DOCSLIB.ORG

Answer to Complaint CVWD July 8, 2013

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Answer to Complaint CVWD July 8, 2013 Case 5:13-cv-00883-JGB-SP Document 39 Filed 07/08/13 Page 1 of 23 Page ID #:137 1 STEVEN 2. A22OTT 6S2N 1252707 sa,,ott8redwineandsherrill.com 2 9ERA-D D. SHOAF 6S2N 410847 3 gshoaf8redwineandhserrill.com REDWINE AND SHERRI-- 4 ATTORNEYS AT -AW 5 1950 0ARKET STREET RIVERSIDE CA 92501 6 PHONE 69517 684-2520 7 FACSI0I-E 69517 684-9583 8 Attorneys for Defendants 9 COACHE--A VA--EY WATER DISTRICT FRANZ DE K-OTZ ED PACK 10 (OHN POWE-- (R. PETER NE-SON 11 and DE2I -IVESAY in their official capacities as mem,ers of the 2oard of 12 Directors of the COACHE--A VA--EY 13 WATER DISTRICT 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 CENTRA- DISTRICT OF CA-IFORNIA A EASTERN DIVISION 16 17 A9UA CA-IENTE 2AND OF 7 CASE NO.C ED CV 13-00883 (92-6SPD7 18 CAHUI--A INDIANS 7 19 7 Plaintiff 7 ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS 20 .s. 7 COACHE--A VA--EY WATER 21 7 DISTRICT FRANZ DE K-OTZ ED COACHE--A VA--EY WATER 7 PACK (OHN POWE-- (R. PETER 22 DISTRICT FRANZ DE K-OTZ ED 7 NE-SON and DE2I -IVESAY in their 23 PACK (OHN POWE-- (R. PETER 7 official capacities as mem,ers of the 2oard NE-SON and DE2I -IVESAY in their 7 of Directors of the COACHE--A 24 official capacities as mem,ers of the 2oard 7 VA--EY WATER DISTRICT TO 25 of Directors of the COACHE--A 7 CO0P-AINT VA--EY WATER DISTRICTB DESERT 7 26 WATER A9ENCYB PATRICIA 9. 7 27 OY9AR THO0AS KIE-EY III (A0ES 7 CIOFFI CRAI9 A. EWIN9 and (OSEPH 7 28 -1- Answer of Coachella Valley Water District Franz De Klotz Ed Pack (ohn Powell (r. Peter Nelson & De,i -i.esay in their official capacities as 0em,ers of CVWD 2oard of Directors Case 5:13-cv-00883-JGB-SP Document 39 Filed 07/08/13 Page 2 of 23 Page ID #:138 1 K. STUART in their official capacities as 7 mem,ers of the 2oard of Directors of the 7 2 DESERT WATER A9ENCY 7 3 Defendants. 7 4 5 6 Defendants COACHE--A VA--EY WATER DISTRICT 6ECVWDF7 FRANZ 7 DE K-OTZ ED PACK (OHN POWE-- (R. PETER NE-SON and DE2I -IVESAY 8 in their official capacities as mem,ers of the 2oard of Directors of the COACHE--A 9 VA--EY WATER DISTRICT 6collecti.ely EDefendantsF7 for themsel.es and no 10 others answer the Complaint for Declaratory and InGuncti.e Relief and admit deny and 11 allege as followsC 12 13 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 14 15 1. In answer to Paragraph 1 su,Gect to the limitations on Gurisdiction under 28 16 U.S.C. I 2409a su,. 6a7 and 43 U.S.C. I 666 Defendants admit that this Court has 17 Gurisdiction o.er the action under 28 U.S.C. II 1331 and 1362. EDcept as eDpressly 18 admitted Defendants deny each and e.ery allegations of Paragraph 1. 19 2. In answer to Paragraph 2 Defendants admit that .enue in this Court is 20 appropriate under 28 U.S.C. I 13916,7. 21 22 NATURE OF THE ACTION 23 24 3. In answer to Paragraph 3 Defendants deny each and e.ery allegation of 25 Paragraph 3. 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// -2- Answer of Coachella Valley Water District Franz De Klotz Ed Pack (ohn Powell (r. Peter Nelson & De,i -i.esay in their official capacities as 0em,ers of CVWD 2oard of Directors Case 5:13-cv-00883-JGB-SP Document 39 Filed 07/08/13 Page 3 of 23 Page ID #:139 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE ISSUE 2 3 4. In answer to Paragraph 4 Defendants deny that the Tri,e and its mem,ers 4 ha.e a,original rights to the surface water and groundwater resources of the Valley. 5 Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a ,elief as to the 6 truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 4 and ,asing their denial thereon deny 7 the remaining allegations of Paragraph 4. 8 5. In answer to Paragraph 5 Defendants admit that the Agua Caliente 9 Reser.ation was esta,lished on 0ay 15 1876 ,y the EDecuti.e Order of President 10 Ulysses S. 9rant from land in the Coachella Valley and that the reser.ation was 11 su,sequently eDpanded through the EDecuti.e Order of President Rutherford 2. Hayes of 12 Septem,er 29 1877. EDcept as eDpressly admitted Defendants are without knowledge or 13 information sufficient to form a ,elief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 5 14 and on that ,asis deny each and e.ery allegation of Paragraph 5. 