The Colorado River Compact is a 1922 agreement among seven U.S. states in the basin of the Colorado River in the American Southwest governing the allocation of the water rights to the river's water among the parties of the interstate compact. The agreement was signed at a meeting at Bishop's Lodge, near Santa Fe, New Mexico, by representatives of the seven states the Colorado river and its tributaries pass through on the way to Mexico.
Contents |
The Colorado River is managed and operated under numerous compacts, federal laws, court decisions and decrees, contracts, and regulatory guidelines collectively known as "The Law of the River." [1]
The compact divides the river basin into two areas, the Upper Division (comprising Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming) and the Lower Division (Nevada, Arizona and California). The compact requires the Upper Basin states not to deplete the flow of the river below 75,000,000 acre feet (93 km3) during any period of ten consecutive years. Based on historical rainfall patterns, the amount specified in the compact was assumed to allow a roughly equal division of water between the two regions. The states within each basin were required to divide their 7,500,000-acre (30,000 km2) foot per year (289 m³/s) share allotment among themselves. The compact enabled the widespread irrigation of the Southwest, as well as the subsequent development of state and federal water works projects under the United States Bureau of Reclamation. Such projects included the Hoover Dam and Lake Powell.
The current specific annual allotments in the Lower Basin were established in 1928 as part of the Boulder Canyon Project, while the current specific annual allotments in the Upper Basin were established by the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948.[2] They are:
Upper Basin, 7.5 million acre·ft/year (293 m³/s) total | |||
Colorado | 51.75%* | 3.86 million acre·ft/year (150.7 m³/s) | |
Utah | 23.00%* | 1.71 million acre·ft/year (67.0 m³/s) | |
Wyoming | 14.00%* | 1.04 million acre·ft/year (40.8 m³/s) | |
New Mexico | 11.25%* | 0.84 million acre·ft/year (32.8 m³/s) | |
Arizona | 0.70% | 0.05 million acre·ft/year (2.0 m³/s) | |
*Percentages with a star are a percentage of the total after Arizona's 0.05 million are deducted. Arizona's percentage is of the total. |
|||
Lower Basin, 7.5 million acre·ft/year (293 m³/s) total | |||
California | 58.70% | 4.40 million acre·ft/year (172 m³/s) | |
Arizona | 37.30% | 2.80 million acre·ft/year (109 m³/s) | |
Nevada | 4.00% | 0.30 million acre·ft/year (12 m³/s) |
In addition to this, 1,500,000-acre-foot (1.9×109 m3)/year of Colorado River water is allocated to Mexico, pursuant to the treaty relating to the use of waters of the Colorado and Tijuana rivers and of the Rio Grande, signed February 3, 1944, and its supplementary protocol signed November 14, 1944. Also, the lower basin can get an additional 1,100,000-acre-foot (1.4×109 m3)/year.[2]
The compact was the fruit of several years of negotiations among the states. The seven states had previously formed the League of the Southwest in 1917 to promote development along the river.[3] In 1921, Congress authorized the states to enter into a compact for allocation of the river resources. The agreement was approved by Congress in 1922, the same year it was signed. As part of the compact, the name of the river was standardized along its length. Previously the portion of the river upstream from its confluence with the Green River had been known locally as the "Grand River". The change was opposed by many local residents in Utah and Colorado, and the new name was enforced locally by acts of the state legislatures in both states in the early 1920s.
The agreement was controversial even at the time, however. Arizona, for example, was dissatisfied with the lower basin allotment and refused to ratify the agreement until 1944 [1]. The specific allotments were disputed by Arizona until the United States Supreme Court upheld the amount in the 1963 decision in Arizona v. California. The agreement ended many years of dispute, clearing the way for the Central Arizona Project, authorized by Congress in 1968.
Since the development of the Colorado River Compact, California has been using the surplus water that has been left over from other states; however with increasing population growth in the Southwest there is concern that this surplus soon will not exist for California’s use. In 2001, Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt signed an interim agreement, determining how water surplus from the Colorado River will be allocated between the states and creating a fifteen year period to allow California time to put conservation methods in place to reduce the state’s water usage and dependence on Colorado River water.[4]
There is also concern regarding Nevada’s increasing population and the state’s water usage. Nevada, with the smallest water allocation in the lower river basin, may find in the near future that the water supplied by the Colorado River will not meet the state’s growing needs . However in 2008 Southern Nevada Water Authority General Manager Pat Mulroy said that she does not support a water reallocation; because all of the states in the river basin have experienced growth she says that it is unlikely that Nevada’s allocation would increase, and it could even decrease.[5] Instead Nevada, like California, may have to work on conservation methods as well as finding other water sources to support the state’s growing population.
Development was the prime concern of the Colorado River Compact, when signed in 1922. Unfortunately this does not take environmental issues into consideration. Using and reusing the river water as well as frequent damming results in an unfavorable environment for native fish species. Dams block fish passage, reduce silt deposition, and change water temperatures, all negatively impacting the natural ecosystem.[6] The high water usage has also caused the river delta, located in Mexico, to significantly deteriorate. Once a lush and green area from the high amounts of silt deposit, the plentiful ecosystem has now all but disappeared. In order to begin to reduce the damage more water will need to be appropriated Mexico.[7]
In recent years, the compact has become the focus of even sharper criticism, in the wake of a protracted decrease in rainfall in the region. Specifically, the amount of water allocated was based on an expectation that the river's average flow was 16.4,000,000 acre feet (4.9 km3) per year (641 m³/s). Subsequent tree ring studies, however, have concluded that the long-term average water flow of the Colorado is significantly less. Estimates have included 13.2,000,000 acre feet (2.5 km3) per year (516 m³/s),[8] 13.5,000,000 acre feet (6.2 km3) per year (528 m3/s),[9] and 14.3,000,000 acre feet (3.7 km3) per year (559 m3/s).[10] Many analysts have concluded that the compact was negotiated in a period of abnormally high rainfall, and that the recent drought in the region is in fact a return to historically typical patterns. The decrease in rainfall has led to widespread dropping of reservoir levels in the region, in particular at Lake Powell, created by the Glen Canyon Dam in 1963, where the exposure of long-inundated canyons has prompted calls for the deliberate permanent extinction of the reservoir.
In December, 2007, a set of interim guidelines on how to allocate Colorado River water in the event of shortages was signed by the Secretary of the Interior.[2][11] The guidelines are described as interim because they extend through 2026, and are intended to allow the system operators to gain experience with low-reservoir conditions, while the effect of climate change on the Colorado River's flow undergoes further evaluation.[12] The agreement specifies three levels of shortage conditions, depending on the level of Lake Mead:
On August 15, 2008, Arizona Senator John McCain called for the compact to be renegotiated.[13] Due to the Senator's position as the Republican Party nominee in the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election and Colorado's swing state status, criticism of the compact may have gained national significance.[14]
|