las vegas — The seven countries that depend on Colorado River Supply farms and cities across the western United States appear no closer to reaching consensus on a long-term plan to share dwindling resources.
The river’s future was the focus of discussions this week at the Colorado River Water Users Association’s annual conference in Las Vegas, where water leaders from California and Nevada participated. ArizonaColorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming rallied along with federal and tribal officials.
It comes after states missed a November deadline for a new plan to deal with drought and water shortages after 2026, when current guidelines expire. the United States Bureau of Reclamation It has set a new deadline of February 14.
Nevada’s chief negotiator said the states were unlikely to reach an agreement so quickly.
“As we sit here in mid-December with the February deadline approaching, I don’t see any clear path to a long-term agreement, but I do see a path to potentially reaching a short-term agreement to keep us out of court,” John Entsminger of the Southern Nevada Water Authority told The Associated Press.
More than 40 million people in seven states and Mexico Native American tribes It depends on river water. Farmers in California and Arizona use it to grow the country’s winter vegetables such as broccoli, cabbage and carrots. It provides water and electricity to millions of homes and businesses throughout the basin.
But long-term drought, chronic overuse and rising temperatures have forced a rethink of the river’s future. Current water conservation agreements that specify who must use less during times of shortages expire in 2026. After two years of negotiation, states have yet to reach an agreement on what comes next.
The federal government continues to refrain from coming up with its own solution – preferring that the seven basin countries reach a consensus on their own. If they don’t, the federally mandated plan could leave parties unhappy and lead to costly and lengthy lawsuits.
The battle is not just limited to water between the upper and lower basins, but individual municipalities, tribal nations and water agencies have their own interests in this battle. California, which holds the largest share of the Colorado River’s water, has more than 200 water agencies alone, each with its own clients.
“It’s a rabbit hole that you can dive into, and it’s incredibly complex,” said Noah Garrison, a water researcher at the University of California, Los Angeles.
During a panel of government negotiators on Thursday, none of them appeared willing to yield to their demands. Each highlighted what their state had done to conserve water, from grass removal projects to lining canals to reduce seepage, and explained why their state couldn’t afford more. Instead, they said, others must bear the burden.
Entsminger, R-Nevada, said he could see a short-term, five-year agreement that sets new rules about releasing and storing water in Lakes Powell and Mead, two major reservoirs.
Lower Basin states have offered a reduction of 1.5 million acre-feet per year to cover the structural deficit that occurs when water evaporates or is absorbed into the ground as it flows downstream. One acre of water is enough to supply two to three families annually.
But they want to see a similar contribution from the upper basin. However, the Upper Basin countries do not believe they have to make additional reductions because they are not already using their full share of water and are legally obligated to send a certain amount of water downstream.
“Our water users feel that pain,” said Estevan Lopez, New Mexico state representative on the Upper Colorado River Commission.
Upper Basin states want to release less water from Lake Powell to Lake Mead.
But Tom Bushatzky, director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources, said he hasn’t seen anything on the table from the Upper Basin that would force him to ask Arizona lawmakers to agree to those demands.
Over the coming weeks, the Bureau of Reclamation will release a set of potential proposals, but it will not outline a specific set of operational guidelines favored by the federal government.
Scott Cameron, the office’s acting commissioner, appealed to states to reach a compromise.
He said during the conference: “Cooperation is better than litigation.” “The only thing that is certain about litigation in the Colorado River Basin is that a group of water lawyers will be able to put their children and grandchildren into graduate school. There are much better ways to spend several hundred million dollars.”