Introduction

            The Colorado River is a critical source of water for the western United States and Mexico, but drought and disputes over water rights have left the river’s future uncertain. Recently, there has been a shift in policy toward recognizing the water rights of Native American communities, which could have significant implications for the future of the river and all the stakeholders. The Biden Administration recently announced a funding package to go to the Colorado River Basin’s recovery efforts from what is now being called a megadrought, lasting over 23 years.

            The current situation requires both Mexico and the US to work together to maintain critical flows of water to prevent catastrophic failures in hydroelectric power, agriculture, and human development. With seven states, two countries, dozens of tribal communities, and millions of citizens all dependent in some way on the flow of the Colorado River, is it even possible to maintain the status quo or is a massive shift required to make progress from the headwaters of this environmental and economic challenge?

            In this paper, I will discuss the long and complicated history of the Colorado River and in selecting two similar agricultural communities, I will illustrate how the Biden administration’s new water rights rulings and funding make sense in a system that needs to make radical changes to its operations, except nobody seems to want to go first.

Section One: Ecological, Historical, Structural Processes

Colorado River Basin Ecology

            The Lower Colorado River Basin extends from the western edge of the Grand Canyon in Arizona down to the Gulf of California in Mexico. This arid region is approximately 68,000 square miles in size and is home to a diverse range of plant and animal species adapted to survive in low precipitation with temperatures often exceeding 100 degrees Fahrenheit during the summer months. The Basin is characterized by a range of desert landscapes, including sand dunes, mesas, canyons, and rocky terrain. Riparian ecosystems line the river, providing habitat for a wide variety of animal species, trees, migratory birds, and fish such as the endangered razorback sucker and bonytail chub. (Cohen et al., 2013)

            Annual rainfall averages only a few inches per year, with the most precipitation occurring in the mountainous areas of the basin. The river is the region’s primary water source and is heavily used for agriculture, drinking water, and hydropower generation. As a result, the Colorado River faces significant challenges related to water scarcity, overuse, and competing demands between the United States and Mexico. (Cohen et al., 2013)

            The Lower Basin is home to dozens of indigenous communities, including the Colorado River Indian Tribes (CRIT), which are comprised of the Mohave, Chemehuevi, Hopi, and Navajo. Also the Gila River Indian Community which encompasses the middle of Maricopa County, Arizona. These tribes possess unique cultural practices that have been passed down for generations and are closely tied to the river, its water, and the land. The CRIT has worked tirelessly to protect their rights to the resources, engaging in economic activities such as farming and ranching in addition to their cultural practices. The region also contains other tribes; the Quechan and Cocopah who have longstanding connections to the Colorado River. (Inter Tribal Council of Arizona |, 2019)

            Fort Mojave Indian Tribe is the only tribe in the United States to inhabit a National Wildlife Refuge located entirely within their reservation boundaries. The refuge, which is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is home to a diverse array of wildlife, including birds, mammals, and reptiles, and provides important habitat for species such as the southwestern willow flycatcher and the desert tortoise. The Fort Mojave Indian Tribe and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have worked together to develop a cooperative management plan for the refuge, which includes provisions for traditional cultural uses of the land by the tribe. Despite challenges, including the loss of their traditional resources and lands, these tribes continue to persevere and protect their cultures and ways of life. Valuable lessons can be gleaned from their persistence that can serve us in our endeavors to find ecological balance within the Colorado River Basin. (Inter Tribal Council of Arizona |, 2019) (Indian Affairs, 2023)

            Before human management, the Colorado River in Mexico flowed through a diverse and dynamic landscape, supporting a variety of plant and animal species. The river would experience natural fluctuations in flow, with seasonal floods and droughts shaping the surrounding ecosystem. These fluctuations were critical to the functioning of the ecology, helping to redistribute sediments, replenish groundwater, and provide habitats. The river was also a strong riparian corridor with cottonwood, willow, and mesquite trees lining the banks. (Cohen et al., 2013)

Understanding Water Rights and Drought

            A water right refers to the legal entitlement to utilize surface water, groundwater, or other water resources. The allocation of water rights for most of the Western United States is predicated on the principles of prior appropriation and beneficial use, which vary across state jurisdictions. Prior appropriation is based on the temporal, locational, and purposeful deployment of water, and it is instrumental in determining the allocation of water rights during periods of shortage. The diverse types of water rights include senior rights, which are claims based on antiquity; junior rights, which are predicated on more recent claims; vested rights, which are established claims predating the obligation to use water rights imposed by state law; and federal reserve rights, which are linked to federal land withdrawals. (University of Nevada, 2020)

            Once a water right is granted, it denotes a lawful claim to a specific allotment of water for productive purposes. However, during times of scarcity, the actual amount of water allocated for use may fall short of the amount claimed. Appropriative rights are subject to various constraints, such as priority rules, which necessitate the postponement or reduction of junior rights until senior users’ claims are fully met; “use it or lose it” requirements, which stipulate the forfeiture of water rights in cases where users fail to fully utilize their allocations over a period of five years; and federal regulations, such as the Endangered Species Act, which may mandate curtailment of water rights if their usage poses a threat to protected habitats. (University of Nevada, 2020) (Cohen et al., 2013)

            Drought is a phenomenon characterized by a prolonged period of dryness resulting in a water shortage. Despite this general definition, defining drought is a complex task, with over 150 published definitions reflecting regional, functional, and operational differences, and can be classified into meteorological, hydrological, agricultural, socioeconomic, and ecological types for monitoring. Drought is difficult to predict and track; its impacts are slow and vary regionally, making it challenging to mark the beginning and end of a drought period. (NDIS, 2023)

            Drought can have significant environmental, social, and economic impacts. Agricultural production, transportation, public health, ecosystems, and water quality can all be affected by drought. Water scarcity and decreased water quality can impact agricultural production and critical ecosystem services. Drought can also increase transportation costs and impact transportation infrastructure. Wildfires can be more likely during drought due to dry and flammable vegetation. Drought can lead to increased incidence of illness and disease, adverse mental health outcomes, and increased mortality rates. Ecosystems can be degraded due to reduced plant growth, reduced species diversity, and landscape-level transitions. Water quality can be negatively impacted due to algal growth, lower dissolved oxygen levels, and increased turbidity. (NDIS, 2020) (Coppola, 2020)

Laws of the Colorado River

            Between 1907 and 2019, the Colorado River witnessed the development of various laws that sought to regulate its water allocation and usage. The establishment of the Colorado River Compact in 1922 marked a significant milestone in the legal framework of the river. This compact emerged from negotiations between the seven states sharing the Colorado River basin, aiming to allocate the water resources fairly among them. The compact established an Upper Basin and Lower Basin division, with each region receiving a specific allocation of water. However, challenges arose over time, as Wyoming contested Colorado’s right to divert water from the river’s headwaters. This led to further negotiations and the creation of the Colorado River Commission, which worked towards developing the Colorado River Compact and ensuring equitable water distribution between the Upper Basin and Lower Basin states. (Law of the River, 2020)

            As agricultural, human, and new electrical power water demands increased in the region, the need for comprehensive legislation became apparent. The Boulder Canyon Project Act of 1928 authorized the construction of Hoover Dam and facilitated the distribution of water and hydropower benefits among the states. Subsequent legislation, such as the Colorado River Storage Project Act of 1956, facilitated the construction of additional dams and reservoirs, expanding water storage and management capabilities. The enactment of the Central Arizona Project Act in 1968 allowed for the diversion of water to southern Arizona, which helped meet the growing water needs of the region’s agricultural and urban sectors. (Law of the River, 2020) (Hanak, 2011)

            Over time, environmental concerns gained recognition, leading to the enactment of laws aimed at preserving the river’s ecosystems. The Western riparian rights system has never truly recognized the rights of the river to its own water, thereby causing countless environmental catastrophes. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 and subsequent amendments sought to protect endangered species, including several native fish species that depend on the Colorado River for their survival. Additionally, water quality regulations were implemented to address issues such as algal blooms and pollution. (Hanak, 2011) (University of Nevada, 2020)

Figure 1 History of Colorado River Legislation (Law of the River, 2022)

Transnational Water Treaty

            The history of the transnational water rights treaty between the United States and Mexico is marked by a series of agreements and negotiations aimed at managing and allocating the shared water resources of the Colorado River and the Rio Grande. The 1944 Treaty between the United States of America and Mexico Regarding the Utilization of Waters of the Colorado and Tijuana Rivers and of the Rio Grande (often referred to as the “1944 Water Treaty”) serves as the foundation of this transboundary water cooperation. (IBWC, 2023)

            The treaty established the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC), a binational organization responsible for administering the provisions of the agreement. It addressed water allocation and deliveries to each country, including provisions for storage, deliveries during drought conditions, and measures to prevent flooding. The treaty also established mechanisms for resolving disputes and promoting joint planning and cooperation between the two nations. (IBWC, 2023)

