Laserfiche WebLink
<br />MR. GEISSINGER. <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS. <br /> <br />The Lower Basin insisted on a series of <br />studies to try to lower the rule curve. The <br />reason being that if you release more water at <br />Lee Ferry the Lower Basin has more water. They <br />weren't satisfied with even the 8.25. They I",~. <br />want more than 8.25 million. This is the basis <br />of their effort. They are talking about in <br />excess of 9 million acre-feet they want us to <br />deliver every year at Lee Ferry. <br /> <br />As a result of their efforts the rule curve, <br />the 98 percent rule curve, originally projected <br />by the Bureau was eliminated in the criteria. <br />We would have gone along with the 98.4 rule curve. <br />However, it is no longer mentioned in the cri- <br />teria, although not precluded. The whole thrust <br />of the Lower Basin's efforts is to get a delivery <br />at Lee Ferry which will be somewhere in the <br />magnitude of 9 million acre-feet plus. That's <br />the essence of their strategy. It boils down to <br />the fact that California lost a lawsuit against <br />Arizona and thereby will lose the use of 700,000 <br />acre-feet of water annually that it is now taking <br />in excess of what California is entitled to. So <br />having lost the lawsuit against Arizona, the <br />State of California, through the Secretary of <br />the Interior, is trying to get the water back <br />from the Upper Basin. It is just that simple." <br /> <br />"Larry, may I ask one other question. I <br />don't want to prolong this but I think this is <br />one of the most important things that will <br />probably be before the Board for a good long <br />time. Do you have any feeling that the 8.23 <br />was an effort to pacify the Lower Basin states <br />who were contending for 9.5 and we were setting <br />our figure at 7.5? Is it a sort of a something <br />to hold out to them to get them to go along?" <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />"The Bureau of Reclamation is in an unhappy <br />position in this matter. Yes, to a certain <br />extent it was to satisfy Lower Basin objections. <br />However, the figure itself has some realistic <br />basis. To generate power revenues for Upper <br />Basin development, something of that magnitude <br />