Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Assessment of the Imperial Irrigation District, <br />released in 1995 revealed that lID's diversions from <br />the Colorado River had increased between 1991 and <br />1994. The main reason cited was a decrease in <br />irrigation efficiencies, which has led to increased <br />agricultural drainage. The report recommended <br />improving on-farm irrigation practices to reduce <br />diversions from the Colorado River. <br /> <br />Additionally, in 1992, MWD reached another <br />ag-urban agreement with growers in the Palo <br />Verde Irrigation District (PVID), a 40-mile.long <br />agricultural region located in the southeastern edge <br />of the state bordering the Colorado River. Sixty- <br />three landowners and lessees in the PVID agreed <br />to not irrigate for two years. These farmers received <br />5620 for each acre fallowed. Approximately 20,000 <br />acres were fallowed between 1992 and 1994 and <br />MWD paid a total of 525 million to store nearly 93,000 <br /> <br />acre-feet of water per year in Lake Mead for future <br />use. This was the first fallowing program along the <br />Colorado River and was considered an overall <br />success. <br /> <br />For California, Arizona could provide an excellent <br />opportunity for storing Colorado River water in an <br />interstate banking arrangement. Arizona has large <br />aquifers underlying much of its state with the desire <br />to eventually develop up to 8 million acre.feet of off- <br />stream storage. So far, MWD has banked 89,000 <br />acre-feet of water in Arizona and is a candidate for <br />storing water in the new interstate account of the <br />Arizona Water Bank. Under Arizona state law, 10 <br />percent of the water stored in the Arizona Water Bank <br />must remain in the aquifer for groundwater replen~ <br />ishment. Arizona law also limits the amount of water <br />that can be pumped out of the interstate account <br />annually at 100,000 acre-feet. <br /> <br />COLORADO RIVER <br /> <br />The Colorado River and its tributaries supply <br />seven western states, Mexico, and American <br />Indian tribes. The 1 AOO.mile.long river is one <br />of the most heavily regulated rivers in the world. <br />Battles over allocation of its water span nearly <br />a century and have been extremely complicated. <br />Dividing use of the river's water has involved <br />interstate compacts, U.S. Supreme Court <br />decisions, a treaty with Mexico, and federal and <br />state legislation. On the lower Colorado River, <br />the secretary of the Interior acts as a water <br />master and administers the water. For this <br />reason. the federal government would hold the <br />ultimate authority over interstate water transfer <br />proposals. <br /> <br />The Colorado's tlow - based on a long. term <br />annual average 18 million acre-feet - is divided <br />between what have been designated as the <br />Upper Basin states - New Mexico, Colorado, <br />Utah and Wyoming - and the Lower Basin states <br />- Nevada, Arizona and California. The latter two <br />states in particular have fought bitterly over <br />water supply. Following a 1963 U.S Supreme <br />Court decision in Arizona v. California, <br />California's basic apportionment was fixed at 4.4 <br />million acre-feet instead of the 5.3 million acre- <br />feet California believed it had. Since that time, <br />southern California has been able to use as <br />much as 5.3 million acre-feet a year because <br />Arizona and Nevada have not used their full <br /> <br />apportionments and because of the available <br />surplus water on the Colorado River system. <br /> <br />In 1998, Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt urged <br />California to reduce its use of the Colorado River <br />and return to its basic apportionment of 4.4 <br />million acre-feet. The so-called "4.4 Plan" is <br />intended to reduce California's use of the <br />Colorado River by approximately 800,000 acre- <br />feet annually through water conservation, water <br />transfers, dry-year fallowing agreements, canal <br />seepage recovery (finish lining the All <br />American Canal using $235 million in taxpayer <br />dollars), groundwater banking, reoperation of <br />Lake Mead and possibly desalination of <br />drainage water. A key component of this plan is <br />a long-term water transfer between liD and <br />SDCWA. <br /> <br />American Indian tribes within the Colorado <br />River Basin also have expressed an interest in <br />marketing water. Though there is disagreement <br />as to whether or not tribes can lease their water <br />off-reservation or out-of-state, some tribes are <br />attempting to do so. The Chemehuevi Tribe, <br />located along the Colorado River across from <br />Lake Havasu in Arizona, submitted a proposal <br />with Interior in 1999 to lease 5,000 acre-feet <br />of water to downstream users. To date, no <br />decision on the marketing proposal has been <br />released. <br /> <br />19 <br />