WSPC03421 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

002072 .A~rZONA Y. CALIFORNIA AND t'AClll'lU ::5UU'l'HWIGST WATER PROBLEMS '75 The subsidy involved in such a program is unprecedented. Under the plan it will cost approximately $75 an acre-foot to transport this water from northern California to southern California. It would be sold to the Metropolitan Water District for $20 an acre-foot, the delivered cost of existing Colorado River supplies, and to the CoachelJa County Water District and the Imperial Irrigation District (agricultural agencies), for $2.25 an acre-foot. 'rhis appears to be the most extensive irrigation subsidy ever proposed by the Bureau of Reclamation. The basis of this aqueduct system proposal is to replace for the two districts the 300,000 acre-foot reduction they suffer under their Priority No. VII to Colorado River water. However, only one-half of the 300,000 acre-feet is presently being used by the agricultural agencies. If the water salvage proposals to line the All-American and Coachella Canals, which were not included in this plan, had heen included, an anticipated 500,000 acre-feet of water would have been developed to make'up the districts'loss. Thus, failure to include the water salvage program has, in effect, resulted in this unusual subsidy and the replacement of this amount from northern California. The estimated water charges under the Revised Plan are as follows: Water rates per acre-foot California Irrigation exchange _________________________________________ $2.25 ~ and I exchange __________________________________________ 20.00 S nrplns -__ ___ __ _ ___ _____ ___ _ __ __ _______ _____ _______ _______ _ 75.00 Central Arizona Irrigation ______ _.__ _____.________ __________________.___________ 10.00 ~ and I -__________________________________________________ 45.00 Dixie Irrigation -_________________________________________________ 7.00 ~ and I ------____________________________________________ 22.00 Southern Nevada ~ and I -----______________________________________________ 28.00 In April 1964, Secretary of the Interior Udall submitted to the Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation of the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee a draft of legislation to authorize the Pacific Southwest Water Plan, Revised. However, the Bureau of the Budget, in a letter to Senator Jackson, Chairman of the Committee, advised that the bureau was unable at that time to recommend enact- ment of either S. 1658, the original Central Ari7.0na. Project bill, or the Pacific Southwest -Water Plan. . . . The Pacific Southwest \Vater Plan, as noted earlier, pre- sents a number of major issues which are still under discussion with the Department of the Interior and other agencies concern cd. Central Arizona has experienced one of the most rapid popula- tion growth rates in the nation. This situation, combined with a continuing overdraft in ground water supplies, IJas resulted in an increasingly critical water supply problem. Moreover, the Central Arizona Project, which would alleviate this situation has been delayed more than a decade pendin~ the outcome, as noted earlier, of litigation before the Supreme Court. The importance of the