WSP06679 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Diijj&~~--O;;rC:'W estern Water ed also by Nevada, the milhon acre foot annual rantee 10 Calir(}rn\3. lid expire when work!> completed to ynpon at ~t 2.5 million acre feet L1ally into the main stem .he Colorado River from .cesouts.ide the bas.in. le governors or their rep- ienratives from Uhe leT Colorado River 8asm es of Colorado, Wyom- Utah, and New MexIco 1l2reed to SU('lplort the 'et Basin project provid- these principles wer(> 1en into the authorizing islation: Diversions from the nstream of the Colorado IW Lee Ferry. Ariz., 'it be limited when neees- ~ so as not to prejudice. )air or preclude future ,e]opment of proiect~ in , Upper Basin after down- ~am delivery of 7S mil. acre feet of water in r consecutive IO-year pe- I as required by the Colo- '0 River Compact of ]912. .Alon~ the Lower Colo- 10 project. or any part of there must also be BU- rrization for bnnging wa- from other basins in:o Colorado Bssln. -Glen Canyon Reservoir, the Utah-Arizona border, uld not be depleted ex- rt. when necessary to lply with the Colorado er Compact or when ap- lVed by the Upper Colo- o River Commission. -Termination of pay- nls from the Upper Cola- o River Ba~in fund to the orado River Dam fund of . Lower Basin for power <Iuction defiCIencies at lYet Dam as a result or . river now. ~ew Mexico dem<lnded ) that Arizona agree to amendment of the >reme Court's 1964 CaIo- la River decree by stipu- lng that New Mexico car. : an extra 46,000 8l're feet Gila River water annually :inning when Colorado ler water is imported into rltral Arizona, ne states of Was~il1~on, ~.Ron and Idaho expressed ious misgivings about the 'en-state Colorado Basin -eement on the need for mediate conditioDal au- ,rization of work~ to 1m- 1 water into the Cola- Jo, and the bills which :rely would authorize Idies of potential sourres forimportcJ Wllter. Supply Noted See r~ ta r y of Interior Stewart L. Udall spoke of studies of weather modiflra- tion :lnd reduclion of waste throug-h seepflge and en,')D' ration, but he put his finger on the mouth of the Colum- bia River D~ the most likely source of a sigmficant aLldi- tion to the \I!:able water sup- ply of the Colorado Basin. UdDlI souRht to quie: Idaho's fears or diverslOn~ from Ihe Snake River, tribu- tary to the Columb~a. He said he would not (on- Ilider taking a d'roo or Columbia Basin watet' be- fore it had passed through alt the hydroelectric J::enera- lors on the Snake and the Columbia and was re:tdy to go to waste in the !>oeD. This was inte! preted to me:ln lhat the Udall plan a.~ it nffecls Oregon WQlild in. volve the takmg of Colum- bia water in an area be- tween Bonneville Dam and the sea. A spokesman for the Bureau of Reclamation 10ld The Oregonian any such p I a n would "cercainh'" stron~ly consider varit'd benefits an-d uses for Ore- gon's normally dry easterfl areas. No Study Yet Asked if anv studies h.Jo been mDdr b\"' the lnterior Departmenl on no.... North- west .....ater could be moved from the "mouth" of the Culumbia to the proposed Colorado Basin, the spokes- man dectared: "There is no definite plan available now for such an action, However, Ihere is no question it can be done on a physical basis; it is the eco- nomics or the plan whIch are as yet unknown." The spokesman suid part of the proposed basin lenis. latioD calls for authorization of a study for the Columbia plan, which if cal fled out would go thoroughly IOta Ihe aspects of "how can we do it and how much WI!/ it case." Udall also foresaw a di- version project benefItting both the Northwest and [he Colorado Basin states, and one which he said both areas would want and support. He envisioned legal protectioDs for the future water needs or the NorlhweSL similJr 10 the Nulthwe~t prefp.lence leg- Islalion en3t:ted in ('Ol1nec- tlon WIth the planned export of surplus power from the Pacific Northwest to Califor- nia. The commJttt"e was in- formed !n<lt Oregon arid WJ.~hll1gton have mitiated studies to identiry all fafure potential needs for walrr in theirstates. LaSr!le E. Coles, Inpmber of the Oregon Water Re so u r c e s Bonrd arid spokesman for Gov. Mark O. Hatfield. said Oregon's study Yiould lake abou~ four years. Data Needed "We believe the type of information to be compiled in the Oregon invesLigation is necessary before propos- als are approved to divert water from one area to ano- ther," he testified. H. M a u r ice Ahlquist, Washinj;tlon state liirctlcrof conservation and spokesman fOl" Gov. Daniel J. Evans, said Washington has nn estI- mated 1.5 million to 2 nlll- lion aaes ot land which can slill be developed wilh wa- ter. "We are greally interest- ed in having this water available for our reclama- tIon growth and for all fore- seeable uses within our state," he said. "Our domestic and industri.:ll needs are expanding very rapidly today." George L Crookham, chnirman of the Idahl) Waler Resol1rces Board, in- sisted that no consideration should be given to any in. terbasin di\'ersion of water until the areas seeking Im- portation have established conclusively thaI they have put all the potable water:;: within their own boundaries to the highest feasible use. This sen.timent was E'choed by Rep. Thomas S. Fbley, D-Wash., and olher Northwest membeu of the House Interior Committee. Rep. Compton 1. Whi[e Jr., D-Idaho, said he dId not want {o adopt a "dog in the manger" attItude, but that he must be sure Idaho and the rest of the Pacific Northwest .....ould be protec.t- ed as to its future water needs. White drew from Rech1- mlltion Commissioner Flov" E. Dominy by questionlfl~ an esllmate of 10 million acre feet as the ultimate supplemenlal water reQuire- ment 01 the Colorado Rivlir Basin, hoth upper and low- er, to satisfy future needs. Sen. Frank Churen. D- Idaho, proposed desi:il"nation of Idaho's Clearwater and Salmon RIvers as part 01 a national system of "wild rivers" as an added protec. tion against diverslO:1 of their waters to the SouU1- 'West. The JohnSOn administra- tion, by decision of the Budget Bureau, recomm~nd- ed aRainst authorization or Bridge Canyon Dam, a half- billion dollar structure. at this time. Bridge Canyon Dam wa! the prmcipal target of the conservationists who con- tended it would spoil Amer- ica's most spectacular l\a- tural wonder by backing wa- ler up 93 miles through the Grand Canyon National Monument and 13 miles into the Grand Canyon Nationsl Park. The conservatiorlists al90 opposed Marble Canyon Dam, upstream from the park, on grounds it would IOterfere with the natural flow or the Colorado throulith the park. "fl1e conservationists con. tend the dams are 'not physically associated with delivery of water tD central Arizona, and that power rev- enues lo assist the project financially cOuld be obtained from coal fired steam plants and eventually from nuclear power produclion. Citin~ rosy predictions of the future efficiency of nu- dea r pO\oVer plants, the out- doorsmen a~ed that the Bridge and Marble Canyon Dams would one day be obsolete and stand as mon- strous desecrations of the 1 Grand Canyon. 1 \.