Laserfiche WebLink
(1949). They were prompted by a 1946 Bureau of Reclamation <br />survey which recommended major projects, prima ily in the <br />Upper Basin, and by the Secretary of 'Interior's announced <br />reluctance to seek congressional authorization of those <br />projects until the Upper Basin states had reached. an alloca- <br />tion of the water provided to them by the 1922 Coipact.24 <br />The Upper Colorado River Compact apportions to each <br />Upper Basin state the following percentage of the Upper <br />Basin's total consumptive use of River water per annum: <br />Colorado, 51.75%; Utah, 23%; Wyoming, 14%; ew Mexico, <br />11.25%. Arizona, whose northeast corner drai s into the <br />upper basin, was given a flat 50,000 acre-feet a year. <br />i <br />"Consumptive use" was defined by Article VI as tthe man-made <br />depletions of the virgin flow measured- at Lee's Fjerry. This <br />definition, controverted by the Lower Basin, allows evapora- <br />tion and channel losses that would have occurred without a <br />state's diversions to be setoff against its de letions.25 <br />Article IV of the Compact adjusts a state's apportionment in <br />the event it has overdrawn in the prior ten years. Reservoir <br />losses are apportioned to each state by Article V. <br />E. Colorado River Storage Project Act of 1956 <br />Passed despite opposition from southern Ca ifornia,26 <br />the Colorado River Storage Project Act of 1956, 43 <br />U.S.C. §620 (1976), was one fruit of the Upper Colorado River <br />Basin Compact. It authorized construction and operation of <br />dams and powerplants at Glen Canyon, Flaming <br />on the <br />-10-