<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJSS</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Soil Science</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2162-5360</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojss.2021.1111027</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJSS-113355</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Earth&amp;Environmental Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  The Disappearing Colorado River: Historic and Modern Attempts to Manage the Lifeline of the United States Southwest
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kenneth</surname><given-names>R. Olson</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>James</surname><given-names>M. Lang</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Department of Natural Resources, Urbana, Illinois, USA</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Department of Crop Sciences, College of Agricultural, Consumer, and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, USA</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>12</day><month>11</month><year>2021</year></pub-date><volume>11</volume><issue>11</issue><fpage>538</fpage><lpage>566</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>23,</day>	<month>October</month>	<year>2021</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>21,</day>	<month>November</month>	<year>2021</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>24,</day>	<month>November</month>	<year>2021</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Historic Native American and modern civilizations have been forcing the unstable use of the Colorado River and adjacent land resources for centuries. Much can be learned from past Native American cultures that created irrigation systems to offset low rainfall. These lessons learned can be applied to our modern civilization. We can learn a lot from their previous behavior and experiences and could apply the lessons learned to our current disappearing Colorado River situation. Little of the Colorado River water flow reaches the international border with Mexico near Yuma, Arizona. Intensive consumption, mostly in the United States, has dried up the lower 160 km of the river. Since the 1960s, the Colorado River has rarely flowed into the Gulf of California and when it does it becomes is a major international news event. The Colorado River Delta is drought prone and its headwater tributaries are a vital source of water for 40 million people. The Colorado River has whitewater rapids, canyons, and many United States National Parks. The tributary and river flow is managed by an extensive system of dams, aqueducts, and reservoirs. Most years the entire Colorado River flow is used for United States agricultural irrigation and domestic water supply purposes. The agricultural and urban needs in the United States are continuing to grow and it appears the days of Colorado River flowing into Mexico and the Gulf of California are numbered and declining every decade. The Colorado River is disappearing and restoration efforts appear to be too little too late. If the Colorado River valley is ever going to recover management lessons and failures learned from the Native Americans, including the Hohokam, must be applied. A balanced approach to water management is needed and must include aggressive conservation and efficiency measures.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Grand Canyon</kwd><kwd> Hohokam</kwd><kwd> Mexico-American War</kwd><kwd> Gulf of California</kwd><kwd> Salton Trough</kwd><kwd> Hoover Dam</kwd><kwd> Glen Canyon Dam</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>The Colorado River headwaters start in the southern Rocky Mountains of Colorado at La Poudre Pass and the river flows through the Grand Canyon and into Lake Mead. The river then turns south into Mexico where it historically flowed towards the tip of the Gulf of California. The Colorado River includes parts of 7 states—Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, Nevada and California. The Colorado is 2330 km long and drains a 637,137 km<sup>2</sup> basin. For 27 km, the river is the international boundary between the United States (Arizona) and Mexico (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref1">1</xref>]. The river is often referred to as the “Lifeline of the South West”. It flows through and drains a vast arid and semiarid section of North America. The Colorado River had cut a two kilometer deep canyon known as the Grand Canyon. The Grand Canyon is one of the Seven Natural Wonders of the World (Figures 2-6). Each Colorado tributary river, such as the Little Colorado River (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7</xref>) and (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8</xref>) draining into the Colorado River had cut narrow deep canyons making the Colorado basin a labyrinth of deep gorges. The longest of the unbroken trunk canyon is the Grand Canyon extending from the Grand Wash Stream to the mouth of Praia. The Marble, Glen and Cataract canyons were cut by the river flow.</p><p>Further downstream, the Colorado passes by the Mojave and Sonoran deserts (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig9">Figure 9</xref>). Part of the Sonoran Desert including Yuma and Colorado deserts lies in the Salton Trough (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>0). The trough is an enormous structural depression which extends northwest from head of the Gulf of California (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>), a distance of 240 km. At one time, the Gulf extended further northwest to a point above where the Colorado currently enters the filled-in Salton Trough [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref1">1</xref>].