DOCSLIB.ORG

Lower Colorado River Water Supply Its Magnitude and Distribution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lower Colorado River Water Supply Its Magnitude and Distribution Lower Colorado River Water Supply Its Magnitude and Distribution GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 486-D Lower Colorado River Water Supply Its Magnitude and Distribution By ALLEN G. HELY WATER RESOURCES OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER-SALTON SEA AREA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 486-D UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1969 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY William T. Pecora, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 60 cents (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Page Abstract_ _ _______________________________________ Dl Distribution of Colorado River water_______________ D24 Introduction. ______________________________________ 2 Gross diversions._______________________________ 24 The lower Colorado River and environs_____________ 2 Net diversions________________________________ 26 Water-control and distribution systems____________ 8 Distribution of flow during 1961-63---_---__------ 27 Legal controls._________________________________ 10 Water use and water loss____-----__--_-_-_---__- 29 Studies of the water supply._________________________ 11 Colorado River at compact point, near Lees Ferry, Conveyance losses from large canals _______ 30 Ariz___________________________________ 12 Lower Colorado River area Davis Dam to Actual flow, 1896-1966___________________ 12 Mexico ____________-____-_____--_-__--_-- 30 Man-caused depletion above compact point. ___ 12 Salton Sea basin. _________________-_-_-_---_ 33 Virgin flow, 1896-1966____________.___ 13 Interrelation of surface water and ground water. _______ 34 Probable future virgin flow_________________ 14 Deficiency of the Colorado River supply...____-_----_- 34 Probable future regulated water supply______ 17 References _____________-___-_---_--_-___--------_-- 36 Colorado River between compact point and Davis Appendix.____________---_---_---------_----------- 37 Dam.___________________________________ 19 Colorado River Compact, 1922.____-_-______-__-- 39 Gains and losses.___________________________ 20 Rio Grande, Colorado, and Tijuana Treaty, 1944___ 42 Effects of storage below compact point- _______ 21 Colorado River and tributaries below Davis Dam_ 21 Decree of the U.S. Supreme Court, 1964, Arizona v. Bill Williams River_______________________ 21 California, Colorado River--.....--------------- 45 Gila River.._______________________________ 22 Tables of basic data ___-___________-____--_-- 49 Colorado River below all major diversions.___. 23 ILLUSTRATIONS Page FIGURE 1. Map of the Colorado River basin showing report area...___-_______-_____-_-_--_------------_----------- D3 2. Map showing principal features of the Colorado River system and water-using areas from Davis Dam to Cibola VaUey...______________________________________________________________________________________ 4 3. Map showing principal features of the Colorado River system and water-using areas below Cibola Valley._____ 5 4. Map showing principal features of the Colorado River distribution system and water-using areas in the Salton Sea basin.______________________________________________________________.__--__-___-.._ 6 5. Graph showing relations of annual depletion of streamflow to annual virgin flow at compact point, 1896-1962-_ 13 6. Bar graph of annual flow of the Colorado River at compact point, 1896-1966.----_-_-----_-------_--------- 14 7. Graph showing progressive averages of annual virgin flow at compact point. ________-______________-------_-- 15 8. Cumulative frequency diagram of annual virgin flow at compact point, 1896-1964________________________ 16 9. Graphical storage analysis of the virgin flow of the Colorado River at compact point, 1895-1966____---_-__-- 18 10. Graph showing dimensionless draft-storage-variability relations____________--____-_-------_-__--__-__--- 18 11. Graph showing relations of uniform annual draft to carry-over storage capacity for virgin flow.______________ 19 12. Bar graphs of annual flows of the Bill Williams and Gila Rivers_-__------------_---------_-_---_ ___- 22 13. Bar graph of annual flow of the Colorado River below all major diversions______________-_____-----__---_ 23 14. Graph showing the principal diversions from the Colorado River below Davis Dam, 1908-63_______________ 25 15. Graphs showing annual diversions and return flows for Parker Valley and Yuma Valley, 1930-63._____---__-- 26 16. Bar graphs of depletion of the lower Colorado River in selected years, by States___________________-__-_--- 27 17. Schematic diagram showing distribution of Colorado River water below Davis Dam, 1961-63-_____--_---___- 28 in CONTENTS V TABLES Page TABLE 1. Summary of annual streamflow at compact point, near Lees Ferry, Ariz.