Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~~~~ <br />n~Z3~L <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />as defined in the decision of the U. S. Supreme Court in the case <br />of Arizona vs. California, et aI, 373 U. S. 546. Subsequently it <br />was decided that the studies would be sponsored by the Upper <br />Colorado River Commission rather than by the Colorado Water Con- <br />servation Board. <br /> <br />The report consists of two parts: Volume I - Text, <br />and Volume II - Appendices. The text describes the manner in <br />which the studies were made and gives the results of the most <br />pertinent studies and final conclusions based on those results, <br />and the reasons therefor. The Appendices consist of copies of <br />34 detailed river and reservoir operation studies that were con- <br />sidered directly pertinent to the report. The Appendices also <br />contain tables indicating the estimated present depletions on <br />the river by the States of the upper Division of the Colorado <br />River Basin, and the prognostication by projects of increased <br />depletion in the future, as made by various entities. A master <br />table is included which indicates all known potentials in the <br />Upper Basin and estimates of others which might come into being. <br /> <br />The following paragraphs are copied from the summary <br />of the report: <br /> <br />"The principal studies described herein are based on <br />study periods 1914 through 1964 and 1921 through 1964. The <br />period 1930 to date has been used by the Department of <br />Interior and by the Colorado River Board of California to <br />determine the amount of water available for use from the <br />lower river by Arizona, California and Nevada. No <br />appreciable difference exists in the basic data used for <br />the various studies, such as the principal one of virgin <br />flow at Lee Ferry for various years. Some difference <br />does exist, however, in respect to the net losses of <br />water between Hoover Dam and Mexico, which is discussed <br />subsequently. <br /> <br />All studies disclose without exception that any in- <br />crease in the use on the lower river must now be made from <br />water apportioned to the upper Basin, but now unused by it. <br />Actually, at present the aggregate demand on L~~e Mead is <br />close to 9 maf per year. It is apparent that even present <br />uses on the lower river are dependent upon significant <br />amounts of water released from Lake Powell in excess of <br />those required by the Colorado River Compact. <br /> <br />- 2 - <br /> <br />~ <br />