</p><p>In 1905, floodwaters caused a break in Imperial Canal diversion controls. As a result, the Colorado River flowed into Salton Sink, creating the Salton Sea (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>0). The total surface area was 777 km<sup>2</sup> and about 21 m deep, 80 km long and 16 to 24 km wide. The breach threatened and inundated the agriculturally rich Imperial Valley and blocked a main railroad route. The repaired railroad breach in 1907 completed a line of protective levees. Today, the Salton Sea acts as a receiving wastewater basin from irrigation projects in the Coachella and Imperial valleys. These valleys received Colorado River water via the All-American Canal.</p><p>Water projects now go through environmental impact studies [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref2">2</xref>]. Controversy between the United States and Mexico was addressed in 1972 agreement. The United States lead a desalinization experiment in the Lower Colorado River Basin and irrigation management projects set the world standard [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref3">3</xref>] for the disposal of saline water in the upper basin.</p><p>The primary objectives are to study: 1) the historical layers of soils, sediments and water flows under ancient climates, 2) the Hohokam culture’s land and water management experiences on the Salt, Gila and Lower Colorado rivers and 3)</p><p>apply them to current land use and water management behaviors and decisions which would need to include aggressive conservation and efficiency measures.</p><sec id="s1_1"><title>1.1. Geology and Soils</title><p>During the Cretaceous period, about 100 million years ago, much of western North America was still part of the Pacific Ocean. Between 50 and 75 million years ago [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref4">4</xref>] the collision of the Farallon Plate with the North American Plate created Tectonic forces which pushed up the Rocky Mountains. The mountain building event was known as Laramide orogeny. The Colorado River was formed as a west-flowing stream draining the southwest portion of the range. The uplift also diverted a tributary of the Mississippi River, the Green River, and west towards the Colorado River.</p><p>The sequence and time scale of the river’s present course and Grand Canyon is uncertain (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>) and (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>). The Gulf of California was formed by faulting processes along the boundary of North America and Pacific plates around 12 to 5 million years ago. The Colorado flowed west to an outlet, possibility Monterey Bay, on the Pacific Ocean where the river most likely played a role in creation of the Monterey submarine canyon [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref5">5</xref>].</p><p>The Colorado River brought its load of silt from the mountains and hills of the watershed above the Gulf of California. Eventually it created a natural sediment dam which separated the Salton Sea, approximately 71 m below sea level, to the north from the Gulf of California. The Colorado then cut a channel into the lower Gulf. The upper waters, cut off from the Gulf, gradually evaporated, forming extensive desert creating a petrified forest (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>1) and (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>2) to the north and near the Grand Canyon.</p></sec><sec id="s1_2"><title>1.2. Climate</title><p>The average summer temperature in the Lower Colorado River valley is 87 degrees F. In the winter, the average temperature is 55 degrees. The seasonal rainfall in the valley is 5 cm with 2.5 cm received during the growing season (April to September). The relative humidity is 20%. Without irrigation water from the Colorado and Gila rivers, crops cannot be grown in the Lower Colorado River valley.</p></sec><sec id="s1_3"><title>1.3. Plant and Animal Life</title><p>The upper elevations of the headwaters of the Colorado River have Alpine tundra and coniferous forests (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>3) and (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>4). The semiarid plateaus</p><p>and canyon support pinon pine (Pinusedulis), juniper (Juniperuscommunis), sagebrush (Artermisiatridetata) and creosote bush (Larreatridentate) and other desert mammals including elk (Cervuscanadensis), bobcat (Lynx rufus), mountain lion (Puma concolor) and coyote (Canislatrans). Beavers (Castor canadensis), muskrat (Ondatrazifethicus) and birds including bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and Condor (Gymnogypscalifornianus) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>5) occupy the middle and upper elevations. Streams are lined with willow (Salix babylonica), cottonwood (Populusdeltoids) and tamarisk (Tamarixramosissima). Accidentally</p><p>introduced in 1850s, the tamarisk shrub has spread along the river. It has deep roots and high transpiration rate through its leaves consuming large amounts of water. To support the ranching economy large predators were eliminated. River otters are gone as are 4 native fish (humpback chub (Gila cypha)), bonytail chub (Gila elegans), razorback suckers (Xyrauchentexanus) and Colorado squaw fish (Ptychocheiluslucius).</p></sec><sec id="s1_4"><title>1.4. Artifacts by Prehistoric People</title><p>The southwestern United States has an extensive and rich history and prehistory for Native Americans who made some of the finest stone tools, ceramics, hand-made decorative items, hand-woven rugs and beautiful beadwork goods found nowhere else in the world. Prehistoric pottery, especially Anasazi and Hohokam, have been recovered by archaeologists and land owners. Pottery occurs in completely undamaged condition because of predominantly dry desert conditions for thousands of years [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref6">6</xref>]. Moisture along with freezing and thawing can degrade and destroy ceramic vessels resulting in fewer surviving examples. Chipped stone implements were made from chalcedony, agate, colorful jasper, chert, multi-colored basalt, obsidian and petrified wood (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>1 and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>2) the Paleo Indian, Archaic and Desert Traditions including Developmental, Classic, Historic and Transitional periods.