Latest news with #UpperColoradoRiverCommission
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
A deal in sight? Colorado River talks are moving again, officials say
BOULDER, CO — Metaphors about divorce and grief defined an emotional presentation about the Colorado River in Boulder, Colorado, on June 6. Those metaphors, however, did not represent strife or disaster in stalled water negotiations, but apparent progress and the willingness to let go of past ideas and move toward compromise. "We've heard about the stages of grief ... about denial and anger and the need to be at bargaining," said Chuck Cullom, executive director of the Upper Colorado River Commission. "Well, I believe the basin states are there." Officials involved in tense negotiations over how to manage shortages on the Colorado River suggested that months of harsh talk and stalemates have ended and negotiators are exploring new options. Federal officials indicated that even parts of the "Law of the River," a 100-year-old legal framework that governs Colorado River allocations, could change as a result of the negotiations. 'We're trying to pivot to something else and be creative, and we have good engagement on that right now," said Colby Pellegrino, deputy general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority. While most of the negotiators from the seven Colorado River basin states did not attend the conference at the University of Colorado in Boulder, the speakers who did attend were cautiously optimistic about their chances at making a deal. The states have been wrangling for two years over how to distribute water cuts as reservoir levels and stream flows have plummeted in the river. Existing operation guidelines for the river expire in 2026, and the federal government will impose its own regime of water cuts unless states can reach a deal. Now, officials are signaling that progress has resumed toward a deal. Alternative urged: How will Arizona deal with Colorado River shortages? Cities need a 'Plan B,' expert says The Colorado River is a critical source of water for Arizona, providing 36% of the state's water, according to the Arizona Department of Water Resources. Populous counties in central and southern Arizona — Maricopa, Pinal and Pima — are the most vulnerable when it comes to water cuts as their water rights have lower priority. Negotiators from the upper and lower basins of the Colorado River have blown through several informal deadlines to reach a deal, sniping at one another in public remarks and propping up their own proposals for shortage management. The debate often centered on whether upper basin states (Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming) should take any administered water cuts, as lower basin states like Arizona have already taken cuts. Now, the basin states have begun the process of 'letting go,' Pellegrino said, backing away from some of the ideas they clung to at the beginning of the process and imagining new compromises. The states, along with federal officials, have met every other week since the end of March, according to Scott Cameron, acting assistant secretary for water and science at the Department of the Interior. Cameron said the Trump administration is looking to rework and expand the alternatives for river management that the Biden administration put forward in January. Cameron said Trump officials like Interior Secretary Doug Burgum are seeking to engage intensely and support Colorado River basin states in reaching a deal. Although the administration has fired large numbers of federal employees working in water modeling, Cameron said he was working to shield this process from those cuts, and state representatives have said they are receiving strong services from federal agencies. California's representative on the river, J.B. Hamby, said in an interview on June 5 that renewed support from federal officials has helped jump-start negotiations. 'For the longest time, states weren't meeting all that often, or were certainly not inviting the feds into the room," Hamby said. "Now that the Trump administration officials are actively engaged in our discussions, I think everyone who supports the basin-state process has seen that as a material benefit.' Cameron said he has also met with several of the 30 tribes in the Colorado River basin to learn about their unique and differing positions and incorporate their views into official negotiations. Less water: Worsening climate outlooks raise the stakes for an agreement on the Colorado River The Colorado River is expected to carry about half of the water it should, according to the Colorado Basin River Forecast Center, pushing states dangerously close to trip wires for legal action under contracts that govern the river. Scientists expect climate change to bring more erratic flows to the river in the long term, with an overall decline in water levels. Brian Richter, scientist and president of the nonprofit Sustainable Waters, presented preliminary estimates on June 5 that potentially a quarter of human water use in the Colorado River basin over the last decade has been unsustainable, meaning it is drawing on limited water reserves that natural water cycles have not replenished. 