Colorado River negotiators express urgency, uncertainty as deadline nears
Lead negotiators from the Colorado River's Upper Basin states expressed a dual sense of uncertainty and urgency on Tuesday, as a deadline to determine the fate of the entire system looms near.
'If you are in the Upper Basin states or probably anywhere across the West, you know it's not looking so good right now,' said Becky Mitchell, director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board.
Mitchell was addressing a meeting of the Upper Colorado River Commission, which also included federal Bureau of Reclamation representatives and the lead negotiators for the other Upper Basin states: Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico.
The commissioners convened to discuss basin-wide hydrology and share updates on longer-term Colorado River negotiations, which have been occurring for more than a year with Lower Basin counterparts: Arizona, Nevada and California.
The talks concern a long-anticipated update of the Colorado River's operational guidelines, which are set to expire at the end of 2026. These 2007 interim rules govern conservation policies for the 1,450-mile river, which provides water to about 40 million people in the U.S. and Mexico.
With the Upper and Lower basins still far from reaching any collaborative arrangement, the Biden administration in late November tried to propel the process forward — releasing a bullet-point list of five potential alternatives for the watershed's long-term management.
Just days before President Trump's inauguration, former President Biden's team released a detailed version of the alternatives, placing the Bureau of Reclamation on a path to issue a draft environmental impact statement — a key step in the federal environmental process — by this summer.
Chuck Cullom, executive director of the Upper Colorado River Commission, confirmed at the Tuesday meeting that this initial framework would need to be in place 'by early summer of 2025' in order to trigger the development of state-level implementation plans.
'Those are the types of agreements between states, and the basin states as a whole, that would be part of the foundation for whatever those post-2026 operations might be,' Cullom said, noting that some of those plans might require the passage of legislation.
The Bureau of Reclamation had initially given the states an early March 2024 deadline to submit a consensus-backed alternative for updated guidelines for the river's management. But two days after that deadline, the basins ended up publishing competing proposals.
The Lower Basin states presented a proposal that incorporated reductions for themselves but also called for cuts across the entire watershed — calculating storage capacity not just on the massive Lake Powell and Lake Mead, but also on five smaller reservoirs, including three in the Upper Basin.
The Upper Basin states, meanwhile, issued plans that they said would consider real-time hydrological conditions in an area dependent on mountain snowpack for its water supply.
Having received no unified vision among all seven states, Biden's Bureau of Reclamation proposed a range of management solutions, none of which precisely match either basin's proposal.
Most of the federal alternatives presented, however, require some level of consensus agreement, Cullom noted at the Tuesday meeting.
'A consensus is the best option out there for everyone, and I'm hopeful that we'll get there,' Mitchell said. 'That is the highest level of certainty that we will have as seven basin states.'
Mitchell stressed the importance of the states determining their own future, adding that all parties must 'acknowledge that cuts are probable, possible and likely.'
'We need to do that for certainty, and everyone needs to do that,' she said. 'We are committed to work with the Lower Basin states toward that seven-state consensus.'
Her Upper Basin colleagues offered similar perspectives, with Estevan Lopez of New Mexico and Brandon Gebhart of Wyoming both expressing their commitment to such collaboration.
'We are meeting with all of the states,' added Gene Shawcroft, Utah's commissioner. 'Discussions have been frank and fruitful.'
Shawcroft expressed optimism 'that there is a box that we can work within that will allow us to come to a seven-state consensus,
'But certainly, there's a lot of work yet to do,' he added.
As for the Colorado River's hydrological conditions, Alex Pivarnik of the Bureau of Reclamation told the commissioners that Lake Powell — the main reservoir for the Upper Basin — is only 35 percent full, while Upper Colorado River system storage is sitting at 43 percent capacity and total system storage in both basins is at 42 percent.
'January was a really bad month for us in the basin,' Pivarnik said, noting that conditions were 'pretty much dry' across all the states.
Pivarnik described the initial weeks of February as 'kind of a make or break for us,' recognizing that precipitation has since increased substantially.
Mitchell echoed these sentiments, acknowledging that water officials have 'been slightly optimistic because of the snow.'