</p><p>The earliest archaeological record for the southwestern United States began around 13,200 years ago. Many Paleo Indian implements were first described in the southwest which included the Clovis from a mammoth kill site near Clovis, New Mexico at Blackwater Draw in 1937. The Folsom spear point found at Wild Horse Arroyo near Folsom, New Mexico, at a bison kill site, was discovered in 1927. The Agate Basin point was found in association with a bison kill site in Wyoming. The Midland point was first described at a site near Midland, Texas. Paleo hunting points were attached to short spears that sat in a larger and heavier thrust spear [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref6">6</xref>]. The shorter shafts with the attached point served as detachable and reloadable implements for large dangerous prehistoric and now extinct game.</p><p>The Archaic period, 8000 to 2300 years ago, was characterized by triangular points with the use of the atlatl spear thrower for present day game. The Desert Tradition sequence in the southwestern U.S. commenced nearly 2300 years ago. The majority of the chipped stone artifacts, made by percussion and pressure flaking, found by archaeologists and land owners, were arrow points used with the invention of the bow and arrow about 1600 years ago. Large triangular points were re-sharpened along the length of the sides and were actually knives [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref7">7</xref>]. Artifacts that were re-sharpened exclusively at the tip were hunting points. Most artifacts found today had been exhaustively re-sharpened and were thrown away by their prehistoric users [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref8">8</xref>].</p></sec><sec id="s1_5"><title>1.5. Transitional and Historic Native Americans</title><p>The prehistoric people of the Anasazi lived on individual scattered farms in the western Colorado River plateau of northern Arizona and New Mexico. Their crops of corn and squash prospered and their culture spread from A.D. 1000 with consistent rainfall [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref9">9</xref>]. However, according to tree ring growth at Sand Canyon, from A.D. 1125 to 1180 and 1270 to 1274 along with a following 24-year drought in the later 13<sup>th</sup> century, the prolonged drought created food scarcity and triggered conflict. The Anasazi were forced to build fortress-like cliff-side dwellings at Mesa Verde and Chaco Canyon. After being attacked and their grain stores burned or looted, the Anasazi migrated to the Rio Grande and Colorado River valleys where irrigation was still possible.</p><p>The Southern Paiute and Ute Indian nations (200 A.D.) gathered and hunted in canyon lands of the upper Colorado basin for hundreds of years (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>6). The Hohokam Indians [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref6">6</xref>] created the largest prehistoric canal irrigation system in American West on the Gila and Salt rivers near the current city of Phoenix, Arizona. Several hundred kilometers of canals were constructed and are still visible from the air or on aerial photographs. The Hohokam grew maize (Zea mays), jack beans (Canavaliensiformis), kidney bean (Phaseolusvulgaris), tepary (Phaseolusacutifolius), lima beans (Phaseoluslunatus), amaranth (Amaranthusgraecizans), squash (Cucurbitapepo), gourds (Cucurbitaceaelagenaria), tobacco (Nicotianatabacum) and cotton (Gossypiumhirsutum) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref6">6</xref>]. Over time, soil management difficulties increased. Irrigated soils became waterlogged as a result of inadequate drainage. Sediment filled the Hohokam canals and salts accumulated in the fields reducing the soil productivity and crop yields. The adobe walls of the villages were unstable as a result of salt erosion. Salt weathering of the adobe walls resulted in their crumbling and eventual collapse [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref6">6</xref>]. By 1400 A.D.,</p><p>the irrigated fields were largely abandoned. Many of the modern canals paralleled or overlapped the ancient Hohokam canals. Soil erosion and salinity problems remained a threat to the stability of the modern irrigation systems. Modern technology has enabled better crop production through improved water management and more effective soil drainage systems to remove salt from the soil profiles. The Yuma tribes farmed the floodplain of the Colorado River and hunted. The river was too large with an irregular flow for canal irrigation. The economic exploitation of the region by the Europeans made it difficult for Indian groups to maintain their traditional way of life on the river.</p></sec><sec id="s1_6"><title>1.6. Global Temperatures in the Southwestern United States</title><p>The year A.D. 1400 dovetails with the Little Ice Age—Phase One of A.D. 1300 to 1550. As with 1500 year natural warming cycles, the last being the Medieval Warming period, from A.D. 900 to 1300, brought on by cyclical normal-occurring solar flare increases (massive solar ejections or M.S.E’s), M.S.E.’s dropped worldwide temperatures to minimum levels by A.D. 1400 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref9">9</xref>]. This profoundly affected the Hohokam people of the Southwest with excessive cold and serious droughts reducing harvest or subjecting the inhabitants to devastating crop failures.