15 6. Paragraph 6 alleges legal conclusions to which no answer is required. To 16 the eDtent an answer is required Defendants deny each and e.ery allegation of Paragraph 17 6. 18 7. Paragraph 7 alleges legal conclusions to which no answer is required. To 19 the eDtent an answer is required Defendants deny each and e.ery allegation of Paragraph 20 7. 21 8. In answer to Paragraph 8 Defendants deny each and e.ery allegation of 22 Paragraph 8. 23 24 PARTIES 25 26 9. In answer to Paragraph 9 Defendants are without knowledge or information 27 sufficient to form a ,elief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 9 and ,asing 28 their denial thereon deny each and e.ery allegation of Paragraph 9. -3- Answer of Coachella Valley Water District Franz De Klotz Ed Pack (ohn Powell (r. Peter Nelson & De,i -i.esay in their official capacities as 0em,ers of CVWD 2oard of Directors Case 5:13-cv-00883-JGB-SP Document 39 Filed 07/08/13 Page 4 of 23 Page ID #:140 1 10. In answer to Paragraph 10 Defendants admit and allege that CVWD is a 2 pu,lic agency of the State of California organized and eDisting pursuant to the County 3 Water District -aw of the State of California Water Code section 30000 et seq. and the 4 Coachella District 0erger -aw Water Code section 33100 et seq. to eDercise the 5 powers conferred therein with its principal place of ,usiness located in Coachella 6 Ri.erside County State of California. Defendants admit that CVWD was formed in 7 1918 that its ser.ice area co.ers approDimately 1 000 square miles that CVWD has 8 de.eloped more than 100 groundwater wells within its ser.ice area and eDtracts 9 groundwater annually for distri,ution to its inha,itants and that it uses a.aila,le storage 10 capacity in the groundwater ,asins underlying the Coachella Valley to store imported 11 Colorado Ri.er water without compensation to the Tri,e. EDcept as eDpressly admitted 12 Defendants deny each and e.ery allegation of Paragraph 10. 13 11. In answer to Paragraph 11 Defendants admit that Defendants Franz De 14 Klotz Ed Pack (ohn Powell (r. Peter Nelson and De,i -i.esay are mem,ers of the 15 2oard of Directors of Defendant CVWD and that they are sued solely in their official 16 capacities as directors of CVWD. EDcept as eDpressly admitted Defendants deny each 17 and e.ery allegation of Paragraph 11. 18 12. In answer to Paragraph 12 Defendants admit the first two sentences of 19 paragraph 12 and that DWA has de.eloped approDimately 29 wells and eDtracts water 20 annually from the Upper Portion of the Whitewater Ri.er Su,,asin and that DWA 21 imports Colorado Ri.er water into the groundwater ,asin located in its ser.ice area 22 without compensation to the Tri,e. EDcept as eDpressly admitted Defendants deny each 23 and e.ery allegation of Paragraph 12. 24 13. In answer to Paragraph 13 Defendants admit that Patricia 9. Oygar Thomas 25 Kieley III (ames Cioffi Craig A. Ewing and (oseph K. Stuart are mem,ers of the 2oard 26 of Directors of Defendant DWA and that they are sued solely in their official capacities 27 as directors of DWA. EDcept as eDpressly admitted Defendants deny each and e.ery 28 allegation of Paragraph 13. -4- Answer of Coachella Valley Water District Franz De Klotz Ed Pack (ohn Powell (r. Peter Nelson & De,i -i.esay in their official capacities as 0em,ers of CVWD 2oard of Directors Case 5:13-cv-00883-JGB-SP Document 39 Filed 07/08/13 Page 5 of 23 Page ID #:141 1 FACTS 2 14. In answer to Paragraph 14 Defendants are without knowledge or 3 information sufficient to form a ,elief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 14 4 and ,asing their denial thereon deny each and e.ery allegation of Paragraph 14. 5 15. In answer to Paragraph 15 Defendants are without knowledge or 6 information sufficient to form a ,elief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 15 7 and ,asing their denial thereon deny each and e.ery allegation of Paragraph 15. 8 16. In answer to Paragraph 16 Defendants are without knowledge or 9 information sufficient to form a ,elief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 16 10 and ,asing their denial thereon deny each and e.ery allegation of Paragraph 16. 11 17. In answer to Paragraph 17 Defendants admit that in 1876 ,y EDecuti.e 12 Order of President Ulysses S. 9rant the Agua Caliente Reser.ation was esta,lished in 13 the Coachella Valley and that in 1877 President Hayes issued another EDecuti.e Order 14 reser.ing additional lands for the Tri,e.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Colorado River Aqueduct
