Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001824 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />But if lower basin tributaries do not count, and III(a) <br />water is all at Lee Ferry or all in the main stream, then water <br />for Mexico is an additional burden to the states of the upper <br />division. If the Compact means what it says with respect to the <br />definition of Colorado River system, both basins are equally con- <br />cerned with the accountability of the waters of the Gila under <br />the Colorado River Compact. <br />If Arizona and the United States are right, of course <br />there must be more water at Lee Ferry from the upper division, <br />although only Nevada puts a definite figure in its findings on <br />the upper division's obligation. The other major water supply <br />contention, urged by both the United States and Arizona, is that <br />the upper basin's depletion at Lee Ferry will not exceed <br />6,200,000 acre-feet per annum prior to the year 2062. The <br />United States cites a Bureau of Reclamation estimate; Arizona <br />refers to physical and economic limitations in the upper basin. <br />Californians tend to take a somewhat relaxed attitude <br />toward both sets of contentions: that the upper division will <br />be required to deliver more water for Mexico, that its uses will <br />develop slowly. However, if any new lower basin project is built <br />on a water supply dependent on those assumptions, we ask that the <br />new project assume the risk that the assumptions are wrong. If <br />unused upper basin water is to supply the Central Arizona Project, <br />and only until the year 2062, we suggest that the decree incorpo~ <br />rate that stipulation binding the United States in its operation <br />of upper basin reservoirs, and that the decree expire in the <br />year 2062. <br /> <br />36. <br />