            Over the years, additional agreements and amendments have been made to address emerging issues and changing water demands. The 1973 Agreement on Coordinated Operations and Additional Works on the Colorado River expanded upon the 1944 Water Treaty, providing more detailed provisions for water management, flood control, and environmental considerations. The 2012 Minute 319 extended and modified the treaty to incorporate measures to address environmental restoration and conservation, including the release of water for ecological purposes and the promotion of environmental flows. (IBWC, 2023)

Transnational Governmental Structures

            The binational governmental structures in the United States and Mexico that support the 1944 Water Treaty and the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) for the Colorado River involve multiple levels of authority and coordination. In the United States, the primary entity responsible for implementing the treaty is the U.S. Department of State. The Department of State oversees the negotiations and agreements with Mexico, representing the federal government in matters related to transboundary water management. Within the Department of State, the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs plays a key role in coordinating and overseeing the implementation of the treaty. (IBWC, 2023)

            Mexico’s Federal counterpart to the US Department of State is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, SRE). The SRE acts as the primary governmental body responsible for engaging with the U.S. government on transboundary water issues, including negotiations and the administration of the treaty provisions. Both these agencies coordinate with other agencies in their respective countries to help deliver treaty projects and promises.(SRE, 2023) In the USA the majority of Colorado River issues delegation goes to these four agencies: The Bureau of Reclamation, the US Geological Survey, the Army Corp of Engineers, and the USDA. These agencies represent for the USA the most important aspects of the Colorado River natural resource which is mostly economic productivity. In Mexico, the SRE generally delegates to five federal departments: Comision Nacional del Agua/National Water Commission (CONAGUA), Secretaria de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural/Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (SADER), Comision Nacional Forestal/National Forestry Commission (CONAFOR), Comision Nacional de Areas Naturales Protegidas/National Protected Areas Commission (CONANP), and the Seretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales/Ministry of Environment and National Resources (SEMARNAT). (OECD, 2013)

            In the middle of these two nations stands one treaty and two national organizations that are the first line managers of the 1944 Water treaty, The International Boundary and Water Commission on the American side and the Comision Internacional de Limites y Aguas (CILA) on the Mexican side. La Comisión Internacional de Límites y Aguas, 2019) Both act as arbiters for each nation over all the transnational rivers and in times of emergency, especially for drought and chemical spills, they are the informational sharing post between FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and Mexico’s Sistema Nacional de Protección Civil (SINAPROC). (OECD, 2013)

Transnational Emergency Management and Response

            In the case of acute response between the United States and Mexico along any of its riparian boundaries, the US-Mexico Joint Inland Contingency Plan was drafted in 2006 to lay out a coordinated incident response plan. This plan includes all departments from both nations that would be called in on a water-defined natural or man-made disaster. ‌(USMJCP, 2006)

At the moment of incident or threat, a notification would be passed to the National Response Center (NRC) in the USA or CENACOM In Mexico. From there, Incident Specific Joint Response Teams and On-Scene Coordinators would be dispatched to the area for the preliminary evaluation and recommendation for a joint response. If the ISJRT and OSC recommend a joint response with the other country, the Joint Response Team Co-Chair will then reach out to their corresponding partner and activate their National Response Frameworks. Due to the nature of the transnational boundary and treaties, the emergency response will also include the IBWC and CILA along with the activation of all the State Department and Foreign Secretaries involved in the leadership structure. ‌(USMJCP, 2006)

            This plan was created for acute emergency response when time matters to the response success, however, in cases of drought, these defined connections are not as easily mapped. Droughts as emergencies go, are slow and protracted. Droughts do not always cause destruction by their very nature, however, with time droughts can change entire ecosystems, turning farmland into dust. The truth is, much like other natural disasters, by the time the first deleterious effects start to occur it is far too late to do anything about it, and no ISJRT will be able to put that genie back into the bottle, unlike a chemical spill recovery might attempt. ‌(USMJCP, 2006)

United States of America

            In the United States there is often more than one response structure depending on the incident along the Colorado River. For toxic spills, the National Response Center, run by the Coast Guard, has dominion over the dispatch of first-line emergency responses on major waterways. They will then send an on-scene coordinator and joint team. If Federal level assistance is deemed to be required, the OSC of the National Response Teams (NRT) and Regional Response Teams (RRT) will dispatch them to the site. These dispatches can consist of teams from the Special Forces, National Strike Teams, Environmental Response Teams, Radiological Emergency Response Teams, Scientific Support Coordinators, National Pollution Funds Center, District Response, and even the US Navy and its Supervisor of Salvage. FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, can also be called out to respond to operations, provide human services support, and logistical needs. ‌(USMJCP, 2006)

            Drought Response does not provide the NRC as a first contact in an emergency, it is instead a part of the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) which monitors drought conditions across the United States. In cases of drought emergency, the initial contact is going to be the USDA that provides the bulk of the human and economic response in cases of drought due to the impact on agriculture. FEMA, which is generally the national acute response to emergencies, has very little to provide the regions within a drought emergency. (NDIS, 2023)

            The federal government has established various drought recovery programs to support individuals and industries impacted by drought conditions. These programs are designed to provide financial assistance and resources to mitigate the effects of drought and aid in the recovery process. One of the programs triggered by the U.S. Drought Monitor is the Livestock Forage Disaster Program (LFP). LFP offers financial support to livestock producers who have experienced grazing losses due to drought or fire. Eligible producers receive payments to help cover the additional cost of forage or feed required to sustain their livestock during the drought period. (NDIS, 2023)

            Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees, and Farm Raised Fish Program (ELAP) aids producers for losses incurred as a result of adverse weather events, including drought. This program covers various forms of loss, such as livestock death, feed or grazing losses, and damage to honeybee colonies. Producers can apply for reimbursement of eligible expenses related to the emergency assistance they require to overcome the impacts of drought on their agricultural operations. (NDIS, 2023)

            In addition to the programs triggered by the U.S. Drought Monitor, there are other drought recovery initiatives offered through the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). These include the Non-Insured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP), which provides financial assistance to producers who have experienced crop losses due to natural disasters like drought. The Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP) compensates producers for livestock deaths resulting from eligible natural disasters, including drought. Moreover, the USDA offers programs such as the Emergency Haying & Grazing program, the Emergency Conservation Program (ECP), and the Tree Assistance Program (TAP), which provide support for emergency forage and grazing, conservation measures, and tree replanting efforts, respectively. These initiatives aim to assist farmers and ranchers in managing the impacts of drought on their operations and restoring their agricultural resources. (NDIS, 2023)

            All these emergency mitigation efforts are for Americans who are suffering from drought, not for those who live on the other side of the Mexican border. The transnational mitigation, response, and recovery efforts to a Colorado River drought require a different scale of coordinating efforts, one that moves entire rivers, drains reservoirs, pumps water upstream, and manages the water resources between the two nations.

Mexico

            In Mexico the emergency response of an event on a transnational river starts with a report to CENACOM, the National Communication Center inside Centro Nacional de Prevención de Desastres/The National Center for Disaster Prevention. From there notice is sent to all the various governmental entities that would possibly be affected. This communication is laid out in the Dirección General de Protección Civil/Civil Protection Directorate (DGPC), much like our National Response Plan and Incident Command Structure does in the United States. ‌(USMJCP, 2006)

            CENACOM then requests a report on the event including any further response activations needed and hands it off to Dirección de Ejecución y Apoyo (DEA), which provides the administrative support for the Mexican Government. All of these systems were only recently put together in Mexico, after the September 19, 1985, earthquake that devastated the country. From that, Mexico tied all its local and regional emergency laws and policies together under SINAPROC, the National Program for Civil Protection. Over the years since, Mexico has continued to define its emergency response system which is represented by the chart below. ‌(USMJCP, 2006)

            Mexico’s National Water Commission, CONAGUA, is responsible for overseeing the emergency response to droughts. CONAGUA plays a crucial role in monitoring drought conditions with a comprehensive network of meteorological and hydrological monitoring stations and remote sensing technologies. By collecting real-time data on precipitation, water availability, and soil moisture, CONAGUA can assess the severity and extent of drought events. The SRE collaborates closely with CONAGUA, which plays a significant role in water management and infrastructure development within Mexico. ‌(USMJCP, 2006)

            Based on its assessments, CONAGUA collaborates with other governmental institutions, research organizations, and stakeholders to develop and implement effective emergency response measures. These measures aim to mitigate the impacts of drought on various sectors, including agriculture, water supply, and ecosystems. Much like the United State’s NIDIS, CONAGUA’s expertise and data-driven approach contribute to informed decision-making, the coordination of drought response efforts, and the development of strategies to manage and alleviate the adverse effects of droughts. ‌(USMJCP, 2006)

