Skip to main content
Colorado River flowing through the Grand Canyon

Rebuttal to the Kyl Center’s May 1 “Arizona Colorado River Update”

Published
May 6, 2026

 

 

 

Nothing against light-hearted, rib-poking humor. Heaven knows the bruising negotiations over Post-2026 Operations on the Colorado River system in which we’ve been engaged for almost three years could use a few laughs.

But humor at the expense of accuracy isn’t helpful. The ASU Kyl Center for Water Policy’s May 1 blog post titled “The Waiting for the Super El Nino Edition” blog entry – literally an analysis of a proposal to operate the Colorado River system that they had not yet daylighted to the public - is riddled with too many distortions for us to just laugh it off. But perhaps the Kyl Center did see a version of the proposal prior to its May 1 blog post. Experience tells us that there are rarely, if ever, any secrets on the river.

Excerpts of the May 1 blog post follow. ADWR’s concerns with the Center’s remarks follow the excerpts:

  • We realize that tragically, the illusion of a deal is long gone.
    None of the three Lower Basin negotiators has given up on reaching a 7-state agreement, but the three states have stepped up to protect the river in the near term in the absence of any parallel actions in the Upper Basin.   
     
  • In the end, we are confronted with the reality we must live with, potentially in the form of a three-state Lower Basin deal, if it emerges, might be better than nothing, depending on what’s in it, and then again, it might not.
    The three Lower Basin states of Arizona, California and Nevada delivered a proposal for operating the river to the federal government on May 1. The states have proposed making extraordinary and unprecedented sacrifices that they believe will help protect the integrity of this vital river system. The Kyl Center posted its cynically tinged observation on the same day, May 1. It is unhelpful in the extreme for the Center to pre-judge that a proposal that had not yet daylighted “might not” pass muster. Based, exactly, on what?
     
  • A three-state Lower Basin deal, if it emerges, might be better than nothing, depending on what’s in it, and then again, it might not. The question is whether riding the deal will be better than walking alone. Certainly, it won’t be the horse we were hoping to ride into battle, but taking it might be better than being a foot soldier.
    Not satisfied with decrying the proposal just once as potentially unworthy of the Center’s approval, they took a second shot at the proposal. This proposal provides protections for the river and for Arizona.
     
  • A three-state Lower Basin deal, even if it’s a decent one, doesn’t solve the problem of the dreaded Colorado River Compact tripwire. 
    It is fundamental that Arizona maintains its ability to enforce its rights under the 1922 Compact.