logo
Colorado River states see possible breakthrough as deadline looms

Colorado River states see possible breakthrough as deadline looms

E&E News27-06-2025
State negotiators grappling with how to share the drought-ravaged Colorado River say they could be close to breaking free from gridlock just as the Trump administration warns that missing a November deadline could force the federal government to take control.
Members of the Upper Colorado River Commission — which represents Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming — announced Thursday that the states are weighing a new method of sharing the waterway based on the actual flow of the river, as opposed to projected flows and historical agreements.
'The basin states have been exploring an explicit supply-driven operational framework based on the natural flow of the river,' said Becky Mitchell, who serves as both Colorado's Colorado River commissioner and acting chair of the Upper Colorado River Commission.
Advertisement
The plan — at the heart of which is a formula for declaring how much water can be shared among the seven states each year, based on actual flows from the preceding three years — was proposed by the Lower Basin states of Arizona, California and Nevada, Mitchell said.
'If done correctly, it should provide the opportunity for the Upper and Lower basins to manage themselves, with the only real point of agreement being the [Lake] Powell release,' Mitchell said of the flows that leave Lake Powell behind the Glen Canyon Dam and head toward the Lower Basin states.
Characterizing the proposal as a 'divorce' between the basins, or a 'conscious uncoupling,' she added: 'What we know today is that for any approach to work, it must be supply-driven and perform well under both dry and varying hydrologies and adapt to uncertain future conditions.'
Tom Buschatzke, director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources, first detailed the proposal last week at a state meeting.
'We are evaluating a supply-driven concept that shares the water that the river actually provides while requiring each basin to take actions to live within their respective shares,' Buschatzke said.
The seven states that share the Colorado River have been in protracted negotiations over a new long-term operating plan for the waterway for more than a year, unable to agree how to share the pain of potential cuts to their individual allocations.
A series of existing agreements that govern the waterway are set to expire next year, and a new agreement must be in place by Oct. 1, 2026, which marks the start of the 2027 water year.
Scott Cameron, who serves as the Interior Department's acting assistant secretary for water and science, reiterated his warning Thursday to states that a failure to reach agreement would result in federal intervention.
'Those are my three charges: Get heavily involved, work intensely to help the states come to a seven-state solution but let [Interior Secretary Doug Burgum] know if he has to act,' Cameron said via video at the Upper Colorado River Commission meeting. 'That's certainly not his preference at all, but he's prepared to follow through on his responsibilities, if necessary.'
Cameron, who has taken on a key role in the negotiations for the Trump administration, issued the same warning earlier this month at a conference in Boulder, Colorado. On Thursday, he set hard deadlines for the states to meet, warning that if a draft agreement has not taken shape by Nov. 11, then Reclamation will need to shift its focus to federal action.
A final deal is needed by Feb. 14 to be included in a March 2026 environmental report. A record of decision is expected in May or June 2026, Cameron said.
Use of the Colorado River water is divided based on the terms of a 1922 agreement known as the Colorado River Compact. That document allocated 15 million acre-feet of water evenly between the two basins. The basins then further divided the flows among their respective states.
An acre-foot of water is equal to about 326,000 gallons, or enough to support two to three families for a year. The same amount of water would cover a football field to a depth of 1 foot.
But decades of persistent drought in the West have reduced water in the river by as much as 20 percent, forcing the states and Mexico, which also claims a share of the waterway, into a series of repeated cuts and conservation efforts.
At the Arizona meeting last week, Buschatzke noted that the average of the past 25 years shows just 12.4 million acre-feet of water in the river. Those measurements, like the ones that would be used in the new proposal, are taken at a point called Lees Ferry a few miles below the Glen Canyon Dam.
'Unfortunately, the river continues to shrink, which obviously provides a real challenge for us,' he said. 'In its simplest form, basing the Lake Powell releases to Lake Mead on natural flow allows for a fair division of what Mother Nature provides to us.'
Buschatzke added: 'We haven't agreed to anything, but we've agreed to test it.'
JB Hamby, chair of the Colorado River Board of California, confirmed to POLITICO's E&E News on Thursday that the states are pursuing the idea.
'California and the other six basin states are exploring a natural flow-based approach to post-2026 operations — one that offers a far clearer path to consensus than last year's competing proposals or continued debates over the compact,' Hamby said.
He added: 'California remains committed to collaboration. Walking away from compromise and cooperative problem-solving is not an option — it's both irresponsible and dangerous.'
Despite the general agreement on how to calculate the available water, there could be some sticking points.
Buschatzke insisted that a new agreement would not alleviate the Upper Basin states from meeting a 'delivery obligation,' or the 75 million acre-feet over a running 10-year period marked by flows at Lees Ferry.
But Colorado's Mitchell rejected that idea Thursday.
'It's essential to understand that this must not impose a delivery obligation on the Upper Basin under any context,' Mitchell said.
In his address to the Upper Basin commission, Cameron did not mention the 'natural flow' proposal under discussion by the states but said that Interior expects any agreement reached by the states will become the de facto operating plan to be adopted by Reclamation.
'The goal is to essentially parachute in a seven-state deal as the preferred alternative' into an environmental impact statement expected next year, Cameron said.
He likewise reiterated comments he made earlier this month about preparing the House and Senate for potential legislation related to any deal, with a focus on water transfers among states or between the basins themselves.
'Perhaps most fundamentally, I think we all need to realize it's a lot less water in the Colorado system than people thought there was going to be 100 years ago or 50 years ago or, quite frankly, 10 years ago,' Cameron said. 'That's a new hydrologic reality, and we all have to live in the physical world as it is, not as we might hope it will be.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why progressives fail homeless Americans and attack effective alternatives
Why progressives fail homeless Americans and attack effective alternatives

