upr000318 62

20 Ca l i f o r n i a ’s s t a k e i n t h e Co l o r a d o r iv e r Of particular concern to California have been two of the potential new project! proposed in Arizona. One of these is a new unit of the Gila Reclamation Project designated as the Wellton-Mohawk unit. The other and much larger proposed undertaking is the so-called Central Arizona Project. Gila Project A bill to authorize the new Wellton-Mohawk unit and to reauthorize a reduced area of the original Yuma Mesa unit of the Gila Project which was authorized in 1937, was introduced at the Second Session of the Seventy-rimth Congress in 1946. It was opposed by representatives of California because it involved a large additional use of Colorado River water that would conflict with California’s rights. The bill failed to receive favorable action in the Seventy-ninth Congress but a bid to authorize this project was reintroduced in the First Session of the Eight­ieth Congress in 1947. After hearings! before the Public Lands Com­mittee of the Senate and House, the bill (S. 483-H.R. 1597) was passed by the Congress, but only after having been amended to limit the aggre­gate use of water on both the old and new units of the project to the same amount (600,000 acre-feet annually) contemplated under the 1937 authorization. With this limitation, the Gila Project as reconstituted and reauthorized is intended to be unchanged from the originally authorized project insofar as use of Colorado River water is concerned, and the bill was passed by the Congress with this understanding. Central Arizona Project Of much greater concern to California is the proposed new Central Arizona Project. It contemplates the diversion of 1,200,000 acre-feet annually of Colorado River water into Central Arizona. A bill (S'. 1175) t° authorize this project was introduced in the First Session of the Eightieth Congress in 1947, and two weeks of hearings were held on the bill before the Subcommittee on Irrigation and Reclamation of the Senat® Public Lands Committee. Further hearings were deferred pending'the ' submission of a final report on the project by the Secretary of the Interior. The proposed project would involve a cost preliminary estimated by the Bureau of Reclamation at from $600,000,000 to $1,000 000 000 Preliminary financial analyses clearly show that the project is’iiot'eco­nomically feasible under existing reclamation law, and that substantial subsidies, would be required from the Federal Treasury or otherwise to finance the project. Of most serious concern to California is the fact that the contemplated diversion of 1,200,000 acre-feet of Colorado River water for this project threatens to invade California’s rights to Colorado River water by a like amount. CALIFORNIA’s STAKE IN THE COLORADO RIVER 21 Water Budget There will be insufficient water available to the Lower Basin States under the compact in the Colorado River System to furnish the water required for the proposed Central Arizona Project, in addition to meet­ing the water requirements of existing and authorized projects covered by the California water appropriations and contracts, of existing and authorized projects in Arizona, including the Gila Project, and of com­mitments to other states of the Lower Basin. The estimated gross water supply that will be available to the Lower Basin, after the Upper Basin has put into use its full apportionment under the Colorado River Com­pact and the Mexican Treaty requirements have been met, amounts to 9.900.000 acre-feet annually, including the waters of the Gila River as well as the main stream. The estimated consumptive use requirements of existing and authorized projects in the Lower Basin States aggregate ^ 10.200.000 acre-feet annually, including main stream reservoir evapora- ’ tion losses of about 800,000 acre-feet annually. Thus there is an indicated deficit of about 300,000 acre-feet annually between available water supply and water requirements of existing and authorized projects m the Lower Basin. Actually, under prolonged drought conditions such as experience^ from 1930 to 1946, the deficit may be two to three times this indicated amount. It is obvious, therefore, that if any new projects are authorized and constructed, the water used thereby must be at the ultimate expense of existing or authorized projects in the Lower Basin States. Water Allocation There is still to be determined— and it is well to realize this fact— the division of the waters of the Colorado River System apportione o the Lower Basin under the terms of the Colorado River ompact an in the light of the terms of the Boulder Canyon Project Act an t e a 1 fornia Limitation Act. Efforts have been made for ma,ny years o nego tiate an agreement between California and Arizona in partu.u ar, u so far these efforts have proved u n s u c c e s s fu l. • . . Arizona’s interpretations of the compact and the a i ornia lmi tation Act are widely at variance with California’s interpretations, n accordance with Arizona’s current contentions, the net amoun o that California would be entitled to and that would be available to e California agencies from the Colorado River, wou o n y e a ou 3.900.000 acre-feet or nearly 1,500,000 acre-feet annually less than the aggregate minimum water requirements of existing °P®ra for use of Colorado River water in California. The , > acr would hardly be sufficient to cover the first, second, an ir prion les allotted to irrigation under the Seven-Party Water Agreement as set forth in the Hoover Dam water contracts, and would leave little, if any,