Balancing the Colorado River's Ecosystem and Water Delivery

Winter 2009-2010

A project of the Water Education Foundation Balancing the Colorado River’s Ecosystem and Water Delivery Capability By Gary Pitzer The Colorado River has many uses – The attention devoted to reaching a some cases perplexing. Invasive species water supply, power generation and critical balance of water supply reliabil- such as salt cedar have taken up perma- recreational opportunities. At the same ity and ecosystem health has involved a nent residence. But even as it robs the time, a renewed emphasis on endangered small army of scientific, legal and policy ecosystem of moisture and habitat for species, Indian water rights settlements experts – all intently focused on a river native vegetation, salt cedar does provide and ecological restoration has created system that is caught in a set of ongoing sanctuary for some birds and wildlife. an era of investment that has increased environmental issues as well as predicted Non-native fish species are problem- the challenge of reconciling these many changes in precipitation that look to atic because of their predation on native competing demands. disrupt the fundamental assumptions of fish. However, their absolute eradication how much water will flow in the next “is not practical because they are well 100 years. adapted to the current regulated riverine The problems confronting users environment and they support a sport of the river and those charged with fishery that helps support local econo- managing it are as varied as they are in mies,” said John Hamill, chief of the Continued on page 4 Dear Readers Since our first Colorado River Symposium in 1997, this biennial, invitation-only event has reflected the times on the river – marked River Report is a project of the in some years by tension among stakeholders and discussions between Water Education Foundation interests in other years. We believe our symposia have played a role in Editors some of the landmark river agreements reached over the last 12 years Rita Schmidt Sudman because we have brought people together on the dais and in private Sue McClurg

negotiations to share ideas on how to manage the river’s energy pro- Writer duction, irrigation supplies and drinking water. Gary Pitzer

Editorial Assistant We held our most-recent symposium in September at the Bishop’s Robin Richie

Lodge in Santa Fe – site of the 1922 compact negotiations. Panelists Photos at the event, “The Colorado River: Building a Sustainable Future,” Colorado River Recovery Program spoke at length about the “relative peace” we now have on the river in Jeff Jones U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the wake of the 2007 Record of Decision, and how this time should Lower Colorado Region be used to tackle some of the 21st century issues facing us: preparing Water Education Foundation for climate change, managing the river for both water supplies and Graphics and Layout environmental protection, and reaching agreement with Mexico on Curt Leipold, transboundary issues. The recorded discussions on environmental issues Graphic Communications helped Writer Gary Pitzer prepare this issue of River Report. The Water Education Foundation thanks all the sources and experts who reviewed What will happen to ongoing discussions over such issues in the wake this newsletter for balance and accuracy. of the recent tentative court ruling over California’s Quantification The mission of the Water Education Settlement Agreement (see page 10) remains to be seen. But one thing Foundation, an impartial, nonprofit organization, is to create a better under- I do know is this: the Foundation will continue its commitment to standing of water resources and foster learning about the many issues and diverse viewpoints in the Basin public understanding and resolution of and bring you information and analysis of these issues through our water resource issues through facilitation, Colorado River Project, which includes River Report, our Lower education and outreach. Colorado River Tour and, of course, Western Water magazine. We look Water Education Foundation to you to provide us with your knowledge of these topics and thank 717 K Street, Suite 317 you for your support. Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 444-6240 fax (916) 448-7699 [email protected] www.watereducation.org Colorado River Project Advisory Members President Hamlet “Chips” Barry, Denver Water William R. Mills Michael Cohen, Pacific Institute Executive Director Rita Schmidt Sudman Gordon “Jeff” Fassett, HDR Engineering, Inc. Herb Guenther, Arizona Department of Water Resources Gary Hansen, Colorado River Indian Tribes Jeff Kightlinger, MWD of Southern California David Lindgren, Downey Brand James Lochhead, Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck Estevan Lopez, New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission Patricia Mulroy, Southern Nevada Water Authority Don Ostler, Upper Colorado River Commission Jennifer Pitt, Environmental Defense Fund Lester Snow, California Department of Water Resources Maureen Stapleton, San Diego County Water Authority Gary Weatherford, California Public Utilities Commission

