Laserfiche WebLink
<br />< " \'J9 <br />_', ,J <br /> <br />15. STREAM FlOWS <br /> <br />recognized as being commonly greater than tributary contributions, Here, the <br />formula seemB to have been applied, that the waters of a given stream, above <br />a designated point, exceed the virgin flow at that point by the amount of <br />natural channel losses between the places of origin of the water as runoff or <br />stream flow and the place of its measurement or evaluation at the designated <br />point. <br /> <br />For example, consider the Gila River. Its virgin flow at the mouth, of <br />1,271,000 acre feet annually, does not represent the waters of the Gila River <br />such as might be measured at the places of production or that is subject to <br />beneficial consumptive use. The same river, if measured or evaluated as of <br />the vicinity of Phoenix. where virgin flow is estimated at 2,282,000 acre feet <br />annually, would afford for beneficial consumptive use a quantity of water <br />greater by more than 1,000,000 acre feet, by reason of having avoided the <br />conveyance losses between Phoenix and the mouth. Similarly, the waters of the <br />Gila River, if evaluated at the various places of origin and of utilization <br />upstream, would exceed 2,282,000 acre feet annually by whatever may be the <br />natural losses between such places of origin and utilization, and the place of <br />measurement or evaluation at Phoenix. <br /> <br />The same relations should apply in the Upper Basin, where a "growing <br />stream" means that natural chaIDllll losses are less than tributary inflows, and <br />not that such losses are absent or may be ignored. Assuming the virgin flow <br />at Lee Ferry as reported at 16,271,000 acre feet annually, the waters of the <br />Colorado River above Lee Ferry would exceed 16,271,000 acre feet annually by <br />whatever may be the natural lossee above that point up to the places where the <br />waters originate and are available for beneficial consumptive use. And finally <br />the same relation and rule should apply below Lee Ferry, down to the inter- <br />national boundary, which marks the limit of the Colorado River Basin and the <br />Colorado River System as defined in the Compact. On the above bases the waters <br />of the Colorado River System, had they been evaluated by the Bureau of <br />Reclamation, would have amounted to more than 19,200,000 acre feet annually, <br />and hence to more than the ultimate depletions of all present and potential <br />projects listed in the Report. <br /> <br />16. DISCUSSION OF UPPER BASIN SUMMAR'{ <br /> <br />Page 125: "S=ry - Upper Basin," should be re-written to improve its <br />accuracy and completeness, particularly since it treats more or less exclusively <br />with a drought cycle such as 1931-1940, and since summary tables for normal <br />conditions are to appear in the revised draft. <br /> <br />The statement is made, with respect to ultimate drought cycle depletions <br />of 6,908,000 acre feet, that, 'although this is less than the 7,500,000 acre <br />feet allocated to the Upper Basin by the Colorado River Compact, actually it <br />is more than would have been available," by reason of the delivery obligation <br />thereafter discussed. Here, the Bureau of Reclamation is saying, in effect, <br />that its estimated "depletions," including main stem reservoir losses, are the <br />same as and directly comparable with "beneficial consumptive use" as provided <br />for in the Compact. If that be the intent, then by definition and uniform <br />application throughout the Report, the two must be the same. To dSllonstrate <br /> <br />(23) <br />