Click the link to read Nevada’s only statewide non-profit newsroom article. Nevada Independent website (Daniel Rothberg):
early this week [April 11, 2023]the Federal Water Authority draft Long-awaited outlining potential large-scale short-term cuts to stabilize the Colorado River, which is shrinking due to overuse and drought, unless the seven watershed-dependent states come up with alternatives. in the documents of
The last part is important.
Officials said they hoped states would reach an agreement on what the painful cuts would look like, as any action taken by the federal government would face the risk of litigation.
Speaking in front of Lake Mead, with its prominent bathtub ring, is one of the most obvious examples of water scarcity on the Colorado River. and the solution. “
The document is “intended to move these conversations and negotiations forward,” he said.
The announcement served as a step in an ongoing environmental impact study led by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to analyze the amount of reductions needed to stabilize the Colorado River reservoir.
The Colorado River and its tributaries form a basin that spans a vast geography that includes seven US states, 30 Native American tribes, and Mexico. The river supports millions of acres of farmland, countless ecosystems, aquatic life, recreation, and many of the western metropolises such as Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, and Denver.
Southern Nevada receives approximately 90% of its water directly from the Colorado River. All states below Lake Mead (Arizona, California, Nevada), which make up the Lower Colorado River Basin, face the potential for large-scale deforestation. In recent years, the Southern Nevada Water Authority has taken aggressive steps to offset future reductions, decorative water gazzle turf and Limit the size of residential pools.
Water officials are still conducting a detailed analysis of the nearly 500-page draft document, said agency spokesman Bronson Mack.
On Friday, water service chief John Entsminger met with his counterparts in Arizona and California. In a statement, he called the draft “the next step in the process of finding viable solutions to protect water supplies for 40 million Americans and economic activity of more than $1 trillion.” .
The document released Tuesday is a draft of what is known as a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, or SEIS. This amends the current set of guidelines governing shortages in rivers.
As the Western United States has experienced the worst drought in 1,200 years, Existing water scarcity guidelines, which were finalized in 2007, have proven inadequate to prevent water levels in Lake Mead, the river’s largest reservoir, from falling too low and threatening distribution to the west. rice field.
Federal water authorities launched the SEIS process last year. Seven states tried to reach agreement but failed on how painful logging to the Colorado River should be apportioned within the framework of the law; river lawThis would give California a preference for its share of the Colorado River over a 336-mile canal called the Central Arizona Project, a major branch of Arizona.
Finally, by January 6 out of 7 states reached consensus However, California, the river’s largest user and a key player making significant cuts, is absent.
of SEIS Draft outlines three possible approaches for the federal government.
- Do-nothing approach: Federal operations would implement existing operating agreements for the Colorado River Reservoir, which would result in either or both of the primary reservoirs, Lake Mead and Powell, declining very low and becoming dry. If the situation continues, it may become practically inoperable in the future.
- Relying on water rights system: Follow what is known as the Priority System outlined in the Law of the River, which summarizes the many treaties, settlements, orders, and treaty documents related to the Colorado River. In general, this system often gives preference to those with the eldest or “senior” rights, such as agricultural districts and tribal states. this is, advocated by California.
- Evenly distribute additional cuts: Another action option outlined by federal water managers is to build on existing agreements that reflect priorities and apply reductions proportionally by allocating up to 15.6% across-the-board reductions. I am asking you to The reduction in this scenario is Align more closely Outlined in the six-state plan, it opposes Arizona-backed cuts and imposes a greater reduction burden on California.
However, federal officials have made it clear that the draft is not final. Notably, federal officials did not endorse the preferred option, instead framing action as a “tool” they could implement.
“It was interesting that they didn’t do what they were trying to do. [preferred] John Fleck, a professor at the University of New Mexico who focuses on the Colorado River and water governance, said: “They simply provided a federal lite version of the six state proposals and the California proposal, and offered a positive ‘power of cooperation’ argument. “
At a press conference on Tuesday, negotiators from California and Arizona indicated they were willing to reach a deal and avoid either option.
Is there a trade-off between the two bookend scenarios?
JB Humby, chairman of the California Colorado River Commission and commissioner of the Imperial Irrigation District, which holds the single largest claim to the Colorado River, said: [document] No need to use. ”
The best way to get there is “continuous work through a collaborative process,” he said. He said the ideal situation would be to formulate a seven-state consensus in the coming months, if not weeks.
