January 31 came and went without the seven (7) states that form the Upper and Lower Basins of the Colorado River Compact coming to agreement on how to cede enough of their extant river allocations to meet the federal government’s (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation) short-term 2023-2026 requirements. When 2026 arrives, the seven (7) states are supposed to have come to agreement on permanently ceding 2-4 million-acre-feet of their current allotments. As has been the case since 1922 for reasons directly related to California’s enormous population and huge agricultural sector, California has enjoyed the largest allotment.
However, January 31 did not come and go without six (6) of those states issuing what they termed a “consensus-based modeling alternative” that could serve as the framework for a negotiated settlement. Arguing that their “framework” was a good 1st step in coming to a collaborative solution, the six states (Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, Nevada, and Arizona) proposed a model based upon an evaporation/water loss scheme that would put the largest burden upon California, according to California Natural Resources Secretary Wade Crowfoot, who was quoted in the Los Angeles Times as stating that “it doesn’t seem like a constructive approach for some states to fashion a proposal that only impacts the water security and rights of another state that’s not part of that proposal.”
Go figure. Wade Crowfoot thinks that a “consensus” that vitiates water law and all past agreements to the detriment of the holder of the most senior rights and privileges without including the holder (California) in said “consensus” isn’t much of a consensus. He is hardly alone. Metropolitan Water District (MWD) General Manager Adel Hagekhalil was quoted in the Los Angeles Times as follows:
Mr. Hagekhalil sounds a lot like the golf community in our entreaties to various water providers and policymakers. We’ll get this done. We’ll get this done quickly. We’ll get this done while fully meeting the ostensible goal of the action, in MWD’s case doing what’s necessary to add the water to Lake Mead and Lake Powell necessary to keep both well above dead pool status. In golf’s case, doing what’s necessary in the short term to meet emergency restrictions and in the long-term what’s necessary to reduce water footprints more permanently.
And this is why January 31 did not come and go without that largest stakeholder (California) issuing its own proposal in a letter to the federal government from newly elected California Colorado River Board Chair JB Hamby of the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) – a proposal Hamby characterized in his letter as providing “a realistic and implementable framework to address reduced inflows and declining reservoir elevations by building on voluntary agreements and past collaborative efforts in order to minimize the risk of legal challenge or implementation delay.”
The letter, which you can access by clicking here, makes clear that California has no intention of deviating from its strong legal position, going so far as to suggest that should the seven states not be able to come to a “consensus” that would include California, everything under American law and all past agreements require that the whole matter default to the “Law of the River,” which would guarantee California’s right to require that all others, including the State of Arizona, perform surgery on their allotments before California would be required to make any cuts.
One is tempted to suggest, let the posturing begin! And that really is the best way to interpret what happened this week. The parties are positioning themselves for the coming negotiations – the 1st round of which involves the immediate cuts necessary to keep Lakes Mead and Powell above dead pool status with a 2nd round commencing immediately thereafter in which the seven states perform the voluntary givebacks that have characterized past practice in the Compact, the most recent of which was the 2003 Quantification Settlement Agreement in which, as Hamby’s letter to the Bureau of Reclamation makes vividly clear, California “was able to find ways to develop and implement intrastate agreements to drastically reduce water use and live within the state’s limited Colorado River water supply.”
Specifically, California permanently reduced its Colorado River water use by 800,000 acre-feet per year through various water management programs that turned out to be the largest agricultural-to-urban water conservation and transfer agreement in American history, something Hamby’s letter suggested Arizona might consider. Or as Hamby’s letter more caustically put it: “Just as the State of California was able to find ways to develop and implement intrastate agreements to drastically reduce water use and live within the state’s limited Colorado River water supply, so too may the State of Arizona be required to make similar arrangements to live within its available Colorado River water supplies.”
What to make of all this?
The Sierra snowpack may be the deepest in 40 years, a full 128% of its April 1 average if it snows not one flake more the rest of the winter, and that has brought substantial relief to the state’s depleted reservoirs with the promise of much more when the snowpack melts. It has allowed the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to increase its state water project allocation from 5% to 30%. However, that won’t change anything in the Colorado Basin, where the last 25 years have been the driest in more than 1,200 years. Nothing about all the posturing and positioning alters that reality. Cuts are coming, both temporary and after 2026 permanent. The precise nature of them may not yet be known, but they’re coming.
That’s the takeaway from this week’s headlines.
Are you interested in becoming an advocate for golf in California? The CGCOA is seeking amateur golfers who are passionate about protecting the game of golf and promoting public policies that enable golf to flourish in California. Take the next step to becoming an advocate for golf by completing the attached Golf is Good Ambassador Application.Read More →
FORE - The magazine of the SCGA. Find archived Public Affairs articles on the website of the SCGA's award winning quarterly publication.Read More →
Last Friday was the deadline for the filing of 2024 bills. Because 2024 is the second year of California’s two-year legislative session as well as a presidential election year, there were fewer bills filed this year than last. But that doesn’t mean that there weren’t a lot of filings.Read More →
It’s that time of year when we start to pay close heed to the status of the Sierra snowpack upon which so much of Southern California’s water needs continue to depend – a dependence that the region is busy working to reduce in favor of local supplies – e.g., storm water capture, aquifer replenishment, traditional recycling (non-potable), potable reuse, and desalination.Read More →
Back in early October we reported that the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) was set to hold its first public hearing on the Proposed Rule it published August 18 to effectuate what the Governor and others had termed “Making Conservation a California Way of Life.”Read More →
This is our Holiday message, and it is one of optimism. Yes, some of the challenges are daunting. But golf has proven over and over again that if it will organize itself around its many strengths, tackle the arduous work of communicating those strengths to all who will listen, and never succumb to cynicism and defeatism, it can not only survive, but thrive.Read More →
Affordable housing a big winner; local control a big loser. What might it mean for golf in California.Read More →
“CalMatters” is a nonprofit, non-partisan state news service that was created a few years ago to do the kind of in-depth journalism once routinely provided by newspapers and periodicals and now provided scantily if at all only by those media organs funded by charitable contributions or substantial enough to sustain deficits.Read More →