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. European and American Settlement</title><p>In 1540 Hernando de Alarcon, an early Spanish explorer, sailed up the Colorado River past the site of the present day city of Yuma (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>7) and (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>8). At that time, Indians of the Yuma culture were living along the banks of the Colorado and Gila rivers. During the period of the American Revolution, Padre Francisco Garces established two missions in the area. This area was located south of the Gila River and remained in Mexican hands until the completion of the Gadsden Purchase in 1854. In the early days, it was impossible for wagon</p><p>trains to traverse the rugged terrain north of the Gila River. Many immigrants to California gold fields (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>8) followed the Gila Trail, which crossed the Colorado River near where Yuma city is located.</p><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Irrigated Soils and Food Crops</title><p>The early farmers in Yuma county area relied on annual spring floods from the Colorado River to provide moisture for crops. When the river dried up, the Indians subsisted on wild plants including mesquite, India tea, and a variety of cacti. In the 1540s European explorers observed Indians carrying on a form of irrigated farming at the confluence of the Gila and Colorado Rivers a few kilometers north of the present day city of Yuma. Father Eusabio Kino, while visiting the Lower Gila Valley in 1700s, wrote of seeing little fields of maize, watermelons, calabasher, and beans.</p><p>The first European settlers to practice irrigation on a large scale was Jose Maria Redondo in 1870. The irrigation system included reed and earthen dams and a network of canals approximately 50 km long to serve 8000 ha of farmland along the Gila River. These structures were washed out during flooding events and had to be periodically rebuilt.</p><p>Soils in the Yuma county area, which are typical of the Lower Colorado River watershed can be divided into two groups, valley and mesa soils, and the valley soils have more favorable available water capacities and are more fertile. They are generally silty and clayey, Most of these soils are alkaline with some areas having a salt accumulation. The valley soils are used to produce alfalfa hay, cotton, sugar beets, small grain, grain sorghum, and vegetables. Mesa soils are sandy and have low available water capacity and natural fertility. They are on older terraces of the Gila and Colorado rivers. These soils require special care for successful farming, but crops can be grown. Mesa soils produce citrus fruit, alfalfa, hay, peanuts and small grains.</p><p>The Spanish explored and settled the Colorado River basin in 1850s. American surveyors focused on passes, routes, and territorial boundaries. The inland-shipping entrepreneurs assessed the navigability of the river (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>8). The federal government funded a major scientific survey in 1870s. The Colorado River was found to have very limited navigation potential. Investigations would focus on river development including irrigation, flood control, hydropower, and water supply [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref3">3</xref>] after 1900.</p><p>In the 1990s the US Department of Interior had been modifying the flow discharge rate of large dams to mimic natural spring floods that modify the channel bed, redistribute sediment and sandbars. The increased flow flushed unwanted river detritus and contaminants. Tensions continue to arise among basin states over interstate water marketing, water allocation, drought management and potential effects of the global climatic change, reservoirs management and Indian water rights.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Public Land Distribution in the Western United States</title><p>Since the Revolutionary War land ownership has been an issue. Border disputes and overlapping claims were common [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref4">4</xref>]. The Land Ordinance of 1785 became the standard land survey method used by the Federal Government to ease the boundary conflicts. A territory was divided into 6-mile squares called “townships” using astronomical starting points. An individual was required to purchase a section 256 ha. By 1800, the minimum lot was reduced to 128 ha and a cost of $4.10 per ha remained the price until 1854.</p><p>As a result of changing economy and evolving social climate, public pressure increased to challenge the land policy of the Federal Government. Prior to the American-Mexico War (1846-1848) western settlers pushed for “preemption” which was the right to settle on the land first and pay later. After the war with Mexico, the homestead movement grew. New roadways (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>9), railroads (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>0), and canals reduced the Western United States farmers need to use</p><p>the Mississippi River Delta harbor at New Orleans [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref4">4</xref>]. The Homestead Act finally passed on May 20, 1862 and made it possible for any citizen who did not bear arms against the U.S. Government to file a land claim [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref10">10</xref>]. The Act gave citizens and future citizens up to 256 ha of public land if they lived on it, improved it, and paid a small registration fee.