Laserfiche WebLink
Interstate and Federal Law <br />Colorado River Compact of 1922 <br />The Colorado River Compact of 1922 <br />divides the water of the Colorado River <br />between what are known as the upper and <br />lower basin states. The lower basin states <br />are comprised of Arizona, California, and <br />Nevada, and those parts of New Mexico <br />and Utah below Lee Ferry, Arizona.. The <br />upper basin states include Colorado, New <br />Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming and that part <br />of Arizona above Lee Ferry. <br />This compact allocates 75 million acre- <br />feet of water for consumptive use averaged <br />over a 10-year period, for the Lower <br />Colorado River Basin. The remainder is for <br />use by the upper basin states. Lake Powell, <br />located immediately upstream of Lee Ferry; <br />is managed to deliver some 7.5 maf annu- <br />ally to the lower basin states, plus a certain <br />amount necessary to meet Mexican treaty <br />obligations. <br />Arkansas River Compact of 1948 <br />This compact apportions the waters <br />of the Arkansas River between Colorado <br />(60 percent) and Kansas (40 percent) <br />based on the inflow to John Martin <br />Reservoir during the winter storage sea- <br />son (December 1 to March 31). This <br />water in storage can be released at the <br />demand of either state after April 1. <br />Colorado and Kansas have often been <br />in litigation before the U.S. Supreme <br />Court over Arkansas River water since the <br />early twentieth century. In 1995, the U.S. <br />Supreme Court Eound that Colorado had <br />depleted the flow of the Arkansas River at <br />the state line in violation of the compact. <br />Irrigation wells installed after execution of <br />the compact caused these depletions. The <br />states are now litigating the nature and <br />extent of the injury to Kansas., and <br />Colorado's method of repayment, before a <br />U.S. Supreme Court Special Master. In <br />response to an order of the Special Master, <br />the Colorado State Engineer has devel- <br />oped well administration rules to bring <br />Colorado into compliance with the com- <br />pact (see 37-69-101 to 37-69-106 C.R.S.). <br />Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948 <br />This compact distributes the consumptive use of Colorado River water <br />among the upper basin states. Subject to interpretation of the compacts and <br />other laws, as well as the amount of water available in the river, Colorado's con- <br />sumptive use rights for Colorado River water can vary. The following calculation <br />is a way of viewing how the ten-year running average 75 million. acre-feet deliv- <br />ery reduirement to the lower basin might translate into water available for con- <br />sumptive use by the upper basin states: <br />Total Water Production in the Upper• Basin. <br />minus the amount remaining to be delivered to the: lower basin under the <br />current 1U-year running average <br />minus 750,000 acre-feet (if the upper basin must bear one-half of the <br />Mexican Treaty delivery, a disputed point) <br />equals Total Available to the Upper Basin <br />naiztus 50,000 acre-feet to Arizona (above Lee Ferry) <br />Of the remainder, the upper basin states receive: <br />Colorado = 51.15°io <br />Utah = 23% <br />Wyoming = 14% <br />New Mexico = 1125% <br />For water planning purposes, the Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />assumes that there is up to 400,000 additional acre-feet of Colorado River water <br />remaining Eor consumptive use that Colorado can develop under the 1922 and <br />1948 Colorado River compacts. <br />C I T I Z E N S G U I D E T O C O L O R A D O ~/ A T E R LAW ~ 2 3 <br />Colorado is a source state - no rnajor rivers flow into Colorado. This reap shows <br />the relative, historical average annual stream flows leaving Colorado. <br />