            Mexico has implemented various drought emergency response mechanisms to provide assistance to individuals, particularly farmers and ranchers, who are affected by drought. One such mechanism is Procampo, a program that offers direct financial support to agricultural producers. Procampo aims to compensate farmers and ranchers for income losses resulting from uncontrollable factors like drought. The program provides subsidies based on the size of the land and specific agricultural activities; aiding and alleviating the economic burden caused by drought. ‌(CONAGUA 2023)

            Another important mechanism is the Seguro Agrícola Catastrófico (SAC), an agricultural insurance program. SAC provides coverage against catastrophic events, including drought, offering financial compensation to farmers and ranchers who suffer losses. This insurance program serves as a vital resource for farmers, enabling them to recover from the economic impacts of drought and sustain their agricultural operations. (Agrosemex, 2017)

            The Fondo de Desastres Naturales (FONDEN) is a national fund for natural disasters in Mexico that plays a crucial role in supporting drought-affected individuals. FONDEN provides financial resources for emergency response, recovery, and reconstruction efforts. Farmers and ranchers can access this fund to receive relief and recovery measures, helping them overcome the challenges posed by drought and restore their agricultural activities. (Secretaría de Gobernación, 2022)

            Additionally, Mexico has the Programa de Apoyo para Productores de Maíz y Frijol (PIMAF), which specifically targets maize and bean producers. During drought conditions, PIMAF extends financial assistance and technical support to farmers, offering resources to cope with the adverse effects of drought on their crops. Furthermore, the Programa de Atención a Contingencias Climatológicas (PACC) addresses climate-related contingencies, including drought. PACC provides resources for emergency measures, such as water supply, fodder, and technical assistance, to support affected farmers and ranchers.(President of Mexico, 2018)

            Like the United States, Mexico provides most relief efforts to economic and agriculture water endeavors. There is a very good reason for this, droughts have huge impacts on economies specifically agricultural. Droughts are the precursors to famine, a disaster that historically has the capacity to kill millions. (Coppola, 2021) Due to the nature of the Colorado River Basin’s 23-year drought, it has crossed defined categories for drought which has led to recent Executive Branch level policy overtures and changes that will affect the people of the basin, including those on the Mexican side of the border. In the next section current events catches up with the Colorado River drought and it has begun to strain the United States’ capacity to remain true to its 1944 treaty with Mexico.

CASE STUDY: Colorado Basin Situational Report

Drought History

            The 23-year drought along the Colorado River can be characterized by its prolonged duration and varying intensity over time. Rather than being caused by a single event, it resulted from a series of multiple years with below-average precipitation and higher temperatures. This prolonged dry period had significant impacts on the water availability and overall water balance in the Colorado River Basin. (Colorado State University, 2017)

            In the early years of the drought, from around 2000 to 2005, the northern part of the basin, including the Upper Colorado River Basin and the Rocky Mountains, experienced below-average snowpack and reduced precipitation. This resulted in diminished spring runoff and contributed to the overall decline in water supply. These conditions affected states such as Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah, which rely heavily on mountain snowpack for their water resources. (Colorado State University, 2017)

            In subsequent years, the drought spread throughout the basin, impacting both northern and southern regions. From around 2007 to 2012, the entire basin experienced severe drought conditions, with record-low precipitation levels and high temperatures. The extreme conditions exacerbated the water scarcity and led to heightened concerns about the sustainability of water resources in the region. This affected states in the southern part of the basin, California, Arizona, and Nevada, where water demands are high due to population growth and agricultural activities. (Partlow, 2023)

            Overall, the 23-year drought along the Colorado River is not solely due to one specific event but rather a combination of several slightly dry years accumulating over time. This long-term water scarcity highlighted the vulnerability of the Colorado River Basin to climate variability and the importance of implementing sustainable water management practices to address future drought challenges. The causes of the 23-year drought along the Colorado River were influenced by weather conditions in both the northern and southern parts of the basin because precipitation patterns and water supply are interconnected across the entire system. However, a greater impact to the region is agricultural and population growth which has drained water resources as the region headed into a drought cycle. While specific impacts varied across different regions and years, it is important to understand the overall dynamics and not simply place blame on the rain. (Partlow, 2023)

Recent Political History

            In 2023, the Colorado River Basin drought reached a political breaking point leaving state stakeholders, California and Arizona fighting for scraps as the Federal government wondered out loud if the USA will break the 1944 Water Treaty with Mexico. The Bureau of Reclamation released an updated policy brief and analysis of the drought situation throughout the basin which suggested that the river system has not seen this type of shortage since 1963, and 2022 was the worst water storage year on record as shown in Figure 3, below.

            The 2019 Colorado River Drought Contingency Plan Authorization Act was a significant legislative measure designed to tackle the persistent drought conditions afflicting the Colorado River Basin. This Act served to authorize the implementation of the Colorado River Drought Contingency Plan (DCP), a collaborative agreement among the seven Colorado River Basin states and the federal government. Its primary objective was to establish measures aimed at addressing water shortages and promoting water conservation in the face of the prolonged drought affecting the region. (NDIS-DCP, 2019)

Figure 4 (NDIS-DCP, 2019)

            Key provisions of the Act include the legal authorization for the Drought Contingency Plans (DCPs), enabling the Secretary of the Interior to execute the DCP agreements and implement associated shortage-sharing provisions. Furthermore, the Act supports initiatives for water storage and conservation by empowering the Bureau of Reclamation to implement strategies like the Lower Basin Drought Contingency Operations Plan, demand management programs, and system conservation programs. In addition, the Act facilitates water management and infrastructure improvements through provisions for modernizing water measurement and reporting systems, as well as the establishment of water banking programs. (NDIS-DCP, 2019)

            Recognizing and safeguarding Tribal water rights is another crucial aspect of the Act, ensuring that the DCP agreements uphold the rights of Native American tribes within the Colorado River Basin. To aid in the implementation of the DCP and associated programs, the Act authorizes federal participation and provides financial assistance, including funding for the Bureau of Reclamation and the Secretary of the Interior. (NDIS-DCP, 2019)

            Despite the implementation of various measures, particularly the DCPs between 2014 and 2022, aimed at ensuring stability and averting crisis planning beyond 2026, the Colorado River’s water supplies have continued to dwindle. This decline has led to historically low levels in the reservoirs of Lake Powell and Lake Mead. The period from 2020 to 2022 witnessed three consecutive years of record-low inflow, with 2021 standing out as one of the most deficient years. Consequently, the combined storage capacity of Lake Powell and Lake Mead dropped from approximately 50 percent to a mere 25 percent of their total live capacity. In year 23 of the Colorado River Basin drought, we are not seeing any recovery. (Partlow, 2023)

            Barring any substantial and unforeseen changes in hydrologic conditions, water use patterns, or both, the Colorado River reservoirs are anticipated to continue to decline, potentially reaching critically low elevations. This alarming trend severely threatens essential water supplies across seven U.S. states and two states in Mexico. In the absence of appropriate and proactive actions, along with the continuation of unfavorable hydrologic patterns, there is a foreseeable risk that major reservoirs along the Colorado River may reach what is commonly referred to as the “dead pool” within the next few years. Such a scenario would have severe implications for the region’s water resources and sustainability. It was critical for the federal government to step in and preserve the river but are these actions going to provide relief or simply take what little resources there are away from those who rely on it for home and business. (Glennon, 2022) (‌Congressional Research Service, 2023)

            Reservoir operators on the Colorado River face the challenging task of constantly adjusting their operations to accommodate changing hydrologic conditions. They cannot simply halt reservoir releases while new rules are developed. Regardless of the timeline or process for determining new operating rules, operators must adapt to both high-water events, such as unexpected snowmelt, and low-water events, where reservoir levels approach critical levels. (‌Congressional Research Service, 2023)

            Managing the largest reservoirs in the Colorado River Basin, namely Lake Powell and Lake Mead, alongside other system reservoirs upstream and downstream, further complicates these adjustments. Given the declining inflows and historically low reservoir levels, it is highly likely that specific entities will object to the impacts of water management decisions. (‌Congressional Research Service, 2023) This puts The Department of Reclamation in an awkward position being solely committed to following relevant federal laws and implementing prudent reservoir operations, considering modified operating guidelines, and under the magnifying glass of competing political interests. In the end it is crucial to recognize that with reservoir elevations at unprecedented lows, even a single winter season with low runoff could have severe consequences throughout the Basin; consequences that can leach over the border into Mexico causing more economic and agricultural stress in the region.