</p><p>The Railroad Act was signed in 1862 and by 1869, a transcontinental railroad (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>0) stretched across the United States frontier [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref10">10</xref>]. The western United States land distribution was affected by Federal Government Indian policy. Congress passed the Dewes Act in 1887. Indian reservations were then broken up the Federal Government which gave individual farms to the Indians and the remaining reservation lands was declared open to settlers.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. General Mining Act of 1872</title><p>In California Gold Rush of 1849 (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>8) prospectors and miners found themselves in a legal vacuum. The United States Government had only recently acquired California by Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and laws governing the leasing of mineral lands had little presence in California. Miners in each mining camp organized their own governments. They adopted the Mexican mining laws which had existed in California which gave the discover the right to explore and mine minerals, such as silver and gold, on public lands.</p><p>At the end (1865) of the American Civil War eastern congressmen regarded western miners as squatters who were robbing the public patrimony. These congressmen proposed seizure of the western mines to pay a huge Civil War debt. Western representatives successfully argued that western miners and prospectors were performing a valuable service by promoting commerce and settling the land. In 1864, Congress passed a law that deferred to the miners who possessed the ground and instructed the courts deciding questions of contested mining rights to ignore federal ownership.</p><p>The General Mining Act of 1872, was approved on May 10, 1872, codified the informational system of acquiring and protecting public land mining claims. The General Mining Act of 1872 was the federal law that authorized and governed prospecting and mining for economically valuable minerals including gold, platinum, and silver, on federal public lands. All 18 years or older citizens of the United States have the right under the 1872 mining law to locate hard rock (lode) or gravel (placer) mining claim on federal lands open to mineral entry. Locatable minerals include lead, silver, platinum, gold, copper, uranium, zinc and tungsten.</p><p>According to the Mining Policy Center, mining companies extract $2 to $3 billion in minerals from public lands every year. From 1872 to 1993, companies produced more than $230 billion in minerals from land claims [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref11">11</xref>].</p></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Economic Development</title><p>In 1922, the Colorado River Compact included the seven states that are in drainage area to facilitate federal investment in reclamation and dams. The total annual flow of the Colorado River was estimated to be 2.1 ha∙m<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>. A treaty in 1944 allocated 0.2 ha∙m<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup>∙yr<sup>−</sup><sup>1</sup> to Mexico. Unfortunately, the estimates were based on an abnormally wet period and the available amounts were either non-existent or less than predicted and specified.</p><p>In 1928, Congress passed the Boulder Canyon Protection Act. The act authorized the construction of Boulder (now Hoover) dam (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>1), a multi-purpose water-storage project. It was completed in 1936. The dam created Lake Mead (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). The multipurpose dam was for irrigation, hydroelectric power development, recreation, navigation and flood control. In the mid-1960s, the Glen Canyon Dam (Figures 22-24) was completed impounding Lake Powell</p><p>(<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). There were 3 other dams, the Aspinall (Curecanti) on the Gunnison River, the Navajo on the San Juan River and Flaming Gorge on the Green River, were built and completed on the Colorado River tributaries [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref12">12</xref>].</p></sec><sec id="s2_5"><title>2.5. Water Rights and Fights</title><p>In the Western U.S. the water law principle, Doctrine of Prior Appropriation developed gradually. Prior Appropriation Doctrine is “the rule that among the persons whose property borders on a waterway,the earliest users of the water have the right to take all they can use before anyone else has a right to it” [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref13">13</xref>] . It is a doctrine that prevails in some American jurisdictions that the person who first diverts and applies the waters of a stream to a beneficial use has a prior right to continue use to the extent of his appropriation.</p><p>Many streams in the western U.S. had intermittent flows and were not amenable to Riparian Doctrine which was commonly used in the Eastern U.S. The Riparian Doctrine “states that water belongs to the person whose land borders a body of water” [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref14">14</xref>]. Riparian owners are permitted to make reasonable use of this water provided it does not unreasonably interfere with the reasonable use of this water by others with Riparian rights.</p><p>There was a general lack of competition for water resources in the Western U.S. as a result of seasonality of flow and sparse population. Landowners modified river channels to impound water for their own use-first come-first served. The U.S. Government did not anticipate wide spread settlement in the arid West.</p><p>In Utah, in the 1800s, the Mormon settlers required some solution to relatively sparse water resources as a result of increased agricultural use. Mormon’s established a water allocation system that favored shared use of the water resource and beneficial use (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>5). However, beneficial use was replaced by “Prior Appropriation Doctrine”.