DOCSLIB.ORG

Central Arizona Water Control Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Central Arizona Water Control Study SUMMARY OF ELEMENTS UNDER STUDY How will flood waters be controlled gestions made by citizens at public along the Salt and Gila Rivers? How meetings or through correspondence will Central Arizona Project (CAP) with the two agencies. waters be stored for distribution in central Arizona? Solutions to these To date, the Bureau and Corps have terns will be evaluated using techni­ two critical water problems are being identified a number of structural and cal and environmental criteria. The sought by the Central Arizona Water nonstructural actions that singly or in systems that are determined to be Control Study (formerly known as the combination could provide for flood most acceptable will be studied at an Study of Alternatives for Salt-Gila control and CAP storage. These "ele­ increased !eve! of detail until a pre­ Flood Control and Regulation of CAP ments" were studied in Phase I of the ferred plan or plans can be recom­ Waters) . The U.S. Bbrnau- of Recla­ study and will be studied further in mended. Plans are combinations of mation, with assistance from the U.S. Phase II, along with additional ele systems with the addition of neces­ Army Corps of Engineers, is con­ ments that were added as a result of sary financial, institutional and oper­ ducting the study, with considerable public comment. ational arrangements. At each deci­ involvement of the public in helping sion point the public will be actively develop solutions to the problems. During Phase II, the elements will be involved. The following diagram Many of the ideas discussed in this combined into sys1ems that achieve shows the sequence of the planning summary are a direct result of sug- the goals of the study, and the sys- process. Process Fo "PI •i g Plans For Flood Cont AP Storage ELEMENTS SYSTEMS PLANS PREFERRED -(Phase Ila) (Phase llb) (Phase Ill) Plans - - - The most technically feasible environmentally compatible, - The most acceptable The most acceptable and publicly acceptable elements will be combined systems will De studied in plans will be selected for CAP - into systems further detail as plans storage and flood control CENTRAL ARIZONA WATER CONTROL STUDY Special Edition 1 SUITE 666, SECURITY CENTER 234 N. CENTRAL AVENUE PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85004 TELEPHONE (602) 271-0915 r·---· 1 ·---------·-·-·-·-·-·-·-~---·~! CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT ••••••• LEVE ES UNDER STUDY I -----• CHANNEL CLEARING UNDER STUDY 1/ CHANNELIZATION UNDER STUDY 'tt.~~ j ;:I- ,-r,,~ NEW WADDELL DAM SITE 7 ~~ ii: AGUA FRIA DAM SITE - if \ ,1/ "': ~ - -----t>:: ,-~-.... .... ,:rl / CALDERWOOD t NEW ' t I .., •.,, BUTTE DAM~ RIVER DAM J I ~ I "'••<!, SITE ff SITE // ,.;:- CAVE BUTTE$ DAM SITE :i -✓ -1,'"•' <r ADO~E DAM~ 1.Y- O j SITE ,,__,,_,,,+- . ,ff'~ ~ .J' --, / ~·/ ~~ ,,_,.<c., - -~ / .,~-s ""' \. • _.,,,..--, .,✓--_.,. } LUKE A F.B --1" ' ,_.,,..,. _.,,, ' CARRIZO CREEK - Ci=' (OFF THE MAP) GRANITE REEF AQUEDUCT (l.NDEA CONSl'RUCTIONI r ~ ~HANDLER l) WILLIAMS A F 8- GJLA RIVER !NOIAN RESERVAl'lON I COOLIDGE DAM­ (OFF THE MAP) FLORENCE~./ 0 COOLIDGE I q,GILA.8!!ND / I I I l __ i . ~--. ---·-·-: --------------·-·---·-----------·-·-·-·-·-·-·---·-· mTERSTATE 8 .\ !I !I Central Arizona ! I Water Control Study Areas !I I\ TAT MOMOLIKOT DAM . \ \\,_/,..-\\ ~/ J ! I ~----------------------------·--~-~~~- --------------·- ---·- \ \ 2 3 ness in controlling flood waters . A systems, and finally plans will be con­ ical sites. Though further geological greater flood control. Construction of Project water storage facility, cannot Analyzing The preliminary cost-benefit analysis con­ structed. The elements range from studies are required, initial investi­ the dam could affect bald eagle and be easily modified, but a new and Elements stituted the economic evaluation proposed physical structures such gations indicate that enlargement of other wildlife habitats. Further study higher dam could be built down­ as dams and levees, to institutional Horseshoe Dam is feasible. is needed on the archaeological, so­ stream. The larger reservoir created cial, and historical impacts. Though would be used primarily for flood con­ Most of the eleme'lts have been stud­ During Phase 11, feasibility studies will measures such as water exchanges Recommendation: A further feasibility further geological studies are re­ trol with some water