BOARD00196

• Board Meeting Date: 11/29/1955
• Description: Minutes
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

'"
~32

The immediate problem is to get a bill enacted by
the House. We should strive to include in it authorization
for the greatest possible development of the Basin, but the
vital thing is to get a bill through. The Lower Basin began
its development with one project.-- the Boulder Canyon
Project~ We should have enough faith in the "House -
Senate Conference" and enough courage to streamline the
House bill whatever is necessary to enact a bill in 1956.
The Upper Colorado Basin as a whole does not face a
deadline.

........----

r

The Glen Canyon Power Profits will be earned by
falling water flowing down the river from-the Upper States,
and 7~0 of that falling water that earns power credits
for all of us is contributed by Colorado, l~o by Utah, l~o
by Wyoming and ~o by New Mexico.

However, these four states divided the right to the
consumptive use of the water of the Colorado River not
according to the amount each produced, but arbitrarily
by a negotiated formula as follows:

Colorado
Utah
Wyoming
New Mexico

51, 7510
23 10
14 10
11. 2510
100 ~o

Colorado is not complaining about that, but why should
not Glen Canyon adopt that identical formula for the
division of its Anticipated Power Profits? Then Colorado
would be the only one of the four States receiving less
power credits than the contribution it makes in the pro-
duction of those vital credits.

Through evaporation and silt deposit, Glen Canyon, the
outstanding storage reservoir and power project on the
Colorado River, will lose not less than 600,000 acre feet
of water a year. That is a very heavy loss and it is
interesting to note'how that loss is divided among our' four
States. Under the terms of the Upper Basip Compact, _ I~
Colorado's share of that loss will be 310,~00 acre feet, ~-
Utah 138,000 acre feet, Wyoming 84,000 acre feet and
New Mexico 67,5qO acre feet.