Current Policy Analysis

            Last fall, projections indicated that water levels at Glen Canyon Dam, upstream of Grand Canyon National Park, could decrease significantly, posing risks to hydropower production crucial for the stability of the Western grid which would reach out far beyond the homes and farms of the Colorado River Basin. In response, the Biden administration called on the states to develop a plan to reduce water consumption by up to one-third of the river’s flows. To bolster its legal authorities in case of disagreement among the states, the administration initiated an environmental review process discussed in the last section. (The White House, 2023)

            Rather than providing a clear roadmap for potential intervention, the Interior Department analyzed different versions of the two competing proposals from the states, along with a scenario in which no reductions are implemented and reservoir levels decline rapidly. One option, aligned with California’s approach, involves the Interior Department imposing water cuts based on the century-old legal framework governing the river discussed in previous chapters. Under this option, newer water users would be cut off entirely before senior users, mainly farmers and ranchers, experience any reductions. (Snider, 2023)

            Another option aligns with the proposal supported by Arizona and the other five states sharing the river, aiming to distribute the cuts more equitably across all water users. However, unlike the states’ proposal that suggested taxing users for evaporated water and canal leakages or utilize old water rights, the Interior Department’s proposal would rely on existing legal authorities related to human health and safety, ensuring water is used beneficially and responding to emergencies. (Snider, 2023)

            By avoiding taking sides, Biden’s Interior Department’s approach could provide leverage in negotiations with both factions. This approach allows room for productive negotiations, especially considering the favorable snowpack conditions this past winter which has recharged the reservoirs. While the department hopes to avoid using the tools outlined in the supplemental environmental impact statement, it remains prepared to step in if necessary. The objective is to maintain the system’s operation and ensure the minimum critical water levels at Lake Powell and Lake Mead are protected. (Snider, 2023)

            The current process is a short-term effort to avert a crisis in the coming years while the states engage in negotiations to establish long-term rules governing the Colorado River, required to be in place by 2026. Furthermore, the Biden administration aims to secure voluntary reductions through new funding provided by the bipartisan infrastructure law and the Inflation Reduction Act. Recent announcements by the Interior Department highlighted significant investments in conservation deals and infrastructure upgrades, emphasizing the administration’s commitment to addressing the situation effectively.

Policy Change

            President Biden in April presented a generous funding package aimed to help jumpstart drought recovery through targeted funding in several areas as a counterpoint to the dismal policy analysis released by the Department of the Interior on Colorado River flow projections and plans. From the press release, “The Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law together include $15.4 billion to enhance the West’s resilience to drought, the largest investment in climate resilience in our nation’s history.” (The Whitehouse, 2023)

            The Biden administration has allocated significant funding for water conservation projects in the Colorado River Basin. The Gila River Indian Community will receive up to $233 million, including $83 million for a water pipeline project that aims to reuse approximately 20,000 acre-feet of water annually and contribute to the stabilization of Lake Mead’s water levels. An additional $50 million from the Inflation Reduction Act, through the Bureau of Reclamation’s Lower Colorado River Basin System Conservation and Efficiency Program, will save 125,000 acre-feet of water this year and offer similar investment opportunities in 2024 and 2025 to benefit the Colorado River System. (The White House, 2023)

            In the Coachella Valley, up to $36 million will be allocated for water conservation efforts. Through the Inflation Reduction Act, the Bureau of Reclamation’s Lower Colorado River Basin System Conservation and Efficiency Program will enter into a $12 million agreement with the Coachella Valley Water District. This agreement aims to conserve 30,000 acre-feet of water in Lake Mead this year and provide investment opportunities for water conservation in the upcoming years. (The Whitehouse, 2023)

            Additionally, $20 million has been designated for four small surface water storage and groundwater storage projects in California and Utah. These projects, funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, are crucial for maximizing water supplies and promoting conservation in the Colorado River Basin. Among the projects, $9.5 million will be allocated to enhance the water management efficiency of the Imperial Irrigation District in California’s Imperial Valley, and $4.7 million will be provided to Washington County, Utah. (The Whitehouse, 2023)

            To improve water delivery systems, over $54 million will be allocated to repair aging infrastructure in the Colorado River Basin. This includes $8.3 million specifically designated for repairs at the Imperial Dam. The funding, announced under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, will support 14 projects in fiscal year 2023, focusing on enhancing water conveyance and storage, ensuring safety, improving hydropower generation, and facilitating water treatment under the supervision of the Bureau of Reclamation. (The Whitehouse, 2023)

            Furthermore, the Biden administration aims to expand drought-focused outreach and technical assistance to communities in the Colorado River Basin. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plans to convene environmental and infrastructure Secretaries from all seven Colorado River Basin states to discuss strategies for maximizing long-term water savings. Leveraging its network of regional Environmental Finance Centers, the Creating Resilient Water Utilities initiative, and other technical assistance efforts, the EPA will enhance federal-state collaboration and engage in targeted outreach to address the challenges posed by drought in the region. (The Whitehouse, 2023)

            These new projects and funding sources are aimed to provide economic lubricant for the Colorado Basin states, namely California and Arizona, to come to the negotiating table and reduce water consumption in a way that is equitable across the region and not weighted to “first rights”, “beneficial use”, or any other political group with deep pockets. In a way, the Biden administration provided the states with both a carrot and a stick and locked them in a room until they figured it out. Time will tell if this policy action works or will the states decide to do nothing and push the problem off for another year. (The Whitehouse, 2023)

Part 2 Drought Recovery

            Considering the $15.4 billion in funding to recover from the ongoing 23-year drought of the Colorado River Basin, we must consider what importance does that region have for the United States as a whole? In the second part of this paper, I will look at the drought economics of the lower basin states and Mexico. I will define the financial realities of what this drought is costing the American economy and what a future of endless droughts looks like. There are dozens of industries that could be affected by drought conditions in the Colorado River Basin, but I will isolate three, farming, ranching, and hydroelectric power, to illustrate the importance of keeping water in the river.

            Further along, I will consider President Biden’s new funding and how will it affect these industries and if this effort will provide long-term relief and recovery or will it just be a short-term stopgap of the inevitable dead pooling of key parts of the river system. I will also provide some examples of policy shortcomings and solutions that could make long term recovery more of a reality in a climate changing world. In the end, I will conclude with what all these efforts and possibilities mean for the economic status of Mexico and what happens if the United States can not make good on its part of the 1944 Transnational Water Treaty. The overall question, “What does ‘Build Back Better’ look like in a water scarce ecology?”.

Economics of the Colorado River Basin

Gila River Indian Community

            In President Biden’s funding push to manage the Colorado River Basin’s continuous drought, the Gila River Indian Community was listed as the beneficiary of $233 million in funding. What makes the GRIC an important player in federal drought recovery plans?

GRIC is home to three casinos within its territory and is currently digging ground on a fourth all located within Arizona’s borders. They broke ground on their fourth casino, Santan Mountain, in Chandler, with the aim of driving revenue and creating over 650 new jobs. This project was made possible by an amended tribal compact between Arizona’s Native American tribes and the state, allowing for casino expansions and the operation of thousands of new slot machines. Additionally, the Gila River Indian Community plans to invest $143 million in expanding its Wild Horse Pass casino and anticipates the construction of another casino in the Phoenix metro area by the Tohono O’odham Nation. However, gaming is not unusual among the Arizona tribal nations, the closest three Native American Territories to GRIC all have busy casinos. (Lewis, 2005) (Clo, 2021)

            In 2018, the University of Arizona did a survey of the agriculture within the Gila River Valley portion of Pinal and Maricopa Counties, including the GRIC. The reservation had a total of 41 farms covering 346,551 acres of land in 2012. Out of the farms cultivating crops, 23 were focusing on forage crops and cotton. Livestock operations included cattle and calves, sheep and lambs, and horses and ponies. The value of agricultural products sold remained relatively stable between 2007 and 2012, with a total market value of $38.4 million in 2012, of which farms operated by American Indians $1.3 million. Over half of the farms within the community had sales of $100,000 or more, with the majority of farms falling into this sales class. (University of Arizona, 2018)

            While Maricopa County, Pinal County, and the Gila River Indian Community have seen significant diversification and growth in their secondary and tertiary sectors, like casinos, primary agriculture continues to contribute to the local economy. Maricopa County ranks first among Arizona counties and 29th among all counties in the United States in terms of the total value of agricultural sales. Maricopa County had 2,479 farms and ranches covering 475,898 acres of land in 2012. The total value of market products sold exceeded $1.003 billion, with livestock sales accounting for 55% and crop sales accounting for 45%. The county’s leading crops in terms of market value were nursery, greenhouse, floriculture, sod, vegetables, melons, potatoes, sweet potatoes, and grains. Fruits, tree nuts, berries, and other crops and hay were also prominent. Grains, such as barley and oats, were primarily produced for the livestock industry as feed. Wheat, particularly durum wheat used for pasta production, was the largest grain crop by value. Additionally, Maricopa County played a significant role in the production of hay, alfalfa, and citrus fruits, with a substantial portion dedicated to the dairy industry. (University of Arizona, 2018)

