Stakes are high for farmers in Colorado water options

By Caleb Hampton

The federal government is considering two options to prevent the Colorado River from running dry. Both plans announced last week would require water users in the river’s Lower Basin to dramatically cut their use.

Under one option, the cuts would be determined according to the longstanding water-rights system, honoring the senior rights of many California farmers and requiring junior rights holders in Arizona and Nevada to give up water first. Under the other option, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation would toss out the century-old “Law of the River” and enforce cuts evenly across the three states.

Fed by snowmelt in the Rocky Mountains, the Colorado River provides water to 40 million people in seven U.S. states and Mexico, irrigating more than 5 million acres of farmland that produces food for people across the country. But the river has been overtapped for years, and two decades of drought have depleted key reservoirs Lake Powell and Lake Mead. Scientists estimate the reservoirs could hit deadpool, no longer able to generate power or supply water to the Lower Basin, within a few years.

The April 11 announcement came after the seven states that draw water from the river failed over several months to form a consensus on how to cut their water use.

In January, six states—Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona and Nevada—proposed that California, which uses the most water, should bear most of the burden. California rejected that plan, citing its senior water rights, many of which belong to farmers whose families diverted water and developed the land a hundred years ago.

“To some extent, California agriculture hangs in the balance—and California agriculture feeds the nation,” said Chris Scheuring, senior counsel for the California Farm Bureau.

The stakes are especially high for farmers in the Imperial Valley, whose senior rights entitle them to more than a third of all the Colorado River water in the Lower Basin. With that water, the farmers produce around 90% of the country’s winter vegetables and power a $2.9 billion local economy, employing one-sixth of Imperial County’s workforce.

Since 2003, Imperial Valley farms have transferred up to 8% of their water each year to cities in Southern California. Under California’s plan to address the Colorado River issue, farms would have to give up an additional 9% of supplies. Those cuts could deepen with federal intervention.

The Imperial Valley is unique in that it depends entirely on the Colorado River for its water, as the region has no groundwater and gets little rain. “Those sorts of cuts ultimately have an impact that spreads throughout the economy—to farmworkers and food processing workers. Everybody in the chain is hurt,” Scheuring said.

As farmers moved into the valley in the early 1900s, the water rights system protected their investments in the land, allowing them to determine future opportunities according to remaining water availability. But over the years, the populations of cities such as Phoenix and Las Vegas grew dramatically, shifting the concentration of water needs and political influence.

Last week, in response to the Bureau of Reclamation’s announcement, the Imperial Irrigation District, which controls water for Imperial Valley farmers and residents, released a statement expressing concern with any plan that enforces “equal cuts” on Colorado River water users.

“The priority system is a foundational element of Colorado River water management and planning and provides the tools to address the very shortage circumstances the system is now experiencing,” IID General Manager Henry Martinez said in the statement. “Alternatives that skirt around long-standing water rights, as well as the agreements and laws put in place to address this situation, have the potential to jeopardize existing long-standing California water agency partnerships and billions of dollars of long-term planning investments that have provided water supply resilience within the state for more than two decades.”

In the Bureau of Reclamation’s announcement, government officials suggested extraordinary circumstances could require extreme measures.

“Drought conditions in the Colorado River Basin have been two decades in the making,” said Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Camille Calimlim Touton. “To meet this moment, we must continue to work together, through a commitment to protecting the river, leading with science and a shared understanding that unprecedented conditions require new solutions.”

If the federal government were to enforce cuts that ignore historic water rights, it is widely expected that such an action would prompt legal challenges, especially from California.

The “equal cuts” option outlined by Reclamation “may be easier politically, but it is not necessarily a legal answer,” Scheuring said. “I would imagine the court system would ultimately be involved if California’s senior water rights were disregarded in substantial form.”

In the meantime, the seven states continue to negotiate in an effort to form a consensus plan that would conserve enough water while avoiding legal challenges.

“The draft released today is the product of ongoing engagement with the Basin states and water commissioners, the 30 Basin Tribes, water managers, farmers and irrigators, municipalities and other stakeholders,” Calimlim Touton said last week. “We look forward to continued work with our partners in this critical moment.”

A comment period on the Bureau of Reclamation’s proposed plans for the Colorado River is open through May 30, with the government planning to make a final decision this summer. The decision will determine water releases for next year.

(Caleb Hampton is an assistant editor of Ag Alert. He may be contacted at champton@cfbf.com.)