THE WIRE · UPDATED 8:13 PM MDT No story is too small.
NewsStatewide

Central Arizona Project joins lawsuit over Colorado River water cuts

Utah.News 1 source cited Details

How this story was published

Published automatically from one public source cited; not yet reviewed by the desk. Tell us if something is wrong ↗

Source

tucson.com

Utah.News publishes every story with the sources it was built from. Questions or a correction: corrections@utah.news.

AI-written from public sources Written by Utah News AI and quality-checked before publishing.
Central Arizona Project joins lawsuit over Colorado River water cuts
Photo via tucson.com
The agency operating the Central Arizona Project canal system has joined a lawsuit to challenge a federal decision regarding Colorado River water cuts. The agency seeks to overturn a decision that could potentially shut down the canal system used for drinking water in Tucson and Phoenix.

Key takeaways

  • The Central Arizona Project has joined a lawsuit to challenge federal Colorado River water cut decisions.
  • The agency warned that potential federal cuts could reduce water supplies to Tucson, Phoenix, and 11 tribes to zero.
  • The lawsuit alleges violations of the 1922 Colorado River Compact regarding water releases from Upper Basin states.
  • The Upper Basin states have reportedly failed to meet the 10-year minimum water delivery requirement for the first time in a century.

The agency that operates the Central Arizona Project canal system has joined a lawsuit to overturn a federal decision that could shut the system down, according to a report published October 28. The agency provides drinking water to Tucson and Phoenix via the canal system.

Brenda Burman, the general manager of the Central Arizona Project, announced the decision to join the litigation during a news conference on Tuesday. Burman stated that the agency has spent years negotiating with the federal government to avoid court, but will act to protect its rights and the health of the river.

Burman noted that the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation decided not to require water use cuts from any of the four Upper Colorado River Basin states, while simultaneously cutting deliveries to Arizona and the other two Lower Basin states. She warned that federal officials have stated they could reduce CAP supplies possibly to zero, which would dry up the canal and cut off supplies to major communities and 11 tribes.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court, was originally brought by the Southern Nevada Water Authority and two other Nevada-based water agencies. The Arizona Department of Water Resources has filed a separate motion to intervene in the same lawsuit.

One central allegation in the legal action is that the Interior Department and the Bureau of Reclamation are violating the 1922 Colorado River Compact. This compact requires the four Upper Basin states—New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming—to release a minimum of 82.5 million acre-feet of water to the three Lower Basin states over a 10-year period.

Burman stated that for the first time in 100 years, the Upper Basin states failed to meet the compact's minimum delivery requirements. She noted that for the water year ending Sept. 30, the total 10-year delivery fell below the required level due to dry and warm conditions.

While Upper Basin officials argue that climate change, rather than water use, is responsible for the reduced flows, Burman argued that CAP is not a junior user to the Upper Basin and the compact delivery obligation must be met. She stated that the U.S. is illegally withholding millions of acre-feet in Upper Basin reservoirs, including the Flaming Gorge reservoir located on the Utah-Wyoming border.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum previously criticized Arizona's decision to intervene, predicting that the lawsuit would be dismissed because the state is claiming hypothetical rather than actual damages. Burgum suggested that Arizona should focus on negotiations rather than litigation, noting that as the junior-most water rights holder, Arizona should not have its future river allocations decided by a judge.

Article details

CategoryNews
ToneNeutral
ProductionAI Generated
Report a problem with this story
What's off? Pick any that fit, or just write below.

Every report is read and checked against the story's sources. Your email, if you give one, is used only to contact you about this message and is never shown publicly. Please keep other personal details out of the text. Privacy