Figure 5

            Recently GRIC along with other Native American tribes won a century-long lawsuit over water rights with the federal government, of which the $233 million federal funding was a part of. Governor Stephen Roe Lewis of the Gila River Indian Community marked the milestone of the inclusion of Native Americans in water-sharing agreements. The tribe, previously excluded from such discussions, played a crucial role in the negotiations. They agreed to keep a substantial portion of their entitled water in Lake Mead, receiving $233 million for irrigation projects. This progress reflects a departure from the past predominantly white, male representation. (Department of the Interior, 2023) (Silversmith, 2023)

            Looking at Figure 4 and understanding the economic value of Maricopa and Pinal County agriculture, there is a distinct feature of the GRIC land in which it controls a major part of the irrigation waters of the area. The involvement of tribes in the Colorado River basin aligns with the broader efforts of the Biden administration to address overuse and a 23-year drought. Because of the Biden negotiation directive to reduce water usage by up to a third, tribes like the Gila River now have unprecedented representation and influence in negotiations with local, state, federal, and transnational negotiations. (Lewis, 2005) (The Whitehouse, 2023) (Silversmith, 2023)

            Nearly 22 out of 30 tribal entities in the Colorado River basin have completed or partially completed settlements with the U.S. government. These settlements grant tribes’ control over more than a quarter of the average flow of the Colorado River, empowering them to preserve their culture and rebuild their governments. The U.S. government’s focus on conservation deals is driven by pragmatic considerations, as the river’s allocation has exceeded its sustainable capacity for farms, cities, and tribes. Negotiating settlements, like the one with the Gila River Indian Community, allows for specifying the exact amount of water tribes are entitled to, providing greater stability in water management. (Silversmith, 2023)

            Stability in water management, especially in places like Maricopa County, Arizona which has a substantial agricultural economic might, creates stability from drought and ensures a “Build Back Better” recovery on many different levels. In a sense, what the Biden administration is doing, is taking away the dual dominance of California and Arizona over the Colorado River Basin hydrology and adding a third, not quite impartial, voice through the Western Tribal Nations. For the GRIC, they have become water mediators, allowing their substantial water allotment to sway negotiations with the Federal government, which is itself negotiating with Mexico. In the current case, GRIC is allowing most of its water to remain in Lake Mead, ensuring the hydroelectric power remains on, for the moment. (The Whitehouse, 2023)

California’s Imperial Valley

            President Biden’s drought recovery funding named California’s Imperial and Coachella Valleys for over $50 million. This includes funding for the Coachella Valley in the north and the Imperial Dam to the east of the working valley. This funding comes at a time when the agricultural powerhouse of southern California begins to feel the major strain from the 23-year drought. Up until this point, California has resisted change due to its position as one of the first in-line right holders from 1900, however, recent conservation measures, the settlement with Native American territories, and the drought itself have pushed their position beyond its argumentative scope.  Farmers in the Imperial Valley argue for water rights for their alfalfa forage crops over city households in Yuma and Phoenix, Arizona when they say, “What’s more important – growing food or growing houses?” (Bland, 2023)

            The Imperial Valley, however, is an agricultural economic powerhouse with over $2.287 billion in gross value in 2022 and continuing to increase in value, year over year. The valley’s top commodities include $251m in Alfalfa, $300m in all lettuce, $132m in Broccoli, $63m in carrots, $62m in onions, and $62m in spinach. The number one commodity, though, is cattle at $464.4m in value, with a total of $577m for all livestock and apiary commodities. Even bees in Imperial Valley make money with a total of $5m in annual gross revenue. Fruit and nut crops like dates, grapefruit, lemons, and other Citrus make up $75m on a total of 10,800 acres. (Ortiz, 2022)

            Overall, the Imperial Valley produces an abundance of food on 460,258 farmable acres within their irrigation district. Of all the states in the lower Colorado Basin, California draws nearly double what Arizona and Nevada draw from the river and that draw comes from miles away using the All American irrigation canal dug at the beginning of the last century. The water system that diverts water from the Colorado River to irrigate the Imperial Valley begins at the Imperial Dam. It follows the path of the canal traveling westward across the arid landscape of southeastern California, delivering water to the farms and agricultural lands of the valley. The canal, with a capacity of over 26,000 cubic feet per second, efficiently transports water over approximately 80 miles. Along its route, the canal is supported by numerous lateral canals and distribution systems that ensure water reaches the various agricultural fields throughout the Imperial Valley. (Fig. 6) (Maven, 2014)

            The water that is not consumed by agricultural irrigation in the Imperial Valley continues to flow through the All-American Canal until it reaches the terminus at the Salton Sea. The Salton Sea, a large inland saline lake, serves as a crucial reservoir for agricultural drainage and excess irrigation runoff. However, due to changes in water management practices and the 23-year drought, the Salton Sea has faced ecological challenges, including declining water levels and increasing salinity. (Mavin, 2014)

Figure 6 (www.mavensnotebook.com)

            Despite the 30% reduction the Federal government is asking from lower states in the Colorado Basin, Imperial Valley farmers have managed to divert water in such a way as to only require a 10% reduction to meet total acre-feet maximums. Even still, farmers are pushing back, even rejecting government buyback offers on the water at $400 an acre-foot because that resource produces $2000 in farm products for the market. (Bland, 2023) The Imperial Valley farmers pay one of the lowest prices for water nationally due to its long-standing contractual rights to the Colorado River, so this provides very little incentive to conserve water at all. Compared to the $233m the GRIC is getting for irrigation measures, the $50m for Imperial Valley seems like a drop in the bucket considering its value to the economy. (Diego, 2022) However, since California’s farmers refuse to come to negotiation on water rights, continuing to stand on First Rights, the Biden Administration also has little incentive to provide funding for the drought as, in many ways, the 80-mile canal dug to the Colorado River has become the main causes for the challenges of the drought throughout the river basin and into Mexico itself. (Bland, 2023)

            Consider the Mexicali Valley, just south of the Imperial Valley, in Mexico. According to the USA, it diverts 1.43m acre-feet to the Mexican side of the Colorado River while keeping 6.8m acre-feet for itself. The Mexicali Valley also maintains a large agricultural economy on a fraction of what the Imperial Valley gets from the river. The last breakdown of agricultural totals shows that over 50 different crops are grown in the area that yields approximately $2m in gross revenue. However, agriculture is not the area’s main economic source anymore. (Brun, et al., 2010)

            The Imperial Valley takes far more water to use on many crops that are both ecologically inefficient and water hungry for the area and the environmental conditions. However, it produces a vast amount of food for the world, with over 30% of vegetables and hay exported to countries like Japan (35% of exports), Mexico (27%), and South Korea (7%). The products of the Imperial Valley in California not only act like a centralized food producer for the country but is big enough to be a global bargaining chip. (Ortiz, 2022)

            When designing national security plans, food, and water, are necessities of daily living and for the United States, this southern California market basket is an example of a concentration of resources, increasing risk exposure to natural and man-made hazards like drought and chemical spills.  (Coppola, 2021) What happened at the beginning of 2023 for drought recovery and why is nobody really talking about it. How did California’s Imperial Valley and its billion-dollar farmers lose funding to a Native American Tribe in Arizona and why does that matter to American and Mexican drought recovery and the Colorado River basin’s new normal?