'But it still does not look as good as we'd like,' she said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Trump's immigration restrictions are pushing Corporate America into remote work faster
It is a fascinating and contradictory scenario: a president championing a full-scale return to the traditional office while simultaneously enacting policies that restrict new immigrants and deport existing ones. This apparent contradiction — a drive for centralized workplaces alongside a potential restriction on talent flow — might not yield the expected results. Instead, these combined pressures could dramatically accelerate the adoption of remote work, fundamentally reshaping our understanding of where and how vital work gets done. This isn't mere speculation — it's a trend with precedent. Harvard's Prithwiraj Choudhury documented how losing H-1B peers after 2017 denials reshaped team performance and nudged firms toward fully distributed structures. His broader research in his new book, 'The World Is Your Office: How Work from Anywhere Boosts Talent, Productivity, and Innovation,' showed that even during the Biden administration, existing immigration restrictions prompted companies to more readily embrace remote work. Moreover, he also shows that work-from-anywhere boosts productivity and widens talent pools, making geographic flexibility a durable competitive edge. At the heart of every dynamic economy lies its talent pool — the skilled individuals who drive innovation, solve complex problems and fuel growth. Companies are in a perpetual quest for this expertise. When national policies create significant hurdles to recruiting talent from abroad, businesses do not simply resign themselves to a diminished workforce. They innovate their hiring strategies. An anti-immigration stance, therefore, becomes an unintended catalyst, pushing companies to aggressively explore and expand remote work as a primary means to access the global reservoir of skills. This strategic pivot allows them to transcend geographical limitations and tap into a broader spectrum of expertise, a necessity when local talent pools are strained. Take the technology sector, for example, an industry renowned for its reliance on a global workforce to maintain its cutting edge. Immigrants have long been pivotal to American innovation; a 2023 report from the National Foundation for American Policy highlighted that immigrants founded over half of America's billion-dollar startup companies. If new immigration restrictions were to make it substantially harder to bring these vital minds to the U.S., tech companies would face an intensified scramble for essential skills. Faced with a potential constriction of the domestic talent pipeline for highly specialized roles, these firms will inevitably look outward — not by navigating complex visa processes for every hire, but by seamlessly integrating talent virtually. The imperative to innovate and lead will compel businesses to strengthen their remote infrastructures, turning a talent challenge into a distributed work opportunity. Consider how former President Biden inherited Donald Trump's June 2020 visa freeze and let it run until March 31 2021, extending a ban on issuing new H-1B, H-2B, J-1 and L-1 visas and leaving thousands of recruits abroad. Human-resources teams refused to lose that brainpower. Envoy Global's 2023 Immigration Trends survey reports that '81 percent of U.S. employers transferred foreign employees to offices overseas because visa barriers blocked on-shore options' and '86 percent outsourced roles originally meant for American desks for the same reason.' When one engineer keeps writing clean code from São Paulo, suddenly the whole team asks why relocation ever mattered. Other data confirm the shift. Revelio Labs analyzed millions of LinkedIn profiles and payroll records and found that 'highly remote-suitable roles have grown 42 percent faster outside the United States than inside it since 2019.' Software engineering, data analysis and legal research now migrate through cables rather than airports. Employers tap deeper candidate pools, pay lower salaries, and still gain round-the-clock productivity as teams baton-pass work across hemispheres. Rising immigration costs push the flywheel harder. Envoy's recent survey shows that '58 percent of companies plan to hire, transfer, or relocate foreign talent abroad this year' to dodge climbing filing fees and processing delays. Finance chiefs cheer because employer-of-record subscriptions undercut relocation stipends, while human resources heads welcome a talent pool unbound by ZIP codes. Employees benefit, too — remote veterans keep family roots, skip uprooted spouses, and pocket metropolitan housing savings. Cost arithmetic, cultural continuity and innovation gains reinforce one another. A dispersed marketing squad can test Spanish-language campaigns overnight in Bogotá, roll out Mandarin versions at dawn from Taipei, and ship a polished English release before New York's lunch. What began as a compliance workaround has become a competitive edge. Consulting firm INS-Global already advises multinationals to 'capitalize on sustained interest in remote work in the U.S.,' precisely because the federal sector is heading back into the cubicles. History rhymes: restricting visas without expanding domestic talent supply drives companies to distribute work virtually. Investors grasp the leverage. Each thousand dollars denied to moving costs drops straight to the bottom line. Client win-rates jump because geographically diverse teams localize products faster. Lobbyists still fight for higher visa quotas, yet chief financial officers quietly model scenarios around a fully remote future. The harder Washington squeezes physical entry, the wider corporate America swings open its digital door. Gleb Tsipursky, PhD, serves as the CEO of the hybrid work consultancy Disaster Avoidance Experts and authored the best-seller'Returning to the Office and Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams.'