2 • Colorado River Project • River Report • Winter 2009-2010 Upper Basin Glen Canyon Dam Aces Check-Up By Reclamation A recent inspection of Glen Canyon An examination of the spillways was The high flow caused “significant erosion” Dam by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation carried out because “the overall condi- of concrete and even some sandstone, (Reclamation) revealed the 43-year-old tion and integrity of the tunnels were of requiring major repairs and tunnel modi- structure can remain “a reliable keystone” particular interest so as to reaffirm their fications in 1984. of Colorado River storage, the agency said. past repairs and continued functional- “The spillway tunnels structural Following a survey of different parts ity,” Reclamation said. The spillways soundness proved to have remained at a of the dam by divers the week of Nov. 16, conveyed incredible amounts of water in quality level, and overall condition was Reclamation said trashracks were “not only 1983 – the wettest year on record since good, considering the inherent debris and in terrific condition but also completely the construction of the dam. Spring and water leakage,” according to Reclamation. mussel-free,” a reference to the invasive summer inflows to Lake Powell were “The true functional test of actual spill- quagga mussel that has been found in Lake more than 100,000 cubic feet per second way operation will only come when water Mead, Lake Mohave and Lake Havasu. (cfs) at times. Because outflow could not and inflow levels necessitate it, but at least The first day of inspections took place in match the magnitude of inflow, both this inspection confirms Glen Canyon the reservoir side of the dam and primarily spillways ended up releasing combined Dam is prepared as well as it can be for focused on the intake structures. rates ranging from 20,000 to 50,000 cfs. that day’s arrival.” • Lower Basin Mead Water Levels Hinge on Hoped-for Surplus in Lake Powell Water levels in Lake Mead, which have two-year projection by Reclamation will get 8.23 million acre-feet next year, dropped precipitously the past decade, assumes that Lake Powell will be able to about 770,000 acre-feet less than what could improve or worsen depending on release about 2.4 million acre-feet more Nevada, Arizona, California and Mexico whether the U.S. Bureau of Reclama- water downstream than usual. The largest annually receive. According to reports, tion (Reclamation) determines if surplus constructed reservoir in the United States, there is about a 50 percent chance of that quantities are present in Lake Powell. Lake Mead can store approximately 26 occurring. The Las Vegas Valley receives As a result, by December 2010, Lake million acre-feet of water. about 90 percent of its drinking water from Mead could rise by about 16 feet or drop If Lake Powell doesn’t reach what is the lake, and work is underway to complete to a level not seen since 1937. The latest called the “equalization mark,” Lake Mead a third intake at a cost of $700 million. • Groundwater Pumping Plan Tripped Up By Legal Ruling The Southern Nevada Water Author- more “acted arbitrarily, capriciously and Opponents of the pipeline are con- ity (SNWA) and the Nevada Division of oppressively.” cerned about the potential impacts on Natural Resources are challenging to the Las Vegas for 20 years has been plan- the aquifer. In July 2008, Taylor granted Nevada Supreme Court a lower court ning to pipe groundwater to augment its SNWA less than half of the water it was ruling that faulted plans to pump water static water supply, aiming for comple- seeking while ordering it to develop a to Las Vegas from a proposed pipeline tion of an approximately 300-mile pipe- monitoring and mitigation program across eastern Nevada. line by 2019 if Lake Mead levels warrant and to collect data for at least two years In an Oct. 15 ruling, Nevada District initiation of construction. Because the before exporting any water from the area. Court Judge Norman Robison wrote that project is designed as a resource alterna- According to Robison’s ruling, while a 2008 order by State Engineer Tracy tive if drought worsens, there is not a the state usually requires “specific empiri- Taylor that would have cleared the way specific completion year, according to the cal data” before allowing groundwater to to bring as much as 6 billion gallons of SNWA. Instead, the goal is to complete be transferred out of a basin, Taylor was groundwater annually to Las Vegas from all necessary permitting so the project is “simply hoping for the best while com- rural parts of the state was an abuse of “shovel-ready” should Colorado River mitting to undo his decision if the worst Taylor’s discretion and that he further- conditions warrant. occurs.” •

