Federal Government May Step in if Southwest States Can’t Agree on Water Cuts

Should the federal government impose water cuts on the states that rely on the Colorado River?

  • 39.0k
    Voted Support

    One of the reasons we have a Federal Government is to resolve disputes between states that they cannot resolve on their own, Remember, our legiator's take an oath of office to preserve the Constituion and protect the country, and by extension, all of the people that live here.

    If our legislators hold true to their oath's of office and the agencies that they have oversight of do their jobs, they should be able to find a solution that best protects all of the people in each of the states competing for access to an increasingly scare resource. Everyone may have to lose a little as that may be the best solution for the common good.

    The alternative would be an intervention by the courts, but the glacial pace of the courts to resolve issues would provide enormous hardships for people who may lose access to potable water.

    As an aside: It would be an interesting statistic to show how much some major glaciers have shrunk during the interval between the time when a significant issue is identified and the time that the issue gets resolved by the courts. A calculation of the acre-feet of ice melted during this interval in most cases, I suspect, would be in the millions.

  • 5,397

    The arrogance and bullying nature of the individualism displayed by Americans is incredibly evident in this pending/developing crisis. The answers are right in front of us if we will but listen; the solutions have been developed and utilized before, but the wisdom of the Native American tribes who have been through these droughts and successfully managed them without the levels of technology we have at our fingertips are again ignored and dismissed. 

    When it comes to living within the environment successfully, the Native Americans have much to teach us, but we have not the courage, nor the wisdom, nor the patience, nor the intelligence to listen. 

  • 2,742
    Voted Oppose

    I look at the recent flooding of almost all of Calimexico and it said they received so much rain and the mountains are so full of multiple feet of snow that the dought in most of Calimexico was mostly ended or reduced substantially. 

    Then the story came out with all that rain that filled the few exsisting reservoirs that because they hadn't built additional reservoirs that 97% of that most valuable water went down rivers into the ocean. BRILLIANT!!!


    This flooding will come back again someday. Calimexico start building reservoirs to capture rain and snow water runoffs. Start building at least 250 desalination plants in the next ten years to fill brand new reservoirs around big cities over 50,000 people. 

  • 54.6k
    Voted Support

    80% of California water use is allocated to agriculture. Diversion and damming of rivers sacrifices fisheries for farming using taxpayer subsidized water to grow water intense crops like almonds and rice for export markets.

     The agricultural industry has been criticized for continuing to grow high profit crops like almonds that are ecologically destructive especially during drought years especially since CA has been the driest it's been in 1200 years according to a UCLA. And another study found climate change is responsible for 40% of the current drought.

     The State of CA has a water management plan but if they can't meet the reduction goals soon enough compared to the other states that have then Federal intervention is required especially since it may require the agricultural industry conversion to hydroponics which uses less water and/or desalination plants which may need investment from the Bipartisan Infrastructure legislation.

     The new California's Water Supply Strategy has 4 goals to address the projected 10% loss of CA water supply by 2050.  The Bipartisan Infrastructure Legislation will invest $309M into 20 projects supporting CA goals, and 3 states that effect CA water supply (ID, UT, WA)

     (1) create storm water storage for 4M acre-feet of storm water

     (2) recycle and reuse 800K acre-feet of wastewater per year by 2030

     (3) employ more efficient water conservation techniques to free up 500K acre-feet of water

     (4) desalinate more sea water









  • 27.9k

    Well, some good news that may help if they can get this process up to industrial size in the near future!

    'Researchers can now pull hydrogen directly from seawater, no filtering required
    It could eventually produce cheap, renewable energy for coastal areas.'

  • 1,738
    Voted Oppose

    It's been time to build desalination plants. Yes, very expensive but worth the cost in the long run. The Middle East uses them and Australia too. It would create millions of jobs and solve our water shortage in California and the south western states. Instead of giving the Ukraine billions and billions of our money and most of it has been untraceable, congress could invest in our country instead. 

  • 465
    Voted Support

    Re: SW Water Rights  & Infinite consumerism - Finite resources

    With reserve I believe that the Feds need to step in to disseminate water use. With incentives to encourage: better conservation, hydroponics warehouses, farming in geographically strategic areas, desalination, waste water reuse projects… Incentives to individuals and corporate levels. 

  • 802
    Voted Support

    Th prior agreement is from another time and because the states are not cooperating with each other, the feds will have to step up.  They need to reach agreement on their priorities.  

  • 4,006
    Voted Support

    If no compromise reached ,the Federal Gov. must mediate.

  • 7,619
    Voted Support

    why are local governments pretending like they didn't know this was on the horizen? 

    they have been repeatedly warned, but continued for the last 20 years calling water shortages a droubt....a droubt that lasts over 20 years is not a droubt, its climate change.

    burry your head in the sand, because thats all you will have in comming years....sand.

  • 1,495
    Voted Support

    IF the states involved cannot come to an agreement, they need a mediator.  That should ONLY be the function of the Federal government when the states cannot agree, but it certainly is withing the scop of the states cannot resolve this themselves.  An agreement, mandated or voluntary, is a requirement because whiile there has never really been enough water in that area it is now increasingly in a critical shortage and must not be wasted. 

  • 374
    Voted Support

    I live in the Colorado foothills of the Rockies, & I think a neutral mediator is necessary, or California & Nebraska will bully us all & slurp up the water. 

  • 4,615

    And not for nothing, but while all of this massive drought is going on the California governor has mandated that every single town or city in the state add a substantial amount of housing. Whether or not, they have the space or infrastructure or not. It's ridiculous and has ticked off everyone because we are all more than aware we do not have the infrastructure (first of all water, but by all mean not only water) to support it. Local towns, cities, and citizens can't get around this horrendous mandate. 

  • 7,894
    Voted Support

    Decrease the usage or sit back and watch it disappear.

  • 3,300
    Voted Support

    Every one of these dry Western States relies on the water they all share from the Colorado River.   That arrangement cannot be changed now that each gets less water.  This is the worst drought in more than 1,000 years.  And things will continue to get worse because of the Global Climate Crisis.  Hey--California get busy desalinating seawater using Solar and Wind Energy.

  • 2,451
    Voted Support

    It appears Arizona and California can not realize they need to cut their fair share of irrigation water. Native American tribes are entitled to their share, but have never really used it.California thinks they have had snow in the Sierras and that is enough. They forgot they have been using aquifer water for several years. That takes ions to replenish. The USBR gave the six states the opportunity to come up with their plan to cut water. But few have really sat down and come up with a plan. So now it is time for the USBR to set up its water cutting plan. I feel for the Ditch Riders, I have seen where they have met big time resistance for irrigators, sometimes with guns. 

  • 3,813
    Voted Oppose

    I'm so sick of Big Govt and their interference in our every day lives.  We know they can't be fair. Maybe those states should look at a more 'conservative' approach for a change and perhaps they wouldn't be in this position. 

  • 1,358
    Voted Support

    It seems that everyone hates 'government regulation'. Except sometimes unregulated actions lead to destruction. This is one such case. 

  • 637
    Voted Support

    This is a multi-state issue. Isn't that what the fed is there for?

  • 289
    Voted Support

    If the several state's involved in the Colorado River water issue can't use compromise and deplomancy , the feds will need to step in either to dictate or the moderate an agreement.