CLAIM UNDER REVIEW
Reclamation’s lists include both Priority 1 and Priority 4 Cocopah entries.
Reclamation’s lists include both Priority 1 and Priority 4 Cocopah entries.
Assessment
The cited evidence establishes the claim as stated.
This is an editorial assessment of the cited evidence, not a finding by a court or public authority.
Evidence summary
Retained files reconcile text and rendering: Priority 1 pages 1–2 list 7,681 and 1,140 acre-feet diversion in separate entries; Priority 4 page 4 lists 2,026 acre-feet diversion and cross-references both PPRs. The Priority 4 file is labeled December 2025.
What the evidence establishes
Retained files reconcile text and rendering: Priority 1 pages 1–2 list 7,681 and 1,140 acre-feet diversion in separate entries; Priority 4 page 4 lists 2,026 acre-feet diversion and cross-references both PPRs. The Priority 4 file is labeled December 2025.
What it does not establish
A complete current tribal rights inventory, current use, or an automatic 10% reduction. CAP Indian Priority is not a Cocopah-specific allocation.
What remains unknown
Final on-river Priority 4 treatment and any additional holdings or later amendments.
Supporting sources 2
- Primary source · Government recordReclamation, Arizona Priority 1 list
Retained September 22, 2026; heading September 2025. Pages 1–3 visually checked against text from the same file. The entitlement list distinguishes diversion quantities from consumptive-use quantities and includes limiting PPR footnotes. Those quantities should not be combined as though they measure the same thing. Not a certification against all later amendments.
- Primary source · Government recordReclamation, Arizona Priority 4 list
Retained September 22, 2026; heading December 2025. Text and rendered pages agree: Somerton 750 AF diversion on page 3; Cocopah 2,026 AF diversion on page 4, with PPR cross-references. The retained official PDF was checked visually against its extracted text for these entries. Later amendments remain outside the scope of this snapshot.
Contradicting sources
No published contradicting sources are attached. This does not establish that none exist.
Sources 2
- Primary source · Government recordReclamation, Arizona Priority 1 list
Retained September 22, 2026; heading September 2025. Pages 1–3 visually checked against text from the same file. The entitlement list distinguishes diversion quantities from consumptive-use quantities and includes limiting PPR footnotes. Those quantities should not be combined as though they measure the same thing. Not a certification against all later amendments.
- Primary source · Government recordReclamation, Arizona Priority 4 list
Retained September 22, 2026; heading December 2025. Text and rendered pages agree: Somerton 750 AF diversion on page 3; Cocopah 2,026 AF diversion on page 4, with PPR cross-references. The retained official PDF was checked visually against its extracted text for these entries. Later amendments remain outside the scope of this snapshot.
Related articles 1
- ExplainerArizona Is Losing Colorado River Water. Is Yuma?
Arizona’s conditional 760,000-acre-foot share does not establish a uniform 27% cut to Yuma. Here is what the official records say about local priorities, planning and the decisions still unresolved.
Organizations 1
- Cocopah Indian Tribe
Tribal government associated with the Cocopah reservation and United States/Cocopah entries in Reclamation’s entitlement lists. These entries are not a complete inventory of all tribal water holdings.
Related topics 1
- Colorado River Water & Yuma
What federal Colorado River reductions mean for Yuma-area water holders, with evidence on priorities, planning, conservation and unresolved delivery decisions.