Winter 2009-2010 • River Report • Colorado River Project • 3 F E A T U R E operations will perform with “changing endangered Colorado River native fish Continued from front page water realities,” and how to best meet and other species – the Upper Colorado water supply needs while accommodat- River Endangered Fish Recovery Pro- U.S. Geological Survey’s Grand Canyon ing the environment, Reclamation said gram, which began in 1988, the San Juan Monitoring and Research Center. in a Sept. 18 release. River Basin Recovery Implementation A legacy of industrial activity has left That same day, a panel of speakers Program, which began in 1992, the Glen costly cleanups such as uranium tail- addressed the subject of “Balancing the Canyon Dam Adaptive Management ings that threaten water quality. Ongo- Colorado River’s Ecosystem and Water Program, which began in 1996 and the ing matters include the indeterminate Delivery System” at the Water Education Lower Colorado River Multi-Species impacts on water quality from emerging Foundation’s biennial Colorado River Conservation Program, which began in contaminants such as pharmaceuticals, Symposium in Santa Fe, N.M. Repre- 2005. the status of the Yuma Desalting Plant senting environmental and federal agency “Today, these conservation efforts and how officials pursue multi-species viewpoints, the panelists underscored span the entire length of the Colorado restoration. the Basin’s shifting status quo and the River Basin and involve scores of state While that ensues, officials are need to address the new paradigm in a and local and federal agencies, Native looking to chart a course that includes coordinated fashion. American tribes, diverse stakeholder in- as much current science as possible to “The lesson is the status quo is unsta- terests and have had, I think, an increas- understand climate change and what it ble,” said Peter Culp, a Phoenix attorney ingly important influence on both water means for the lifeblood of the Southwest. who works on environmental, natural management and conservation in the In September, the Department of the resource and water issues, including the Colorado River basins,” Hamill said. He Interior announced its plans to address Yuma Desalting Plant. “For environ- noted the programs “have many com- the impacts of climate change on natural mentalists there is not a lot of point in monalities including similar and overlap- resources, including water. Shortly preserving the status quo if it doesn’t lead ping goals and objectives,” but that “until thereafter the U.S. Bureau of Reclama- to a healthy river. And for water users very recently there had been no formal tion (Reclamation) unveiled its plans for there is very little point in fighting to opportunity for information exchange.” a Basin water supply and demand study preserve the status quo if that won’t help With that as an impetus, stakehold- for the Colorado River. us face the future together.” ers met in Scottsdale, Ariz. in November The study includes “state of the art” Evaluating the effects of river manage- 2008 for a three-day Colorado River projections of future water supply and ment on the natural environment is the Basin Science and Resource Management demand, an assessment of climate change focus of four major science-based con- Symposium, which emphasized coordi- impacts, how existing water and power servation programs developed to address nation of activities linked to restoration of the river ecosystem. Attendees were unified by their in- volvement in collective efforts throughout the Basin to address native fish recovery, a process that includes land acquisition, flow releases from reservoirs that are more in sync with natural variability, high-flow experiments from Glen Canyon Dam into Grand Canyon National Park, non- native fish management, extensive hatch- ery operations designed to reintroduce or bolster native fish adversely impacted by the river’s development and research and monitoring. “Populations of native fish have re- sponded variably to this extensive sweep of recovery actions that have been imple- Participants on the environmental issues panel at the Colorado mented throughout the Basin, although River Symposium, L to R, Peter Culp, Squire Sanders & Dempsey; none has achieved any of the recovery Jay Rhodes, Hunton & Williams: Ted Melis, USGS; John Swett, goals that have been established,” Hamill Reclamation; Kara Gillon, Defenders of Wildlife; and Taylor Hawes, said, summarizing key points given at the The Nature Conservancy. 2008 symposium.

4 • Colorado River Project • River Report • Winter 2009-2010 “There are certainly places in the Colorado River Basin where water and power providers have changed their operations Beyond the fish recovery efforts lay to make accommodation for less substantial. The damming and diver- the larger efforts to reconcile the many environmental concerns.” sion of the natural river system has had demands placed on the river with the – Jennifer Pitt, consequences intended and unintended, environmental strain it’s under. Taylor Environmental Defense Fund something that years of environmental Hawes, leader of The Nature Conser- laws have sought to rectify. vancy’s Colorado River Program, said “There are certainly places in the the convergence of environmental and tion, non-native fishes are “the most con- Colorado River Basin where water and resource management challenges have sequential factor preventing persistence power providers have changed their put the river “on the verge of a crisis.” and recovery of imperiled native fishes in operations to make accommodation for “If we don’t figure out ways to course the Southwest, and … it is now apparent environmental concerns,” said Jennifer correct we are going to be in a crisis that presence of non-native fishes cancels Pitt, senior resource analyst with the similar to what we’ve seen in [Califor- any benefits from habitat protection and Environmental Defense Fund. ”But just nia’s] Bay-Delta,” she said. “There will be restoration.” about all the Colorado River infrastruc- 12 to 15 million more people in the next This issue ofRiver Report looks at ture was built before our modern envi- 30 years and we need to provide drink- some of the issues associated with balanc- ronmental laws were on the books, so as ing water. Agriculture is threatened due ing the Colorado River’s ecosystem and those projects were built all the ‘giving’ to the pressure to transfer water to urban its water delivery system, based on the was on the part of the environment, use. There is a billion-dollar recreational comments of a panel assembled at the while the ‘taking’ was done by those who economy. If there is not water flowing in Foundation’s invitation-only Colorado developed the resource.” those streams that economy is threat- River Symposium. The full written pro- After many years of river operations ened.” ceedings of the September 2009 confer- designed to maximize water supply reli- Hamill called climate change “one of ence will be published in Spring 2010. ability and hydropower generation, the the most compelling issues” in the Basin tide began to turn in the 1980s as agen- and “a significant threat” that restoration Seeking a Sustainable cies and stakeholder interests combined programs throughout the Basin must River System to pursue modifications designed to contend with. Regional models indicate Once described as “too thick to drink, provide for the well-being of endangered a hotter, drier basin during the next cen- too thin to plow,” the Colorado River species. tury, with altered patterns of runoff and has seen substantial development that “The evolution of and amendments water temperature. The changes could has brought water to faraway places and to operating criteria and the alteration cause the river to lose 5 percent of its na- enabled the Southwest to thrive as a of water supply and power generation tive fish species, said Kara Gillon, senior vibrant part of America. At the same time, activities to accommodate environmen- staff attorney with Defenders of Wildlife. the costs to the environment have been no tal concerns demonstrate a significant “Considering [the Colorado River] has a small assemblage of native species, that’s a significant impact,” she said. “We A Northern Pike and a Colorado could see ‘heat stroke’ in our fish to the Pikeminnow it was eating. Non- level of extinction.” native species like the Northern While Reclamation is evaluating the impacts of climate change on water Pike are threatening several supply, delivery and power operations, native species. there is no parallel effort to evaluate the impacts of prolonged drought on water quality or the natural, cultural and recreation resources, Hamill said. “This kind of gap will make it difficult to assess the implications of those changes to current recovery and conservation strategies,” he said. Native fish also are threatened by non-native fish, which Hamill called “one of the most serious challenges” to achieving native fish goals for all restoration programs. According to Reclama-