</p><p>Prior Appropriation Doctrine grew out of the California gold rush. There was a need due to limited water availability for gold miners to establish some system of water use and mining claims. This was the origin of the “first come, first served” concept of water rights. California which became a state in 1850 adopted the “Doctrine of Prior Appropriation” which allowed the diversion of water from a waterway for use on non-riparian lands. Once a claim is made under the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation it was subjected to “use it or lose it” annual stipulations.</p><p>In 1963, the United States Supreme Court made explicit the amount “reserved” for the Indian nations, apportioned among lower-basin states and for federal public lands. The decision cleared the way for funding the Central Arizona Project which transferred water to Tucson and Phoenix [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref2">2</xref>]. The project included a mountain tunnel which transferred water from the south end of Lake Havasu that passed through and then was pumped up and into an aqueduct that flows to both cities.</p><p>The Colorado River often runs dry (Figures 26-31) before any river water reaches the Gulf of California. Intensive consumption, mostly in United States, has dried up the lower 160 km of the river and, since the 1960s, the river flow</p><p>has rarely reached the Gulf of California. The Colorado River Delta is drought prone and its headwater tributaries remain a vital source of water for 40 million people. The states of Arizona and California have attempted to restore the vegetative cover by planting trees and shrubs in the Colorado River valley (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig32">Figure 32</xref>) and (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig33">Figure 33</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s2_6"><title>2.6. The Establishment of the U.S.-Mexico Western Border and Immigration Policy</title><p>The modern border took shape following the American-Mexican War. While the Rio Grande formed the dividing line between Mexico and Texas, the border originally moved from El Paso west on a straight line to the Gila River, across</p><p>the Colorado River and then on another straight line south of San Diego to the Pacific Ocean. Following the Gadsden Purchase of 1854, the borders of New Mexico and Arizona moved further south from the Gila River.</p><p>A team of soldiers, surveyors and officials from both countries staked out the border from Tijuana to El Paso. According to St. John [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref15">15</xref>], an associate professor of history at UC Davis and author of “Line in the Sand: A History of the Western U.S.-Mexico Border”. The joint boundary commission underestimated the time and cost it would take to complete the project through such an inhospitable terrain of canyons, mountains and desert. Not until the late 1850s did the boundary commission complete its work. There were no federal limits on</p><p>immigration in the decades following the American-Mexican War as citizens from both countries passed freely across the border. After the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, it was Chinese immigrants, not Mexican immigrants that American vigilante groups and authorities first sought to keep from illegally crossing its southern border. “One of the ways that immigrants from China would try to get across the border is to learn a few words of Spanish and disguise themselves as Mexican” [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref15">15</xref>].</p><p>In the 1910s restrictions on the movement of Mexican citizens were not actually enforced by the U.S. government until the decade of the Mexican Revolution when large numbers of refugees came to escape the war and there was a large demand for “Mexican labor” [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref11">11</xref>]. The United States deployed soldiers to patrol the boundary along with the Texas Rangers and government-sanctioned “home guards” to tightened border security. Following Mexican revolutionary Pancho Villa’s deadly raid on Columbus, New Mexico, in 1916 and the subsequent publication of the Zimmerman Telegram proposing a World War I military alliance between Mexico and Germany the U.S. immigration restrictions were enforced.</p><p>According to St. John [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref15">15</xref>], in 1909 the U.S. Bureau of Animal Industry erected the first fence along the frontier to stop the trans-border movement of cattle. During the 1910s border towns erected fences, not as a physical barrier to entry, but to denote the boundary line and channel people into designated crossing points. The United States began the installation of border fences to restrict the movement of unlawful drugs and immigrants in 1993 when President Clinton mandated the construction of a 22-km barrier between Tijuana and San Diego. The Secure Fence Act of 2006 authorized the construction of 1900 km of vehicle barriers and border fencing which was completed in 2011.</p><p>The border between Mexico and the United States is nearly 3200 km from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean and borders California, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas. Most of the 1900 km of chain link, barbed wire, post-and-rail and wire mesh fencing has been erected along the 2060 km west of El Paso [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref16">16</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref17">17</xref>] but United States plans after 2018 were to expand the fence and wall building effort along the Rio Grande. United States political leadership change in early 2020 had resulted in the wall construction being stopped.