It’s lower basin states versus the upper basin in fight over Colorado River water

By Lindy Browning | Contributing Writer, Rocky Mountain Voice

As he prepares to begin his first term in the U.S. House of Representatives, on priority for U.S. Rep.-elect Jeff Hurd will undoubtedly be protection of water in Western Colorado, via the Colorado River.

During a Dec. 5 conference in Las Vegas, Nev., representatives of the seven states that utilize water from the Colorado River Basin were so at odds over what states and how much water use needs to be cut that they couldn’t even be on stage at the same time. 

Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico make up the Upper Basin. California, Arizona and Nevada represent the Lower Basin. The current rules for sharing water expire in 2026, and each group has submitted a separate proposal for new guidelines thereafter.  To say there is disagreement in the group is a glaring understatement.

The lower basin states, California, Nevada and Arizona, doubled down on their river management proposal, which outlines a system in which water cuts would be shared by all river basin states in severely dry water years. The Lower Basin states would take the first cuts in less-dry years.

The Upper Basin states defended their proposal, which suggests that all of the mandatory cuts take place in the Lower Basin while the Upper Basin participates in voluntary conservation.

“The Upper Basin does not have more to give,” officials said. Its farmers, ranchers and other water users are already cut off in dry years because there is simply not enough water in rivers.

Hurd says he wants to focus on pushing back against the Biden administration’s regulations that make construction of high-elevation water storage next to impossible to permit and build. Those were frequent discussions he had with constituents as he campaigned for their votes.  He is also focused on measures that would allow for more efficient use of the water that is available and specific remedies for specific plant life such as tamarisk, a plant that is known to use enormous amounts of water along the Colorado River.

“I am not for changing the Colorado River Compact document,” he said.  He has noted in the past that he is aware that the lower basin states are taking 7 million acre-feet more in water than has been allocated under the compact.

He readily admits that he is working hard to learn more about water law since that is not the type of law that he neither is an expert in nor practiced.  He told constituents during his campaign and on debate stages that he has the basics and would learn the more specific laws as it pertains to protecting water in Western Colorado and in the Upper River Basin states.

In reference to the recent meeting in Las Vegas, he said that it was not the compact itself, a document and legal premise for the allocation of water in the basin that was being discussed, the separate bureaucracy that determines the management of the operational guidelines for the basin.

When asked about the feasibility of states like California and Arizona who both have discussed the viability of large scale desalination plants, he said that although there are places where it works, there are some big hurdles that currently prohibit large scale use in the United States.

“It is a technology that is technically feasible, but it is very expensive and comes with very energy intensive demands,” he explained. 

Hurd said state Sen. Clive Simpson, who represents the San Luis Valley, has voted NO on desalination operations within the state for the above-mentioned reasons.

Desalination is the process of removing salts and minerals from water to make it suitable for human consumption, irrigation, or industrial uses. It’s used in dry regions around the world, such as the Middle East, Australia and California, in very limited scale operations.