<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 />
|