    Fact Sheet: Our Water Lifeline__ The Colorado River Aqueduct. Photo: Aerial photo of CRA Investment in Reliability The Colorado River Aqueduct is considered one of the nation’s Many innovations came from this period in time, including the top civil engineering marvels. It was originally conceived by creation of a medical system for contract workers that would William Mulholland and designed by Metropolitan’s first Chief become the forerunner for the prepaid healthcare plan offered Engineer Frank Weymouth after consideration of more than by Kaiser Permanente. 50 routes. The 242-mile CRA carries water from Lake Havasu to the system’s terminal reservoir at Lake Mathews in Riverside. This reservoir’s location was selected because it is situated at the upper end of Metropolitan’s service area and its elevation of nearly 1,400 feet allows water to flow by gravity to the majority of our service area The CRA was the largest public works project built in Southern California during the Great Depression. Overwhelming voter approval in 1929 for a $220 million bond – equivalent to a $3.75 billion investment today – brought jobs to 35,000 people. Miners, engineers, surveyors, cooks and more came to build Colorado River the aqueduct, living in the harshest of desert conditions and Aqueduct ultimately constructing 150 miles of canals, siphons, conduits and pipelines. They added five pumping plants to lift water over mountains so deliveries could then flow west by gravity. And they blasted 90-plus miles of tunnels, including a waterway under Mount San Jacinto. THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA // // JULY 2021 FACT SHEET: THE COLORADO RIVER AQUEDUCT // // OUR WATER LIFELINE The Vision Despite the city of Los Angeles’ investment in its aqueduct, by the early 1920s, Southern Californians understood the region did not have enough local supplies to meet growing demands.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of the Salton Sea with No Restoration Project
    HAZARD The Future of the Salton Sea With No Restoration Project MAY 2006 © Copyright 2006, All Rights Reserved ISBN No. 1-893790-12-6 ISBN-13: 978-1-893790-12-4 Pacific Institute 654 13th Street, Preservation Park Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone (510) 251-1600 Facsimile (510) 251-2203 [email protected] www.pacinst.org HAZARD The Future of the Salton Sea With No Restoration Project Michael J. Cohen and Karen H. Hyun A report of the MAY 2006 Prepared with the support of The Salton Sea Coalition & Imperial Visions The U.S. Geological Survey Salton Sea Science Office and the Compton Foundation About the Authors Michael Cohen is a Senior Associate at the Pacific Institute. He is the lead author of the Institute’s 1999 report entitled Haven or Hazard: The Ecology and Future of the Salton Sea, and of the 2001 report entitled Missing Water: The Uses and Flows of Water in the Colorado River Delta Region. He is also the co-author of several journal articles on water and the environment in the border region. He is a member of the California Resources Agency’s Salton Sea Advisory Committee. Karen Hyun is a Ph.D. candidate in the Marine Affairs Program at the University of Rhode Island. Her research interests include ecosystem-based management and governance, especially in the Colorado River Delta. She also has interests in transboundary water issues, authoring Solutions Lie Between the Extremes: The Evolution of International Watercourse Law on the Colorado River. In addition, she has examined watershed to coast issues in Transboundary Solutions to Environmental Problems in the Gulf of California Large Marine Ecosystem.