storage. Bald ied by the Bureau and the Corps in be performed for most of the remain­ and floodplain regulations. In various study is warranted. quired, preliminary investigations in­ eagle and other wildlife habitat could Phase I at an initial level of study. This ing elements Feasibility studies will ways, they provide for flood control dicate that this is a suitable dam site. be disturbed. The archaeological, level includes include: and/or CAP regulatory storage. Ide­ 1. More detailed analysis of water ally, an individual element would help Cliff Dam historical. and social impacts have solve both CAP regulatory storage Recommendation: A further feasibility not been fully assessed. Preliminary 1. Preliminary analysis of the ele­ supply or flood control capabil­ Cliff Dam would be constructed on and flood control problems. However, study is warranted. geological investigations indicate that ment's effectiveness for flood ities of the element the Verde River, immediately up­ most elements offer only partial so­ this is a SU1table dam site. control or supply of CAP water stream from Bartlett Reservoir. Cliff 2. Drilling program to determine lutions to these problems and must Dam would provide limited control of 2. Relationship between dam geological conditions below the be combined with other elements to Verde River flood flows but could be New Bartlett Dam Recommendation: A further feasibility height and reservoir capacity surface provide both storage capacity and combined with other elements for The existing Bartlett Dam, a Salt River study is warranted. flood control capability. 3. Literature review of geological 3 Site-specific engineering de­ information sign and cost estimates All of the elements that have been evaluated to date are described in the 4 Preliminary cost estimates 4. Studies of environmental, social, following sections of the brochure. A Salt River confluence of the Black and White neither flood control nor regulatory economic, demographic, and map showing the locations of all the Rivers near Alkali Canyon and east of storage needs. 5. Review by geologists and engi- other relevant non-engineering currently viable structural elements Sites to be considered for dam con­ Roosevelt Lake. The dam would im­ neers in the field factors may be found on page 2. At the end struction along the Salt River are pri­ pound flows of poor quality water Klondike Buttes Dam of the description of the elements. a marily suited for flood control, except thereby improving the quality of water Klondike Buttes Dam would be con­ Based on this initial level of study, Elements that have been recently table may be found that shows the for the sites at the confluence of the in downstream segments of the Salt structed on the Salt River just above some elements were recommended added at the suggestion of the public function of each element and the rec­ Salt and Verde Rivers and at Granite River. The dam would allow for the Roosevelt Lake, and its primary pur­ for further study, while other elements will receive initial study and, if war­ ommendations concerning further Reef. At this site, regulatory storage diversion of water to the Gila River to pose would be flood control of the were eliminated. The recommenda­ ranted, feasibility study. study. can also be provided. Additional auament the natural inflow to the San upper portion of the river It would not tions were based on three main fac­ water conservation may exist at other Carlos Reservoir. Carrizo Creek Dam be suitable for CAP storage. A dam tors: ( 1) geotechnical considerations, Your comments on any of the ele­ 1 sites through the use of water ex­ would be too far upstream to offer ef­ ' and reservoir at this site would impact (2) site location, and (3) economics. ments described or the issues dis­ changes between CAP and the Salt fective flood control for the Phoenix vegetation along the stream and Geotechnical considerations focused cussed may be added to the tear River Project. area, and it cannot be used for reg­ What Are The would encroach upon a proposed on foundation preparation, particu­ sheet at the back of the brochure. ulatory storage needs. larly the prevention of seepage at "Wild and Scenic Rivers" area. A dam Elements? This tear sheet can be detached and Carrizo Creek Dam the dam sites Sites were evaluated mailed. If you have no comments, you at this site would not control Tonto for their proximity to the CAP aque­ As the diagram of the planning pro­ may wish to return the card and have