Winter 2009-2010 • River Report • Colorado River Project • 5 “We need to explore scenario planning at a basinwide scale so we fully understand the trad- commitment to the environment,” eoffs as we plan for our children southern Arizona, Hamill said. Unfor- said Robert Lynch, assistant secretary- and grandchildren.” tunately, the use of instream barriers treasurer of the Irrigation and Electrical – Taylor Hawes, to prevent upstream migration “is not Districts Association of Arizona. The Nature Conservancy technically or politically feasible in large Whatever differences stakeholders rivers.” may have, “it’s probably safe to say we all Hawes said stakeholders “need to want a sustainable river system … that we can’t save every place and have every embrace the concept of adaptive manage- will provide for the needs of humans and demand met.” ment using sound science to determine the environment for future generations,” Numbers of endangered Colorado whether we are hurting or helping the Hawes said. The lack of an integrated pikeminnow increased in the Colorado situation and adapting as necessary.” It is approach “has led to winners and losers River from 1992 through 2005. Al- also important that sustainable funding in the Basin, conflicts, uncertainty, loss though numbers of Colorado pikemin- sources be developed because “integrated of species, water shortages and increasing now decreased in the Green River from water management is not going to be in- risk [and] sacrificing one use for the sake 2000 to 2003, preliminary information expensive but it is going to be critical to of the other has rarely worked out in the from 2006 to 2008 shows numbers are our future.” As such, she cited potential long run.” increasing. Humpback chub, also endan- sources such as fees on water bills that Hawes said officials need to explore gered, are declining in the Yampa River, better reflect “the true cost of water” as solutions such as water banking, possibly remain stable in the upper Colorado well as the needs of the environment. in the Upper Basin as a way to solve River and, after a decade of decline, have the needs of water managers and the increased by 50 percent in the Grand Creating New Habitats: environment. She stressed that environ- Canyon, Hamill said. The MSCP mental flow needs should be included The conundrum of protecting and On the Lower Colorado River, meeting in the planning process “and not be an restoring native fish has prompted some environmental needs took a big step in afterthought.” to conclude that segregating native from 2005 with the Multi-Species Conserva- “We need to explore scenario plan- non-native fish “is the only viable tactic” tion Program (MSCP), a 50-year, $626 ning at a basinwide scale so we fully to save threatened native fish. This is million commitment to protect the Lower understand the tradeoffs as we plan for being done in some headwater streams Colorado River environment while ensur- our children and grandchildren,” Hawes in the Gila River Basin, which starts in ing the certainty of existing river water said. “We can’t have it all. I think we all southwest New Mexico and meets the and power operations. The MSCP strives recognize that. It is about tradeoffs … Colorado near Yuma, draining most of to protect 26 covered species and their habitat in the Lower Basin, including six federally listed endangered and threatened species. The MSCP also is intended to re- duce the likelihood that additional species will be listed as threatened or endangered during the life of the program. The stated goal in the MSCP Habitat Conservation Plan is “work toward the recovery” of threatened and endangered species and also reducing the likelihood of additional listings, said John Swett, who manages the program for Reclama- tion. At the same time, current water and power production is being accommodat- ed. “We are optimizing future water and The Imperial Ponds habitat power production. It’s a stated goal,” he said. “We are not ignoring the fact that dedication Nov. 5, 2007 marked as the population increases, we are going completion of the first MSCP to have to deal with this.” backwater habitat restora- Beginning in 1996, officials began the tion project along the lower framework of the MSCP, which has the Colorado River. goal of creating more than 8,100 acres of riparian, marsh and backwater habitat