    [Show full text]
  • Law of the River the Colorado River Compact
    Colorado River Water Users Association: Law of the River . The Colorado River Compact . As the 20th century dawned, the The Colorado River Compact vast domain of the Colorado River lay almost entirely Boulder Canyon Project Act untouched. Though there had been a few early filings for Treaty with Mexico diversion and a "grand ditch" conveying water some 16 miles across the Continental Divide Upper Colorado River Basin into eastern Colorado in the late Compact of 1948 1800s, California's Imperial Valley was among the first areas to tap the river's true potential. In early 1901, the 60 mile long Alamo Canal, Colorado River Storage Project developed by private concerns, was completed to deliver Colorado Act River water for irrigation, and a wasteland was transformed. But the Imperial Valley did not move ahead without problems. About 50 miles Grand Canyon Protection Act of the canal coursed through Mexico, leaving the valley farmers at the mercy of a foreign government. And in 1905, the river, raging with Arizona vs. California floods, eroded the opening to the canal, roared through and created the Salton Sea before the river was pushed back into its normal channel. Future of Western Water With the constant threat of flood looming along the lower Colorado, demands grew for some sort of permanent flood control work -a storage reservoir and dam on the river. And Imperial Valley farmers called for a canal totally within the United States, free of Mexican interference. By 1919, Imperial Irrigation District had won the support of the federal Bureau of Reclamation. A bureau engineering board recommended favorably on the canal and added the government "should undertake the early construction of a storage reservoir on the drainage basin of the Colorado." While this report was greeted with enthusiasm by people along the river's lower stretches, it was viewed with alarm by those in upper reaches.
    [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]
  • Sunland-Tujunga, Lake View Terrace and Shadow Hills 07.14.2020 GREATER LOS ANGELES COUNTY INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT REGION
    Sunland-Tujunga, Lake View Terrace and Shadow Hills 07.14.2020 GREATER LOS ANGELES COUNTY INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT REGION Sylmar Uninc. Sylmar San Fernando «¬118 Arleta - Pacoima Sunland-Tujunga-Lake View Terrace-Shadow Hills Mission Hills - Panorama City Sun Valley - ¨¦§210 - North Hills La Tuna Canyon La Canada Flintridge ¨¦§5 «¬170 Glendale Burbank North Hollywood - Valley Village City of LA Valley Glen - North 0 0.5 1 2 «¬2 Sherman Oaks ° City of LA Hollywood Miles Community Boundary Funded by California Department of Water Resources and Prop 1 It’s our water. TOOLKIT TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT BACKGROUND What is WaterTalks? IRWM Regions- How do we plan for water in California? Project Overview- How is WaterTalks funded? Funding- What sources of funding are available for water-related projects? WATER IN OUR ENVIRONMENT Surface Water and Groundwater- Where does my rainwater go? How do contaminants get into our water? Watershed- What is a watershed? Groundwater- Where does my groundwater come from? Flooding- Am I at risk of flooding? (optional) Access to Parks and Local Waterways- How clean are our lakes, streams, rivers, and beaches? Where can I find parks and local waterways? Existing Land Use- How does land use affect our water? Capturing and Storing Water- How can we catch and store rainwater? OUR TAP WATER Water Sources- Where does my tap water come from? Water Consumption- How much water does one person drink? How much water do we use at home? Tap Water Quality- How clean is my drinking water? Water Service Provider-
