The Colorado River Basin faces a complete \u201csystem crash,\u201d with little chance that a wet winter will fully prevent a worst-case scenario, a leading group of experts says in a new academic paper.<\/p>\n
That is, unless water managers can get serious about cutting water use fast.<\/p>\n
Study author Anne Castle, a fellow at the University of Colorado, Boulder, served as the assistant secretary for water and science at the Interior Department from 2009 to 2014. In an interview, she said the nation\u2019s two biggest reservoirs, Lake Powell and Lake Mead, are rendered useless in providing accessible water storage below certain elevations.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf the reservoirs drop to that level, we\u2019re not getting any benefit from them anymore,\u201d Castle said. \u201cIf that happens, it\u2019s like the Colorado River is running free. We get what we get, what nature provides, and we have no ability to buffer dry years.\u201d<\/p>\n
At Lake Mead, Southern Nevada\u2019s primary water source, that crucial number is 975 feet above sea level. On Friday, the reservoir sat at about 1,049 feet, though the Trump administration\u2019s recent decision<\/a> to reduce flows out of Lake Powell could see Lake Mead drop some 28 feet<\/a> by July 2027, far past any previous record low.<\/p>\n The story at Lake Powell is far more complicated. Below 3,500 feet in elevation, long-ignored plumbing problems<\/a> at Glen Canyon Dam could mean that federal water managers cannot send any water downstream at all.<\/p>\n Thus came the emergency decision to prop up Lake Powell with reduced outflows and water moved in from an upstream reservoir in order to avoid near-term catastrophe.<\/p>\n Rhett Larson, a water law professor at Arizona State University, said in an interview that the paper highlights the lack of options water managers will be left with to even out the system if snowpack shortages persist.<\/p>\n \u201cThey\u2019ve already shot that bullet, and you can\u2019t unshoot it,\u201d Larson said. \u201cUnless Mother Nature bails us out, I don\u2019t see what emergency measures the federal government can take next year.\u201d<\/p>\n Southern Nevada\u2019s water savings account<\/p>\n A more favorable snow season could buy the nation\u2019s two biggest reservoirs and their hydropower dams about two years before crisis conditions return, according to the study, which was released June 1. With a supercharged El Ni\u00f1o season<\/a> on the way, that\u2019s possible.<\/p>\n The researchers say a system crash would not have immediate effects for residents of larger cities in the Southwest.<\/p>\n \u201cA system crash doesn\u2019t necessarily mean that people\u2019s taps go dry because there are other sources to rely on,\u201d Castle said. \u201cBut not every water user has that potential of using other sources. That\u2019s why we\u2019ve expressed concern that agricultural water users, and maybe some rural communities that don\u2019t have other supplies available, could be in a world of hurt.\u201d<\/p>\n That\u2019s true, too, for residents of the Las Vegas Valley.<\/p>\n Water managers have claim to 10 years of water available for use in the Las Vegas Valley stored in different areas, Southern Nevada Water Authority spokesman Bronson Mack said. That\u2019s about 2.2 million acre-feet of water; last year, the region\u2019s water use came in at 198,000 acre-feet after accounting for credits from water recycling.<\/p>\n An acre-foot<\/a> of water, by most estimates, is enough to sustain two single-family households for one year.<\/p>\n Groundwater aquifers in the Las Vegas Valley, Arizona and California account for some of that banked water, Mack said. Out of state, it functions as a water transfer, where other jurisdictions would use the groundwater while Southern Nevada takes more from Lake Mead.<\/p>\n The low-level, third intake<\/a> at Lake Mead \u2014 a massive infrastructure project completed in 2013 \u2014 allows Southern Nevada to access the 900,000 acre-feet of water it has stored in the reservoir.<\/p>\n Southern Nevadans\u2019 sacrifice in contributing to conservation in multiple ways, whether that\u2019s ripping out grass in their front lawns, removing decorative grass or complying with a ban on evaporative cooling systems, have all been to accommodate to the river\u2019s new reality, Mack said.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat we have been doing has been with the foresight that conditions on the Colorado River could get worse, and that is exactly what we have been seeing over the past 25 years,\u201d Mack said in an interview.<\/p>\n Cuts could not be enough<\/p>\n The desperately needed cuts in use are likely to come first from the Lower Colorado River Basin states of Nevada, California and Arizona. Nevada\u2019s sister states produce the lion\u2019s share of the country\u2019s winter leafy greens and vegetables; agriculture accounts for more than half of all water used from the river, while cities only use about 18 percent.<\/p>\n On or before Oct. 1, the Trump administration is expected to impose new guidelines for how all seven states share the river because state officials tried and failed for multiple years to come up with an updated, 20-year operating regime.