← Back to Home

Feds set urgent deadline on Colorado River drought plan

to Arizona and California: ‘We are quickly running out of time.’
Arizona and California have blown this week’s federal deadline to approve their strategies, jeopardizing progress for Colorado and the four others.
Water bosses from Arizona and California said publicly at a water conference here Wednesday that they’re close to striking deals, but privately admitted that negotiations have been stalling.
And Lake Powell serves the same purpose for the Upper Basin states of Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico and Utah, which must deliver a certain amount of water to the Lower Basin each year under the terms of a 1922 interstate compact known as the Law of the River.
The deal they reached in November sets up a “demand management” program that, among other things, is designed to prod farmers and ranchers – who consume nearly 90 percent of the state’s river water – to cut their use in exchange for money at times of shortage.
The pickle The plan can’t be implemented without the three Lower Basin states having first approved their own statewide water shortage approaches and also signed off on a collective Lower Basin strategy.
Ted Cooke, CAP’s general manager, said negotiations are taking so long “not because we’re slow, but because it’s difficult.” Under Burman’s deadline, Arizona not only needs to strike a deal with Pinal County farmers, but also persuade its legislature to approve the shortage plan by the end of January.
Although the Interior Department traditionally has let states set their own policies, it could after January swoop in and dictate which water users in Arizona and California would take the hit in case of a water shortage.
Burman told reporters Thursday that the “incredible history of (states) coming together” on Colorado River policy makes her confident there will be unity moving forward.
Though nobody questions Burman’s own commitment to easing the effects of climate change on already parched western water users, they wonder if she would have the support she’d need to impose cutbacks, if necessary, on states or water agencies unwilling to make the tough choices managing their shares of river water.

Learn More