    [Show full text]
  • Salinity of Surface Water in the Lower Colorado River Salton Sea Area
    Salinity of Surface Water in The Lower Colorado River Salton Sea Area, By BURDGE IRELAN, WATER RESOURCES OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER-SALTON SEA AREA pl. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, PROFESSIONAL PAPER 486-E . i V ) 116) P, UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1971 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract El Ionic budget of the Colorado River from Lees Ferry to Introduction 2 Imperial Dam, 1961-65-Continued General chemical characteristics of Colorado River Tapeats Creek E26 water from Lees Ferry to Imperial Dam 2 Havasu Creek -26 Lees Ferry . 4 Virgin River - 26 Grand Canyon 6 Unmeasured inflow between Grand Canyon and Hoover Dam 8 Hoover Dam 26 Lake Havasu 11 Chemical changes in Lake Mead --- ---- - 26 Imperial Dam ---- - 12 Bill Williams River 27 Mineral burden of the lower Colorado River, 1926-65 - 12 Chemical changes in Lakes Mohave and Havasu ___ 27 Analysis of dissolved-solids loads 13 Diversion to Colorado River aqueduct 27 Analysis of ionic loads ____ - 15 Parker Dam to Imperial Dam 28 Average annual ionic burden of the Colorado River 20 Ionic accounting of principal irrigation areas above Ionic budget of the Colorado River from Lees Ferry to Imperial Dam - __ -------- 28 Imperial Dam, 1961-65 ____- ___ 22 General characteristics of Colorado River water below Lees Ferry 23 Imperial Dam Paria River 23 Ionic budgets for the Colorado River below Imperial Little Colorado River 24 Blue Springs --- 25 Dam and Gila River - 34 Unmeasured inflow from Lees Ferry to Grand Quality of surface water in the Salton Sea basin in Canyon 25 California Grand Canyon 25 Summary of conclusions 39 Bright Angel Creek 25 References ILLUSTRATIONS Page FIGURE 1 .
    [Show full text]
  • QUAGGA and ZEBRA MUSSEL SIGHTINGS DISTRIBUTION in the WESTERN UNITED STATES 2007 - 2009 ") Indicates Presence of Quagga Mussels ") Indicates Presence of Zebra Mussels
    QUAGGA AND ZEBRA MUSSEL SIGHTINGS DISTRIBUTION IN THE WESTERN UNITED STATES 2007 - 2009 ") indicates presence of quagga mussels ") indicates presence of zebra mussels NEVADA Lake Mead - January 2007 Lake Mohave - January 2007 CALIFORNIA Parker Dam - January 2007 Colorado River Aqueduct - March 2007 Washington Colorado RA at Hayfield - July 2007 Lake Matthews - August 2007 Lake Skinner - August 2007 Dixon Reservoir - August 2007 Lower Otay Reservoir - August 2007 Montana San Vicente Reservoir - August 2007 North Dakota ") Murray Reservoir - September 2007 ") ")") ")") Lake Miramar - December 2007 Oregon ")") Sweetwater Reservoir - December 2007 ") San Justo Lake - January 2008 ") El Capitan Reservoir - January 2008 Idaho ") ")")")") Lake Jennings - April 2008 ")")")")") Olivenhain Reservoir - March 2008 South Dakota ")") Irvine Lake - April 2008 ") Rattlesnake Reservoir - May 2008 Lake Ramona - March 2009 Wyoming ")") Walnut Canyon Reservoir - July 2009 ") Kraemer Basin - September 2009 ") Anaheim Lake - September 2009 ") Nebraska ARIZONA ") Lake Havasu - January 2007 Nevada ") ") Central Arizona Project Canal - August 2007 ") Lake Pleasant - December 2007 ") ")") Imperial Dam - February 2008 Utah Salt River - October 2008 ") ") ") ")") COLORADO Colorado Kansas Pueblo Reservoir - January 2008 ") ") ")")") Lake Granby - July 2008 California ")")")")")") ") ")") Grand Lake - September 2008 ")")")")")")") ")") Willow Creek Reservoir - September 2008 ")")")")")") ") Shadow Mountain Reservoir - September 2008 ") ") ") ")")") Jumbo Lake - October