6 • Colorado River Project • River Report • Winter 2009-2010 for four listed species and 16 other spe- “Anytime you see a big bunch of trees example. “Building adaptive capacity cies native to the Lower Colorado River. [on the river], they’re ours,” he said. “It’s for both public safety and ecosystem Swett said the need for environmental becoming a big difference and a notice- requires that water and flood manage- compliance in Colorado River opera- able difference.” ment projects maintain and enhance tions, along with the need for certainty “Being the fourth and most recent of biological diversity and natural ecosystem in the context of the increasing water the river programs, we feel we are a little processes,” she read. “Water supply and supply impacts of Endangered Species more evolutionarily advanced from the flood management systems are signifi- Act (ESA) regulations, convinced water other ones; we weren’t so ‘fish-centric,’ cantly more sustainable and economical agencies to join in the MSCP process. we were looking at a more ecosystem over time when they preserve, enhance With that in mind, a decade of plan- approach,” he said. and restore ecosystem functions, thereby ning unfolded to provide the parameters Challenges remain, including the creating integrated systems that suf- of just what species preservation would impact of climate change on future water fer less damage from and recover more look like. The process was far from easy. supplies. “You can’t do passive restora- quickly after severe natural disruptions. “Those 10 years … were definitely chal- tion in most of the Colorado River,” That’s the sort of thinking we need to see lenging,” Swett said. “There were times Swett said. “It’s an active restoration when we talk about climate change.” we weren’t sure the MSCP would come to program and it requires water to man- Gillon said she hopes Reclamation’s fruition.” age it through the 50 years.” There also new Colorado River Basin study will But perseverance paid off, leading to are practical considerations, such as the include strategies and alternatives to a multi-stakeholder, federal/non-federal desire to separate native from non-native restore resiliency in natural ecosystem partnership that seeks to balance use of fish, which is controversial because of the processes as they assess the imbalances the river in compliance with the ESA – associated impacts on the sport fishing that climate change will cause. “More “the driver of the program.” economy. sustainable” storage and modified dam Lynch said the MSCP is designed to operations “are things we will need to provide mitigation and enhancement of Changing Climate, look at as climate change changes how the river corridor below Hoover Dam Changing Needs our reservoirs currently work,” she said. to the Mexican border “and, by treating While climate change “presents opportu- Reclamation Commissioner Mike the entire area holistically, improve the nities and challenges” to the environment Connor said the basin studies “are our habitat for endangered and other species and those dependent on the Colorado first step down the path” of implement- while allowing the Basin states and their River, the depth of focus is lacking in ing the provisions in the Secure Water water and power users to continue to assessing its impacts within the river basin, Act having to do with the Climate benefit from those resources.” Gillon said. Change Adaptation Program and that The MSCP’s habitat conservation “We need to see a conversation “next year we’re certainly going to be includes some ambitious goals. “We have between water managers and natural looking to bolster our scientific expertise over 1.2 million native fish that we have resource managers when it comes to in this area.” to stock back into the Lower Colorado adapting to climate change,” she said. “The modeling is getting more River. We have over 8,100 acres of ripari- “The strategies for adapting to and in- in-depth,” he said at the Colorado an marsh and backwater habitats we have creasing our resilience to climate change River Symposium. “The risk assessment to create for these covered species,” Swett for ecosystems and for our river infra- activities are getting more complicated said. “And we are creating new habitats. structure could be complementary and and we’re going to start to build our We are not enhancing existing, we are it’s increasingly important that they not capability to not only address that within not restoring; we are creating new.” be at odds.” Reclamation, but as we partner with Of course, starting habitat from Climate change “adds an incredible other federal agencies as well as states and scratch can be a challenge. Swett said in uncertainty to the mix,” with predicted local entities in trying to get our arms the early 1990s it took two weeks to plant flow reductions ranging from 5 percent around this problem.” seven acres of trees – a laborious task of to 30 percent. “We know it is coming, digging 700 holes by hand. In the fourth we just don’t when,” Hawes said. “We Explaining Cause and Effect year of the MSCP, more than 1 million don’t know what it’s going to look like.” On March 5, 2008 a surge of water was trees have been planted and more than Gillon said it’s important for everyone released into the Colorado River from 3,300 acres of land plus water have been to recognize that reliable water supplies Glen Canyon Dam – about 41,500 cubic secured. More than 107,000 native fish and resilient flood protection depend feet per second for about 60 hours. The have been stocked into the system. The upon ecosystem sustainability. experiment, the latest in a series, aimed results of the MSCP’s work are coming She quoted from California’s draft to stir up and redistribute sediment to into view. climate change adaptation study as an enlarge existing beaches and sandbars,

