WSP06216

• File Number: 8407.500
• Description: Platte River Basin - River Basin General Publications - Missouri River
• State: CO
• Basin: South Platte
• Water Division: 1
• Date: 5/1/1980
• Author: MRBC
• Title: Missouri River Basin Water Resources Management Plan - Part I - Chapters I-VI
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

I
I
I
I
I

OJJSg6

I
I

26 percent, to 48.4-million acre-feet by 1985; and by 40 percent, to 53.8
million by the year 2000. Water for irrigation accounts for about 80 percent
of all withdrawals in each time frame. Withdrawals for cooling at
steam-electric power plants, predominantly from surface sources, run a distant
second, accounting for about 10 percent of withdrawals. All other purposes
constitute the remaining 10 percent of water withdrawn.
Consumptive use of water is the estimated amount of water loss to the

area. ThUS, estimated totals shown for consumptive use reflect water taken

from all sources including surface, related ground water, and mined ground

water, and are not necessarily equal to streamflow depletions.

Consumptive use of water for all purposes was estimated to be 17.6 million

acre-feet in 1975. Overall consumption of water is expected to increase to

22.5 million acre-feet by 1985, and to exceed 28.5 million acre-feet by the
year 2000. Irrigation dwarfs all other consumptive uses,' accounting for some

90 percent of the total in each time frame. Water consumption for livestock

production and municipal and industrial purposes each comprise another 3

percent of total consumptive use.

Table 2-3 summarizes Missouri Basin gross withdrawals and consumptive use

for seven major purposes for 1975, 1985, and 2000. Table 2-4 displays subbasin
totals of gross withdrawals and consumptive use for all functions for the same

three time periods.

LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
,

Development and management of water resources has long been recognized in

the Missouri River Basin as a joint responsibility of private interests, the

States, and the Federal Government. Their resource objectives and programs are

largely complementary, as are many of their water laws and policies, though

areas of uncertainty and challenge do exist.

I

I

I
I
I

I
I

I

I
I
I

I

2-23