'There is a massive cultural change that has to happen in this space, and about how we use water, and that is going to affect the culture of every single water user,' Pellegrino said. "And we need to be doing that cultural change very rapidly." Cameron indicated that the negotiations could mean big changes in the bedrock laws that govern the river, saying some of the legal framework defining river management can be changed by Congress or state legislatures. The Colorado River is governed by a long list of compacts, court decrees, and international agreements with Mexico. "We don't take all aspects of what people lump together as the 'Law of the River' right now to be fixed," Cameron said. "If the needs of society change, we ought to be open to having a conversation about changing existing law." Cameron said his team has notified federal lawmakers that they might seek congressional action in the spring of 2026. The federal team aims to have a final decision in place by the summer of that year. Interested in stories about water? Sign up for AZ Climate, The Republic's free weekly environment newsletter. But to even reach a state-approved deal, Pellegrino said, state negotiators need to be better shielded from stakeholders and interest groups in their states that keep squashing ideas for deals before they can be fleshed out. 'If every whisper of what we are working on results in every person who's worried about how it might affect them running and saying, 'This isn't the deal for us,' we're never going to get there,' Pellegrino said. Cullom and Pellegrino said the basin is dealing with a hydrological reality in the river that no one can change. 'People are trying to turn this thing upside down and sideways, trying to find a unicorn," Cullom said. "But there is probably not an operational scheme that prevents us from the challenges that this drier future brings.' Austin Corona covers environmental issues for The Arizona Republic and azcentral. Send tips or questions to Environmental coverage on and in The Arizona Republic is supported by a grant from the Nina Mason Pulliam Charitable Trust. Follow The Republic environmental reporting team at and @azcenvironment on Facebook and Instagram. This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Colorado River negotiations are getting unstuck, officials say
Yahoo
01-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
How much water flows down the Colorado River? The right answer is more important than ever
With their funding source under review by the Trump administration, states and the federal government are continuing a mission to better understand how much water flows in the Colorado River, and how much of that water gets used before it reaches Arizona. As the possibility of legal battles on the Colorado River grows, competing states could use water data to back up their arguments, including claims that Arizona should bear the most water cuts in future shortages The Upper Colorado River Commission — a body that represents the four states in the upper Colorado River basin — is in its third year beefing up the measurement of stream flows, water consumption by crops, and water diversions that its states use to regulate their water use. Though the Trump administration is reviewing the federal funding designated for the projects, the commission says it has continued its work. In 2023, the commission and its member states (Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming) began installing and re-activating stream gages, eddy covariance towers and other measurement technology that will ultimately cost around $50 million. The new and re-activated systems measure the water consumption of hayfields, hookup river level gages to the internet, and count the cubic feet of water that run down ranchers' and farmers' diversion ditches. 'One of the critical paths to successfully managing water in an uncertain future is having the best available information to guide decisions," the commission's executive director, Chuck Cullom, said in a written comment. So far, the commission has spent close to $40 million, with the largest share going to measuring the water upper basin users divert from the Colorado and its tributaries. The commission has also sought contractors to integrate all the information from these tools and create an online data portal for public view. The new data will help the Upper Basin fine-tune its water management, but it could also play a role in lawsuits between Colorado River states if ongoing negotiations break down. A lawsuit could drag on for years, partly because states would interpret the new data differently, at a time when some experts say the river needs shared understanding and basin-wide action. Quantifying the river's flow is also critical in the short term, as the seven states try to reach an agreement on how to divide up the water during times of shortages. The current plan expires in 2026, but the states have been unable to reach a consensus on most of the key issues. And the agency that oversees the river's operation, the Bureau of Reclamation, is still without a commissioner, further slowing work on