Winter 2009-2010 • River Report • Colorado River Project • 7 create new ones and distribute sediment into drainage channels. The high-flow experiments, which were unheard of 20 years ago, began with regularity in the mid-1990s at Glen Can- yon. What remains elusive is a definitive account of the effects the pulse flow have on the river system below the dam. Ted Melis, deputy chief of the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center, said the challenge is to move beyond the intuitive assumption that the mimicked flood must inherently benefit the Grand Canyon river corridor. “The dilemma scientists have is know- ing some treatment might be available and it might be effective but we can’t explain the cause and effect at least to each other so we don’t feel compelled to advocate it as an effective treatment for whatever the malady is,” he said. High-flow experiments have occurred on other rivers – seven years on the Four open jet tubes at Glen San Juan and five on the Green – while scientists seek to clarify what it is they Canyon Dam during the 2008 hope to achieve and how those goals are high-flow experiment. attainted. “Are [high flows] achieving the desired restoration objectives? Maybe about the flow experiments,” he said. “If vide water for people while preserving a they are, maybe they aren’t,” Melis said. they are not working, we need to explain significant environmental asset. Created “Science has to explain why or why not why and what the other alternatives accidentally through the disposal of and it becomes a dilemma to convey that might be if the flows don’t meet those agricultural runoff, the Ciénega de Santa information back to water managers who objectives for trying to get the restoration Clara is 40,000 acres of precious wetland have to balance action with knowledge.” accomplished.” habitat in what used to be a vast Colorado While decisions should be based on There are “many questions” about River Delta in Mexico. the best available science, “we also need the ecology below Glen Canyon Dam, The Ciénega is home to thousands of to err on the side of caution, because the including the impacts of the dam “just migratory and resident birds and is an social and environmental consequences being there vs. the way it is operated” important resting and feeding ground of failing are too great,” Hawes said. “We and to what extent mitigation measures along the Pacific Flyway, the north-south have to be proactive to ensure survival of can or need to be employed, Lynch route migratory birds follow from Alaska these species and it will mean operating said. Because the “relative value” of the to South America. Thriving as it has with our reservoirs in a way that balances the flood flow experiments is still being a steady source of water, the Ciénega has environmental and human needs.” determined, “what we have, in fact, is a been part of the controversy regarding Scientists with the Glen Canyon 27-year learning curve that is still being the obligation to provide Mexico with Adaptive Management Program are developed.” higher-quality water, a process that re- looking to refine the high-flow experi- sulted in the YDP’s development to treat ments, which include gathering informa- Getting Beyond Narrow brackish agricultural return flows from tion from the other Basin restoration Positions: The YDP and the Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation and Drain- programs, including the degree to which Ciénega age District and return them to the river. flow experiments have been reported and Given the stretched water supplies of the Operating minimally since its incep- conveyed to water managers, Melis said. Colorado River, the saga of the Yuma tion, the YDP remains a divisive issue. It He said he hopes experts will continue Desalting Plant (YDP) and the Ciénega has generated no small amount of atten- to share information on a large scale. de Santa Clara is a vivid example of all tion but at the same time has opened an “We want to share what we have learned things related to the struggle to pro- unprecedented level of dialogue between

8 • Colorado River Project • River Report • Winter 2009-2010 officials and nongovernmental organiza- tions (NGOs) about meeting water supply needs and obligations while keeping January the Ciénega the vital ecological preserve 27-29 52nd Colorado Water Congress Annual Convention it is. The issue has required more than Denver, CO • Contact: 303-837-0812 its share of creative thinking because the web: http://www.cowatercongress.org/AnnualConvention United States is not obligated under the U.S.-Mexico treaty to provide water to February support the Ciénega ecosystem. 18-19 National Salinity Summit Culp, the Phoenix attorney who has Sponsored by Multi-State Salinity Coalition, Las Vegas, NV witnessed all the whys and wherefores Contact: Donna Bloom, 775-626-6389, email: [email protected] web: http://multi-statesalinitycoalition.com/#2010AG of the issue, said the YDP “highlights why we need to keep thinking bigger 25-26 15th International Water Conservation and Xeriscape Conference and broader about the river system and Sponsored by Xeriscape Council of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM maybe some of the opportunities that Contact: 505-468-1021, web: http://www.xeriscapenm.com/xeriscape_ come out of doing that.” conferences/2010/index.php While that process unfolds, Culp said it and other realities facing the Upper March and Lower Basin states illustrate why it is 2-4 Annual Conference, sponsored by Nevada Water Resources Association time to think about the river and its uses Las Vegas, NV • Contact: 775-473-5473, web: http://www.nvwra.org/events. in a different manner. “The lessons that asp#2010NWRA came out of YDP and the whole Basin 10-12 Water Education Foundation’s Lower Colorado River Tour states experience with the shortage guide- Las Vegas, NV • Contact Diana Farmer, 916-444-6240 lines is recognition at the basic level that email: [email protected], web: http://www.waterducation.org/tours the status quo is unstable and it may not 18-19 Nevada Water Law even be desirable,” he said. “The Ciénega, Sponsored by CLE International, Reno, NV while it couldn’t be ignored as a resource, Contact: 800-873-7130, web: http://www.cle.com/product. is not a resource that could survive in php?proid=1188&page=Nevada_Water_Law the long run on its current water supply, 25-26 Water Education Foundation’s Annual Executive Briefing which is eventually going away. It was Sacramento, CA • Contact: Diana Farmer, 916-444-6240 created by accident so it probably could email: [email protected], be managed better.” web: http://www.watereducation.org/conferences The quandary of the Ciénega’s fate has brought the recognition it “is a very April small part of a big and very growing 5-8 Annual Conference, sponsored by New Mexico Rural Water Association issue,” namely how to operate a river sys- Albuquerque, NM • Contact: 505-884-1031, web: http://www.nmrwa. tem in the future in the face of so much org/2010conference.php uncertainty. “We are facing a much broader set May of water supply challenges and envi- 13-14 Law of the Colorado River ronmental problems both inside the Sponsored by CLE International, Reno, NV U.S. and with Mexico that have just Contact: 800-873-7130, web: http://www.cle.com/product. made preserving people’s legal posi- php?proid=1196&page=Law_of_the_Colorado_River tions somewhat untenable,” Culp said. “Whether we are looking at the risk of June shortage, population growth or environ- 27-29 Western Governors Association Annual Meeting mental needs, we’ve got to begin to think Whitefish, MT • web:http://www.westgov.org differently. We have to get beyond zero sum outcomes and look for flexibility, look for practical solutions, think more Contact Sue McClurg with your calendar items from July 2010 through December 2010 holistically, try and view problems as part for inclusion in the Summer issue of River Report, [email protected] or of a broader picture and begin thinking 717 K Street, Suite 317, Sacramento, CA 95814 longer term.”