__.__-_______._______.___--_-_----_ D12 2. Confidence limits for multiyear means of virgin flow at compact point- -___--_---____--_-____________-_-- 17 3. Gains and losses between compact point and Davis Dam, Ariz.-Nev______________________________________ 20 4. Average annual flow in the lower Colorado River system, 1961-63._-______--__-____--_____-_________-__ 29 5. Water losses from majoi canals, 1961-63_____-----______-______________-_________-______-___-_-_-_--- 30 6. Annual flow of Colorado River at compact point, near Lees Ferry, Ariz., 1896-1966,.__________---___-_-__-- 49 7. Annual flows of the lower Colorado River, 1902-66______-_-_____-__-_____----___-_-___--____---___---_- 50 8. Annual flows of principal tributaries to the lower Colorado River, 1903-66-________________________________ 51 9. Annual diversions and return flows, Lake Mead to Imperial Dam, 1915-66__--__--___----__-___-------_---- 52 10. Annual diversions and return flows at and below Imperial Dam, 1908-66_____--_-___----___-__-_---------- 53 11. Year-end usable contents of reservoirs below compact point, 1934-66..____________________________________ 54 12. Approximate irrigated acreage in principal water-using areas for selected years.____________________________ 54 WATER RESOURCES OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER-SALTON SEA AREA LOWER COLORADO RIVER WATER SUPPLY ITS MAGNITUDE AND DISTRIBUTION By AJLLEN G. HELY ABSTRACT The water supply in the lower Colorado River depends almost the principal diversions to Mexico (via the Alamo Canal) were entirely on (a) the virgin flow at compact point (Lee Ferry), 240,000 acre-feet and 1,800,000 acre-feet, respectively. As a near Lees Ferry, Ariz., (b) the depletion of that flow caused by result of such increases in water use and the predominately be­ storage above compact point and use of water in the upper low average runoff since 1930, flow into the Gulf of California Colorado River service area, and (c) the provisions of the has diminished to negligible quantities in recent years. Future Colorado River Compact for release of water to the lower distribution of the available water supply in accordance with the river. U.S. Supreme Court decree of 1964 will permit a large increase in The computed average annual virgin flow at compact point the amount of Colorado River water used in Arizona and will for the 71 water years 1806-1966 is 14,900,000 acre-feet, but require a decrease in the amount used in California, at least for the 34 years, 1931-64, it is only 12,900,000 acre-feet. During during periods of below-average runoff. the decade 1953-62 the virgin flow was depleted about 2 mil­ The beneficial use of water below compact point is accom­ lion acre-feet per year by diversion and use in the upper service panied by large losses, some avoidable and some unavoidable. area. These depletions increased sharply after 1962 and probably Evaporation from the Colorado River and from reservoirs con­ will continue to increase for many years. sumes more than a million acre-feet per year, and nearly worth­ Probability and storage analyses indicate that the water supply less native vegetation consumes more than half a million acre- derived from the Colorado River system above compact point feet. Seepage from large canals between Imperial Dam and the to meet all demands for depletion above that point and release to areas served amounts to about half a million acre-feet, some of the lower river can be sustained at about 13 million acre-feet, which is being recovered or is recoverable. Considerably more and that 14 million acre-feet will be available most of the time. than a million acre-feet per year drains to the Salton Sea. Al­ The division of this gross supply between the upper and lower though drainage is necessary to maintain productivity of the service areas depends in part on the existence of facilities to land and is also essential to the continued existence of the sea, enable use of the water in the upper service area and on pro­ much of this water can be considered a loss from the standpoint visions of the Colorado River Compact. The actual flow at com­ of irrigation. Annual deliveries of water to Mexico during 1961- pact point probably will exceed compact requirements most of 63 exceeded treaty requirements by about 400,000 acre-feet, which the time until the upper service area's development of water can be considered a loss to the United States. supplies progresses considerably and also during subsequent With no new importation of water to the lower Colorado periods of abundant runoff. River and with natural water yields similar to those of 1931-64, Below compact point, the losses associated with storage and any new diversions from the river will depend chiefly on redis­ transport of water exceed the inflow from
