My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP01461
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
WSP01461
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:31:06 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:27:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8549.800
Description
Rio Grande Basin-Miscellaneous Small Projects and Project Studies-Rio Grande Assessment
State
CO
Basin
Rio Grande
Water Division
3
Date
2/1/1981
Author
Brandes Kier Stecher
Title
Water Resources Reference Base for the Assessment of the Rio Grande Region
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.
/
84
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 />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />accruing debits and credits annually in the delivery of water by Colorado and <br />New Mexico. <br /> <br />The administration of the Rio Grande Compact has been complicated by the <br />widely ranging flows in the River. Relatively large quantities of water were <br />available from the river through 1945, but a general decline has occurred <br />since. Both Colorado and New Mexico have been deficient in their deliveries <br />during the past 20-30 years; maximum debits were accrued in 1965 (Colorado - <br />940,000 acre-feet; New Mexico - 445,000 acre-feet). In 1977, the debits for <br />Colorado had been reduced to 705,000 acre-feet and New Mexico had an accrued <br />credit of 32,000 acre-feet. <br /> <br />New Mexico and Texas joined in a suit against Colorado in 1966, claiming <br />that they were not receiving the water guaranteed by the Compact. That suit <br />was essentially stayed in 1968 when the three states and the United States <br />agreed to a stay of proceedings in the pending legislation to "afford a <br />reasonable time for the interested parties to demonstrate the imminence of an <br />equitable administrative solution". On April 17, 1968, the Attorneys General <br />of the three states signed a Motion for Continuance and Memorandum based on <br />the conditi on that Colorado "under takes to del i ver water at the Colorado-New <br />Mexico state line to meet every year the delivery obligation established by <br />the schedules of Article III of the Rio Grande Compact. To this end the <br />State of Colorado shall exercise its best efforts and use all available admi- <br />nistrative and legal powers including, if necessary, the curtailment of <br />di versions enforced by agents of the State." <br /> <br />Pecos River Compact <br /> <br />New Mexico and Texas originally signed a compact for the Pecos River in <br />1925, but it was not finally ratified until 1948, after modification. Those <br />complications have typified the relationship between the states over the <br />PecOS River. Presently the delivery of water by New Mexico is being con- <br />tested by Texas in the courts. <br /> <br />Generally the compact divides the flow of the Pecos using 1947 as a <br />base year, stating that New Mexico, by man's activities shall never cause <br /> <br />59 <br /> <br />....:..' <br />I <br /> <br />j <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />^Cl <br />~b <br />,,-."-. <br />:.c.i' <br />,~". <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.