</p></sec><sec id="s2_7"><title>2.7. Mexico-United States Border Wall</title><p>The 2000-mile border (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig34">Figure 34</xref>) goes from an arid climate at Tijuana to a tropical climate at Brownsville. Soil tunnels (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig35">Figure 35</xref>) could be constructed in an arid climate (Entisols and Aridisols) with a low permanent water table [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref4">4</xref>]. The unconsolidated material and soils (Entisols and Aridisols) are deep and have a low water table. While in the tropical climate with soils (Entisols and Mollisols) to the east have a high water table along the eastern Rio Grande with potential flooding restricted earthen tunnel construction along the eastern half of the border. In the western half of the border area conditions are better for tunnel construction (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig36">Figure 36</xref>).</p><p>Since 1990, over 170 incomplete border tunnels, between Tijuana, Mexico (Pacific Ocean) and El Paso, United States and (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig37">Figure 37</xref>) have been found. In 2006, the U.S. Border task force found a 730 m tunnel connecting a San Diego warehouse to Tijuana airport. It was up to 27 m deep and 1.5 m high. The walls and floor were cement and clay with lighting and ventilation systems. A drainage system removed the seeping groundwater. Additional significant tunnels were found in 2010, 2012 and 2014 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref4">4</xref>].</p><p>One of the longest drugs-smuggling cross-border tunnels [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref4">4</xref>] between the US and Mexico was discovered in 2016 by authorities in San Diego. The 800 m long soil tunnel was used to transport an “unprecedented cache” of marijuana and cocaine (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig37">Figure 37</xref>). It was the 13<sup>th</sup> sophisticated secret tunnel found along California’s border with Mexico since 2006. In the latest incident, about 6350 kg of marijuana and 1016 kg of cocaine suspected of being transported through the</p><p>tunnel was seized. This is the largest tunnel cocaine seizure. The tunnel ran from a house in California to a restaurant in Mexico. This tunnel ran at a depth of 14 m from a hole in the ground on the American side enclosed within a fenced-in lot set up as a pallet business to the bottom of an elevator shaft built into a house in Tijuana. The hole was hidden under a trailer-sized rubbish bin that smugglers used to move the drugs. The tunnel used in the operation was sophisticated with cemented ceilings and walls and a lighting and ventilation system. On the Tijuana side (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig37">Figure 37</xref>), the tunnel was connected to an elevator that ascended into a house. Seeping drainage water, not part of a permanent water table, was periodically removed from the tunnels.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Summary and Conclusions</title><p>Historic Native American and modern civilizations have been forcing the unstable use of the Colorado River and adjacent land resources for centuries. Much can be learned from past Native American cultures such as the Hohokam in the Colorado River watershed which can be applied to our modern civilization. Over time, soil management difficulties increased. Soils became waterlogged as a result of a lack of drainage under the irrigation systems. Sediment filled the Hohokam canals and salts accumulated in the fields reducing the soil productivity and crop yields. The adobe walls of the villages were unstable as a result of salt erosion. Salt weathering of the adobe walls resulted in their crumbling and eventual collapse and the irrigated fields were largely abandoned. Many of the modern canals overlapped or paralleled the ancient Hohokam canals. Soil salinity and erosion problems remained a threat to the stability of the modern irrigation systems. Modern technology has enabled better crop production through improved water management and effective soil drainage under the irrigation systems to remove salt from the soil profiles. The Yuma tribes farmed and hunted the floodplain of the Colorado River. The river, with an irregular flow could not be used for canal irrigation. The agricultural and urban needs in the United States are continuing to grow and it appears the days of Colorado River flowing into Mexico and the Gulf of California are numbered after declining for decades. The Colorado River is disappearing and restoration efforts appear to be too little too late. If the Colorado River valley is ever going to recover, previous lessons learned from the Native Americans, including the Hohokam, must be applied. A balanced approach to water management is needed and must include aggressive conservation and efficiency measures such as creating irrigation systems with underlying drainage systems to prevent the capillary rise of salty water to the soil surface.