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Colorado River Imperial Valley Soils
    THE COLORADO RIVER and IMPERIAL VALLEY SOILS I I ' ' '' ' ' '"' ' A CHRONICLE OF IMPERIAL VALLEY'S CONTINUING FIGHT AGAINST SALT FOREW ORD Elsewhere In the Untied States, soil conservation dlstricte - lormed as a result of referendum by landowners - are governed by an elected board ol directors. In Imperial Valley, Imperial lrriqatlon Dlatrict functions a.s the SoU Conservation District under a unique memorandum of aqreement with the U.S. Department of Aqr;culture. Soil conservotlon policy Ia ael by the District board which also aerves as a soli conservation board. Soil scl.ontlata. en91n..•r• and con&41rvatlonlsts provide technical assistance to farmers. Soil engineering lnforma1ton and survey da1a, prepared by either the liD or SCS, are freely interchanged. The Dlatrict provides clerical and office facllJUes lor SCS, as well as pub!Jc Information 01818tance. Silt and Salt Imperial Valley, the winter qreenhouse of the nation. has be&n oonqu.,rtng the pro!> !ems and obstacles tha1 have tendad to discourage Ita formers sin~ 1901. In 1900, thta was a bo11en deMrl. Wllh the construction ol a heading on the Colorado River, 60 mllos east ol the Valley, irrigation wa1er was brought lnto the thirsty d·-rt In 1901. This au~sful dlv"r slon ol water through o con ...... ~«-..l••·•t "' * or· VIIYOnc:e canol, many miles of which were In Mexico, was enJoyed (or the brief period of only four years before trouble developed. Looldnf eouth.. thl• oeriol •lew .atowa the beodworb of tl:•• AJI. A flood on the Colorado River washed out the control wor;ca Amenccm Cc:ma.L Tb• Colorado IU•tr ia ot left.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Fishing Regulations 3 Fishing License Fees Getting Started
    2019 & 2020 Fishing Regulations for your boat for your boat See how much you could savegeico.com on boat | 1-800-865-4846insurance. | Local Offi ce geico.com | 1-800-865-4846 | Local Offi ce See how much you could save on boat insurance. Some discounts, coverages, payment plans and features are not available in all states or all GEICO companies. Boat and PWC coverages are underwritten by GEICO Marine Insurance Company. GEICO is a registered service mark of Government Employees Insurance Company, Washington, D.C. 20076; a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. subsidiary. TowBoatU.S. is the preferred towing service provider for GEICO Marine Insurance. The GEICO Gecko Image © 1999-2017. © 2017 GEICO AdPages2019.indd 2 12/4/2018 1:14:48 PM AdPages2019.indd 3 12/4/2018 1:17:19 PM Table of Contents Getting Started License Information and Fees ..........................................3 Douglas A. Ducey Governor Regulation Changes ...........................................................4 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH COMMISSION How to Use This Booklet ...................................................5 JAMES S. ZIELER, CHAIR — St. Johns ERIC S. SPARKS — Tucson General Statewide Fishing Regulations KURT R. DAVIS — Phoenix LELAND S. “BILL” BRAKE — Elgin Bag and Possession Limits ................................................6 JAMES R. AMMONS — Yuma Statewide Fishing Regulations ..........................................7 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT Common Violations ...........................................................8 5000 W. Carefree Highway Live Baitfish
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 Electronic Data Deliverable Valid Values Reference Manual
