Hydro turbines can stop spinning. Las Vegas and Phoenix may be forced to limit water use or growth. Farmers may stop growing some crops and turn fields of lettuce and melons to dust. 8} are some of the dire consequences that could result if we could not agree on how to reduce the amount of water we draw from
Seven states in the United States have allowed more water to be extracted from rivers than nature can replenish. Despite widespread recognition of the crisis, states missed a deadline this week to propose the deep cuts the federal government said it needed.
Once again the government has failed to enforce tough decisions and has refrained from imposing cuts on its own despite having previously been threatened to do so.
15} Unilateral action by federal officials will likely shift the conversation from the negotiating table to the courts, further delaying action. It quenches the thirst of 40 million people in the United States and Mexico and supports a $15 billion annual agricultural industry.But for a century, the agreements governing how water is shared have been based on erroneous assumptions about the amount of water available. As climate change makes the region hotter and drier, the discrepancies are becoming more significant.
Lake Powell and Lake Mead, the two largest reservoirs that hold the water of the Colorado River, have declined to dangerous levels at a rate no one expected. This decline threatens to disrupt hydropower production and water delivery to cities and farms.
Everyone agrees the risks are high, but states and the U.S. government are struggling to reach agreement on what to do.
Against river water "People were hoping to get through this day," said Felicia Marcus, a former Supreme Waters official for California, which holds the largest rights. "But I don't think we can expect Mother Nature to save us next year. Some of these very difficult decisions are now."
This river It is also utilized by Arizona, Colorado, Nevada,New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming, Mexico, and some tribes.
For years, authorities have warned about the state of the river, but have reassured people that the system will not crash.
A potentially dramatic moment shrugged as the deadline passed on Tuesday.
The federal government said she: We are ready to move forward on our own. "But we will continue to talk to everyone about what the process is," the official said.
Not everyone is happy with that approach.
"At the very least, we're asking them to explain very clearly how that threat is imposed," said John Entsminger, general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority.
Entsminger and his counterparts in Arizona, Utah, and California, as well as local officials in and around Phoenix, also repeated a common catchphrase. Tell their water users that the river will not stop flowing imminently.
``This is not a situation that people should worry about. It's very clear that we're going through an unprecedented time," said Wade Crowfoot, California's secretary of natural resources.
Some states make up the difference by using other water sources or employing technologies such as wastewater recycling.
has voluntarily implemented strict conservation measures.The climate change bill signed into law by President Joe Biden on Tuesday provides $4 billion that can be used to pay users of the Colorado River for cuts
The shrinking of the river caused inflammation. Tensions are rising in It also pits growing cities against agricultural regions.
In Pinal County, Arizona, Kelly Anderson grows special crops for the flower industry and leases land to alfalfa farmers who feed cattle on a nearby dairy farm. He expects about half of the area to become random next year after farmers in the area lose all access to the river.
Farmers use most of the water. But they have less room to store water than cities that can more easily recycle or tap other sources. Rivers are the lifeblood of places like California's Imperial Valley, where vegetables such as broccoli, onions and carrots are grown. Water scarcity can have ripple effects throughout the food system.
The states aren't the only things in the table. Native American tribes hold the oldest water rights and have a unique position in the bargaining because the federal government needs to protect their interests.
Indian tribes on the Colorado River along the Arizona-California border have provided water to revitalize Lake Mead in the past. They may be called again.
"The rights of our upper echelons do not mean that we can or must stand by," said Amelia Flores, president of the Colorado River Indian Tribe. We won't let this river die."
The upstream states, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico and Wyoming, have historically not used all of their water and are therefore on the cutting edge. I argue that it should not be faced.
They want to protect their share in anticipation of population growth and have not pursued water conservation policies as much as Arizona and Nevada.
Zach Frankel, director of the Executive Utah River Council, said many people in the Rocky Mountains clung to the false belief that their water rights were safe, continuing to wreak havoc on their downstream neighbors, and one
Arizona, Nevada and California say they are willing to offer water.
A growing chorus of veteran officials, d Environmental advocates say both state and federal governments are sending mixed messages by emphasizing the gravity of the situation but delaying meaningful action.
Shrinking reservoirs encourage conservation by rethinking how the river is managed, said James Eklund, an attorney and former chairman of the Upper Colorado River Commission. said it would provide an opportunity to
Bureaucrats continue to think they can delay change, he said. The thing is, "not taking action means you're driving towards a cliff, so it doesn't really work here."
___
Ronin was reported from Madera, California. AP writer Felicia Fonseca contributed from Flagstaff, Arizona.