</p><p>If the Colorado River Valley is ever going to recover the management successes and failures learned from the Native Americans, including the Hohokam, must be applied. We could learn a lot from their previous behavior and experiences and should apply the lessons learned to the disappearing Colorado River which often runs dry. The Colorado River flow has rarely reached the Gulf of California in the last few decades. Colorado River that discharges into the Gulf of California in Mexico is over-apportioned and the river is often only a trickle at best and at times it is totally dry [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.113355-ref17">17</xref>]. Most often all the water was used by ranchers, urban dwellers and farmers. The Mexico-United States boundary includes 1600 km of the Rio Grande and 1600 km of upland between El Paso and Tijuana with the Colorado River flowing across the border and through Mexico to the Gulf of California. However, in most years, the Colorado River runs dry and disappears. The United States’ decision to lengthen and strengthen the existing border wall has re-ignited tensions between Mexico and the United States as the United States, attempted to reduce the flow of illegal immigrants, primarily from Central and South America. In 2021 the construction of the border wall has been frozen by the new Federal administration in place which has actually temporarily resulted in a reduced need by Mexico citizens and others to create and use soil tunnels under the border walls to gain illegal immigrant entry into the United States.</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>Published with funding (Hatch Project 875-979) and support from USDA, NIFA, Water Division and the Director of the Illinois Office of Research, College of Agricultural, Consumer, and Environmental Science, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois. This article is dedicated to the memory of Dr. Gerry Olson, a soil scientist and agronomist at Cornell University, who introduced the 1<sup>st</sup> co-author to the irrigation practices of the Hohokam Indians who lived on the Gila, Salt and Colorado rivers.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Olson, K.R. and Lang, J.M. (2021) The Disappearing Colorado River: Historic and Modern Attempts to Manage the Lifeline of the United States Southwest. Open Journal of Soil Science, 11, 538-566. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojss.2021.1111027</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.113355-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Benke, A.C. and Cushing, C.E. (2005) Rivers of North America. Academic Press, Cambridge.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Diaz, H.F. and Anderson, C.A. (2003) Precipitation Trends and Water Consumption in the Southwestern United States. In Impact of Climate Change and Land Use in the Southwestern United States. US Geological Survey.  
https://geochange.er.usgs.gov/sw/changes/natural/diaz</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gelt, J. (1997) Sharing Colorado River Water: History, Public Policy and Colorado River. Compact. Water Resource Center, University of Arizona.  
https://learn.genetics.%20utah.edu/content/earth.waterallocation</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Olson, K.R. and Speidel, D.R. (2020) Review and Analysis Successful Use of Soil Tunnels in Medieval and Modern Warfare and Smuggling. Open Journal of Soil Science, 10, 194-215. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojss.2020.105010</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Clausen, E. (2021) Yampa River-Colorado River Drainage Divide Origin Determined from Topographic Map Evidence, Southern Routt County, Colorado, USA. Open Journal of Geology, 11, 319-339. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojg.2021.118017</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Olson, G.W. (1981) Soils and the Environment. A Guide to Soil Surveys and Their Applications. Chapman and Hall, Boca Raton, Florida.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Overstreet, R.M. (2015) Indian Arrowheads Identification and Price Guide. 14th Edition, Overstreet Arrowheads, LLC.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Reber, R.J., Bowes, S.L., Emerson, T.E., Evans, M.G., Loebel, T.J., McElrath, D.L. and Nolan, D.J. (2017) Projectile Points and the Illinois Landscape: People, Time, and Place. University of Illinois, Illinois State Archaeological Survey. Studies in Archaeology, Number 11.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Singer, S.F. and Avery, D.T. (2007) Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years. Rowman &amp; Littlefield Publishers, Lanham, 46-55.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Potter, L.A. and Schamel, W. (1997) The Homestead Act of 1862. Social Education, 61, 359-364.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">D’Esposito, M. (1997) Testimony before Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, April 28, 1998. Part of Public Domain Record.  
https://congress.gov/hill/105th-congress/senate-bill/1102/text</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gupta, S.K. (2010) Modern Hydrology and Sustainable Water Development. John Wiley &amp; Sons, Hoboken. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444323962</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Legal, U.S. (2021) Prior Appropriation Doctrine Land and Legal Definition [Wyoming vs. Colorado 259. U.S. 419 (U.S. 1922)].  
https://definitions.uslegal.com/p/[rior-appropriation-doctrine</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Cornell Law School (2021). Riparian Doctrine. Legal Information Institute.  
https://law.cornell.edu/wex/riparian_doctrine</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">St. John, R. (2011) Line in the Sand. A History of the Western U.S-Mexico Border. Princeton University Press, Princeton.  
https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691141541.001.0001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Lichtenwald, T.G. and Perri, F.S. (2013) Terrorist Use of Smuggling Tunnels. International Journal of Criminology and Sociology, 2, 210-225.  
https://doi.org/10.6000/1929-4409.2013.02.21</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.113355-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Waterman, J. (2012) Where the Colorado Runs Dry. The New York Times.  
https://nytimes.com/2012/02/15/opinion/where-the-colorado-river-runs-dry.html</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>