My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC04714
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
18000-18999
>
WSPC04714
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 11:40:39 AM
Creation date
10/9/2006 4:47:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.100.10
Description
Colorado River - Interstate Litigation - Arizona Vs California
State
AZ
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
7/17/1959
Author
Charles E Corker
Title
AZ Vs CA - Legal Documents 1958-1965 - The Issues in Arizona V California - A Paper Prepared for Presentation at CU Western Resources Conference
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
61
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />~, <br /> <br />0\)1798 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />States prevail. The United states would force all existing <br />prOjects to accept partial satisfaction of their rights in <br />reservoir losses, and possibly--the United States says it is not <br />certain about this--in channel losses. Even the Arizona con- <br />cession of 4,400,000 acre-feet to California is far less generous <br />than it looks. Arizona and the United States both assert that <br />there is 3,100,000 acre-feet of water available from the main <br />stream for use in Arizona and Nevada, that it is equal in <br />priority to the 4,400,000 acre-feet for use in California. <br />The initial problem is, what are the states to use for <br />water? Unless unused upper basin water is included, there is <br />not 7,500,000 acre-feet available for use from the main stream, <br />or anything like that quantity. The issue, therefore, can be <br />simply stated: Is the Central Arizona Project to be built on <br /> <br />unused upper basin water? <br /> <br /> <br />California asks findings that the safe annual yield <br /> <br /> <br />usable from the main stream is from 5,400,000 to 5,850,000 acre- <br /> <br /> <br />feet per annum.lI Nevada asks findings that the main stream <br /> <br />11 The 5,850,000 acre-foot upper limit is based on an average <br />annual delivery, over a climatological cycle like 1909-l956, of <br />8,700,000 acre-feet from the upper basin at Lee Ferry. It assumes <br />over that period an average of l,200,000 acre-feet of "spills" <br />from upper basin reservoirs, beyond the capacity of existing and <br />authorized upper basin reservoirs to control. The upper basin <br />depletions, including reservoir losses, would not exceed 6,500,000 <br />acre-feet. About 950,000 acre-feet per annum evaporates from <br />lower basin reservoirs, 600,000 acre-feet is lost from natural <br />river channels below Hoover Dam, 300,000 acre-feet is lost as <br />uncontrollable spill in the few years of extraordinary floods, <br />200,000 acre-feet is unavoidable overdeliveries to Mexico, and <br />1,500,000 acre-feet is scheduled delivery to Mexico. These losses <br />are partly offset by lower basin tributary inflow. <br /> <br />lO. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.