Carrizo Creek Dam would be con­ Recommendation: No further study is Creek, a major tributary to Roosevelt duct system or for their location in the cess shows on page 1, the elements your name added to the Central Ari­ structed on the Salt River below the warranted because the site meets watershed, and thus their effective- are the building blocks out of which zona Water Control Study mailing list. deep under the dam site. At this time Verde River Verde River Area THEODORE no feasible method is known of effec­ ROOSEVELT The four elements that have been tively controlling these springs. Foun­ LAKE considered on the Verde River are dation material underlying the pro­ posed left abutment is unsuitable, dams that would be built primarily for IENLARGEDI flood control. These structures could and treatment is not economically FORT McDOWELL SALT RIVER INDIAN RESERVATION _/J _ r also be used for CAP storage through feasible. i1 ~ v'v ,, the use of water exchanges between APACHE LAKE the CAP and the Salt River Project. HORSESHOE DAM Recommendation: No further study is KLONDIKE BUTTES DAM SITE (RE CONSTRUCTED! warranted because of geotechnical SAGUARO LAKE problems.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CENTRAL ARIZONA SALINITY STUDY --- PHASE I Technical Appendix C HYDROLOGIC REPORT on the PHOENIX
    CENTRAL ARIZONA SALINITY STUDY --- PHASE I Technical Appendix C HYDROLOGIC REPORT ON THE PHOENIX AMA Prepared for: United States Department of Interior Bureau of Reclamation Prepared by: Brown and Caldwell 201 East Washington Street, Suite 500 Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Brown and Caldwell Project No. 23481.001 C-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ 2 LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... 3 LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 4 2.0 PHYSICAL SETTING ....................................................................................................... 5 3.0 GENERALIZED GEOLOGY ............................................................................................ 6 3.1 BEDROCK GEOLOGY ......................................................................................... 6 3.2 BASIN GEOLOGY ................................................................................................ 6 4.0 HYDROGEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ................................................................................ 9 4.1 GROUNDWATER OCCURRENCE ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Little Colorado River Project: Is New Hydropower Development the Key to a Renewable Energy Future, Or the Vestige of a Failed Past?
    COLORADO NATURAL RESOURCES, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REVIEW The Little Colorado River Project: Is New Hydropower Development the Key to a Renewable Energy Future, or the Vestige oF a Failed Past? Liam Patton* Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 42 I. THE EVOLUTION OF HYDROPOWER ON THE COLORADO PLATEAU ..... 45 A. Hydropower and the Development of Pumped Storage .......... 45 B. History of Dam ConstruCtion on the Plateau ........................... 48 C. Shipping ResourCes Off the Plateau: Phoenix as an Example 50 D. Modern PoliCies for Dam and Hydropower ConstruCtion ...... 52 E. The Result of Renewed Federal Support for Dams ................. 53 II. HYDROPOWER AS AN ALLY IN THE SHIFT TO CLEAN POWER ............ 54 A. Coal Generation and the Harms of the “Big Buildup” ............ 54 B. DeCommissioning Coal and the Shift to Renewable Energy ... 55 C. The LCR ProjeCt and “Clean” Pumped Hydropower .............. 56 * J.D. Candidate, 2021, University oF Colorado Law School. This Note is adapted From a final paper written for the Advanced Natural Resources Law Seminar. Thank you to the Colorado Natural Resources, Energy & Environmental Law Review staFF For all their advice and assistance in preparing this Note For publication. An additional thanks to ProFessor KrakoFF For her teachings on the economic, environmental, and Indigenous histories of the Colorado Plateau and For her invaluable guidance throughout the writing process. I am grateFul to share my Note with the community and owe it all to my professors and classmates at Colorado Law. COLORADO NATURAL RESOURCES, ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REVIEW 42 Colo. Nat. Resources, Energy & Envtl. L. Rev. [Vol. 32:1 III. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF PLATEAU HYDROPOWER ...............