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 5 ELECTRONIC DATA DELIVERABLE VALID VALUES REFERENCE MANUAL Appendix to EPA Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) Comprehensive Specification Manual . March, 2019 ELECTRONIC DATA DELIVERABLE VALID VALUES REFERENCE MANUAL Appendix to EPA Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) Comprehensive Specification Manual TABLE OF CONTENTS Table A-1 Matrix .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Table A-2 Coord Geometric type .................................................................................................................. 7 Table A-3 Horizontal Collection Method ..................................................................................................... 7 Table A-4 Horizontal Accuracy Units .......................................................................................................... 8 Table A-5 Horizontal Datum ........................................................................................................................ 8 Table A-6 Elevation Collection Method ....................................................................................................... 8 Table A-7 Elevation Datum .......................................................................................................................... 9 Table A-8 Material ........................................................................................................................................ 9 Table
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3. Affected Environment Lower Sonoran/SDNM Draft RMP/EIS 253
    Chapter 3. Affected Environment Lower Sonoran/SDNM Draft RMP/EIS 253 3.1. INTRODUCTION This chapter describes the environment within the Lower Sonoran Planning Area that would potentially be affected by actions proposed under the alternatives described in Chapter 2, Alternatives (p. 27). While the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is only responsible for managing BLM-administered public lands (public lands) within the Planning Area (i.e. the Lower Sonoran and Sonoran Desert National Monument [SDNM] Decision Areas), proposed decisions may affect environmental components outside the Decision Areas. Therefore, unless indicated otherwise, discussion and analysis in this section encompasses the Planning Area as a whole. The environmental components potentially impacted consist of resource and management activities listed below. The foreseeable environmental effects of the alternatives on these same resource and management activities are described in Chapter 4, Environmental Consequences (p. 371). Resources Resource Uses Air Quality Lands and Realty Cave Resources Livestock Grazing Management Climate Change Minerals Management Cultural and Heritage Resources Recreation Management Geology Travel Management Paleontological Resources Special Area Designations Priority Wildlife Species and Habitat Management National Landscape Conservation System Soil Resources Administrative Designations Vegetation Resources Other Special Designations Visual Resources Social and Economic Water Resources Tribal Interests Wild Horse & Burro Management Hazardous Materials and Public Safety Wilderness Characteristics Social and Economic Conditions Wildland Fire Management The data and descriptions of these categories are drawn from the Analysis of the Management Situation (AMS) (BLM 2005) and subsequent, completed resource assessments on several of the environmental components occurring within the Planning Area. The AMS is available for public review at the BLM’s Phoenix District Office.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Resource Inventory for the Vega SES LLC Solar Additional 80-Acres Project, Imperial County, California
    Cultural Resource Inventory for the Vega SES LLC Solar Additional 80-Acres Project, Imperial County, California Prepared for: Vega SES, LLC 750 W. Main Street El Centro, California 92243 Prepared by: Joel Lennen, M.A., RPA ASM Affiliates, Inc. 2034 Corte del Nogal Carlsbad, California 92011 USGS 7.5-minute Mount Signal; approximately 80 acres Keywords: Imperial County, Mount Signal USGS 7.5’ Quad, West Mesa, West Side Main Canal, Fern Canal, Fig Drain, Wormwood Canal and Drain, Drew Road, PN 27970 December 2017 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ................................................................................ iii 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION .................................................................. 1 STUDY PERSONNEL .................................................................................................... 1 2. SETTING ......................................................................................................... 6 NATURAL SETTING ...................................................................................................... 6 Geology and Soils ...................................................................................................... 6 Climate ...................................................................................................................... 6 Topography ..............................................................................................................