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Impacts of Alternative Water Allocation Institutions in the Colorado River Basin
    ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE WATER ALLOCATION INSTITUTIONS IN THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN by James F. Booker and Robert A. Young Completion Report No. 161 ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE WATER ALLOCATION INSTITUTIONS IN THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN by James F. Booker and Robert A Young Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics Colorado State University August, 1991 RESEARCH PROJECf TECHNICAL COMPLETION REPORT Supported by the U.S. Geological Survey Department of the Interior Under Award No. 14-08-0001-G1644 and by the Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station COLORADO WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH INSTITUTE Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 Robert C. Ward, Director FOREWORD The contents of this report were developed under a grant from the Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. However, those contents do not represent the policyof that agencyand the reader should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. This research was supported bythe U.S. Geological Survey(USGS), Department of the Interior, under USGS award number 14-08·0001-Gl644. Support was also provided by the Colorado State University Agricultural Experiment Station. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the views of Colorado State University. The research was aided by the cooperation of numerous people in local, state and federal water agencies who assisted us by providing access to data and experience on the supply and demand for Colorado River water. We particularly wish to acknowledge the assistance of colleagues in the Department of Agricultural Economics, Colorado State University. Garth Taylor and Laurie Walters aided in preparing data and models used in deriving estimates for agricultural and municipal demand relationships.
    [Show full text]
  • Kayaking from Source to Sea on the Colorado River: the Basin Up-Close and Personal by Zak Podmore with Photos from Will Stauffer-Norris
    Kayaking from Source to Sea on the Colorado River: The Basin Up-Close and Personal By Zak Podmore with photos from Will Stauffer-Norris The 2012 Colorado College State of the Rockies Report Card The Colorado River Basin: Agenda for Use, Restoration, and Sustainability for the Next Generation About the Authors: Zak Podmore (Colorado College class of ‘11) is a 2011-12 Field Researcher for the State of the Rockies Project. Will Stauffer-Norris (Colorado College class of ‘11) is a 2011-12 Field Researcher for the State of the Rockies Project. Will Stauffer-Norris The 2012 State of the Rockies Report Card Source to Sea 13 First day of kayaking! So much faster... ? Dam portage was easy ? in the sheri's car Will and Zak near the “source” of the Green River in Wyoming’s Wind River Range Upper Basin Bighorn sheep in Desolation Canyon Finished Powell, THE CONFLUENCE surrounded by houseboats ? e End of the Grand ? ? ? ? Survived Vegas, back to the river North rim attempt thwarted Lower Basin by snow & dark Dry river bed; about ? to try the canals Will water go to LA, Zak paddles through an irrigation canal Phoenix, or Mexico? Floating in the ? remnants of the Delta ? USA MEXICO ? El Golfo, el n. - The gulf of California The messages on this map were transmitted from Will and Zak via GPS while they were on the river. Between Mountains and Mexico By mid-January, the Colorado River had become a High in the Wind River Mountains of Wyoming, joke. Will Stauffer-Norris and I climbed out of a concrete Mexico was a joke.
