WSP02650 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

21-19 LAW OF THE COLORADO RIVER ~ 21.03[1] tural interests are probably in the least jeopardy.64 Irriga- tion, storage, and often transbasin diversions increase salin- ity through the processes of salt loading and salt concentrating.65 While the salt content of the River appears to have stabilized for the time being, a long-range solution has yet to be achieved. Further increases in salinity levels could lead to restrictions of water use in both Basins. ~ 21.03 Unintended Effects of the Law of the River Upon Water Use in the Upper and Lower Basins [1] The Great and Growing Deficiency of Water Unfortunately, the mathematics of the law of the River simply have not worked: the sum of the parts is greater than the whole. The Compact apportions in perpetuity to the Up- per Basin 7.5 m.a.f. per annum; it apportions in perpetuity to the Lower Basin 7.5 m.aJ. per annum and allows it another 1.0 m.a.f. under Article IlI(b); and the Mexican Treaty as- sures Mexico another 1.5 m.a.f. for a total of 17.5 m.aJ. Yet the average virgin flow of the River from 1922-1985 at Lee's Ferry, where the Upper Basin relinquishes water to the Lower, was only 14.3 m.a.f.66 For substantial periods of time during recent decades it has been less. From 1930 to 1985, the flow averaged 13.9 m.a.f. per annum,67 and from 1953 to 1964 it averaged only 11.6 m.a.f. per annum.58 The volume of water emptying into the Colorado River may decline still further in the future. Analyses by the Tree Ring Laboratory at the University of Arizona yielded an esti- mate that the average long-term flow of the River at Lee's 64 See, e.g., Comptroller General of the United States, Report to the Congress of the United States, Colorado River Basin Problems: How to Reduce Their Impact 3G-40 (May 4, 1979). 65 Environmental Defense Fund v. Castle, 657 F.2d at 280 n. 16. 66 Upper Colorado River Commission, Thirty-Seventh Annual Report 24-27 (Salt Lake City, Utah, 1985). 67Id. 68Id.