Part 3: Recovery

Presidential Policy Directive 8 and Etapa de Posdesastre

            Under the auspices of Presidential Policy Directive 8 (PPD-8), signed in March of 2011 by President Obama, a reorientation of recovery efforts in the United States occurred, marked by several significant changes. PPD-8 emphasized a comprehensive approach to recovery, transcending the conventional focus on short-term response by acknowledging the importance of long-term recovery and reconstruction endeavors. Notably, it recognized that recovery should not be treated as a mere aftermath of response activities, but rather an integral component of the broader emergency management cycle. As such, it underscored the necessity of early and sustained engagement in recovery planning to ensure a seamless transition and foster community resilience in the face of future disasters. (DHS-PPD-8, 2011)

            Moreover, PPD-8 placed a premium on coordination and collaboration among all tiers of government, as well as with private sector entities and non-governmental organizations. It called for the establishment of recovery support functions to facilitate the harmonization and integration of recovery efforts across diverse sectors, encompassing housing, infrastructure, health, and economic restoration. These functions served as focal points for coordinating recovery activities, optimizing the utilization of resources, and addressing the multifaceted needs of affected communities in a comprehensive manner. By fostering coordination, PPD-8 sought to enhance the efficacy of recovery initiatives, promote information sharing, and maximize the collective capacity of stakeholders to achieve successful outcomes. (DHS-PPD-8, 2011)

            In Mexico, as discussed, the 1985 earthquake forced the country to develop a national response program to natural disasters. While that structure was far better than the uncoordinated local efforts previously, it did not address some structural issues of the Mexican government, primarily economic injustice. By 2014, there were critical discussions being had about the disconnect between the response, which simply considered safety and efficiency in their process, to the requests and requirements of the local communities being served. Examples of entire communities simply relocated away from their homes with no plan on ever returning were common. (Rodriguez Valazquez, 2014)

            In 2020 Mexico reviewed its Disaster response structure and rewrote the strategy from a recovery perspective. The strategy is designed to enhance community resilience and reduce vulnerability to natural hazards and climate change impacts in Mexico. It emphasizes the importance of integrating disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation measures into local development plans and policies. It focuses on 4 pillars: risk assessment and management, governance, and participation, knowledge and innovation, and financial mechanisms. (MIKTA, 2022) It promotes the use of risk assessments to identify and prioritize areas prone to hazards and supports the development of risk management plans at the local level and the importance of community participation and engagement in decision-making processes, aiming to strengthen social cohesion and empower communities to take proactive measures to reduce risks. (MIKTA, 2022)

            Additionally, the strategy emphasizes the need for knowledge and innovation, encouraging the use of scientific research, technology, and best practices in disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. It promotes capacity building and knowledge sharing among different stakeholders to foster a culture of resilience. Lastly, the strategy recognizes the importance of financial mechanisms to support resilient communities, advocating for the allocation of resources and the establishment of partnerships between the public and private sectors. (MIKTA, 2022)

            In terms of recovery, the United States and Mexico have similar structures in place regarding the transition from response to recovery. Both seek to utilize every part of the federal government in building local, regional, and national public/private partnerships with businesses and communities. In this way, the Colorado River drought recovery should resemble some kind of “Build Back Better” process. With the Biden Administration ending the over 100-year-old battle over water rights with many of the indigenous communities that have lived along the Colorado River Basin since time immemorial, what happens to first-in-line rights and how does that bode for the future as the recovery process begins, transnationally, while the drought continues through 2023.

RECOVERY CASE STUDY: Hydroelectric Power

The Process and Economics of Water Management and Hydroelectric Power

            The water management and hydroelectric power system in the Colorado River Basin involve significant storage and operational activities. The basin’s two largest dams, Glen Canyon Dam/Lake Powell in the Upper Basin and Hoover Dam/Lake Mead in the Lower Basin, play crucial roles in water storage and regulation. Glen Canyon Dam serves as a linchpin for Upper Basin storage and generates about 5 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity per year. Other notable storage projects in the Upper Basin include the CRSP units, such as the Aspinall Unit, Flaming Gorge Unit, and Navajo Unit, as well as 16 participating projects authorized for various purposes. (Bureau of Reclamation, 2023)

            In the Lower Basin, Hoover Dam is the primary storage facility and generates approximately 4 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity annually. Davis Dam/Lake Mohave and Parker Dam/Lake Havasu are also important for regulating flows and water diversion. Imperial Dam diverts water to the All-American Canal, which supplies water to agricultural areas in California’s Imperial and Coachella Valleys. The operations of these reservoirs and dams are closely monitored by Reclamation through monthly studies projecting reservoir conditions and annual operating plans that establish baselines for future operations. (Bureau of Reclamation, 2023)

            Since the adoption of operational guidelines in 2007, the operations of Hoover and Glen Canyon Dams have been tied to specific pool elevations at Lake Mead and Lake Powell. Certain shortage conditions, such as the Tier One Shortage Condition, can trigger reductions in allocations for Arizona, Nevada, and releases to Mexico if Lake Mead falls below 1,075 feet. Drought contingency plans enacted in 2019 introduced additional operational changes linked to reservoir elevations. Falling water levels in Lake Mead have led to delivery curtailments, including Tier One and Tier Two Shortage Conditions, impacting water supply for Arizona and Nevada. In March 2022, Lake Powell fell below the target elevation of 3,525 feet for the first time in decades. (Bureau of Reclamation, 2023)

            As far as the economic impact of the water management system along the Colorado River Basin we can look at the operating budget of each major hydroelectric authority. The Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) has a revenue of nearly a billion dollars serving over 40 million people. Hoover Dam produces $63m in electricity every year distributed around several areas. (The “Forever” Investment You Never Realized You Could Own, 2014) The average annual revenue of the Glen Canyon Dam is $153 million serving well over 4 million people. (Glen Canyon Damn Authority, 2018) The Mohave Electric cooperative at the Mohave Dam, a nonprofit, has an average revenue of $77m serving a dozen communities in the area. The Salt River Project in Arizona’s annual operating revenue is $3.5b with over a million customers and wholesale operations. (About Salt River Project | SRP, 2022) 30% of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s $4.3b revenue to hydroelectric power of which a majority is Colorado River water based.

            A dead pool situation, one which drops the water capacity of the Colorado River basin below several dams’ ability to produce hydroelectric power would be a catastrophic event for the west coast of the United States. From Washington state to the border with Mexico, hydroelectric power produces an enormous amount of energy for people and businesses and while maintaining our treaty with Mexico is a priority, not allowing that catastrophic situation to happen is tantamount.

            Deadpool in hydroelectric dams has detrimental effects from an engineering standpoint. Firstly, it hinders turbine functionality as turbines require adequate water levels for effective operation, resulting in a significant decrease or complete loss of electricity production. This poses risks to the reliability and stability of the power grid. Secondly, deadpool the Colorado River reservoirs are anticipated water levels, the weight, and pressure on the dam to decrease, causing uneven stresses that can lead to severely threaten, or even dam failure. Additionally, deadpool disrupts natural flow patterns, impacting downstream ecosystems, aquatic habitats, fish populations, and overall river health, thus carrying adverse environmental and ecological consequences. (Glennon, 2022)

            Water management and storage on the Colorado River, particularly in Lake Mead and Lake Powell, involves several key engineering practices. These reservoirs serve as crucial components of the water supply system, enabling water storage and regulation, levels controlled to balance capacity, downstream releases, and upstream demands. Engineering infrastructure such as dams and hydropower facilities play a vital role in storing water, generating electricity, and facilitating controlled releases. The management of these reservoirs involves monitoring and forecasting hydrological conditions, implementing operational guidelines, and responding to changing water supply and demand scenarios. This requires a comprehensive understanding of the river system, hydraulic principles, and effective coordination among multiple agencies and stakeholders. (Glennon, 2022)

Recovery Policy Analysis

USA

            In the beginning of 2023, the federal government of the United States set off another level of emergency drought management on the Colorado River with an analysis of current water conditions and predictions of capacity through the next few years. In that review, it was acknowledged that acts of reclamation, reduction, and moderate restriction on water rights have not made the necessary impacts on the river basins’ hydrological health and considering the threats of dead pool conditions at several dams, the possibility of complete loss of the river, and defaulting on our Transnational treaty with Mexico the stakeholders needed to cut more. However, for 23 years drought conditions have not forced the hands of the major water consumers of the river, Arizona and California. California standing on its Western Water Rights of “First in Time, First in Line” and Arizona utilizing beneficial use statuses have been at an impasse long before the drought started.

            Deb Haaland, first Native American cabinet member and Secretary of the Department of the Interior, said “Water is a sacred resource and access to water is fundamental to human existence and economic development. Tribal water rights are crucial to ensuring the health, safety and empowerment of communities, The Biden-Harris Administration was proud to support these bills, and I am grateful to the bill sponsors and committee leaders for making progress in Congress to ensure that Tribes are finally getting the water resources they have long been promised.” On January 5, 2023 as she announced the end of a century-long battle for water rights with tribal communities. (Department of the Interior, 2023)

            This announcement was part of a bigger effort to move the Colorado River drought recovery forward in which the Biden Administration is providing millions of dollars in funding to go to recovery efforts that will provide more resiliency to dam and irrigation systems. The policy shift now places Native American tribes like the Gila River Indian Community first in time and therefore first in line for water rights. That has shifted millions of acre-feet of water into the hands of Native Americans and away from farmers and states in California and Arizona.

            Moving forward, what does this realignment mean for California, Arizona, and the rest of the Colorado River basin? It could mean that Native American tribal nations now become executors of the water recovery effort in the west exerting not only their First in Time water rights, but also their cultural priorities on what recovery looks like. For now, it appears that Gila River Indian Community will bank it’s water reserves in the reservoir system of the Colorado River so that the river itself maintains its water.

