Colorado River Agreements

In 2007, when water officials concluded negotiations on the final regulatory framework to deal with a possible shortage, they expected these rules to work by 2026. But it wasn`t until half that time that they realized the measurements weren`t strong enough. And this forced them to negotiate the new drought agreements to end the period. Pollution caused by global warming and rising global temperatures have increasingly affected the river in recent decades. “It`s positive that the Colorado River Basin states are trying to reduce the river`s water consumption, but it`s unfortunate that our state has decided to supplement the river`s water with more groundwater pumps,” said Sandy Bahr, director of the Sierra Club`s Grand Canyon Chapter. “Unfortunately, the Arizona plan is not sustainable and must ensure that Arizona does more of the same – unsustainable and thirsty agriculture and ever more urban sprawl.” == Terry Fulp, regional director of the Bureau of Reclamation Lower Basin, the federal government`s top official on the river, recently told Western water managers that “our risk is too high. We cannot deal with this, referring to the effects of climate change, which could make it impossible to meet the current requirements. He reminded them that when it comes to last winter`s heavy snow, “a good year doesn`t break the drought in the Colorado Basin River.” Fulp advocated the continuation of dependence on the pact and not a revision of commitments between the countries of the South-West. Some form of concerted effort seemed necessary. Delph Carpenter, a Colorado attorney, took the opportunity to suggest that the Colorado River states negotiate a pact to determine each state`s rights to river water. At the time, intergovernmental pacts for the settlement of water disputes were an inexperienced strategy. Despite the current challenges, some officials see water commercialization as the future of Colorado River management. MacDonnell says that water commercialization is the “third generation of river water sharing.” The first generation occurred when the compact divided the water between the upper basin and the lower basin.

The second generation extends from 1922 to the present day and is characterized by a sharing of water determining development. A strong presence in generations one and two, political after Macdonnell, should play a less heavy role in the expected third generation. Market forces are expected to gain influence. The drainage flows of Arizona`s Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation District are now the main source of water for the Cienega de Santa Clara, the largest estuary in the delta. In 1977, the district began showering its heavily salty drainage in the delta in order to prevent rivers from flowing into the main Colorado River tribe and to exacerbate the river`s water quality problems. If the Yuma desalination plant went entirely online, the Wellton-Mohawk drainage would be processed for liberation in the river`s main tribe. The Cienega de Santa Clara would then be deprived of its vital water source. Another possibility that would have an impact on flow management is a persistent severe drought. Again, history, this time the history of the Colorado River waterways, can help establish guidelines for public order. Historical records indicate that droughts of varying severity are periodic.

. . .

This entry was posted in Uncategorized by Sirkka. Bookmark the permalink.