    [Show full text]
  • Central Arizona Water Conservation District
    Central Arizona Water Conservation District District collects and spends revenues in accordance with legal requirements and/or policies, has established various financial reserves, and operates the Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District Special Audit December 2017 Report 17-112 A Report to the Arizona Legislature Debra K. Davenport Auditor General The Auditor General is appointed by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee, a bipartisan committee composed of five senators and five representatives. Her mission is to provide independent and impartial information and specific recommendations to improve the operations of state and local government entities. To this end, she provides financial audits and accounting services to the State and political subdivisions, investigates possible misuse of public monies, and conducts performance audits and special reviews of school districts, state agencies, and the programs they administer. The Joint Legislative Audit Committee Senator Bob Worsley, Chair Representative Anthony Kern, Vice Chair Senator Sean Bowie Representative John Allen Senator Judy Burges Representative Rusty Bowers Senator Lupe Contreras Representative Rebecca Rios Senator John Kavanagh Representative Athena Salman Senator Steve Yarbrough (ex officio) Representative J.D. Mesnard (ex officio) Audit Staff Dale Chapman, Director Laura Long, Team Leader Jeremy Weber, Manager and Contact Person Katherine Boligitz Adam Tillard, Financial Manager Monette Kiepke Contact Information Arizona Office of the Auditor General 2910 N. 44th St. Ste. 410 Phoenix, AZ 85018 (602) 553-0333 www.azauditor.gov December 20, 2017 Members of the Arizona Legislature The Honorable Doug Ducey, Governor Mr. Theodore Cooke, General Manager Central Arizona Water Conservation District Transmitted herewith is a report of the Auditor General, A Special Audit of the Central Arizona Water Conservation District.
    [Show full text]
  • The Central Arizona Project
    University of Colorado Law School Colorado Law Scholarly Commons New Sources of Water for Energy Development and Growth: Interbasin Transfers: A Short 1982 Course (Summer Conference, June 7-10) 6-9-1982 The Central Arizona Project Jon Kyl Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/new-sources-of-water-for-energy- development-and-growth-interbasin-transfers Part of the Agriculture Law Commons, Animal Law Commons, Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, Biodiversity Commons, Contracts Commons, Energy and Utilities Law Commons, Environmental Law Commons, Hydrology Commons, Law and Economics Commons, Legal History Commons, Legislation Commons, Natural Resource Economics Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Natural Resources Law Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law Commons, Property Law and Real Estate Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons, Transportation Law Commons, Water Law Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Citation Information Kyl, Jon, "The Central Arizona Project" (1982). New Sources of Water for Energy Development and Growth: Interbasin Transfers: A Short Course (Summer Conference, June 7-10). https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/new-sources-of-water-for-energy-development-and-growth-interbasin- transfers/21 Reproduced with permission of the Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment (formerly the Natural Resources Law Center) at the University of Colorado Law School. Jon Kyl, The Central Arizona Project, in NEW SOURCES OF WATER FOR ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH: INTERBASIN TRANSFERS (Natural Res. Law Ctr., Univ. of Colo. Sch. of Law 1982). Reproduced with permission of the Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment (formerly the Natural Resources Law Center) at the University of Colorado Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • ARIZONA WATER ATLAS Volume 1 Executive Summary ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