    [Show full text]
  • Assignment and Assessment for Grades 6-8 the Colorado River Basin
    Assignment and Assessment for Grades 6-8 The Colorado River Basin Arizona Water History During the early 1900's, the seven states sharing the Colorado River Basin - Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah - debated for shares of Colorado River water. In 1922, representatives from the seven states and the United States government created the Colorado River Compact, which divided the states into upper and lower basins. Each basin had 7.5 million acre-feet of water annually to split amongst themselves. 1 Assignment and Assessment for Grades 6-8 Interstate political and legal disagreements over Colorado River water dominated the relationship among lower basin states throughout the next 22 years. Arizona was the last state to approve the compact in 1944, ensuring 2.8 million acre-feet of water per year for the state. The Boulder Canyon Project Act of 1928 provides California with 4.4 million acre-feet of water per year and Nevada with an annual allocation of 300,000 acre-feet. Arizona, California, and Nevada comprise the lower basin and are responsible for splitting the 7.5 million acre-feet allotment. One of the most popular recreation areas in America, Lake Mead, is located in the lower basin state of Nevada. As the Colorado River exits the Grand Canyon it enters Lake Mead created by the Hoover Dam. As the Colorado River travels south it meets the Central Arizona Project’s aqueduct and the Colorado River Aqueduct. The Colorado River Aqueduct is 242 miles long and diverts water west over state lines and across the Mojave and Colorado Deserts.
    [Show full text]
  • Downstream Effects of Damming the Colorado River
    International Journal of Lakes and Rivers. ISSN 0973-4570 Volume 10, Number 1 (2017), pp. 7-33 © Research India Publications http://www.ripublication.com Downstream Effects of Damming the Colorado River Aregai Tecle* *Professor, College of Engineering, Forestry and Natural Sciences Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff, Arizona 86011. Abstract This paper deals with downstream riverine ecosystem effects of damming the Colorado River. The construction and operation of dams in the Colorado River have multiple benefits that include having increased water for irrigation and domestic supply, generation of hydroelectric power energy, providing improved aquatic recreation and wildlife habitat, and flood control. Damming the river has also some drawbacks. The storage of water behind dams has inundated and buried under invaluable cultural and historical artifacts. The damming and the extensive stream flow diversions for irrigation and water supply have also prevented the river water from reaching the delta area for months and sometimes for an entire year. In addition, damming the river has resulted in decreased sediment accumulation, especially in the Grand Canyon, and high level salinity and other chemical accumulations in the lower irrigated parts of the basin. Some efforts being made to ameliorate the negative effects of damming include periodic high flow experiments at Glen Canyon Dam to improve sediment dynamics, fish and wildlife habitat and the overall ecosystem along the Colorado River within the Grand Canyon. Another improvement effort being made is desalination of irrigation effluents in the lower Colorado River to improve the quality of water going to Mexico. Keywords: Colorado River management, effects of damming a river, laws of the river, sediment dynamics, water shortage, water quality.
    [Show full text]
  • California Water Supply Infrastructure
    California Water Supply Infrastructure Natural: rivers, snowpack, aquifers Aqueducts, canals, pipelines, pumping plants Surface storage (dams, reservoirs) Groundwater extraction and recharge Urban: treatment, storm water capture, desalination California Aqueduct (DWR) Geographical Features Coastal Range Sacramento River Valley Delta San Joaquin River Valley San Francisco Tulare Basin area Kern County Colorado Los Angeles area River . http://www.california-map.org Imperial County 2 Water Accounting in California Average Usage Agriculture: 33 MAF Urban: 9 MAF Some sources of supply State Water Project: 3 MAF Federal Water Project: 8 MAF Colorado River: 5 MAF Ground water: 15 MAF Other from local projects and reuse 3 Water Supply Example: Irvine Ranch Water District 380,000 residents Water Sources for IRWD Local streams Recycling (non-potable) Imported by MWD Local groundwater pumping (OCWD) Remote groundwater banking Desalination (future) Role of Infrastructure in Water Transfers river or aqueduct Major California Water Projects Federal, State and local (California Water Plan: Update 2013) Shasta Dam and lake (Anthony Dunn) Red Bluff Diversion Dam (Red Bluff Daily News) Oroville Dam and lake (California DWR) Sacramento River (placesonline.com) Delta scene (DWR) Left: Sacramento – San Joaquin Delta (Wikipedia) Lower left: Harvey O. Banks Pumping Plant (baydeltalive.com) Lower right: Federal and State Aqueducts (Wikipedia) Friant Dam and Millerton lake (USBR) San Luis Reservoir (California DWR) San Joaquin River (www.alamy.com) Edmonston Pumping
    [Show full text]