Fox News

time4 hours ago

  • Fox News

Why progressives fail homeless Americans and attack effective alternatives

In Denver, Colorado – a city that prides itself on inclusion, compassion and progressive ideals – a Christian coffee shop owner has become the target of hostility; it's not for what he's done wrong, but for what he's done right. Jamie Sanchez launched The Drip Cafe as an employment-training program for those struggling with homelessness who want to rebuild their lives. More than just offering a job, the café provides mentorship, structure and consistent support to equip team members to reenter the workforce and to attain long-term employment and stability. But for dozens of far-left activists in Denver, ideological conformity overshadows the measurable good of helping the homeless of the streets. Protesters are regularly showing up at his café, accusing him of bigotry and calling for boycotts due to his biblical stance on sexuality. In Seattle, Andrea Suarez leads a highly effective grassroots effort to clear homeless encampments and connect the homeless into treatment and other services – We Heart Seattle. In return, she and her volunteers face relentless protests and hostility from far-left extremists. Rather than encouraging their efforts, activists recently shoved Andrea into the street and threatened her with kidnapping. Apparently, they prefer to let their homeless neighbors languish in tents and addiction. It should not be lost on us that those protesting – and even engaging in violence – are not lifting a finger to help the people they claim to champion. They're not offering shelter, treatment or support. They're simply demanding more money for the same failed policies that have driven this crisis to historic levels. Meanwhile, those doing the hard and healing work are treated not as partners, but as pariahs. This moment reveals something increasingly corrosive in American life: the progressive left's unwavering loyalty to ideology over outcomes, with no regard for the financial nor the human cost. Homelessness is a searing national emergency sprawled across our streets, endlessly debated yet persistently ignored. Cities like Denver and Seattle have thrown billions at the crisis, clinging to a rigid, one-size-fits-all policy approach rooted in progressive ideology. This approach – Housing First – became federal policy in 2013. It provides permanent, taxpayer-funded housing without requiring sobriety, treatment or employment. Ever. In practice, it has become "housing only." Passionately championed as the silver bullet to homelessness, it has proven to be anything but. Yet within left-wing policy circles, it remains unquestioned gospel, immune to scrutiny and divorced from results. Since adopting Housing First, homelessness has reached its highest level ever recorded in our nation's history, including a 58% increase in the unsheltered population. In Seattle, unsheltered homelessness rose by 88%; in Denver, it more than tripled. Still, the left clings to the ideology. Billions be damned and outcomes be damned. Which brings us back to Jamie and Andrea. Their steady and steadfast hands have brought hope, stability and tangible support to people who are left to languish on sidewalks. They offer relationship and support, not red tape. Yet the progressive left condemns them because they don't wear the correct ideological uniform. Across America, programs such as these – with proven track records of moving people from homelessness to stability through sobriety, job training, counseling and accountability – are not just denied public funding, but they are systematically ostracized from the systems charged with ending homelessness. Why? Their expectations around personal responsibility – sobriety, work and accountability – are dismissed as too demanding by progressive standards, even though these very principles are the foundation of lasting recovery and independence. In homelessness, not unlike today's policy climate overall, ideological conformity takes precedence over real-world results, even if it means keeping people trapped in cycles of addiction, instability, and despair. It is cruelty wearing a mask of virtue. By demonizing those who operate outside the rigid confines of left-wing homeless orthodoxy, we're stifling innovation and punishing the very people trying to help, while abandoning the vulnerable they serve. Jamie Sanchez and Andrea Suarez should be celebrated – not vilified – for stepping boldly into the suffering of their communities, guided by compassion, courage and a relentless commitment to restoring broken lives. They aren't pontificating from the sidelines or waiting on government mandates. They are in the trenches, delivering real, effective solutions where bureaucracy has failed. In clinging to purity tests, the progressive left isn't just missing the point – they're standing in the way. It's sabotage. And it's the homeless who pay the highest price.

