A century ago this month, representatives from the seven states in the Colorado River Basin came together at Bishop’s Lodge, north of Santa Fe, and signed the Colorado River Compact. It was and still is a momentous occasion. The nation’s first interstate treaty involving more than two states brought an apparent end to acrimony and litigation between the states over who gets how much water. It formed the foundation that undergirds the “Law of the River” — which governs the Colorado River to this day. And it opened the door to damming the Colorado River to moderate its wildly fluctuating flows and curtail flooding along the lower stretches of the river.
“The big thing about the Colorado River Compact is that it breaks the blockade on development of the whole river,” wrote then-Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover, who oversaw the negotiations. “The worst thing about the compact is that it will destroy much oratory. It makes for growing spuds, not glowing speech.”
If Hoover were alive now, he might have second thoughts about that assessment. It would turn out that the foundation, as solid as it may have looked, was actually full of holes. Tribal nations were not only left out of the Compact and negotiations, but their senior and therefore stronger water rights were discounted altogether. This was not only legally and morally wrong, but also would create conflict down the road.
Additionally, the entire compact was based on flawed — and maybe even fabricated — assumptions, with more water allocated to the states than was actually in the river, setting the stage for demand to outpace supply. Yet the compact included no contingencies for such a scenario. The document’s framers never even considered the possibility that the river’s flows would diminish over time, as is now the case thanks to climate-change-induced aridification.
Now, the flaws are turning into fatal ones, as the states, tribal nations and federal government struggle to correct the supply-demand imbalance within the framework of the compact. And, despite what Hoover may have hoped for, that has spurred much oratory indeed, from federal officials warning of imminent “dead pool” and “system collapse” to Nevada and Arizona officials scolding California alfalfa farmers for guzzling so much water.
On the compact’s 100th birthday, we take a look back at how the agreement came about and analyze some of the most salient — and flawed — provisions in hopes of illuminating this revered and sometimes reviled document.