WSPC03421

• File Number: 8230.100.10
• Description: Colorado River - Interstate Litigation - Arizona Vs California
• State: AZ
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 12/1/1964
• Title: AZ Vs CA - Arizona V California and Pacific Southwest Water Problems - California Assembly Interim Committee Reports - 1963-1965 - Volume 26-Number 13
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

0020S9

~n
'"

ASSEMBLY INTERIM COMMITTEE ON WATER

of the Imperial Irrigation District stated to this committee that the
so-called "local projects" in California which transport Colorado River
water for agricultural use in the Imperial and Coachella Valleys, are
owned and operated by the federal government (the All-American and
Coachella branch canal system). Since the facilities are federally owned,
these officials claimed that major physical improvements such as lining
(which may involve complete reconstruction of portions of the aque-
duct) is properly a federal expense. The bureau indicated it would ac-
cept this responsibility but not as part of a regional plan:

The Bureau of Reclamation would cooperate fully with the state
in the planning, design, construction, and solution of the problems
of financing of a canal lining program. The bureau is presently
investigating the feasibility of lining 87 miles of the unlined por-
tion of the Coachella Canal to reduce seepage losses by an esti-
mated 150,000 acre-feet annually. A feasibility report is scheduled
for fiscal year 1966. Studies will also be initiated on the feasibility
of lining the All-American Canal itself. These studies will result
in conclusions and recommendations, together with cost estimates
for procedures, types of lining, estimated reduction in seepage
losses, etc."

In addition, there is disagrcement between the bureau and the
agricultural agencies involved over disposition of the water salvaged.
According to the bureau:
Before the federal government should participate in a canal
lining program, however, the problem of the disposition of the
conserved water must be resolved. If water conserved by canal
lining were to be devoted to irrigation of new lands in the Imperial
and Coachella Valleys, it would not be consistent with a primary
objective of the Pacific Southwest Water Plan; i.e., to meet present
water deficiencies and growing demands, but only to sustain,
through the plan facilities, the existing level of irrigation develop-
ment. If the conserved water were to be used not for irrigation
of new lands but for meeting other water demands in California
this would require, as It prelude, extensive negotiation and modi-
fication of existing agreem.ents and contracts.
Proposals on such matters must originate in California. Because
of the magnitude and importance of this untapped, inexpensive
source of new water supply, it is urged that California take the
initiative in seeking decisions, including proposals for contract
modification, that will permit canal lining to be undertaken as part
of the Pacific Southwest Water Plan or through some other pro-
gram. The federal government should, of course, participate to
the extent that its contractual responsibilities for Colorado River
water are concerned. As soon as these matters are resolved and a
feasibility report can be prepared, lining of these canals should
be proposed for authorization.9

Officials of the Coachella County Water District, however, contended:
. . . If the canals were lined, it is obvious that some water
could be saved for beneficial use which now is wasted. through

8 Hearing Tran8cript~ August 19, 1964 at 20.
D Pacific Southwest Water Plan, January 1961" ap. cU., at 32.