a new deal. Law of the River: As the Colorado River is stretched thin by drought, can the 100-year-old rules that divide it still work? Measuring water use has challenged Upper Basin water managers for decades. A network of almost 70 major creeks and smaller rivers feeds into the Colorado before it reaches Arizona. Cities and farms divert water from more than 20,000 points along those tributaries. Plants and trees also take their share, and so do the soil and atmosphere. The amount nature provides, and the amount ecosystems and people consume, changes each year depending on the weather and human development. When the river hits Arizona, water dynamics become much easier to measure. Nearly all the water in the river system has naturally collected in one channel, and there are far fewer points of diversion (though those diversions are larger). Some Lower Basin tributaries like the Gila River are not included in the overall measurement of the river for interstate legal purposes, a difference in accounting that Upper Basin states commonly say is unfair. Over the last century, governments and scientists have developed an immense network of sensors, gates, and webpages to communicate the vast, ever-changing reality of the Upper Basin to the millions of people who rely on that river every day. Across four states, federal and state officials monitor and operate more than 125 snow measurement sites, 325 real-time streamgages, 20,000 water diversions, 22 large dams, nine eddy covariance towers, and four high orbit satellites that transmit data from those sites to data centers and ultimately computers. There are at least four federal departments involved in this network, along with the four state governments and thousands of water users. 'We feel responsible for providing this real time, reliable public information,' said Matt Ely, director of the US Geological Survey's Colorado Water Science Center, which operates streamgages throughout the state of Colorado. The streamgages, some of which are more than a hundred years old, transmit data to satellites or cellphone links every 15 minutes. The data is then bounced back to a database called the National Water Information System, where it then becomes visible to the public through the internet. The data from the gages and related systems is a bedrock resource for communities in the Upper Basin. Rafting companies and anglers check the flows every morning before they hit the river, and state water officials use the meters to decide who gets water every day. 'I took a fly fishing course once, and the instructor said, 'The first thing you do before you head out is you look at the USGS streamgage.' I didn't say anything, but that was a point of pride,' Ely said in an interview. State officials use the network to decide who gets water during dry times. When the water level gets too low to provide for everyone, they pick up the phone, or hop in their trucks, and tell water users with the lowest-priority water rights to shut down. 'Some folks aren't extremely excited to be shut off,' Colorado State Engineer Jason Ullmann said. 'It's a difficult job, because the (water officials) have to make that decision, and each year is completely different based upon the snowpack we receive.' The data also indicates how much water Arizona will get each year, as Arizona's water allocation relies on the amount of water that flows out of the Upper Basin. Still, the system is not perfect, and officials are filling gaps. Until recently, Colorado had no strict requirements for measuring water diversions in some parts of the Colorado River basin (diversion records were kept through more informal or situational methods by local officials). Now, the state is expanding water measurement devices into more corners of the state and establishing rules everywhere, using money from the same Biden-era law that is funding the UCRC project. Utah is also expanding the number of its measurement sites that can transmit data remotely, according to Utah State Engineer Teresa Wilhemsen. "The expansion of water measurement and monitoring in the Upper Division States is improving the information available to water managers and users to adapt to changing water supplies," Cullom said. Water shortages: Colorado River states fear a long legal battle as talks falter over shortage rules All of this data — and the way it's interpreted — has gained special importance in the last two years as Colorado River basin states negotiate who should bear the brunt of an ongoing megadrought and long-term unpredictability in water supplies brought on by climate change. The negotiations have been strained, but states have met to discuss their positions as recently as mid-March, according to a river commission spokesperson. If the talks break down, the data could be critical in understanding the reason for the dwindling supplies in the Colorado River, and how much of a cut Arizona should take in dry times. Flows in the Colorado River have dropped 20% over the last century. Scientists believe a warming climate will have an overall drying effect on the river system, though it will happen through dramatic swings of intense drought and intense