At a news conference Tuesday, Tom Buschatzke, who heads the Arizona Department of Water Resources, also noted that officials in Arizona, California and Nevada are discussing the way forward, and the state’s negotiated agreement. repeated that it is necessary to tie
Buschatzke said the goal is to avoid lawsuits.
“So we have to avoid that outcome,” said Bussacke, who said it could take decades to settle any lawsuit, requiring negotiators to reach a major agreement on the cuts. Argued that there is no time. “If there is a lawsuit, it will be very difficult to negotiate moving forward.”
Setting up bookend alternatives could give states the boundaries to negotiate a forward path that balances priority systems and equity, water experts say.
“What they are trying to do is set up a worst-case scenario for California by showing what authorities can do if they deviate from their strict enforcement of priority,” he said, focusing on water policy. Hit and negotiate the cut.
Each state has internal dynamics to organize
Much of the rhetoric about the Colorado River negotiations focuses on the long-standing tensions between California and Arizona’s share of the river’s water.
While California has priority over the water that flows through the Central Arizona project (the water that feeds cities, tribal nations, agricultural districts, and industrial users), each state has internal control that influences what happens next. There is a dynamics of
How the priorities look in and among the three states is very complicated.
For example, while California is often considered an advanced user of rivers, the Metropolitan Water District, a major municipal water provider in Southern California, is given a lower priority compared to other water users, with either You have the right to be blocked. Alternative proposal.
and statementthe general manager of the Water Agency said neither option was ideal.
“Both include significant supply cuts that hurt our partners across the metropolitan and the basin,” said general manager Adelhage Khalil. “There are better ways to manage the river.”
Arizona also faces complex internal dynamics when it comes to what priority cuts might look like in practice. Although Arizona favors an equitable approach and is often seen as a junior to California, some Arizona water users have priority water rights to the Colorado River. At a press conference on Tuesday, Buschatzke said several Arizona water users, including Indian tribes on the Colorado River and farmers in the Yuma area, wrote letters urging authorities to respect the priority system. I was.
Last week, federal water authorities began a 45-day comment period on SEIS as negotiations continue. The final version of the document will be released after the comment period ends.
“Optimistically, the next 45 days look like we’re hitting the middle ground between preferred and equity-based approaches,” said Rhett Larson, a law professor at Arizona State University. It will require an amount of give and take.”
Looking for long term contract
Two options being considered by federal officials are part of a larger dialogue on long-term management of the river. The drilling aims to stabilize the Colorado River reservoir through 2026.
The 2007 guidelines for operating the river are set to expire in 2026, forcing authorities to renegotiate a new set of rules over the next few years.
Since last year, drought conditions in the Colorado River Basin have improved, with major storms causing much higher than average snow cover, the primary source of the Colorado River.
Reservoirs may begin to recover from record lows when the snow melts this summer. But his year of low runoff beyond 2023 could quickly return the river to dire straits, especially given the existing deficit. Additionally, many water experts believe that significant reductions are still needed to allow watersheds to rebuild reservoir storage rather than continue to overuse water.
“The hydrology has been amazing this year, and I think it’s up to us to make sure it’s not wasted,” said Esteban Lopez, New Mexico’s Colorado River negotiator. We now have an opportunity to rebuild the supply that has been loaned to the system.
Even after a year of snow cover, the Colorado River faces significant challenges. There are more rights to use water than rights to water. In addition to these structural problems and continued overuse, climate change and rising temperatures are making the region drier, reducing runoff in recent decades and reducing water supply concerns. Uncertainty is growing.
Negotiators have focused on long-term river management and renegotiating the 2007 rules, thus excluding tribal governments and giving little consideration to river ecosystems damaged by abuse. We must also address the inequities embedded in the underlying documents of
At a news conference Tuesday, Rosa Long, vice chairman of the Cocopa Indian Tribe, said: ten tribe partnershipurged all states to focus on protective measures.
“Finally, let us commit to continuing our cooperation and working together in a spirit of mutual respect and understanding,” Long said in remarks Tuesday. We can ensure that it will remain an important and prosperous resource for many years to come.”
