My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP02650
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
WSP02650
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:37:56 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:16:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.700
Description
Law of the River
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
1/1/1980
Author
Carlson and Boles
Title
Chapter 21 Contrary Biews of the Law of the Colorado River: An Examination of Rivalries Between the Upper and Lower Basins
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
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 />21.,..23 <br /> <br />LAW OF THE COLORADO RIVER <br /> <br />~ 21.03[2] <br /> <br />Upper Basin water uses.85 That study assumed a level of wa- <br />ter use by the energy industry which will apparently not be <br />realized. But the Westwide Study, based on varying sets of <br />assumptions about the intensity of water use, also concluded <br />that the Upper Basin would face restrictions by the year <br />2000.86 A Bureau of Reclamation probability analysis has <br />suggested that constraints on Upper Basin water use may be <br />postponed somewhat-but only until about 2010.87 <br /> <br />The Lower Basin currently consumes far more water than <br />the Upper. In 1981 it used about 9.536 m.aJ. from the main- <br />stream of the Colorado River.sa 883,000 acre-feet of that was <br />diverted by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern Cal- <br />ifornia. Inclusion of the consumptive use of water from <br />Lower Basin tributaries would probably add 2.0 to 4.5 m.a.f. <br />to the total. The gaping disparity between the two Basin's <br />consumption is no doubt caused primarily by the Lower Ba- <br />sin's larger population, greater aridity, warmer climate, and <br />higher demands for water for agricultural, municipal, and <br />industrial purposes. <br /> <br />To some degree, though, it has probably also been caused <br />by the unevenness of federal development of storage and di- <br />version projects on the lower and upper parts of the River. <br /> <br />Hoover Dam became the foundation for tremendous eco- <br />nomic growth in California by regulating destructive <br />floods, storing irrigation water for fertile desert lands, and <br />supporting the expanding population of southern Califor- <br />nia with water and cheap electric power.89 <br /> <br />With the arrival of the CAP at Phoenix, the lower River has <br />practically reached a state of full development. The Upper <br />Basin has not been so highly favored. Only nine of the 21 <br /> <br />85 <br />Report on Water for Energy, supra note 76, at 60-70. <br />86 ' <br />Westside Study Report, supra note 3, at 167-70. <br />87 Statement on the Operation of the S~n Juan-Chama Project, Presented by S.E. <br />Reynolds. New Mexico State Engineer. to the Subcommittee on Energy Research <br />and Water Resources of the Senate Committee on ,Interior and Insular, Affairs, at 19 <br />(June 12, 1975). <br />88 <br />Eleventh Annual Report, supra note 83, at 24, <br />89 <br />Getches, supra note 7, at 449. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.