wetness. Legally, the Upper Basin and the Lower Basin (Arizona, California, and Nevada) should split a fixed, equal amount of Colorado River water, but that split has become physically impossible as water levels swing and drop. Someone has to take less than they are entitled to — a 'cut' — and the states are debating who that should be. In their first climate-related argument, the Upper Basin states claim they should not have to take administered cuts because climate and geography have constrained the river, not them. The Upper Basin has pushed this argument in two forms. In their first argument, Upper Basin states say that because their geography and climate already curtails their water supply in dry years, they shouldn't have to take additional cuts. Unlike the Lower Basin states, the Upper Basin can't rely on large reservoirs like Lake Powell and Lake Mead in dry years, which is why they have state officials who cut off water users frequently. Upper Basin states say they already take these nature-caused "involuntary cuts" each year. 'When you are a headwaters state and all your water comes from snowpack and follows gravity throughout the state, you don't have a lot of choice and sometimes it sucks,' Colorado's negotiator Becky Mitchell said at the annual Colorado River Water User's Association conference in December. In their second climate-related argument, the Upper Basin says it cannot be held responsible for what climate change does to the river. According to the 1922 Colorado River Compact, which divides the river between the two basins, the Upper Basin states must not 'cause' the river to be depleted below a certain amount. If climate change depletes the river to the point that downstream states like Arizona don't get their promised amount of water, the Upper Basin says it isn't at fault. Data is critical in making both arguments work, according to John Fleck, a professor of water policy at the University of New Mexico. At this point, Fleck said the data isn't totally clear cut. New data has already complicated the Upper Basin's argument about water shortages in dry years. In 2014, the Upper Basin states began pushing the federal government to update its methods for calculating those states' agricultural water consumption on the Colorado River. Under the old methods, the data did not show that Upper Basin states use less water in dry years, taking 'involuntary cuts.' Rather, it indicated that thirsty farm fields used slightly more water in dry years. The new methods were supposed to clear that up, but the story is still complicated. Colorado has pointed out that in the new consumption data, the Upper Basin has used 200,000 acre-feet less in the five driest years than the five wettest. The basin used 3.8 million acre-feet in dry years and 4 million in wet ones. But the data also challenges the Upper Basin's narrative in some way. Two of the Upper Basin's five highest-use years are also among the five driest. In addition, the basin seems to use the same amount in average years that it uses in dry years (3.8 million acre-feet). As for the climate change argument, Fleck said negotiators will need more than data to distinguish between the effects of climate change and the effects of human water consumption. If climate change dries the river, thirsty crops could require more irrigation, blending human use and climate into a combined drain on the river. 'This is one of the huge scientific uncertainties,' Fleck said. 'There's an unanswerable question … Let's say my field takes three acre feet of water for alfalfa this year, and it used to take two and a half. Is that climate change, or is that me? I mean, I'm the one taking more water, but I have to because of climate change. And you know, we'll just argue about that.' Drought in the West: Could wet winters start to refill Colorado River reservoirs? What researchers are saying If states can't reach an agreement about how to distribute cuts, the Supreme Court may wade into these undefined and thorny data questions, an outcome public figures in the basin frequently say they want to avoid. 'Trials and litigation are expensive in terms of dollars, resources, and trust,' said Jeffrey Wechsler, a litigator focusing on water law at the New Mexico-based law firm Spencer Fane at the water users association event. Conflicts over data analysis can make those trials costlier, Wechsler pointed out. In a 1995 Supreme Court case between Kansas and Colorado over water allocations in the Arkansas River, the states fought for more than 100 days just to determine which hydrologic model the court would use for measuring water use. Wechsler estimated that a lawsuit between states over the Colorado River could run five to seven years before the actual trial even begins. 