<\/p>\n While the Upper Basin states of Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming stonewall any admission that they could take mandatory cuts in water use, the Lower Basin has stepped up with a plan<\/a> to spare 1.25 million acre-feet in both 2027 and 2028.<\/p>\n Nevada alone could face an annual cut anywhere between a sixth and a third of its allocation under the plan, which would need to go before the Arizona Legislature and governing water agency boards in California and Nevada for approval.<\/p>\n Sarah Porter, director of the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University, said in an interview that the Lower Basin\u2019s efforts are not enough to solve the crisis.<\/p>\n It\u2019s difficult to absolve the Upper Basin of the responsibility of shouldering some of the pain of cuts to water use, she said.<\/p>\n But while she agrees that it is complicated to ensure that a cut upstream doesn\u2019t impact a downstream user with more senior water rights, Porter said the makeup of the reservoir system plays a role, too. Upper Basin users, without major reservoir storage and not dependent on dam infrastructure, can continue to use their water as it flows down through the headwaters.<\/p>\n \u201cNegotiators in the Upper Basin don\u2019t have a strong incentive to push deep, deep cuts on their water users right now, unlike the Lower Basin, for whom it\u2019s existential,\u201d Porter said.<\/p>\n Have state officials \u2018failed\u2019?<\/p>\n The study\u2019s authors make their dissatisfied position on how state officials approached the interstate dealmaking process clear. Castle said the existing system did not allow for much room for progress.<\/p>\n \u201cIt becomes very difficult to compromise for the benefit of the whole system,\u201d Castle said. \u201cYou can stand on your legal rights and fight to the death for the interests of your particular water users, all while the system crashes around you. And those water users get hurt, too.\u201d<\/p>\n Both Porter and Larson, the water law professor, said in the wake of how bad conditions are, all signs point to the U.S. Supreme Court. Until now, officials have presented that as a last-ditch effort<\/a> that could cost taxpayers millions and delay progress several years.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019ve started correcting people when they say the negotiators failed, because I think the word \u2018fail\u2019 presupposes that there was a possibility of success,\u201d Porter said. \u201c I don\u2019t think this context of a consensus-based agreement really ever had a chance.\u201d<\/p>\n However, Larson said it\u2019s not clear what laws or interpretations of those laws will apply. All modern laws governing the Colorado River system assume the functionality of dams and reservoirs, he said.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s either going to catalyze a radically new imaginative deal, which is what I hope it would do, or it is going to catalyze a rapid run to the courthouse,\u201d Larson said.<\/p>\n Larson, unlike Porter, said he believes it\u2019s prudent to say state negotiators have failed to deliver on their promises of a seven-state deal. He said he likens the Colorado River dilemma to a family affair.<\/p>\n \u201cMother Nature is sick in bed; she will not bail us out, and she\u2019s not a part of the solution. We shouldn\u2019t count on her,\u201d Larson said. \u201cDad, the federal government is drunk in the garage. He has failed. He hasn\u2019t led us to a solution.\u201d<\/p>\n And the family\u2019s children, or state officials, have failed to pull themselves together, too, Larson said. That leaves local governments and the private sector to step up with solutions.<\/p>\n While the authors\u2019 definition of a system crash won\u2019t immediately affect urban residents, Larson said it\u2019s imperative for everyday people to hold their leaders to account on the issue of water, especially as voters head to the ballot box.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s highly unlikely that any time in the next few years you\u2019re going to see this actually hit your taps in your home, so you shouldn\u2019t panic,\u201d Larsons said. \u201cPanic is a liability. Panic doesn\u2019t do us any good, but concern is an asset that should be cultivated.\u201d<\/p>\n Contact Alan Halaly at ahalaly@reviewjournal.com.<\/a> Follow @AlanHalaly<\/a> on X.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The Colorado River Basin faces a complete \u201csystem crash,\u201d with little chance that a wet winter will fully…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":852619,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[23],"tags":[746,159,67,132,68],"class_list":["post-852618","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-environment","tag-environment","tag-science","tag-united-states","tag-unitedstates","tag-us"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/116713940849002028","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/852618","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=852618"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/852618\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/852619"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=852618"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=852618"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=852618"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}