Page 91

Metadata

Title
Page 91
Source
Colorado River problem
Is Part Of
http://digital.library.unlv.edu/u?/dig,8
Full text
396 WEYMOUTH ON THE COLORADO RIVER PROBLEM be ascertained and the cost of the works, or better, the cost of the service rendered, should be charged in some equitable manner to those who use the output of power and water and to those who benefit by the flood-control works. Surely there should be no difficulty in reaching an understanding on this point with Mexico, neither should there be any difficulty in agreeing with Mexico on the project for flood control within that country, nor yet as to the limit beyond which a delivery of Colorado River water to Mexico cannot be assured. E. E. Weymouth,* M. Am. Soc. C. E. (by letter).—The writer would like to point out discrepancies in data which, in the paper, have been credited to the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation. For example, Table 11 does not appear in any report of the Bureau of Reclamation, as far as the writer can learn; the equivalent information as it appears in a report which he made in February, 1924, is as given in Table 30. TABLE 30.—Irrigable Areas and Water Requirements. (Areas, in Thousands of Acres; Consumption of Water, in Thousand Acre-Feet.) Present : Immediate Future. Near Future. Distant Future. Total. Area. Water. Area. Water. Area. Water. Area. Water. Area. Water. Above Boulder..... Between Boulder and Laguna...... Below Laguna in United States.... Total for United States............ In Mexico.......... * 40 469 509 190 * 120 2,111 2,231 855 773 166 430 1 369 300 1,349 498 1,935 3,782 1,350 1,063 47 1,110 310 1,958 141 2,099 1,395 989 216 1,205 † 1,879 937 2,816 2,825 469 899 4,153 800 5,186 1,696 4,046 10,928 3,600 Grand total..... 699 3,086 1 669 5,132 1,420 3,494 1,205 2,816 4,993 14,528 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ * Not shown, as Table 30 shows only anticipated future demands on present stream flow. † 200,000 acres not dependent on Colorado River discharge is not included. A part of Table 19 is designated "U. S. Bureau of Reclamation Plan", and contains in its heading" an assumption of up-river storage development, which, to the writer's knowledge, no report made by the Bureau of Reclamation has ever embodied. Even if this heading were changed, the data presented as to power head, evaporation, irrigation storage, and flood-control storage, do not conform to similar data presented in that report covering development to Elevation 1,250, which. Table 19 is probably intended to present. Further, this table contains no reference to the alternative plan presented at the same time, contemplating development to the elevation of the Bridge Canyon site. These discrepancies should be borne in mind in considering the discussion following Table 19. * Pres., Brock & Weymouth, Inc., Philadelphia, Pa.

Cite this Item

When linking to this object, please use the following URL:

http://digital.library.unlv.edu/u?/lv_water,1698

Tags

Comments

Subscribe to recent comments

There are no comments yet. Be the first to comment below!

Comment on this object