'And along that same timeframe,' said New Mexico Deputy State Engineer Tanya Trujillo in the same event, 'the hydrology is shifting, operations haven't ceased, and people haven't stopped planting crops or drinking water in their homes.' The engineers and water experts at the Bureau of Reclamation, the federal agency that manages the Colorado River's largest dams, have signaled they are unlikely to make their own reading. In releasing their alternatives for the next set of operating guidelines for managing the river, the Bureau did not include an option that would place cuts on the Upper Basin, as Lower Basin states have proposed. The Bureau has also not firmly stated how or whether it would 'enforce' the Colorado River Compact, something Lower Basin states have repeatedly asked the agency to do. That enforcement would require the federal government to interpret the compact in relation to the Upper Basin's climate argument, drawing legal resistance. The Bureau may also be losing time and effectiveness as the Trump administration has still not appointed a commissioner to lead it. With the Upper Basin hardening its arguments, producing more data for both sides to interpret in their own ways, the federal government declining to intervene and interpret the compact for the states, or otherwise threaten to 'enforce' it in some way, the states could be headed toward the litigation nightmare described by Wechsler, and that litigation nightmare could arrive soon. Official projections from the Bureau of Reclamation show that flows from the Upper Basin could drop below the amount required to satisfy allocations to the Lower Basin and Mexico as soon as 2027, depending on changes in dam operations. 'Given the current stalemate between the Upper and Lower Division States over how the reservoir system should be operated, it means the potential for basin-wide litigation is now in the 'Red Zone,'' Fleck wrote in a January blog post. Instead of fueling conflict, the data could help states collaborate on basin-wide reforms, argues Mark Squillace, a law professor at the University of Colorado. Squillace has argued that states should simultaneously enact reforms to their water laws to discourage waste and maximize efficiency, stretching water supplies to serve more users. Doing so, he has written, would require a consensus around how to legally quantify water consumption, something new measurement technology could help water managers do. 'My view is that no state wants to get out front on efforts to conserve water, because they don't think it's fair that they should do those conservation measures when another state is not doing them,' Squillace said. 'And so if the states were able to reach agreement about changing their laws in ways that would better conserve water, then everybody would have, I think, an equal sort of incentive to do it.' Referencing the late sociologist Elinor Ostrom, Fleck pointed out that data can be as useful for collaboration as it is for conflict. 'Ostrom argues that you don't need a centralized government to make decisions for you and impose solutions—that it works better if the management regime emerges from the people who are using the water,' Fleck said. 'And one of the things Ostrom thought was crucially important for the success of these water management regimes was a shared understanding of the numbers, a shared understanding of the measurement and quantification of the resource.' Austin Corona covers environmental issues for The Arizona Republic and azcentral. Send tips or questions to Environmental coverage on and in The Arizona Republic is supported by a grant from the Nina Mason Pulliam Charitable Trust. Sign up for AZ Climate, our weekly environment newsletter, and follow The Republic environmental reporting team at and @azcenvironment on Facebook and Instagram. This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Upper Colorado River states are measuring their water use better
Yahoo
19-02-2025
- Climate
- Yahoo
At odds over water cuts, Colorado River states still seek consensus as deadline nears
Negotiators for the states haggling over future cuts to their use of Colorado River water say they're committed to reaching consensus, though time and snow are running short. The seven states are effectively under a deadline to reach a deal by summer or face whatever water-use restrictions the federal government or courts may impose after the existing shortage guidelines expire next year. Meantime, a slow start to winter precipitation has dialed up the stakes, possibly leading to painful new cuts by the end of next year. The Upper Colorado River Commission, representing Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming, met virtually on Tuesday and heard projections from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation suggesting that current trends indicate the natural flow into Lake Powell this year will be about 71% of the 30-year average, accounting for near-normal snowpack atop soils that were parched heading into winter. It's not a great outlook for a reservoir that's currently 35% full and that holds the key to providing water to the Lower Basin. 