Winter 2009-2010 • River Report • Colorado River Project • 9 F R O M T H E H E A D L I N E S

Judge’s Ruling Jolts Basis of Quantification Settlement Agreement Under the QSA, the state committed to pay mitigation costs that exceed $133 million. Candee’s ruling compared that to a “blank check.” According to news reports, IID will meet with the other QSA parties to discuss how to deal with paying for Salton Sea mitigation, including possible A tentative court ruling has raised questions about how much the funding from the Legislature to mitigate state can spend to mitigate water transfer effects on the Salton Sea. impacts to the Salton Sea caused by the water transfer. A Sacramento Superior Court judge the other Colorado River Basin states “Among the options the board will has tentatively ruled the state’s agreement are closely watching. “[The ruling] just be considering are direct talks with the to pay for Salton Sea environmental miti- causes so much uncertainty and it desta- other parties and the state to address any gation costs under a historic Colorado bilizes everything at a time when having deficiencies in the Salton Sea mitiga- River transfer agreement is a constitu- stability among the states is critically tion funding mechanism and obtaining tionally invalid unfunded mandate – a important,” Pat Mulroy, general manager a continuing appropriation from the development that has interested parties of the Southern Nevada Water Authority Legislature for impacts to the Salton pondering the future of shared water use. told the Associated Press. Sea caused by the water transfer,” IID Judge Roland Candee’s tentative ruling News of the tentative ruling came General Manager Brian Brady said in a Dec. 10 said the 2003 Quantification during the annual Colorado River Water statement. Settlement Agreement (QSA) was incon- Users Association conference. “Reclama- For those familiar with the case, the sistent with state law, which prohibits the tion has valid and binding agreements ruling was unanticipated, although the incurrence of debt more than $300,000 with California agencies and plans to legal theory (and its possible challenge) without appropriation of the Legislature. stand by those agreements,” U.S. Bureau regarding the responsibility for Salton If the ruling stands, it would invalidate of Reclamation Commissioner Mike Sea restoration always existed. Because the joint powers authority agreement Connor said at the conference. the Salton Sea is such a critical piece of that was entered into by the federal The QSA quantified how much of any water-sharing agreement, sources government, the Imperial Irrigation the state’s annual 4.4 million acre-feet of said the court ruling poses a direct threat District (IID), the Coachella Valley Water Colorado River water was available for to the peace unless all the involved District, the Metropolitan Water District the four California water districts, making parties can preserve their position while of Southern California and the San Diego possible water transfers among them, in- finding a funding source for the Salton County Water Authority (SDCWA). cluding a 35-year transfer (with potential Sea. Candee made no further decisions Dec. extensions to 75 years) of water from IID “The constraint on IID is that if they 17 after a two-hour hearing. It is unclear to SDCWA. The QSA also commits the don’t transfer they face the … threat of when he will issue a final ruling. state to a restoration path for the environ- reduction which spurred them in the first The decision will not have an im- mentally sensitive Salton Sea and provides instance,” said a source familiar with the mediate impact as appeals are expected to full mitigation for these water supply case. “The QSA is critical for SDCWA so take years in the state and federal court programs. Restoring the state’s largest lake it may try to corral everyone not to break system. “It’s way too premature to push was a crucial piece of the agreement. away.” the panic button,” Dennis Cushman, Candee ruled the state improperly In a separate lawsuit filed in federal assistant general manager of the San agreed to pick up much of the cost of court Oct. 9, Imperial County and the Diego County Water Authority, told the saving the shrinking Salton Sea in the Imperial County Air Pollution Control San Diego Union-Tribune. southeastern California desert. The state District Imperial are challenging the Nevertheless, the QSA is viewed as put no limit on costs, “even if they ulti- legality of the QSA based on possible the foundation for many of the subse- mately amounted to millions or billions adverse impact on air quality as dust is quent multi-state/federal agreements of dollars,” he wrote. “The Court has stirred up from the exposed Salton Sea related to managing the Colorado River no ability to sanction a way to contract bed. • in times of surplus and shortage, and around the Constitution.” – Gary Pitzer

