona. 2 Source: BOR, 1991 3 Source: Trueman, 1996. 4 Source: Cook, 1997. County Water Authority (SDCWA), the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA), Central Arizona Water Conservation District (CAWCD), the City of Phoenix and various other municipalities. Depending on which flow estimates are used, the river has been over allocated by 20 to 30 percent. As shown in Table 5, a total of 17.5 mafhas been allocated to the seven basin states and Mexico. While the Upper Basin is not close to fully utilizing its legal entitlement and uses 6.0 maf as the number for planning purposes, there is increased concern in the Upper Basin about future demands on Colorado River water. (Projected use to 2030 in the Upper Basin is depicted by state in Figures 6 to 10). Water use estimates were compiled in 1995 and projections were made to the year 2060 by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) in consultation with individual states within the Colorado River Basin and the Upper Colorado River Commission. Tribal uses and claims will be discussed below in the "Indian Water Rights" section, but it should be noted that the general consensus is that these uses and claims to reserved rights are considered within each state's apportion- ment under the "Law of the River.u5 5 The Navajo Nation objects to the characterization that tribal water rights are considered as a part ofa states entitlement (Letter from Stanley Pollack, Special Counsel For Water Rights, Navajo Nation, April 4, 1997). 14