Longtime lawmaker shapes the debate as Arizona grapples with dwindling water supplies
Longtime lawmaker shapes the debate as Arizona grapples with dwindling water supplies

Yahoo

time7 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Longtime lawmaker shapes the debate as Arizona grapples with dwindling water supplies

Arizona Groundwater Reform PHOENIX (AP) — Throughout two decades marked by drought, climate change and growing demand for water, Arizona's leaders have fiercely debated an increasingly urgent problem: how to manage dwindling water supplies in an arid state. At the crossroads sits Rep. Gail Griffin, a savvy and quietly assertive lawmaker who has for years used her status as the leader of key water and land use committees in the Republican-controlled Legislature to protect property owners' rights, deciding which bills live and die. Griffin's iron fist has infuriated residents and other lawmakers worried that unfettered groundwater pumping is causing wells to run dry. The GOP lawmaker has also drawn the ire of Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs, who considered her the barrier to legislation that stalled this year despite having others at the negotiating table. Without the Legislature charting a path, Hobbs could tap her executive authority to carve out specific areas where regulations could be imposed, like she did in recent months with the Willcox Basin north of Douglas. Fighting over a rural framework At the start of this year's session, Hobbs floated a proposal to regulate pumping in rural areas but the bipartisan deal failed to get Griffin's support. Griffin, however, did back a separate measure to let farmers transfer their pumping rights to developers, who can then access credits to demonstrate they have enough drinking water to supply future housing projects. It was one of the most significant pieces of water legislation to win approval this year. Still, domestic well-owner Karen Weilacher and other residents are frustrated that efforts to expand Arizona's 1980 groundwater code have repeatedly failed despite pleas to address unchecked pumping as conditions worsen — in the state and greater Southwest region. Arizona's code already allows for managing pumping in major metropolitan areas. The disagreement is over a framework for rural areas. Lawmakers also have clashed over who would govern the use of the water and pathways for future regulation. Weilacher, earlier this year, addressed the natural resources committee led by Griffin. She pivoted to let the powerful panel read her shirt: 'Water is life.' 'I shall use the remainder of my time to do what Representative Griffin has done to us,' she told committee members, as she turned her back on them. Griffin declined to comment specifically on her role in shaping Arizona's water policy, but she's adamant about her belief that Hobbs' proposal would devastate agriculture and rural economies. 'As we work with stakeholders, we will continue to support private property rights and individual liberty while ensuring that any legislative solution protects local communities and our natural resource industries, allowing rural Arizona to grow,' Griffin said in an emailed response to an interview request from The Associated Press. Rural way of life With a legislative tenure dating back to 1997, Griffin's convictions are anchored in preserving a rural lifestyle in which residents help each other and reject government mandates, said former GOP House Speaker Rusty Bowers, a friend of hers for decades. 'She was a hard-core believer in her principles,' Bowers said. 'And if you didn't respect it, then get the heck out of the way, she'll run over you like a Mack truck.' Back home in Hereford, Griffin has been known to go on walks, armed with her gun and mobile phone. A member of the Arizona Farm Bureau and the Arizona Cattle Growers Association, she has referred to her ranching neighbors as 'true environmentalists' because they take care of the land year-round. At a 2019 forum, Griffin recounted an exchange in which she was advised how to handle a bear busting into her home, questioning at the time whether calling authorities for help would be enough to keep her safe. 'And what will you do when I shoot and kill that bear?' Griffin had asked. She didn't like the answer she got — that prosecution, jail time and a fine would be likely. Griffin won the crowd over with her rural sensibilities. She told them the desire to give people the tools they need to protect themselves and their property is what first led her to run for public office. That hasn't changed. Her stances resonate with voters who repeatedly send her back to the statehouse. Cochise County farmer Ed Curry is one of them but wouldn't say whether he would do so next year as Griffin eyes a seat in the state Senate. He said he and other constituents have begged Griffin to usher in change, sharing stories at a town hall last year about wells drying up and the exorbitant costs residents face when digging deeper wells. 'She doesn't ask, she tells. She doesn't listen, she speaks,' Curry said of Griffin. Curry, who serves on the governor's water policy council, said that even growing crops that don't require much water hasn't kept his wells from dropping. He said new regulations will help to ensure Arizona's future. 'Something has to be done,' he said. ___ The Associated Press' women in the workforce and state government coverage receives financial support from Pivotal Ventures. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at Solve the daily Crossword

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store