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 />" ' <br /> <br />g 21.03[3J <br /> <br />MINERAL LAW INSTITUTE <br /> <br />21-26 <br /> <br />[3J Faint Hopes for a Resolution <br /> <br />Of course, this, and virtually all the other problems of the <br />Colorado River could be solved by just adding more water. <br />Congress clearly recognized this panacea when it passed the <br />Colorado River Basin Project Act. House Report No. 1312 de- <br />clared: "The answer to the Colorado River controversy is not <br />to try to divide shortages but to provide additional water." 97 <br />The Act called for 2.5 m.a.f. more water and authorized work <br />toward. the development of an augmentation plan. In a de- <br />cade during which the United States asked for, and got, the <br />moon, diverting 2.5 m.aJ. of water from the Columbia River <br />to the Colorado River probably seemed like a small matter. <br />But in the ensuing years, harsher economic and political re- <br />alities have beset this enterprise. Investigations into water <br />importation plans were suspended at first until 1978, and <br />then until 1988.9s It is now unlikely that importation plans <br />will be developed, let alone implemented, in the foreseeable <br />future.99 Desalinization of sea water is considered prohibi- <br />tively expensive with current technology. 100 It has been esti- <br />mated that weather modification programs could increase <br />the water of the Basin by .9 m.a.f. to 1.3 m.a.f.,lOI but those <br />efforts remain experimental, if not ephemeral. <br /> <br />Water storage projects do not increase the amount of wa- <br />ter, but they do ameliorate shortages by allowing users to <br />manage the existing supply to obtain maximum benefits. <br />However, since 1977 when President Carter withdrew fed- <br />eral funding for eight major water projects, federal support <br />for storage projects has receded.102 The available federal <br />funding has been concentrated on salinity control projects, <br />part of which are paid for out of the Lower Colorado River <br />Basin Development Fund and the Upper Colorado River Ba- <br />sin Fund. <br /> <br />97 <br />H.R. Rep. No. 1312, supra note 25, at 3670. <br />9S See 43 U.S.C. ~ 1511 (1982), as amended by the Reclamation Safety of Darns <br />Act, Pub. L. No. 95-578, S 10, 92 Stat. 2471 (1978). <br />99 See Report to the Congress of the United States. supra note 64. at 22. <br />100 Id.. <br />101 <br />Report on Water for Energy, supra note 76, at 58, <br />102 <br />See Getches, supra note 7, at 450-52. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.