    [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]
  • The Lining of the All-American Canal
    The Lining of the All American Canal: Effects on Mexico Construction of the All-American Canal, 1935 (top), 1939 (bottom), José Luis Castro-Ruiz and Vicente Sánchez- and 1936 (background). Courtesy of Munguía – El Colegio de la Frontera Norte U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. n 1988, the U.S. Congress approved 7.3 million acre-feet (maf) annually in Law 100-675, authorizing the equal parts, creating high expectations for Secretary of the Interior to line the the economic transformation of the region. All-American Canal (AAC) along a I The Alamo Canal experienced a number 23-mile section in the southern Imperial Valley of California. Lining the canal was of difficulties in the years that followed. expected to save an estimated 70,000 acre- An inability to control canal volumes from feet of water per year lost to seepage the Colorado River resulted in a series where the canal traverses sand dunes. The of floods from 1905 to 1907, affecting Mexican government quickly filed an the cities of Mexicali and Calexico and informal complaint through the Mexican agricultural areas on both sides of the section of the International Boundary and border, and creating the Salton Sea. These Water Commission (IBWC), claiming conditions, together with the dependence potential harm to water users in the of the canal operation on Mexican Most evident is a potential decrease in Mexicali Valley, and noting that the United policy changes, moved Imperial Valley static levels of the Mexicali Aquifer, States was legally obligated by Minute 242 users to lobby for their own access to which depends mostly on AAC seepage to notify Mexico of any changes affecting the Colorado.
    [Show full text]
  • THE L\IIEXICALI VALLEY \VATER PROBLEM . Jol-IN C
    THE l\IIEXICALI VALLEY \VATER PROBLEM . JOl-IN c. ARCHBOLD San Diego City Schools The Mexicali Valley of Baja California has become a prime producer of cotton and one of the world's great processors of raw cotton. General argiculture has flourished, too. Like a phoenix arisen from the desert this region has been reclaimed from the arid conditions that have gripped the entire area since before the white man arrived. Now, salinity left in the soil by draining irrigation waters threatens to wipe out the progress of half a century. Only salt-tolerant cotton may survive conditions which have become an international issue. North of the border in the summer of 1961 the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation completed the vVellton-Mohawk Irrigation and Drainage District project. The $14,000,000 drainage system includes 70 deep drain­ age wells with pumps, and a 50-mile concrete-lined conveyance channel with an outfall on the Gila River above Yuma, Arizona (Figure 1). Drainage water being pumped in the Wellton-Mohawk system is not return Bow in the usual sense of the word, but water accumulated over a long period of tirrie as a result of interior drainage. From before the turn of the century until 1952, Wellton-Mohawk farmers depended upon underground flow of the Gila River for irrigation water.1 The quality of this water was uniformly so poor that it was disclosed in testimony before the United States Senate in 1945 that the irrigated area was down to 8,000 acres (as of 1943; later, even less was in crops) and that samples were taken showing a salt content of 12,000 parts per million.2 In 1952, Colorado River water became available with the completion of the Gila Project.
