Estimated read time: 5-6 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — Politics and threatened litigation are replacing what is left of the water in the Colorado River as the seven basin states that rely on the West's largest river try to reach an agreement to cut flows so power generation can continue at Glen Canyon and Hoover dams.
The directive to find some sort of definitive plan for dam operations by reducing flows was issued by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which is tasked with making decisions to prop up the river that has been decimated by drought and over diversion through the years.
The proposals do not change any of the states' water allocations, for now, or affect any existing water rights. The plans will ultimately become part of a more comprehensive effort being worked on by the federal agency.
But with seven states, more than 30 tribes and Mexico all dependent on the river, the politics are as diverse as the players, leaving them to jockey for action that inflicts the least amount of individual damage while satisfying the bureau and delivering what are supposed to be workable solutions.
It is more than a heavy lift for a river that was divided up under a compact forged more than 100 years ago in a remote location in New Mexico and subsequently shaped by regulations, court decisions and compacts that all coalesced into what is now known as the "Law of the River."
The water allocations have long come under scrutiny for a river that 40 million people in the West depend on and that irrigates more than 5 million acres of farms.
Tough choices
Critics call what the six states are proposing as mere baby steps that tiptoe around the reality of long-failing Lake Powell and the power generation now in jeopardy.
"Instead of bending over backwards to prop up Lake Powell, officials should be making plans to save Lake Mead and utilize Glen Canyon as a backup facility," said Eric Balken, executive director of Glen Canyon Institute. "There's just not enough water to save both reservoirs, and Mead is more vital to the basin."
The institute has long advocated for the draining of Lake Powell, the nation's second largest reservoir behind Lake Mead.
On Monday, six of the states sharing the Colorado River — California later detailed its own plan — submitted what they described as a Consensus Based Modeling Alternative to the reclamation bureau. While not a formal agreement, they say it provides a step toward helping the federal agency as it crafts an environmental review going forward.
"The challenge we continue to face is dry hydrology and depleted storage across the Colorado River Basin. The (alternative) provides a path forward so that every state can contribute to finding a solution in close collaboration with our tribes and water users," said Gene Shawcroft, Utah Colorado River commissioner.
Among other things, the alternative details:
- Additional combined reductions of 250,000 acre-feet to Arizona, California and Nevada at Lake Mead elevation 1,030 feet and below.
- Additional combined reductions of 200,000 acre-feet to Arizona, California and Nevada at Lake Mead elevation 1,020 feet and below, as well as additional reductions necessary to protect Lake Mead elevation of 1,000 feet.
Those potential reductions are designed to keep Lake Mead's Hoover Dam in operation.
"The (alternative) includes the significant and necessary step of assessing evaporation and transit losses against Lower Basin uses. The Lower Basin actions operate in coordination with additional actions in the Upper Basin.
"We can only save the Colorado River system if we act together. The (alternative) approach appropriately distributes the burden across the basin and provides safeguards for the tribes, water users and environmental values in the Upper Basin," said Becky Mitchell, the Colorado representative on Upper Colorado River Commission.
Evaporation losses and the potential fight ahead
California, which is the biggest user on the Colorado River, submitted its own plan to the bureau a day later, saying states could cut use by as much as two million acre-feet based on Lake Mead's elevation.
But, unlike the other six states' plan, it did not count water lost to evaporation and during transportation — which sets a potential for litigation, according to a report by the Associated Press.
California, which holds the most senior water rights along the river, has not had to endure any cuts to its allocation.
California water officials have often repeated that any additional cuts must be legally defensible and in line with western water law that honors its water rights, the Associated Press said.
JB Hamby, chairman of the Colorado River Board of California and a board member of the Imperial Irrigation District, indicated California may file a lawsuit if the federal government attempts to count for evaporative losses. Those are estimated at 1.5 million acre-feet on the river system.
"The best way to avoid conflict and ensure that we can put water in the river right away is through a voluntary approach, not putting proposals that sidestep the Law of the River and ignore California's senior right and give no respect to that," he said, according to the Associated Press.
The six states' plan accounts for that loss, setting up the conflict.
Colorado has indicated it is willing to litigate to protect its share of the Colorado River and Utah, too, has said it will fight to develop what it says is its unused portion of the river.
Upper Basin states have long argued the Lower Basin developed its water more quickly and is guilty of over-consuming its share.
Shawcroft has said that the Upper Basin, which includes Utah, Colorado, Wyoming and New Mexico, has never failed in its contractual obligation to allow 7.5 million acre-feet to flow to the Lower Basin states of Nevada, California and Arizona.
But a coalition of Colorado River activists renounced the plans, asserting the federal government and the states are prioritizing an agreement that fails to meaningfully reduce consumptive use across the Colorado River Basin while propping up Glen Canyon Dam.
A report published last year by the Utah Rivers Council, the Glen Canyon Institute and the Great Basin Water Network summarized the critical plumbing problem inside Glen Canyon Dam, which it asserts threatens downstream water supplies and Grand Canyon flows.
