Laserfiche WebLink
L 15:27 7204890524 FAX PAGE 03/05 <br />The Denver Post <br />editorial <br />Page J. of 1 <br />Colorado River's future on the line <br />Interior Secretary Gale Norton faces decisions about the management of Lake <br />Mead, Lake Powell, and the water supply for seven Western states. <br />Monday, May 02, 2005 - <br />The Colorado River's future will start being mapped today as U.S. Interior Secretary Gale Norton <br />begins confronting the complex task of resolving a dispute among the seven states that rely on the <br />river. <br />The issue Is key for the Front Range, as many of our cities get water from the Colorado's tributaries <br />The first decision Norton faces is whether the Bureau of Reclamation should release more water from <br />Lake Powell, still low after years of drought, into Lake Mead, where water levels have partly <br />recovered. Norton will get an in -depth briefing this afternoon and may announce a decision <br />afterwa rd, <br />If Norton releases more water from Powell, the four upstream states (Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and <br />New Mexico) will complain that their water supplies may be at risk if the drought that has haunted <br />the West in recent years resumes. But if Norton keeps water in Powell, she will anger the three <br />downstream states (California, Arizona and Nevada) that want to continue pulling their usual <br />allocations from the lakes. <br />If the data is ambiguous, Norton should err on caution's side. It would be only prudent to keep water <br />in Powell until it further refills to near - normal levels. <br />Regardless of how she settles the first matter, Norton confronts another, longer -term problem: how <br />to get the seven states to share the pain of water shortages. A 1922 compact allocates a share of <br />water to each state, but in prolonged droughts there's not enough to satisfy all the demands. Last <br />week, the seven states failed to reach a consensus on how to deal with potential shortages. <br />The four upstream states historically have stood united on Colorado River issues. But this time, the <br />lower basin states set aside their historic bickering and also crafted a united position, That's not <br />necessarily good for upstream interests: The huge populations and congressional delegations of <br />California, Arizona and Nevada carry formidable political clout. <br />Upstream states might be open to compromise if they knew they wouldn't shoulder the entire burden <br />of a future drought. For example, Colorado already has imposed tough conservation measures, with <br />Denver and other Front Range cities cutting water use by a third. <br />But conservation has been uneven downstream. California has reduced waste with strict use rules. <br />Nevada is getting better at conservation. But Arizona has been profligate: During the worst drought <br />in centuries, many cities didn't even restrict lawn watering. <br />It would be illogical for Interior to tell Denver residents they couldn't fill up their bathtubs, if the fells <br />still allowed Phoenix folks to let water gush unused down the gutters. <br />http:// www.denve.rpost.comledaJarticle/ print /0,1.674,36 %257E41. 7 %257E2846506,OO.htznl 5/3/2005 <br />