    [Show full text]
  • Resource Law Notes Newsletter, No. 8, Apr. 1986
    University of Colorado Law School Colorado Law Scholarly Commons Resource Law Notes: The Newsletter of the Natural Resources Law Center (1984-2002) Newsletters 4-1986 Resource Law Notes Newsletter, no. 8, Apr. 1986 University of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/resource_law_notes Part of the Energy and Utilities Law Commons, Energy Policy Commons, Environmental Law Commons, Environmental Policy Commons, Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Natural Resources Law Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, Oil, Gas, and Energy Commons, Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law Commons, Public Policy Commons, Water Law Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Citation Information Resource Law Notes: The Newsletter of the Natural Resources Law Center, no. 8, Apr. 1986 (Natural Res. Law Ctr., Univ. of Colo. Sch. of Law). RESOURCE LAW NOTES: THE NEWSLETTER OF THE NATURAL RESOURCES LAW CENTER, no. 8, Apr. 1986 (Natural Res. Law Ctr., Univ. of Colo. Sch. of Law). 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. Resource Law Notes The Newsletter of the Natural Resources Law Center University of Colorado, Boulder • School of Law Number 8, April 1986 10:50 John D. Leshy, After the Concrete Sets: The Two Conferences Future Role of the Bureau of Reclamation in Western Water Management Scheduled for June 1:15 Panel: The Natural Resources Law Center will present its Mohamed T. El-Ashry, Policy Options for Improved seventh annual summer program this June, 1986.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Water Conservation Plan
    WATER CONSERVATION PLAN LAKE HAVASU CITY, ARIZONA 2020 UPDATE Approved by Lake Havasu City Council on December 10, 2019 LAKE HAVASU CITY WATER CONSERVATION PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF DISTRICT ....................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 LOCATION ............................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 HISTORY .................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 SIZE OF POPULATION ............................................................................................... 1-1 1.3.1 Population Projections ................................................................................. 1-3 1.4 NATURAL SETTING................................................................................................... 1-5 1.4.1 Climate/Weather ........................................................................................ 1-5 1.4.2 Topography/Soils ......................................................................................... 1-5 1.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................ 1-6 1.6 ZONING ................................................................................................................... 1-7 1.6.1 Classifications .............................................................................................. 1-7 1.6.2 Existing Land Uses .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ATTACHMENT B Dams and Reservoirs Along the Lower
    ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT B Dams and Reservoirs Along the Lower Colorado River This attachment to the Colorado River Interim Surplus Criteria DEIS describes the dams and reservoirs on the main stream of the Colorado River from Glen Canyon Dam in Arizona to Morelos Dam along the international boundary with Mexico. The role that each plays in the operation of the Colorado River system is also explained. COLORADO RIVER INTERIM SURPLUS CRITERIA DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT COLORADO RIVER DAMS AND RESERVOIRS Lake Powell to Morelos Dam The following discussion summarizes the dams and reservoirs along the Colorado River from Lake Powell to the Southerly International Boundary (SIB) with Mexico and their specific roles in the operation of the Colorado River. Individual dams serve one or more specific purposes as designated in their federal construction authorizations. Such purposes are, water storage, flood control, river regulation, power generation, and water diversion to Arizona, Nevada, California, and Mexico. The All-American Canal is included in this summary because it conveys some of the water delivered to Mexico and thereby contributes to the river system operation. The dams and reservoirs are listed in the order of their location along the river proceeding downstream from Lake Powell. Their locations are shown on the map attached to the inside of the rear cover of this report. Glen Canyon Dam – Glen Canyon Dam, which formed Lake Powell, is a principal part of the Colorado River Storage Project. It is a concrete arch dam 710 feet high and 1,560 feet wide. The maximum generating discharge capacity is 33,200 cfs which may be augmented by an additional 15,000 cfs through the river outlet works.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Havasu City Recommended Landscaping Plant List
    Lake Havasu City Recommended Landscaping Plant List Lake Havasu City Recommended Landscaping Plant List Disclaimer Lake Havasu City has revised the recommended landscaping plant list. This new list consists of plants that can be adapted to desert environments in the Southwestern United States. This list only contains water conscious species classified as having very low, low, and low-medium water use requirements. Species that are classified as having medium or higher water use requirements were not permitted on this list. Such water use classification is determined by the type of plant, its average size, and its water requirements compared to other plants. For example, a large tree may be classified as having low water use requirements if it requires a low amount of water compared to most other large trees. This list is not intended to restrict what plants residents choose to plant in their yards, and this list may include plant species that may not survive or prosper in certain desert microclimates such as those with lower elevations or higher temperatures. In addition, this list is not intended to be a list of the only plants allowed in the region, nor is it intended to be an exhaustive list of all desert-appropriate plants capable of surviving in the region. This list was created with the intention to help residents, businesses, and landscapers make informed decisions on which plants to landscape that are water conscious and appropriate for specific environmental conditions. Lake Havasu City does not require the use of any or all plants found on this list. List Characteristics This list is divided between trees, shrubs, groundcovers, vines, succulents and perennials.
    [Show full text]