Laserfiche WebLink
<br />TABLE 3. (Continued) <br /> <br />A. <br /> <br />B. <br /> <br />Laws, compacts, treaties and other decisions <br />Year Action Rationale I effect <br /> <br />Dams, diversions, and other structural modifications <br />Year Action Rationale I effect <br /> <br />environs <br /> <br /> watera ; Havasu to Southern <br /> authorized Davis CA) <br /> Dam 1943 Gila Project (Imperial <br />1948 Upper Colorado River Apportioned upper Res. to lands along <br /> Basin Compact basin water to Colorado and Gila <br /> signed upper basin states rivers) opened <br /> and AZa 1946 Headgate Rock Diver- <br />1956 Colorado River Authorized sion Dam <br /> Storage Project Flaming Gorge, (Colorado R., CAI <br /> Act passed Glen Canyon, AZ) completed <br /> Navaho and 1950 Morelos Dam <br /> Curecanti projects (Colorado R., <br /> in upper basin Mexico) completed <br />1964 Arizona v. Apportioned lower 1953 Davis Dam (Colorado <br /> California Supreme basin water R., AZ/NV) com- <br /> Court decision between AZ, CA pleted <br /> issued; Canyon and Nva 1963 Flaming Gorge Dam <br /> lands National Park (Green R., UT) and <br /> established Navaho Dam (San <br />1968 Colorado River Basin Authorized Central Juan R., CO) com- <br /> Project Act Arizona Project and pleted <br /> passed five upper basin 1964 Glen Canyon Dam <br /> projects (Colorado R., AZ) <br />1969 National Environmen- Required Bureau and Fontenelle Dam <br /> tal Policy Act of Reclamation to (Green R., WY) <br /> passed work under provi- completed <br /> sions of acts and 1977 Bypass drain <br /> consult with wild- (Colorado R. to <br /> life authorities Gulf of California) <br />1973 Endangered Species opened <br /> Act passed 1978 Crystal Reservoir <br />1974 Colorado River Basin Controlled salinity (Gunnison R., <br /> Salinity Control Act of Colorado R. CO); Curecanti <br /> passed water Unit (name changed <br />1982 Reclamation Act Raised limitation on to Wayne Aspinall <br /> amended land owned by Storage Unit 1980) <br /> Bureau of Reclama- completed <br /> tion water users Under construction <br /> Yuma Desalting <br /> Plant; central <br /> Arizona Project <br /> (L. Havasu to <br /> Pheonix) <br /> <br />Irrigation of lower <br />Gila and Colorado <br />Valleys <br /> <br />Irrigation of Indian <br />lands along <br />Colorado R. <br /> <br />Storage for irrigation <br />of Mexicali Valley, <br />Mexico <br />Regulation of water <br />delivery to Mexico; <br />flood control <br />Multipurpose <br /> <br />Multipurpose <br /> <br />Diverting brackish <br />water from <br />Colorado R. <br /> <br />Storage <br /> <br />Desalting water; sup- <br />plying water to cen- <br />tral AZ and to cen- <br />tral NV and UT. <br /> <br />aSee Graf (1985) for legal water entitlements to basins, states and Mexico. <br />bSee Graf (1985) for heights and storage capacities of major high dams in the Colorado system. <br /> <br />The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, created by legislative <br />action in 1902 (Table 3A), is responsible for construction <br />and operation of projects that support economic develop- <br />ment, primarily irrigation agriculture and industrial water <br />uses (Graf 1985). Fradkin (1981) referred to five phases of <br />the Bureau's "conquest" of the Colorado River. First, it <br />constructed several small, non-controversial projects and <br />followed these with the larger Strawberry Valley Project, <br />Utah; Gunnison Tunnel, Colorado; Roosevelt Dam, Ari- <br />zona; and Laguna Dam on the lower Colorado (Table 3B). <br />Plans to enhance irrigation of the Imperial Valley by build- <br />ing a new canal (within the borders ofthe United States) and <br />large reservoirs on the river to store water, control floods, <br /> <br />and produce power led to fears in upper-basin states that the <br />lower basin would claim rights to all water in the river under <br />the doctrine of prior appropriation. Discussions culminated <br />in the Colorado River Compact, which divided waters <br />between the upper and lower basins (above and below Lee <br />Ferry, respectively) on the basis of estimated virgin flows <br />at Lee Ferry from 1896 to 1921. Negotiators based alloca- <br />tions on an annual flow of at least 22.20 kIn3 (Hundley <br />1966) . Average annual virgin flow at Lee Ferry is now esti- <br />mated at 20.72 km 3 for the pre-Compact period and <br />17.52 kIn3 since 1922 (Upper Colorado River Commission <br />1984). The Colorado's waters were overcommitted by this <br />first attempt at apportionment. <br /> <br />229 <br />