OPINION: We Must Protect the Colorado River Itself

Recently, the Commissioner of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), Camille Touton, took the reins of the chaos swirling around the collapse of the water supply on the Colorado River. She said two most important things:

The seven states have to come up with a plan in the next 60 days to “conserve 2 to 4 million acre-feet of water” so that water won’t be diverted from the river next year.

“It is in our authority to protect the system. And we will protect the system.”

We applaud Touton’s statement saying “2 to 4 million acre-feet of water must be conserved.” In fact, we’ve railed against the Bureau of Reclamation and the seven states for not addressing the severity of the situation earlier.

Here in Colorado, we’ve railed against the Colorado Water Plan for the last seven years because it sets policy to divert hundreds of thousands of acre feet of more water out of the Colorado River before the river reaches the state line with Utah. In addition, we’ve fought every proposed diversion in the court of public opinion, in the media and in federal district court.

It’s time to quit nibbling and pull out our incisors and take a hard bite. It’s time to get real. It’s time speak truth to power and make consequential systemic changes that are sustainable over time. It’s time to quit growing bluegrass in the desert. It’s time to quit draining the river in order to grow hay that gets shipped across the ocean to China. It’s time to question continued “economic growth” in the Southwest U.S.

Touton finally acted as the adult in the room, issuing an edict that must be complied with.  Otherwise the federal government will step in and force compliance.

However, we may be in conflict with Touton’s next statement. By saying “we will protect the system,” does that mean USBR will make sure that all the hydro-power dams still operate and all the reservoirs remain above dead pool?

Is that the “system” USBR will protect?

We have an alternative view of what should be protected, not the dam-and-reservoir system, but rather the ecological health of the Colorado River itself. A person could easily argue that it is the dam-and-reservoir system that has caused the very problem the Bureau must now fix. There are too many dams and reservoirs facilitating too many diversions and pipelines. If the Bureau simply stops millions of acre feet from being diverted to prop up Lake’s Powell and Mead, it merely supports a broken system — and worldview — created well over 50 years ago.

To actually protect the ecological health of the Colorado River system, some dams need to be decommissioned, and water needs to be allocated in an entirely different way.

We created a “solutions” policy that lays out the steps needed to protect the Colorado River’s ecological system that is also sustainable for the water supply system. Our policy includes:

• Stopping all proposed new dams, diversions and pipelines.
• Decommissioning Glen Canyon Dam.
• Enacting conservation programs to save Lake Mead.
• Letting 10% of the river’s total water flow into and through its delta in Mexico.
• Allocating Native American water rights by subtracting that water from current diversions, not by creating new additional diversions.
• Distributing water allocations to all users based on a percentage of total flow available each year, not a fixed amount.

“Protecting The System” must protect the river itself as well as the water users. If USBR merely tries to protect its dams and reservoirs, the Bureau will fail in its mission, and fail the people of the southwest U.S.

Commissioner Touton would do well to read former Commissioner Daniel P. Beard’s book, Deadbeat Dams, in which he argues that the Bureau should focus on restoration, not reclamation.

The Colorado River system does not need to be “reclaimed” — in fact, it is “reclamation” that has already pushed the river past its breaking point.