    Arizona Department of Water Resources September 2010 ARIZONA WATER ATLAS Volume 1 Executive Summary ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Director, Arizona Department of Water Resources Herbert Guenther Deputy Director, Arizona Department of Water Resources Karen Smith Assistant Director, Hydrology Frank Corkhill Assistant Director, Water Management Sandra Fabritz-Whitney Atlas Team (Current and Former ADWR staff) Linda Stitzer, Rich Burtell – Project Managers Kelly Mott Lacroix - Asst. Project Manager Phyllis Andrews Carol Birks Joe Stuart Major Contributors (Current and Former ADWR staff) Tom Carr John Fortune Leslie Graser William H. Remick Saeid Tadayon-USGS Other Contributors (Current and Former ADWR staff) Matt Beversdorf Patrick Brand Roberto Chavez Jenna Gillis Laura Grignano (Volume 8) Sharon Morris Pam Nagel (Volume 8) Mark Preszler Kenneth Seasholes (Volume 8) Jeff Tannler (Volume 8) Larri Tearman Dianne Yunker Climate Gregg Garfin - CLIMAS, University of Arizona Ben Crawford - CLIMAS, University of Arizona Casey Thornbrugh - CLIMAS, University of Arizona Michael Crimmins – Department of Soil, Water and Environmental Science, University of Arizona The Atlas is wide in scope and it is not possible to mention all those who helped at some time in its production, both inside and outside the Department. Our sincere thanks to those who willingly provided data and information, editorial review, production support and other help during this multi-year project. Arizona Water Atlas Volume 1 CONTENTS SECTION 1.0 Atlas Purpose and Scope 1 SECTION 1.1 Atlas
    [Show full text]
  • Those Glen Canyon Transmission Lines -- Some Facts and Figures on a Bitter Dispute
    [July 1961] THOSE GLEN CANYON TRANSMISSION LINES -- SOME FACTS AND FIGURES ON A BITTER DISPUTE A Special Report by Rep. Morris K. Udall Since I came to Congress in May, my office has been flooded with more mail on one single issue than the combined total dealing with Castro, Berlin, Aid to Education, and Foreign Aid. Many writers, it soon became apparent, did not have complete or adequate information about the issues or facts involved in this dispute. The matter has now been resolved by the House of Representatives, and it occurs to me that many Arizonans might want a background paper on the facts and issues as they appeared to me. I earnestly hope that those who have criticized my stand will be willing to take a look at the other side of the story -- for it has received little attention in the Arizona press. It is always sad to see a falling out among reputable and important Arizona industrial groups. In these past months we have witnessed a fierce struggle which has divided two important segments of the Arizona electrical industry. For many years Arizona Public Service Company (APSCO) and such public or consumer-owned utilities as City of Mesa, Salt River Valley Water Users Association, the electrical districts, REA co-ops, etc. have worked harmoniously solving the electrical needs of a growing state. Since early 1961, however, APSCO has been locked in deadly combat with the other groups. Charges and counter-charges have filled the air. The largest part of my mail has directly resulted from a very large, expensive (and most effective) public relations effort by APSCO, working in close cooperation with the Arizona Republic and Phoenix Gazette.
