The Colorado River Water Users Association is holding its annual three-day conference this week in Las Vegas.
By Alan Riquelmy, Courthouse News Service
Water is like a set of assets in a bankruptcy hearing.
In both scenarios — water and bankruptcy — there’s a limited pool of resources that must be divided among multiple people. The question in either situation: What method should be used to do so?
People want certainty and the resolution of conflict, said Rhett Larson, a water law professor at Arizona State University.
“But certainty and peace have a price,” he added.
Larson spoke Tuesday in Las Vegas on the first day of the Colorado River Water Users Association’s three-day gathering. He drew a bright line between bankruptcy and water fights as he detailed the history of the Colorado River, and the states and people who have battled for it over centuries.
But while water is a valuable asset, like uranium, it is more than that. Some Indigenous tribes include the Colorado River in their origin stories. It’s used to cool off in the summer and in key religious ceremonies.
“Nobody’s using uranium to be baptized,” Larson said. “It’s just a different resource.”
The nation has experienced its share of problems over water. Larson noted the best way to ensure future conflict is to make a river a political boundary, a common occurrence.
Another problem is how the nation has resolved water disputes. Prior appropriation — meaning the first person to the water has first right to it — can lead those with rights further down the line without it in lean years.
Legal battles between states, which happen regularly over water, go to the U.S. Supreme Court. Only one out of nine justices has lived west of the Mississippi River — a composition Larson intimated wasn’t ideal for the Colorado River Basin.
Alternatively, states can have Congress divvy up water resources, though that process also has pitfalls, Larson said.
Agreements, or compacts, between states is a third option, though Congress must approve all compacts and disputes will still land before Supreme Court justices.
Those agreements have led to eyebrow-raising annals in the history books. Larson described spies from Arizona as part of the 1928 Boulder Canyon Project Act informing on California’s actions. That led Arizona’s governor to send a “Navy” up the Colorado River to stop the project.
Water disputes in the early 1940s led Germany to conclude that America wouldn’t become involved in World War II, as it surmised the nation would fall into a civil war over water, he added.
Arguments over water continue to the present day.
Jeff Kightlinger and Jim Lochhead both were involved in discussions for the 2003 Colorado River water delivery agreement and the 2007 interim guidelines for Lake Powell and Lake Mead. Lochhead described the meetings as acrimonious and filled with posturing, but solutions — though temporary — did spring from them.
Lochhead said the 2003 agreement helped California with a “soft landing,” as it wasn’t receiving as much water as it once did. The agreement also sought to determine how many acre-feet of water — the amount of water to cover an acre up to a foot — the upper basin of the Colorado River should send to the lower basin, and determine a minimum amount.
“Kind of sounds familiar,” Lochhead said.
Reduced water coming from the Colorado River soon led to the realization the 2003 negotiation plans would need changes, Kightlinger said.
The 2007 guidelines led to more talks in 2012. However, those later discussions had no mandate for action, Lochhead said.
Meanwhile, water experts’ worst predictions about water shortages appeared to become reality.
The problems of water availability are nuanced, Larson said. Golf courses require some 138,000 acre-feet of water a year from the Colorado River. Power plants need 162,000 acre-feet a year. He said some people might argue water conservation is found in cutting off golf courses.
Growing alfalfa takes 1.5 million acre-feet a year, he added.
People grow alfalfa because it feeds into the dairy and beef industries. It’s grown in the desert because of the climate. Alfalfa might enjoy 12 cuttings a year in the desert and three a year in Georgia, for example.
History teaches a lesson, Larson said. Failing to treat Native American tribes as coequal sovereigns has created challenges that exist today. Tribes must be included in water management.
Also, if litigation creates a catalyst for a solution, it’s good. However, most cases become bogged down in the court system.
Lochhead and Kightlinger agreed.
Asked to pull from some 25 years of experience, the men echoed Larson: Avoid litigation when possible and take action.
“At some point, you need to stop the blame game,” Lochhead said, adding people should ask what can be accomplished instead of stating what can’t be done.
“We’re going to follow the Nike slogan and ‘Just Do It,’” Kightlinger said.