Mexico

            In this paper we have discussed ways in which Mexico is responding from an economic perspective, from emergency funding, rewriting its recovery response structure, and its net water reserves from the river itself. Unlike the USA, Mexico does not have competing stakeholder issues regarding water as an economic resource. Are there towns in Northern Mexico that are running dry? Yes, and the response to that continues to happen as long as there is a drought. Mexico has passed several water restrictions including the use of water in brewing beer which has even hurt foreign investors like Heineken. (Max de Haldevang et al., 2022) However, what of a permanent recovery plan?

            Over the past fifteen years, collaborative efforts between policymakers, water agencies, and non-governmental organizations from the United States and Mexico have aimed to bring about historic change for the delta. In 2012, a significant milestone was reached with the agreement of Delta restoration provisions in a binational water-sharing agreement called Minute 319. This agreement allowed for the sharing of water surpluses and reductions in times of drought, incentivized water storage, and facilitated joint investments in conservation projects. The restoration efforts included a pulse flow in 2014, which temporarily restored the river’s flow to the Sea of Cortez, and subsequent base flows. (Raise the River, 2023)

            Monitoring of the pulse flow and base flows has been conducted by federal agencies, universities, and conservation organizations to assess their impacts on the Delta ecosystem. The local communities’ feedback has been crucial in shaping the next steps for delta restoration. Minute 323, executed in 2017 as the successor agreement to Minute 319, aims to promote a more secure water future and expand the scope of restoration beyond the main channel to encompass the Delta’s estuary and nearby wetlands. Raise the River, an organization actively involved in the negotiations and drafting of Minute 323, is working to bring life back to the Delta by restoring habitat and engaging local communities in restoration activities. (Raise the River, 2023)(IBWC, 2023)

            The pulse flow and subsequent base flows have shown positive results, including an increase in birds, plants, and groundwater in the delta. These water flows have played a vital role in restoring the native environment and bringing back native flora and fauna to the arid Colorado River delta. Raise the River, in partnership with Sonoran Institute and Pronatura Noroeste, has been actively working on restoration projects, such as the Laguna Grande Restoration area and the riparian restoration site in Miguel Alemán. Through planting native vegetation and engaging local residents in restoration work, these projects provide habitat for at-risk bird species. Raise the River has successfully managed restoration sites, planted thousands of trees, and established a water trust in Mexico to support their commitments. (Raise the River, 2023) (Audubon Society, 2021)

Discussion: Policy Moving Forward

            With the United States now making overtures that it will be strongly backing the Native American water rights as to break the log jam in water restrictions negotiations, what does the future of the Colorado River look like specifically for transnational cooperation in drought recovery? Up until now, the US and Mexico have been merely maintaining the river to the best of its ability without requiring penalties. The water policy in the United States is left up to the states to manage at the individual level, however, at some point the river will run dry causing billions of dollars in economic damage across the West.

            If the GRIC and other Native American communities begin to flex the power of their water rights in line with their cultural roots, what does that mean for drought recovery on the Colorado? One of the major changes could be the recognition of the Colorado River itself as a stakeholder. As discussed previously, all the river laws in the books do not recognize the river’s rights to its own water. For indigenous peoples, the river is a sacred individual in a relationship with humans, animals, and the ecology of an area. The river as a person should have the freedom to move and have the right of self-determination. If the river is its own stakeholder in the water rights conversation, then how much water should be allotted to it along with the farmers in California, the city folks in Yuma, and the beer brewers in Mexico? (LaPier, 2017)

            What does the International Boundary and Water Commission look like now that we have added more stakeholders? Prior to this year, indigenous peoples only provided content within conversations, not a member in them regarding Colorado River Rights, now they are the main owner of most acre-feet of water. Will that mean cross boundary cooperation between Mexico’s indigenous communities and the Native American communities? Mexico recently putting local committees in charge of disaster recovery potentially allows for these indigenous communities to, like the GRIC, declare their water rights and the rights of river self-determination. The results of both minute 319 and 323 providing water pulses through to the delta and recharging the ecology, can Mexico build a coalition with Native American tribal representatives inside the IBWC and squeeze California’s Imperial Valley’s water allotment?

            We have learned the hydroelectric, agricultural, and political narratives wrapped up in the Colorado River Basin and how all those things require there to be water in the river. What about everything else? According to a recent study, $1.4 trillion in economic benefits are gifted to the seven states in the river basin because of the water. From tourism to real estate, the Colorado River touches a lot of industries in the West. In Colorado alone, $9b annually is attributed to the river. (Conran, 2016)

            According to the farmers in the Imperial Valley, the national choice is food over housing people, but that is a simplification of the real scope and scale of the problem. It’s not just farms or people. It’s fish and trees. It’s villages in Mexico and electricity in Washington State. It is also more than about the water itself; the story of the 23 year drought does not start or end with the weather and rain, it starts with growing water intensive crops in a place with declining water resources and the ending of that story is unwritten.

            If this policy shift in water rights continues its arc, there is a reasonable argument to be made that Native American communities across the country could force a movement to accept the rights of the river in the negotiations for water. The rights of the river would affect the costs of doing business in and around our waterways. For example, what happens when a tribe like the Sioux takes companies to court over putting oil pipes over our rivers? (Staff, 2016) The Biden Administrations’ ending of the Native American water rights issue is far larger and more reaching than the media is giving it credit for and for the environmental movement, especially regarding water and ecology, this could provide stable footing for communities to file lawsuits to take back resources from those who have fundamentally dominated due to colonizing and racial injustices.  

References

About Salt River Project | SRP. (2022). Srpnet.com. https://www.srpnet.com/about/about-srp

‌Agroasemex . (2017, October 12). Seguro Agrícola Catastrófico. Gob.mx. https://www.gob.mx/agroasemex/acciones-y-programas/seguro-agricola-catastrofico

‌Audubon Society. (2021, June). Colorado River Water flows across U.S.-Mexico border through historic cooperation. Audubon. https://www.audubon.org/news/colorado-river-water-flows-across-us-mexico-border-through-historic-cooperation

‌‌Bland, A. (2023, January 17). Growers brace to give up some Colorado River water. CalMatters; CalMatters. https://calmatters.org/environment/2023/01/colorado-river-water/

‌Brun, L., Amochd, A., & Geurtsen, C. (2010, September 15). Agricultural Value Chains in the Mexicali Valley of Mexico: Main … Yumpu.com. https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/19145485/agricultural-value-chains-in-the-mexicali-valley-of-mexico-main-

Bureau of Reclamation. (2023, February 2). Colorado River Basin, River Reservoirs and Water Management. Usbr.gov. https://www.usbr.gov/ColoradoRiverBasin/#AOPColoradoRiverReservoirs

‌‌ Cló, R. (2021, October 19). Gila River Indian Community breaks ground on 4th casino south of Chandler. The Arizona Republic; Arizona Republic. https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/chandler/2021/10/18/gila-river-indian-community-breaks-ground-casino-south-chandler/8476361002/

Cohen, M., Christian-Smith, J., & Berggren, J. (2013). WATER TO SUPPLY THE LAND Irrigated Agriculture in the Colorado River Basin. https://pacinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/pacinst-crb-ag-1.pdf

‌‌CONAGUA. (2023, March 22). Atención a la Sequía en México. Gob.mx. https://www.gob.mx/conagua/articulos/atencion-a-la-sequia-en-mexico

Colorado River Drought National Dam Safety Program Technical Seminar | 2023. (n.d.). Retrieved May 1, 2023, from https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_colorado-river-drought_022023.pdf

Congressional Research Service. (2023). Management of the Colorado River: Water Allocations, Drought, and the Federal Role. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45546.pdf

Department of Homeland Security . (2022). Presidential Policy Directive 8: National Preparedness | Homeland Security. Dhs.gov. https://www.dhs.gov/presidential-policy-directive-8-national-preparedness

‌Department of the Interior. (2023, January 5). Interior Department Welcomes Significant Progress for Indian Water Rights Settlements. Doi.gov. https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-department-welcomes-significant-progress-indian-water-rights-settlements

DHS. (2015). National Preparedness Goal Second Edition. In Department of Homeland Security/ FEMA. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/national_preparedness_goal_2nd_edition.pdf

DHS-PPD-8. (2011, March 30). Presidential Policy Directive 8: National Preparedness | Homeland Security. Dhs.gov. https://www.dhs.gov/presidential-policy-directive-8-national-preparedness

‌Diego. (2022, December 5). Morning Report: Water Is Cheap. Why These Imperial Valley Farmers Want to Pay More. Voice of San Diego; Voice of San Diego. https://voiceofsandiego.org/2022/12/05/morning-report-water-is-cheap-why-these-imperial-valley-farmers-want-to-pay-more/

‌‌EPA. (n.d.). United States-Mexico Joint Contingency Plan Preparedness for and Response to Environmental Emergencies in the Inland Border Area. Retrieved April 22, 2023, from https://archive.epa.gov/emergencies/docs/chem/web/pdf/final_us_draft_us_mexico_jcp_january20_2006.pdf

Fitch Ratings. (2023). Fitch Rates Los Angeles DWP AA, stable. Fitchratings.com. https://www.fitchratings.com/research/us-public-finance/fitch-rates-los-angeles-department-of-water-power-ca-power-rev-bonds-aa-outlook-stable-14-10-2022

‌Gila River Indian Community. (2020). Facebook.com. https://www.facebook.com/gilariver

‌‌Glen Canyon Dam Authority. (2018). THE IMPACT OF THE LOSS OF ELECTRIC GENERATION AT GLEN CANYON DAM Overview of Study Findings Background. https://www.glencanyon.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/GCI-Power-Study-Overview-Full.pdf

Glennon, R. (2022, May 12). What is dead pool? A water expert explains. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/what-is-dead-pool-a-water-expert-explains-182495

‌‌Hanak, E. (2011). Managing California’s Water: From Conflict to Reconciliation. United States: Public Policy Institute of California.

