AuthorSteiner, Wesley E.
AffiliationArizona Water Commission, Phoenix, Arizona
KeywordsWater resources development -- Arizona.
Hydrology -- Arizona.
Hydrology -- Southwestern states.
Water resources development -- Southwestern states.
Colorado River compact
Colorado River basin
Pacific Northwest U. S.
Water allocation (policy)
Central Arizona project
MetadataShow full item record
RightsCopyright ©, where appropriate, is held by the author.
Collection InformationThis article is part of the Hydrology and Water Resources in Arizona and the Southwest collections. Digital access to this material is made possible by the Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science and the University of Arizona Libraries. For more information about items in this collection, contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
PublisherArizona-Nevada Academy of Science
AbstractThe Colorado River is the only major stream in the U.S. whose water supply is fully utilized. This distinction has brought the Colorado more than its share of controversy, within states, between states and between nations. The Colorado River compact, whose purpose was to equitably apportion the waters between the upper and lower basins and to provide protection for the upper basin through water reservation, was ratified by all states except Arizona, in 1923. Arizona finally ratified it in 1944. The history of controversies and negotiation concerning the compact are outlined through the supreme court decision on march 9, 1964, which entitled California to 4.4 maf, Nevada to 0.3 maf and Arizona to 2.8 maf, of the first 7.5 maf available in the lower Colorado. Unfortunately, the court did not attempt to establish priorities in the event of shortage. The problem is complicated by an international treaty of 1944, guaranteeing Mexico 1.5 maf annually, except in years of unusual circumstances. Because Senator Connally of Texas was then chairman of the senate foreign relations committee and because the treaty allocated twice as much Colorado River water to Mexico as it was then using, it was argued that this treaty represented a tradeoff to Mexico, giving it less water from the Rio Grande in exchange for more water from the overburdened Colorado. Problems of inter-basin water transfer studies, uniform Colorado basin water quality standards and central Arizona project planning are discussed.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Water Resource Alternatives for Power Generation in ArizonaSmith, Stephen E.; DeCook, K. James; Fazzolare, Rocco A.; Nuclear Engineering, University of Arizona, Tucson; Water Resources Research Center, University of Arizona, Tucson (Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science, 1974-04-20)An examination of potential water sources for power plant cooling in Arizona is presented along with information pertinent to Arizona's future water needs relative to electrical usage growth. It has been projected that Arizona's peak electrical power demands in 1980 and 1990 will exceed that of 1970 by some 5000 megawatts and 16000 megawatts of electricity respectively. At present, the bulk of the electrical energy generated in the western states originates at hydroelectric installations. Utilization of nuclear reactors for power generation requires a larger amount of cooling water than is required for a comparable fossil-fueled plant. It is suggested that the utilization of reclaimed wastewater for cooling purposes is a viable and attractive alternative to groundwater pumpage from both economic and ecological standpoints. Savings arise from conservation of fuel normally required for well pumps, costs of well construction are not required, quantities of fresh water should be released for consumption by alternate users, and a previously unused resource would be effectively recycled.
A Rational Water Policy for Desert CitiesMatlock, W. G.; Agricultural Engineering, Soils, Water and Engineering Department, University of Arizona (Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science, 1974-04-20)Four sources of water supply for desert cities are rainfall, runoff, groundwater, and imported water, and the potential use for each varies. The government can institute various policy changes to eliminate or reduce the imbalance between water supply and demand. Restrictions should be placed on water-use luxuries such as swimming pools, subdivision lakes, fountains, etc. Water pricing should be progressive; each unit of increased use above a reasonable minimum should be charged for at an increasing rate. Runoff from individual properties, homes, storage, and supermarkets should be minimized through the use of onsite recharge wells, and various collection methods should be initiated. A campaign to acquaint the general public with a new water policy must be inaugurated.
Economic Alternatives in Solving the U. S.-Mexico Colorado River Water Salinity Problem (invited)Martin, William E.; Arizona Agricultural Experiment Station, the University of Arizona, Tucson (Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science, 1974-04-20)A proposed desalting plant is an engineering solution to the effects of a problem which could have been avoided and even now could be reduced on the farm. Water costing $125 per acre-foot will be delivered to Mexico to grow wheat, cotton, garden crops, alfalfa and safflower, of which the average value added per acre-foot was estimated at $80 for cotton and garden crops and $14 for wheat, alfalfa and safflower. The U.S. government, instead of building the desalting complex, could accomplish its purpose just as well by paying each farmer in the Yuma area, in return for the farmers reducing their drainage flow by whatever method they see fit, $114 per acre per year for the next 50 years. With proper management on the farm, the costs of managing salinity need not be high.