    [Show full text]
  • Glen Canyon Unit, CRSP, Arizona and Utah
    Contents Glen Canyon Unit ............................................................................................................................2 Project Location...................................................................................................................3 Historic Setting ....................................................................................................................4 Project Authorization .........................................................................................................8 Pre-Construction ................................................................................................................14 Construction.......................................................................................................................21 Project Benefits and Uses of Project Water.......................................................................31 Conclusion .........................................................................................................................36 Notes ..................................................................................................................................39 Bibliography ......................................................................................................................46 Index ..................................................................................................................................52 Glen Canyon Unit The Glen Canyon Unit, located along the Colorado River in north central
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Water Resource Spring 2010 Insert
    Arizona Water Resource Supplement Spring 2010 Announcing: Arizona Water Map Poster and Educators’ Curriculum Guide The University of Arizona’s Water Resources Research Center (WRRC) promotes understanding of critical water resource issues through community outreach and public education. As part of this mission, WRRC first published the Arizona Water Map in 1994, with an update published in 2002. Both map editions focused on Arizona’s surface and groundwater resources, riparian areas, water conservation, and water infrastructure with photos and text. In preparing a new 2010 Water Map update, a committee of water education stakeholders from the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), the Arizona Department of Water Re- sources (ADWR), the Salt River Project (SRP), and the Central Arizona Project (CAP) contrib- uted resources to the map publication. The 2010 version of the Ari- zona Water Map has expand- ed on the focus of the earlier maps by including stunning graphics showing groundwater aquifers, physiographic prov- inces, and watersheds, each important to understanding where water is and how water moves through our environ- ment. A Curriculum Guide ac- companies the map with text to explain each graphic element. In addition, the updated The Arizona Water Map Curriculum Guide is published to central map of the poster now includes Native American enable educators to use the Map for classroom instruction, Tribal lands, Riparian Conservation Areas, National Parks, and to replace the lengthy text sidebars of the earlier edi- mountain ranges, environmental clean-up sites, and agricul- tions. Designed to bring relevant Arizona-specific content tural lands. into the classroom for middle and high school students, the Guide includes expository text that describes each map or graphic, and suggests Arizona Project WET lessons that relate to the content along with learning extensions.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado River Slideshow Title TK
    The Colorado River: Lifeline of the Southwest { The Headwaters The Colorado River begins in the Rocky Mountains at elevation 10,000 feet, about 60 miles northwest of Denver in Colorado. The Path Snow melts into water, flows into the river and moves downstream. In Utah, the river meets primary tributaries, the Green River and the San Juan River, before flowing into Lake Powell and beyond. Source: Bureau of Reclamation The Path In total, the Colorado River cuts through 1,450 miles of mountains, plains and deserts to Mexico and the Gulf of California. Source: George Eastman House It was almost 1,500 years ago when humans first tapped the river. Since then, the water has been claimed, reclaimed, divided and subdivided many times. The river is the life source for seven states – Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming – as well as the Republic of Mexico. River Water Uses There are many demands for Colorado River water: • Agriculture and Livestock • Municipal and Industrial • Recreation • Fish/Wildlife and Habitat • Hydroelectricity • Tribes • Mexico Source: USGS Agriculture The Colorado River provides irrigation water to about 3.5 million acres of farmland – about 80 percent of its flows. Municipal Phoenix Denver About 15 percent of Colorado River flows provide drinking and household water to more than 30 million people. These cities include: Las Vegas and Phoenix, and cities outside the Basin – Denver, Albuquerque, Salt Lake City, Los Angeles, San Diego and Tijuana, Mexico. Recreation Source: Utah Office of Tourism Source: Emma Williams Recreation includes fishing, boating, waterskiing, camping and whitewater rafting in 22 National Wildlife Refuges, National Parks and National Recreation Areas along river.
    [Show full text]
  • The Colorado River: Lifeline Of
    4 The Colorado River: lifeline of the American Southwest Clarence A. Carlson Department of Fishery and Wildlife Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA 80523 Robert T. Muth Larval Fish Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA 80523 1 Carlson, C. A., and R. T. Muth. 1986. The Colorado River: lifeline of the American Southwest. Can. J. Fish. Aguat. Sci. In less than a century, the wild Colorado River has been drastically and irreversibly transformed into a tamed, man-made system of regulated segments dominated by non-native organisms. The pristine Colorado was characterized by widely fluctuating flows and physico-chemical extremes and harbored unique assemblages of indigenous flora and fauna. Closure of Hoover Dam in 1935 marked the end of the free-flowing river. The Colorado River System has since become one of the most altered and intensively controlled in the United States. Many main-stem and tributary dams, water diversions, and channelized river sections now exist in the basin. Despite having one of - the most arid drainages in the world, the present-day Colorado River supplies more water for consumptive use than any river in the United States. Physical modification of streams and introduction of non-native species have adversely impacted the Colorado's native biota. This paper treats the Colorado River holistically as an ecosystem and summarizes current knowledge on its ecology and management. "In a little over two generations, the wild Colorado has been harnessed by a series of dams strung like beads on a thread from the Gulf of California to the mountains of Wyoming.
