Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />The Colorado often is described as the most <br />controversial and regulated river in the United States. <br />Given the importance at water to all of the South- <br />west. it is not surprising that there was - and still is <br />- controversy over how to share this major river. <br />Perhaps more surprising is that the multitude of <br />agreements have endured. <br /> <br />Without water, the vast deserts and arid plains in all <br />seven basin states could not be developed; the land <br />that could benefit from water for irrigation far exceeds <br />available yields of the Colorado River. Some of the <br />states ultimately could make full use of most of the <br />water in the Colorado River by themselves if they <br />were not obliged to share that water. In Arizona, for <br />example, the available land resources exceed water <br />resources by at least a hundredfold. <br /> <br />Because of the tremendous water needs and desire <br />for flood control, development of large water <br />diversion projects (including dams and hydropower <br />plants) on the Colorado always has involved barter <br />and compromise. When the first projects were built <br />in the early 1900s. the atmosphere was one of a <br />developing country anxious to build an economy in <br />a sparsely settled region. Due to increasing <br />influences associated with urbanization, American <br />Indians and environmental protection needs, in the <br />eyes at most, the era of large water project <br />development has come to an end. <br /> <br />Ensuring its own share of the water is a key <br />motivation that has changed little among the Repub- <br />lic of Mexico, each of the seven Colorado River Basin <br />states and each American Indian tribe. Apportion- <br />ment of the water and agreements to support projects <br />were hammered out by determined people, because <br />each concession of more water for one area might <br />mean deprivation for another. No state's represen- <br />tative wanted to leave the bargaining table with less <br />than what it was thought possible to obtain. Most of <br />the agreements were worked out through a <br />combination of mutual selt-interest and bargaining, <br />although in the early days not all of today's competing <br />interests - including tribal and environmental- were <br />at the bargaining table. <br /> <br />Concern over developing the Colorado coincided <br />with settlement of the West. California was settled <br />more rapidly than the other Western states. largely <br />because the 1849 Gold Rush lured thousands. As <br />development progressed and new farming <br />techniques advanced, more and more settlers envj. <br /> <br />\ <br /> <br />-,--~ <br /> <br />-- <br /> <br />, <br />'. <br /> <br />\ <br />\- <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />, <br />, <br />~. <br />I . . <br /> <br /> <br />L~~~ <br /> <br />J <br />l.. +. <br /> <br /> 'Ii .-"'. <br /> '.. <br /> < t( <br /> ~: <br /> , <br />" , <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />sioned the possibility of crop production. In some <br />areas of the West. the growing season between <br />frosts was as short as two months and the southern <br />California desert could sustain continuous cropping <br />throughout the year - if only reliable water supplies <br />could be transported to the land. For southern <br />California, the source of water within a feasible <br />distance was the Colorado River. <br /> <br />Starting ill /93/. Ifom'cr <br />Da111 wm. buillllsillg more <br />COIllT('ft> rhall all pn'\'ious <br />UUl'l'al/ projects combincd <br />(lnd rhe efforts oj close to <br />j,OOO 111ell u'orkill.f!, aroulld <br />Ihe clock. <br /> <br /> <br />s <br />