‌‌‌ICBW. (2023). U.S. IBWC Organization and Structure. Ibwc.gov. https://ibwc.gov/Organization/organization.html

Indian Affairs. (2023). Tribes Served by the Western Region | Indian Affairs. Bia.gov. https://www.bia.gov/regional-offices/western/tribes-served

‌Inter Tribal Council of Arizona |. (2019). Itcaonline.com. https://itcaonline.com/

‌La Comisión Internacional de Límites y Aguas. (2019, September 5). Tratados y Convenciones. Tratados Y Convenciones. https://cila.sre.gob.mx/cilanorte/index.php/marco-juridico/tratados-y-convenciones

‌‌‌Law of the River. (2022, November 3). Central Arizona Project. http://www.cap-az.com/about/history-of-cap/law-of-the-river/

LaPier, R. R. (2017, October 8). For Native Americans, a river is more than a “person,” it is also a sacred place. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/for-native-americans-a-river-is-more-than-a-person-it-is-also-a-sacred-place-85302

‌‌Lewis, R. B. (2005). Hard Times on the Colorado River: Drought, Growth and the Future of the Compact. In University of Colorado Law School (Ed.), Hard Times on the Colorado River: Drought, Growth and the Future of the Compact: Summer Conference, June 8-10, 2005. Retrieved from https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=hard-times-on-colorado-river

Max de Haldevang, Navarro, A., & Bloomberg. (2022, August 8). “We won’t produce beer in the north—that’s over”: Mexico’s president sounds the alarm over drought and climate change. Fortune; Fortune. https://fortune.com/2022/08/08/mexico-beer-production-climate-change-north-amlo-heineken-modelo-ab-inbev/

Maven. (2014, August 31). All American Canal. MAVEN’S NOTEBOOK | Water News. https://mavensnotebook.com/the-notebook-file-cabinet/californias-water-systems/all-american-canal/

MIKTA. (2022, May 16). Mexico´s national strategy for resilient communities. MIKTA Disaster Risk Reduction Joint Advocacy Campaign as Printed InPreventionweb.net . https://www.preventionweb.net/news/mexicos-national-strategy-resilient-communities

‌‌‌NIDIS. (2023). Drought Basics. Drought.gov. https://www.drought.gov/what-is-drought/drought-basics

NDIS-DCP. (2017). Colorado River Drought Contingency Plan. Drought.gov. https://www.drought.gov/colorado-river-drought-contingency-plan#:~:text=On%20April%2016%2C%202019%2C%20the,Colorado%20River%20System%20reservoirs%20accordingly.

‌‌OECD. (2013). OECD Reviews of Risk Management Policies: Mexico 2013. In OECD eBooks. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264192294-en

Olivas, T., Carlos, J., Ramírez, C., Enrique, H., Calleros, R., & Adolfo, J. (n.d.). Economic analysis of the Channel Independence, D.R. 014, Colorado River. Retrieved April 22, 2023, from https://iwra.org/member/congress/resource/PAP00-5002.pdf

Ortiz, C. (2022). 2021 Imperial Valley Agricultural Crop and Livestock Report (Final Draft). Retrieved January 1, 2022, from https://agcom.imperialcounty.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/2021-CR-Draft-Final.pdfThe “Forever” Investment You Never Realized You Could Own. (2014). Nasdaq.com. https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/forever-investment-you-never-realized-you-could-own-2014-11-24

‌‌Partlow, J. (2023, February 5). The Colorado River drought crisis: How did this happen? Can it be fixed? Washington Post; The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/02/05/colorado-river-drought-explained/

‌President of Mexico,. (2018). Decree: The government will continue to be an ally to the livestock sector, which produces the food the country needs and exports to the world: EPN. Gob.mx. https://www.gob.mx/epn/prensa/the-government-will-continue-to-be-an-ally-to-the-livestock-sector-which-produces-the-food-the-country-needs-and-exports-to-the-world-epn?idiom=en

Raise the River. (2017, September 28). Raise the River. https://raisetheriver.org/our-work/

‌‌Rising, J., & Naresh Devineni. (2020). Crop switching reduces agricultural losses from climate change in the United States by half under RCP 8.5. Nature Communications, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18725-w

Rodriguez Velazquez, D. (2014). Post-disaster housing policies in Latin America: The right to housing and failed post-disaster strategies in Mexico [Le droit à un logement et échec des stratégies post-disaster in Mexico; Housing rights and the failure of post-disaster strategies in Mexico]. Journal of American Studies, 43(3), 483-506. https://doi.org/10.4000/bifea.5917Western Area Power Administration. (2022). About – Budget Allocation. Wapa.gov. https://www.wapa.gov/About/the-source/Pages/budget-allocation.aspx

‌‌Secretaría de Gobernación. (2022). Fideicomiso Fondo de Desastres Naturales (Fonden). Gob.mx. https://www.gob.mx/segob/documentos/fideicomiso-fondo-de-desastres-naturales-fonden

Silversmith, S. (2023, April 7). Gila River Indian Community receives $233M in water conservation, infrastructure funding. Arizona Mirror. https://www.azmirror.com/2023/04/07/gila-river-indian-community-receives-233m-in-water-conservation-infrastructure-funding/#:~:text=By%3A%20Shondiin%20Silversmith%20%2D%20April%207%2C%202023%202%3A12%20pm&text=The%20Gila%20River%20Indian%20Community%20will%20receive%20up%20to%20%24233,of%20the%20Colorado%20River%20system.

Spener, S., & Secretary, U. (2021). INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION THE COLORADO RIVER BINATIONAL WATER SCARCITY CONTINGENCY PLAN. https://www.ibwc.gov/Files/CF_SEAZ_(Sally)_Colorado_River_Binational_Water_SCP_061021.pdf

‌‌Snider, A. (2023, April 11). Biden admin sidesteps painful decisions for Colorado River cuts. POLITICO. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/11/biden-colorado-river-arizona-water-00091433

‌SRE. (2023). Tratado de Aguas de 1944. Gob.mx. https://www.gob.mx/sre/documentos/tratado-de-aguas-de-1944

The White House. (2023, April 6). FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Investments to Protect the Colorado River System – The White House. The White House; The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/04/06/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-investments-to-protect-the-colorado-river-system/#:~:text=An%20additional%20%2450%20million%20from,for%20the%20benefit%20of%20the

‌‌United States-Mexico Joint Contingency Plan Preparedness for and Response to Environmental Emergencies in the Inland Border Area. (n.d.). https://archive.epa.gov/emergencies/docs/chem/web/pdf/final_us_draft_us_mexico_jcp_january20_2006.pdf

‌University of Arizona. (2018, March 21). Contribution of Agriculture to the Maricopa County and Gila River Indian Community Economies. Agricultural and Resource Economics. https://economics.arizona.edu/contribution-agriculture-maricopa-county-and-gila-river-indian-community-economies

University of Nevada, Reno. (2020). Western Water Law: Understanding the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation | Extension | University of Nevada, Reno. Extension | University of Nevada, Reno. https://extension.unr.edu/publication.aspx?PubID=3750

‌USMJCP. (2006). United States-Mexico Joint Contingency Plan Preparedness for and Response to Environmental Emergencies in the Inland Border Area. https://archive.epa.gov/emergencies/docs/chem/web/pdf/final_us_draft_us_mexico_jcp_january20_2006.pdf

US Water Alliance. (n.d.). Recovering Stronger: State Innovations Building a One Water Recovery 1. Retrieved April 22, 2023, from https://www.uswateralliance.org/sites/uswateralliance.org/files/State%20Innovations%20to%20Build%20a%20One%20Water%20Recovery.pdf