'It looks like hydrology is calling us to action,' Colorado's river commissioner, Becky Mitchell, told colleagues. While the Lower Basin states of Arizona, California and Nevada have conceded they will have to cut back when water levels dip too low in the river's largest reservoirs at Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the upstream states have argued that they already suffer outsize losses in dry years because they have no such massive storage pools. A dispute over whether the Upper Basin should join the Lower Basin in taking additional cuts in the driest years led to an impasse at the annual winter meeting of river water users. The Rocky Mountain states use less water and argue that they have little more to give up. Divisions on the river: Colorado River states fear a long legal battle as talks falter over shortage rules The rift flows out of a math problem that a previous generation of negotiators set up in 1922. The Colorado River Compact and a suite of subsequent deals tied to it envisioned a river spilling 16 million acre-feet of water in a typical year. The Lower Basin, below Lake Powell, would get 7.5 million acre-feet, and so would the Upper Basin, with some left over for Mexico. But the river today, after decades of drought and warming, sometimes provides only about 12 million acre-feet. Over the years, the Lower Basin maxed out its allowable use, while the slower-developing Upper Basin lagged, developing just over 5 million acre-feet in the best of years. Now the Lower Basin must cut back to keep water flowing our of the reservoirs, and the Upper Basin has little ability to develop without shorting the Lower Basin. An acre-foot is roughly 326,000 gallons, or enough to support about three southwestern households for a year. Most of the river, though, supports agriculture. Upper Colorado River Commission Executive Director Chuck Cullom on Tuesday spelled out the typical shortage that water users in the mountain states face. The Upper Basin states have developed capacity to use 5.2 million acre-feet in good years, but in practice fall short on average by at least 1.2 million acre-feet because of localized dry weather. So while the Lower Basin uses its 7.5 million, the Upper Basin uses about 4 million. Mitchell noted that the Upper Basin's shortages are not compensated, as some of the Lower Basin's have been — a water officials simply comes around to close a headgate and drain a canal. Wyoming's top negotiator, State Engineer Brandon Gebhart, said ranchers in his state can't feed their cattle when that happens and must sell off herds that might have taken years to build. 'These existing and very real impacts must be adequately recognized and considered in our discussions,' Gebhart said. Sharing resources: As the Colorado River is stretched thin by drought, can the 100-year-old rules that divide it still work? The counterargument from Arizona and its neighbors in the Southwest has been that they can't realistically take all of the possible cuts — up to 4 million acre-feet in the worst years — out of existing uses without deep economic pain. Arizona Water Resources Director Tom Buschatze was not available for comment on Tuesday, but at the December meeting of water users he noted that his state already has reduced its 2.8 million acre-foot share of the river to 1.9 million over the last decade. Heaping all of the future cuts onto the Lower Basin could actually zero out a major water supplier to Phoenix and Tucson, the Central Arizona Project, he told The Arizona Republic. California continues to seek a seven-state consensus, its Colorado River commissioner, JB Hamby, said in an email. But, as he has before, he said that 'involves all users, states, basins, and both countries further reducing use to manage what the river now provides.' In putting forward several alternatives for future shortage guidelines, the Biden administration had envisioned putting most of the burden of new cuts on the Lower Basin, except for up to 200,000 acre-feet of voluntary conservation during wet years in the Rockies. 'We are working to reach a consensus during this (Trump) administration,' Hamby said. Without offering specifics, Colorado's Mitchell closed the Upper Basin meeting on a conciliatory note, saying that everyone will have to give something to reach consensus and avoid the uncertainty that would arise from a lawsuit. "Cuts are probable," she said. "We need to do that for certainty, and everyone needs to do that." Brandon Loomis covers environmental and climate issues for The Arizona Republic and Reach him at Environmental coverage on and in The Arizona Republic is supported by a grant from the Nina Mason Pulliam Charitable Trust. Sign up for AZ Climate, our weekly environment newsletter, and follow The Republic environmental reporting team at and @azcenvironment on Facebook and Instagram. This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: As drought continues, the stakes for a Colorado River deal rise.
Yahoo
19-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
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.
The Hill
18-02-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
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 Colorado's 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 both discuss basin-wide hydrology as well as 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, Biden's team then 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 Basin, 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 upon 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 towards 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.