    [Show full text]
  • Ca-Lower-Colorado.Pdf
    COLORADO RIVER Location - Colorado-Utah State line to confluence with Lake Powell. Four Counties, Utah. Length study area - 150 miles. Qµ.ality of recreation - limited fishing {catfish). Largely unexpiored country. Beautiful scenery. Excellent boating. Good hunting, small game and. waterfowl. Ownership - Central 10-mile section, Arches National Park. Remainder 50 percent BLM; 50 percent private. Summary of findings - Only this portion of the Colorad.o River remains undeveloped. and free flowing. Scenery is primitive, approaching ture wilderness. Lower portion proposed. for inclusion in Canyonlands National Park. Numerous potential damsites, but no impoundments studied at present. ·F°= UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR * * * * * * * * * * * * * ********news release OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY For Release at 11:30 a .m., February 1, 1967 REVISED LOWER COL IVER PLAN ANNOUNCED BY UDALL Secretary of the Interior Stewart L. Udall today announced a revised development program for the Lower Colorado River and the Central Arizona Project with an estimat ed Federal cost of $719 million. The proposal eliminates consideration now of con struction of any lower Colorado dams to provide required electric power and substitutes purchase of power from a thermal electric generating plant constr ucted under sponsorship of public and priv ate e lectri c utilities. Key elements of the proposal, worked out during t he last four months with the Bureau of the Budge t , are : 1. Continued support for legislation designed to create a National Wa t er Commission to study critical water supply problems on a national basis. (The legislation already has been recommended by President Johnson and r eported by the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee.) 2.
    [Show full text]
  • A Regional Groundwater Flow Model of the Salt River Valley - Phase I
    SDMS DOCID#1142207 ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES A REGIONAL GROUNDWATER FLOW MODEL OF THE SALT RIVER VALLEY - PHASE I PBOEN~ AC~ MANAGEMENT AREA HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK AND BASIC DATA REPORT BY EDWIN F. CORKHILL, STEVE CORELL, BRADLEY M. HILL. and DAVID A. CARR HYDROLOGY DIVISION MODELING REPORT NO. 6 Phoenix, Arizona April, 1993 ARIZO~A DEPARTMENT OF \'1ATER RESOURCES A REGIONAL GROUND\VATER FLOW MODEL OF THE SALT RIVER VALLEY ~ PHASE I PHOENIX ACTIVE MANAGEMENT AREA HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK AND BASIC DATA REPORT Final Report by Edwin Corkhilt Steve CorelL Bradley M. HilL and David A. Modeling Report No. 6 Hydrology Division - Groundwater Modeling April 1, 1 Abstract The Phoenix Active :Management Area groundwater flow model focuses on the hydrologic system of the Salt River Valley, the most intensive water use area of the state. The goal of the hydrologic study and modeling effort was to develop a quantitative tool to test various groundwater management scenarios. The predevelopment hydrologic system (circa 1900) of the Salt River Valley is analyzed. Various components of groundwater inflow and outflov,/ are identified. A predevelopment groundviater budget is presented. The total inflows and outflows were in approximate balance and equaled approximately 139J~OO acre-feet per year. The modern hydrologic system (1978-198:-1) is analyzed. The vari.ous components of groundv,:rner inflow and outflov<' are identified. Detailed descriptions of the methodologies used to analyze the components of flow are provided. A groundwater budget for the period 19/X-1 Y88 is presented. The total inflows were approximately 13.5 million acre-feet and the total outflow-, were approximately 14.0 million acre-feet The estimated decrease in the volume of groundwater in storage \\'US 0.5 rnillion acre-feet Various recommendations are provided to improve future data collection and analysis efforts.
    [Show full text]