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump asks appeals court to keep tariffs in place or risk 'irreparable economic and national security harms'
The Trump administration on Monday argued to an appeals court that a lower court's invalidation of the president's "Liberation Day" tariffs was "illegal" and that that reimposing a halt to those duties would risk "irreparable economic and national security harms." The administration made these statements in a document filed Monday with the US Federal Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., saying the court should keep Trump's tariffs in place while considering the president's wider legal arguments about his trade policies. The president is seeking a new legal victory after a three-judge panel at the US Court of International Trade (CIT) said in May that he lacked authority to impose his "Liberation Day" duties under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA). That decision was temporarily put on hold by the appeals court, pending further arguments. The appeals court could issue a decision at any time either keeping the tariffs in place or putting them back on hold, pending the outcome of the administration's appeal. The argument made in favor of keeping them in place is that reimposing the CIT's injunction that invalidated the tariffs would risk "irreparable economic and national security harms," according to the court document filed Monday. "The injunction unilaterally diminishes America's bargaining position during sensitive trade negotiations, encouraging other countries to hold our nation hostage," the administration said. The CIT's decision, it said, usurped political choices, putting the judiciary in a central role in managing foreign negotiations, the national economy, and national security. In addition, the administration said, it would likely prevail over the lower court's ruling on appeal because the lower court misapplied the text of the IEEPA. That court's interpretation of the law would "unnaturally cabin" the president's tariff authority, the administration said. The CIT ruled that the president lacked power under IEEPA to impose the duties, saying "any interpretation" of IEEPA "that delegates unlimited tariff authority is unconstitutional." The ruling touched on key issues in the underlying case that will likely determine the ultimate fate of the administration's tariffs. In its decision striking down many of Trump's tariffs it avoided directly applying the 'major questions doctrine,' which limits the authority of federal agencies to take action on issues of "vast economic and political significance" except where Congress has explicitly authorized the action. In 2022, the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 ruling dominated by the court's conservative majority, used the major questions doctrine to find that Biden's EPA lacked clear congressional authorization to regulate certain greenhouse gas emissions. A year later, the court held that Biden's secretary of education lacked clear authority under the HEROES Act to forgive $400 billion in student loan debt. Like the EPA case, the court said Biden's debt relief regulation was so major that it would need explicit authorization from Congress. Alexis Keenan is a legal reporter for Yahoo Finance. Follow Alexis on X @alexiskweed. Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest stock market news and events moving stock prices Sign in to access your portfolio
New York Post
4 hours ago
- New York Post
RFK Jr. ousts every member of CDC vaccine advisory committee
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has sensationally ousted every member of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the Biden-appointed group that made recommendations on the necessity and use of vaccines, in the first of a series of sweeping changes. The decision to remove all 17 members of the scientific committee, which advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and replace them with his own picks, was described as 'a clean sweep' by President Trump's Health Secretary in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece published Monday. President Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speak at a MAHA event on May 22, 2025. Francis Chung – Pool Via Cnp/CNP via ZUMA / Advertisement 'Without removing the current members, the current Trump administration would not have been able to appoint a majority of new members until 2028,' RFK Jr. wrote. 'A clean sweep is needed to re-establish public confidence in vaccine science.' Kennedy Jr., one of the leading anti-vaccine activists in the US, did not say who he would appoint to the panel, but said the committee would meet in Atlanta in two weeks time. The move has been slammed by a number of major physicians and public health groups.