10 • Colorado River Project • River Report • Winter 2009-2010 An example of that burgeoning changes, including habitat restoration, are exploring what kind of flexibility is relationship occurred with the initial and, in some cases, operational changes needed for adaptation. On the Colorado commitment by U.S. and Mexican to improve environmental flows.” River, she said, there needs to be a dis- officials, plus NGOs, to provide replace- A “common challenge” to all the res- cussion of how climate change will affect ment water to the Ciénega during times toration programs is to assess the overall the many resource issues. the YDP is operated. “The significance of effectiveness of actions taken to preserve “I haven’t heard if anyone is looking that agreement is … the commitment it- and bolster fish populations, said Hamill at how climate change will impact the self in which each of our countries found with USGS. “The fact that multiple ecosystem, flood control, recreation, some value in making a commitment to actions are being implemented simul- clean water, cultural resources – even just the other,” Culp said. “It is important taneously in combination with natural a sense of place and quality of life,” she [the Ciénega] was recognized as having variability in the ecosystem and the long said. “If we begin that discussion now significance beyond a legal argument and time it takes for native species to show we can make that leap together and be which had to be addressed through a improvement makes it extremely difficult similarly vested in what happens.” thoughtful binational discussion.” to evaluate the success of any individual While not supportive of merging Culp said the YDP agreement could experimental or management action.” the four restoration programs, given the serve as a template for similar resolutions. As such, monitoring is “critical” to many extenuating circumstances such as “To me, the most basic lesson is that you determine the degree to which success budgetary limitations and the basin-wide had a group of people who it seemed occurs. “The importance of monitor- impacts of invasive species and climate could never get along with each other, ing cannot be overstated yet historically change, Hamill said “it is time to con- but by virtue of taking time to sit down it has not been included consistently sider developing a broader framework to and share information and perspectives in restoration programs,” Hamill said. guide overall efforts.” and begin building relationships and “Often it is done qualitatively or anec- Such an approach, which would trust … with a common goal … that dotally and not sustained for a sufficient include an independent science orga- process I think is indefinable but it pro- time or intensity to adequately track nization, “would be useful in establish- duces results,” he said. “The relationships resource conditions.” ing fundamental science practices to that were formed there ended up being Development of an overarching sci- guide restoration efforts throughout the more important than the outcome itself.” ence authority for the Colorado River Basin,” he said, “conduct regional scale Basin would “promote a more effective analyses and assessments of the status of Making the Leap Together balancing between environmental and important resources, establish indices of Managing the Colorado River’s uses for water supply objectives” and would allow ecosystem health and develop the neces- the next century is not likely to be based on for setting basin-wide priorities. sary data to inform those indices and any blueprint developed since the Colorado “Some would say this goes beyond the serve as a clearinghouse for reports and River Compact was signed in 1922. For compliance requirements of the ESA or provide information on the best available this reason, it is necessary to chart a course Grand Canyon Protection Act,” he said. management practices.” that recognizes the evolutionary process “That may be true but I believe it will But there is concern that those who that has occurred since the river’s most sig- lead to what is needed: a more sustain- manage the water system throughout the nificant development and how that impacts able and effective science-based conserva- Colorado River Basin will be asked to how adaptations are made. tion effort throughout the Basin.” somehow compensate for the anticipated “Rather than trying to answer the Swett said the subject of consolidat- loss of precipitation that comes with question about who has ‘given’ more, ing Colorado River restoration programs climate change. The Nature Conservan- it may be more useful to ask if today has been raised, but that it is unlikely a cy’s Hawes, who was previously counsel we have a functioning Colorado River unified program would be formed. “Each to the Colorado River Water Conserva- ecosystem, and if we have sustainable individual area has a different story to tion District, said “we all have to give conditions for the species that depend tell … so one solution … doesn’t always a little bit to make this work,” which on this resource,” Pitt said. “I’d say in overarch the entire river system. It’s a facilitates conflict resolution and moves some parts of the watershed the species very long river and it changes reach to negotiations forward. and their habitat are doing all right, but reach.” “It’s not going to be one interest in many, perhaps most, reaches there are Planning strategies need to be flexible group’s ox that’s gored,” she said. “We all serious problems. The fact of the matter enough to account for the variability have to provide water and I think there is that if we want a functioning river of a changing climate and should not are some things like water banking that ecosystem, and we don’t want to drive wait to take their cues from the federal can use those reservoirs to provide eco- the species that depend on it to extinc- government, Gillon said, adding that logical needs but it’s not going to come tion, we will need to make additional many states and municipalities already just from water providers.” •

Winter 2009-2010 • River Report • Colorado River Project • 11 Non-Profit Organization U.S. Postage P A I D Sacramento, CA Permit No. 430

717 K Street, Suite 317 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: (916) 444-6240 Fax: (916) 448-7699 Internet: www.watereducation.org

CHANGE SERVICE REQUESTED

C O N T R I B U T O R’ S F O R M

❏ $35 yearly subscription to River Report Please accept my additional contribution to the Colorado River Project:

❏ $50 ❏ $100 ❏ $250 ❏ Other $______❏ I would like to pledge $______Please invoice me: ❏ quarterly ❏ annually Your Name:______Company/Organization:______Mailing Address______Phone(______)______Email______

Method of Payment: ❏ Check ❏ Credit Card ❏ Please send invoice Purchase Order Number Credit Card Information: ❏ Visa ❏ MasterCard ❏ American Express Card #______Exp. Date______

Signature______

Fully 83% of contributions to the Water Education Foundation go toward education programs. Contributions to the Water Education Foundation and the Colorado River Project are tax-deductible to the fullest allowable by law.