Spelling suggestions: "subject:"colorado river compact"" "subject:"colorado liver compact""
1 |
The twenty-first century Colorado River hot drought and implications for the futureUdall, Bradley, Overpeck, Jonathan 03 1900 (has links)
Between 2000 and 2014, annual Colorado River flows averaged 19% below the 1906-1999 average, the worst 15-year drought on record. At least one-sixth to one-half (average at one-third) of this loss is due to unprecedented temperatures (0.9 degrees C above the 1906-1999 average), confirming model-based analysis that continued warming will likely further reduce flows. Whereas it is virtually certain that warming will continue with additional emissions of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, there has been no observed trend toward greater precipitation in the Colorado Basin, nor are climate models in agreement that there should be a trend. Moreover, there is a significant risk of decadal and multidecadal drought in the coming century, indicating that any increase in mean precipitation will likely be offset during periods of prolonged drought. Recently published estimates of Colorado River flow sensitivity to temperature combined with a large number of recent climate model-based temperature projections indicate that continued business-as-usual warming will drive temperature-induced declines in river flow, conservatively -20% by midcentury and -35% by end-century, with support for losses exceeding -30% at midcentury and -55% at end-century. Precipitation increases may moderate these declines somewhat, but to date no such increases are evident and there is no model agreement on future precipitation changes. These results, combined with the increasing likelihood of prolonged drought in the river basin, suggest that future climate change impacts on the Colorado River flows will be much more serious than currently assumed, especially if substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions do not occur. Plain Language Summary Between 2000 and 2014, annual Colorado River flows averaged 19% below the 1906-1999 average, the worst 15-year drought on record. Approximately one-third of the flow loss is due to high temperatures now common in the basin, a result of human caused climate change. Previous comparable droughts were caused by a lack of precipitation, not high temperatures. As temperatures increase in the 21st century due to continued human emissions of greenhouse gasses, additional temperature-induced flow losses will occur. These losses may exceed 20% at mid-century and 35% at end-century. Additional precipitation may reduce these temperature-induced losses somewhat, but to date no precipitation increases have been noted and climate models do not agree that such increases will occur. These results suggest that future climate change impacts on the Colorado River will be greater than currently assumed. Reductions in greenhouse gas emissions will lead to lower future temperatures and hence less flow loss.
|
2 |
Politics and the Colorado RiverSteiner, Wesley E. 23 April 1971 (has links)
From the Proceedings of the 1971 Meetings of the Arizona Section - American Water Resources Assn. and the Hydrology Section - Arizona Academy of Science - April 22-23, 1971, Tempe, Arizona / The 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.
|
3 |
Physiographic Limitations Upon the Use of Southwestern RiversBreed, Carol S. 23 April 1971 (has links)
From the Proceedings of the 1971 Meetings of the Arizona Section - American Water Resources Assn. and the Hydrology Section - Arizona Academy of Science - April 22-23, 1971, Tempe, Arizona / Southwestern rivers are few in numbers and low in discharge. The physiographic and climatic reasons for this are discussed. To the east of the 100th meridian, rainfall is reliable and agriculture is stable; while to the west, there is a chronic deficit of water, droughts are frequent and lifestyles must be accordingly adjusted. Dam building results in greatly increased silting behind the dam in both the river and its tributaries and accelerated channel erosion below the dam. Total flow must also decrease due to withdrawals and increased evaporation from reservoirs. The correction of apparent errors in measuring the virgin flow of the Colorado River now indicates that this flow is about 15 maf/yr. Current legal allocations total 17.5 maf/yr of river water, including the central Arizona project (cap), which will withdraw 1.2 maf/yr. While the river is being dammed and overallocated beyond all reason, the water table is being mined at the alarming rate of 20 ft/yr. In central Arizona, it has dropped to about 250 ft below the surface, and even if all withdrawals ceased immediately, it would take many centuries of of desert rains before it would return to its former level of 50 ft. The cap water will cancel only about 1/2 of this overdraft annually. A glance at the phoenix area today shows that rain follows neither the farmers plow nor the subdividers bulldozer.
|
4 |
United States-Mexico Water Agreements and Related Water Use in Mexicali Valley: A SummaryDeCook, K. J. 20 April 1974 (has links)
From the Proceedings of the 1974 Meetings of the Arizona Section - American Water Resources Assn. and the Hydrology Section - Arizona Academy of Science - April 19-20, 1974, Flagstaff, Arizona / A summary is given of interrelated, technical and institutional events concerning the Colorado River which took place between the United States and Mexico from 1849 to 1974 with emphasis on the 1961-1974 period. Until the treaty of 1944, Mexico had had no guarantee of a specific annual quantity of water, but in the years after 1945, when a guarantee of 1.5 million acre-feet per year was established, more than that amount was available for use. Salinity problems arose, and in 1965 an agreement for a 5-year plan for alleviating the technical and political difficulties surrounding the salinity question was made. In 1973 it was agreed that the United States would build, within approximately 5 years, a facility for desalting the saline drainage water entering Mexico. Fulfillment of the technical provisions for this agreement requires, in any event, the timely provision of federal funds to construct and operate the physical works. The several states should receive assurance that their rights and those of their respective water users will not be impaired within the legal operation of the agreement.
|
Page generated in 0.0668 seconds