Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Colorado River deal a high water mark

The Rocky

Published December 22, 2007 at 10:25 p.m.

Text size  

Interstate water compacts may seem dull as, well, dishwater unless you're a farmer dependent on uncertain supplies . . . or you craft policy for a living.

But the agreement reached by Colorado and the six other states in the Colorado River basin Dec. 13 marks a huge step forward - the largest advance in water policy in more than 80 years. It will give the entire region more flexibility to cope with rising population, dwindling water supplies and the vagaries of the weather.

Since the Front Range relies on the river for roughly half its drinking water, the agreement, which runs through 2026, makes access to this liquid lifeline more secure.

It also raises the stakes for the fast-growing Lower Basin states (Arizona, Nevada and California) to use water more wisely. If they fail to do so, they will no longer be able to count on getting their current allotments. The real possibility of cutbacks and rationing in the Lower Basin should better protect the health of the river and the livelihoods of the millions of people who depend on it.

Under the deal, Lake Powell and Lake Mead - which are both less than half full - will be managed as one reservoir. They will rise and fall in tandem.

In dry years, the Lower Basin states will no longer be able to drain Lake Powell to levels that can jeopardize its ability to produce power and support recreation and wildlife.

Instead, Arizona, Nevada and California will have to cut water usage during droughts. The trade-off is that Lower Basin states can store water in wet years, "bank" water they save through conservation efforts, use groundwater to recharge Lake Mead, and cut deals with farmers to purchase water if fields are left fallow.

Wyoming, Colorado, Utah and New Mexico will gain the right to store water in Lake Powell during droughts. Local supplies will also be better protected, because the agreement sets triggers based on lake levels that require the Lower Basin states to surrender part of their allocations.

By specifically stating when states would lose the right to take water - and how much they'd give up - the agreement also makes it less likely that states would sue one another if the drought persists.

The 1922 Colorado River Compact or "Law of the River" has not kept pace with the dynamism of the West. It has not allowed swaps or purchases. It has provided few incentives to conserve or store water.

That deal was also struck when the states were more sparsely populated. And it allows the states in the basin and Mexico to draw 17 million acre-feet of water from the river a year. (An acre-foot is about enough water to supply two households for a year.) Runoff from rain and snowmelt have delivered only 14 million or 15 million acre-feet in recent years.

The new agreement doesn't overturn the Law of the River. Nor does it allow the free market to permit an unimpeded flow of drinking water throughout the West, as we would prefer; if it did, Phoenix and Las Vegas might permanently buy water rights from marginal farming operations.

Though the deal may not go as far as we would like, it signals a dramatic and positive shift. It gives policy-makers better tools to manage the river that has allowed the arid West to grow and prosper.

Comments

  • December 23, 2007

    8:40 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    ebmfck writes:

    The U.S. Supreme Court is going to weigh in on this as the original compact had to be approved by them. I doubt that this will take effect in any form for 20 years. I just talked to a water lawyer out of Glenwood Springs and he agrees with me, but says I'm optimistic.