Gov. Katie Hobbs and Arizona Department of Water Resources chief Tom Buschatzke gave updates on Colorado River negotiations on the heels of a summit in Washington, D.C., to the Arizona Reconsultation Committee on Monday.
We’ll spare you the full rundown — we’ve devoted many pixels to Colorado River talks in recent weeks — but here are some highlights.
Hobbs and Buschatzke go to Washington
Six of the seven governors of the Colorado River basin met with Interior Secretary Doug Burgum in Washington, D.C., last week, perhaps the first such meeting of basin state governors in regional history as the states face an impending deadline to come up with a plan to manage the river’s water and reservoirs in coming decades.
Buschatzke said the main issues in negotiations are (and historically have been):
The volume of releases from Lake Powell to Lake Mead — in effect, how Upper Basin water is ferried to the Lower Basin
The prospect of releases from reservoirs in the Upper Basin like Flaming Gorge to stabilize infrastructure down river
Whether the Upper Basin will commit to a certain volume of cuts, and whether the Lower Basin will have to make cuts beyond what it has already committed to — 1.5 million acre feet a year
And whether the Lower Basin states will waive rights under the Colorado River compact to receive a certain amount of water from upriver
The pair said there seems to be some movement toward commitments for cuts from the Upper Basin states of Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming and Utah, if not legally enforceable ones — a persistent sticking point in negotiations.
But even if there is some progress, the likelihood of a deal before the current Feb. 14 deadline — statehood day, not Valentine’s Day, they note — seems slim, and nobody seems sure what the federal government might do if the states don’t have a deal by then. Current agreements governing the river expire in October.
A phased approach
Buschatzke said the states are now talking about a phased deal with separate but related components — one for the next five-ish years and one for the next twenty-ish years.
This may be the best way to incentivize conservation efforts by the Upper Basin and to keep the dogs of litigation at bay, he said.
But details are sparse, and it seems the parties are getting stuck in familiar territory — namely, under what conditions and during which phase the Upper Basin would share the conservation burden.
Gov. Lewis sounds off
Stephen Roe Lewis, governor of the Gila River Indian Community, said during the ARC meeting — with others echoing him — that the obligation of the Upper Basin states to allow for an average of 80.2 million acre-feet over ten years to arrive downriver is a core component of the community’s settlement rights.
“Any unilateral action by the Department of the Interior that fails to uphold this minimum release, which the community relied and negotiated on in good faith, would in our view, constitute a blatant violation of the United States’ responsibility to protect our CAP water,” Lewis said.
A six-state deal
Twice in the last two weeks, I’ve been in press events with Buschatzke in which a reporter from a Washington, D.C.-based outlet has asked the director about the prospect of a six-state deal that leaves out Arizona — someone from the Washington Post last week and Politico this week.
The idea is basically that the other states are coming closer to a deal, with Arizona — painted as a reckless water user by critics in the Upper Basin despite its conservation efforts — as the odd one out.
Both times, Buschatzke strenuously denied that this was likely.
“What binds us (in the Lower Basin), and what continues to bind us, is there might be different risk profiles for the three states, but nevertheless, the path we are on is a higher risk profile for the Lower Basin, with each state owning their own piece of that risk profile,” he said during a presser last week. “And I think that's binding us together as well, and it's not going to change.”
At the same time, during the ARC meeting this week, he said he views failure as giving away Arizona’s water, not necessarily failing to reach a seven-state deal. And Arizona arguably has the greatest risk profile of the basin, so it’s conceivable its negotiators would be less likely to concede ground than even their California and Nevada counterparts.
“The only real failure for me, when I look in that mirror, is if I give away the state of Arizona's water supply for the next several generations,” he said. “And that ain't gonna happen.”
It’s hard to say where this idea of a six-state solution is coming from.
News outlets in Colorado — perhaps Arizona’s main adversary in these talks — report that local (though anonymous) sources are saying that six of the seven states are approaching a deal, sans Arizona.
This may be true. But it also may be true that Upper Basin officials would benefit from a narrative that Arizona is the main obstacle to an agreement.
Lucky number eight: The state last month finalized its designation of its eighth Active Management Area, strictly managing withdrawals in the Ranegras Plain Groundwater Basin. In documents related to the designation, the state says excessive withdrawals have threatened groundwater supplies and led to land subsidence in the La Paz County region.
“The future of residents and businesses depends upon protecting the finite groundwater resources in the Ranegras Plain basin. This is a critical step in achieving that outcome,” ADWR chief Tom Buschatzke said in a statement.
Speaking of Ranegras: Even with the new AMA designation, Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes is forging ahead with her nuisance lawsuit against Fondomonte Arizona, the Saudi-backed firm pumping groundwater to grow alfalfa to ship overseas in the western reaches of the state. In a press release, she argues the AMA designation is good, but not enough to stop Fondomonte, and “only the Attorney General's public nuisance lawsuit can address the alleged harms caused by a single defendant against an entire community.”
News from upriver: As we’ve discussed, the whole Colorado River basin is dependent on snowmelt in the cooler, higher-elevation states up the river. But this winter has been characterized by “snow drought,” further threatening stability of the already strained river. For its part, Colorado is experiencing its worst snowpack on record for this time of year, the Colorado Sun’s Shannon Mullane reports.
Trade snow drought for news flow — join the subscriberpack.
Bring on the lawsuits: The state House gave unanimous approval to Republican Rep. Gail Griffin’s HB2116, which would appropriate $1 million in fiscal year 2027 to the Colorado River Litigation Fund. The bill is designed to help finance lawsuits to protect the state’s position in Colorado River talks — talks that may well sputter out and give way to dueling court cases across the basin.
“Other states have been positioning themselves for court long before this fund was created. Hopefully, the fund will not be needed, but if it is—this bill makes sure that Arizona is ready to defend the water that millions of people and billions of dollars of economic activity depend on,” Griffin said in a statement. “Waiting until a lawsuit is filed to start planning would be reckless.”
Comb the desert!: Beginning Feb. 10, ADWR staff and researchers will begin a “sweep” of wells in southern Arizona to measure water levels and inform hydrologic management. It will be the first basin-wide survey of the region since 2016, ADWR says.
At the Arizona Reconsultation Committee meeting this week, Tom Buschatzke kicked off a discussion of Colorado River hydrology by using the spoonerism “dry-hology.”
Who knows if this was intentional or a slip of the tongue, but either way, it’s a fair assessment of the basin’s dire hydrologic position.
So fair that, when department staff continued their discussion, they continued to use the word, streamlined to “dryology.”
Maybe you should be using it too!