States agree on water-savings model for Colorado River

In a letter sent to the Bureau of Reclamation Jan. 30, six states agreed to a model to cut back on Colorado River water use.
Six states, including Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, agreed to a model to cut back on Colorado River water use while California released its own plan.

In a letter sent to the Bureau of Reclamation, Washington, D.C., Jan. 30, six states, including Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, agreed to a model to cut back on Colorado River water use.

The model “suggests a number of specific modifications to operations of Lake Powell and Lake Mead, protecting water delivery through 2025, when the ’07 Guidelines expire,” according to the Arizona Department of Water Resources.

Water agencies in the seventh state, California, released their own plan.

“The alternative provides a realistic and implementable framework to address reduced inflows and declining reservoir elevations by building on voluntary agreements and past collaborative efforts in order to minimize implementation delays. California’s alternative protects critical elevations and uses adaptive management to protect critical reservoir elevations through the interim period,” JB Hamby, chair of Colorado River Board of California and California’s Colorado River Commissioner, wrote in the letter to the Bureau of Reclamation.

Irrigation Association Advocacy Director Nathan Bowen says that it is essential that the methods used to sustain a model of responsible water use in the basin must be efficient and that there are a number of entities affected by these decisions — not just those who take advantage of the water provided by the river.

“As states and the federal government continue to grapple with serious drought conditions in the West, it is imperative any framework prioritizes the use of water efficiency tools and systems, takes into account the interests of impacted stakeholders and industries, and recognizes the positive socioeconomic impacts on the agriculture and landscape sectors,” says Bowen.

John Entsminger, Southern Nevada Water Authority general manager, says he has a positive outlook on the future of collaboration, asserting in the group of six’s letter that the goal is to eventually develop a seven-state solution.

“While our goal remains achieving a seven-state agreement, developing and submitting this consensus-based alternative is a positive step forward in a multi-phased environmental review process critical to protecting the Colorado River system,” he says.

“I don’t view not having unanimity at one step in that process to be a failure,” Entsminger reiterated in an interview with The Associated Press. “I think all seven states are still committed to working together.”

The model the group of six put together includes accounting for water lost through evaporation and transportation. The plan that California released Jan. 31 does not.

“Historically, Coachella Valley Water District and our agricultural community have invested heavily in its irrigation delivery system to minimize water loss, including canal lining projects, a closed pipe irrigation distribution system and installing drip irrigation,” says Jim Barrett, general manager, CVWD. “We have prioritized the efficient use of Colorado River water over the long term. We also took action last year with other California agencies to voluntarily identify a collection of Colorado River water conservation and reduction actions to save 400,000 acre-feet annually through 2026. We support our California partners and are committed to reaching a 7-basin state consensus on a framework for additional water use reductions through 2026.”

According to the California water board, the six-state solution’s inclusion of allocative adjustments based on evaporative loss is in conflict with the extant legal framework.

“The six-state proposal would direct the majority of water use reductions needed in the Lower Basin to California water users through a new apportionment method based on ‘system and evaporative losses.’ The proposal directly conflicts with the existing Law of the River and the current water rights system and mandates cutback without providing tools to manage reductions,” reads the letter published by the State of California’s Water Board.

Other members of the board are confident that California’s approach is the right one.

“Twenty years ago, California adopted the largest water conservation-and-transfer agreement in U.S. history that not only supports the bulk of our nation’s food system but also sustains the environment. This multi-billion-dollar conservation-focused framework – the Quantification Settlement Agreement – is the blueprint for other states to follow. California has done its part and is willing to do more, but it’s time for the other states to step up and create their own conservation programs that sustain the quality of life in their communities,” says Jim Madaffer, vice chair of the Colorado River Board of California, representing the San Diego County Water Authority.

Despite the differences between the two proposals, the IA’s Bowen says that the industry is committed to a sustainable outcome through collaboration.

“Our industry stands ready to contribute in a meaningful way to dialogue and solutions that have a lasting impact on the sustainability of our nation’s water resources,” says Bowen.

In This Category

Inge-Bisconer-headshot
Bisconer has served on the IA Board since 2018 and took over for Randy Wood, who served as the 2023 IA president. 
Stats-Housing-starts-down-14.8%-in-January
The Census Bureau reported that privately owned housing starts in January were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,331,000.
IA-hosts-annual-Technician-Week-event
This year’s event culminated in an in-person certification exam on March 15 at the IA headquarters in Fairfax, Virginia. 

Share on social media: