Clock ticking on stakeholders to decide water policy – Kathryn Sorensen #831

Hi everyone, I'm Paul Yeager. This is the MtoM Show podcast, a production of Iowa PBS and the Market to Market TV show. That land behind me is lush and green - water is at the source of that. And the old Mark Twain saying, which we frequently talk about on Market to Market, is going to be a little bit of the center of today's MToM Show podcast. I'm Paul Yeager by the way, thanks for watching. If you have feedback for me, hit me up at an email Paul.Yeager@Iowa PBS.org. The best way to spell is on the screen right now - we're gonna go west to the state of Arizona. Kathryn Sorensen is somebody who appeared recently on Market to Market in a story about alfalfa. And a couple of things that she said got our attention. So we're going to talk about water usage in the West, specifically around the Colorado River, her job with the Kyl Center, and at Arizona State University. She also used to run a couple of water districts. So we get some great insight there from her about just how vital and imperative a decision is, for this topic and the ticking clock that's happening on this issue. We'll get into that in this installment of the MToM Show podcast. Kathryn, where I'm at, almost a foot of snow fell yesterday, but you're telling me oh, woe is Arizona? Because you went below freezing yesterday or how'd that go? 

[Kathryn Sorensen] We did. We had record lows as well. So yeah, I think we ended up around 30 degrees, which I know for Iowa is warm. But for us here in Arizona. That's pretty cold.

[Yeager] Now that happens. Is Arizona home? I mean, career wise, but did you grew up there? 

[Sorensen] Yeah, I'm from Tempe, Arizona. I went to McClintock High School. And yeah, and actually, I think that kind of formed a lot of my interest in water. Because of course, if you grew up in the desert, you kind of naturally understand the importance of water. And it's and the lack thereof. And so I think that that really did help form my career path. 

[Yeager] Is it just go without saying that everybody around you also pays attention to we're in a desert? There's not much water?

[Sorensen] Yeah, no, that's a good question. I would say it's mixed. There are some people who go about their daily lives and water comes out of the tap. And they use water to irrigate lawns or their landscaping outside and they don't really think much about it. But I think there's more and more people who do understand no, this is a really precious resource. We live in the desert. You know, native landscaping was gorgeous, and really aren't our choosing to live abroad in a desert adapted lifestyle. But we have a lot of transplants from the Midwest and other places. So, you know, sometimes it takes them a minute to kind of figure out like, hey, you know, maybe you should live a little differently out here in the desert.

[Yeager] The water situation is always a story that now has stretched beyond your region to the Midwest to the east, everybody's paying attention to the water. Is that a new phenomenon nationwide that you found?

[Sorensen] You know, I kind of feel like it is, I would say, especially in the last five years or so and what's ironic is that, obviously, here in the desert, we've known for decades, how precious water is and what the risks are, of not having an adequate water supply. And so we've planned very carefully to make sure that we have one, you know, particularly here in the Phoenix area. And I think other cities across the nation are now buying themselves in really unexpected situations where they are also facing scarcity issues that they didn't think they would ever face, which is kind of interesting. 

[Yeager] We're gonna get into those in a moment, but I need to make sure I connect the dots from your high school to college to work right. How did you make that? Where was that jump? 

[Sorensen] Yeah, so actually, so after graduating high school here in Arizona, I went to the University of Michigan so I started becoming a reverse Snowbird. I was in Michigan when it was frigid cold, and then I would come back home for the summers when it was crazy hot. But hey, when you're young, you can tolerate such things. And then actually, I never did a master's degree. I went immediately into a PhD program at Texas A&M University, where I actually did a dissertation on the economics of water resources. But I'm a desert gal, love Arizona. And so when I finished my education, I came back home and took up a career in water resources, ultimately ended up running the water utilities for the city of Mesa, Arizona, which is just east of Phoenix, and then ran the water and wastewater utilities for the city. Be a Phoenix for several years. 

[Yeager] In those two cities, the main source of water is, is it a well?

[Sorensen] No, actually, the Valley of the Sun is blessed to have access to water from a local Salt and Verde river system. Those are river systems that originated as a snowpack up in the mountains in central and eastern Arizona, and then flow through the valley of the sun. And then there's also imported Colorado River water. It's imported from Western Arizona on the border with California. And yeah, there is some groundwater use, but maybe less than you might think.

[Yeager] Are all of those agreements, old agreements?

[Sorensen] Yes, well, it is relative, right. And the Phoenix area is relatively young. But yeah, in fact, our development of Salt and Verde river water dates back to about 1903. That Salt Verde river system was developed through the Salt River Project, which was one of the Bureau of Reclamation earliest projects. It predates statehood for us. And we began importing Colorado River water into central Arizona in about the mid 80s. So I don't know if old is a relative term. 

[Yeager] And pulling from the Colorado, there's a lot of people who put a straw into that river, how has that changed? Over? You know, give me a sense of, obviously, before the 80s, but maybe since the 80s, where maybe that intensity has grown?

[Sorensen] Yeah, that's a really good question. So, you know, farmers have made and Native American tribes have made use of the Colorado River for a very, very long time, in the case of Native Americans since time immemorial, farmers you know, at more than 100 years. So the use of the river dates back quite some time. But of course, as a farming acreage expanded, particularly after, or during World War Two, to grow cotton for war material and, and other purposes. And then as the population grew as well, more and more people used more and more of the Colorado River water. And so it is an over-allocated system. It's over allocated by a fair amount. And it is when you put on top of that climate change, and the fact that scientists say the flows of the river might diminish by as much as 25%, that there's a real problem there on the Colorado River. 

[Yeager] So sources is one discussion we could get into, but also the usage side of things, which has the greater possibility for a solution here?

[Sorensen] Yeah, that well-use. I mean, we have to live within what Mother Nature gives us, otherwise, we will drain our workforce. So that's pretty clear. But you know, something on the order of 70% of the water in the Colorado River, is used actually for agriculture. So although a lot of people like to think that the increasing population of the Southwest is a main driver of the over allocation of the river, that's that's that's really debatable. As you mentioned, a lot of people have straws in this river. And so I would say that it's over allocated both because of agricultural uses, but also because of the uses of the city. But yeah, we have no choice, right? It's an over-allocated river system. That means we absolutely have to find a way to use less on an annual basis and have to find a way to live within a diminishing river that's a tall order. Because of course that water is very valuable to farmers to Native American communities, to cities to industries. So it's a big challenge ahead of us.

[Yeager] California is known for their senior rights, junior rights. What are the rights of the user in Arizona? 

[Sorensen] Yeah, actually, so Arizona ends, kind of with the short end of that stick. Arizona is both in population and political power, a small state compared to California and always will be. Back decades ago, Arizona wanted to import Colorado River water from Western Arizona into the growing cities of Phoenix and Tucson. And California kept blocking Arizona for the federal legislation necessary to do so. And understandably so. I mean, if I were California I would have done the same thing. Finally, a compromise was reached in late 1968. The federal legislation was pushed through, but the price that California extracted from Arizona for passage of that federal authorization was that when there is not enough Colorado River water to go around in the lower basin, so that's Arizona, California and Nevada, that Arizona cuts back the imported water from Western Arizona first. So all the water from Western Arizona that gets imported into central Arizona gets cut when there isn't enough to go around before Western Arizona and California take cuts on the river. So we have the lowest priority.

[Yeager] And again, it's a source issue, you're not going to likely get more of that source. So boy, how fun are those meetings trying to tell someone that they're going to have less?

[Sorensen] Yeah, stuff. Um, you know, and of course Arizona has and and probably will continue to take the largest cuts, when there isn't enough to go around. But I think there are some equity issues at play. And for one thing, about 45% of the water that flows through the canal that imports water into central Arizona belongs to Native American tribes. And the rest, you know, feed cities here in the Phoenix and Tucson area. So, you know, I think there are some compelling equity arguments that matter these days that maybe didn't matter as much in the past. But certainly, it's a tall order. And, you know, I understand the position of the Native American tribes on the river and the farmers on the river who say, hey, you know, we were here first, we have the highest priority, right? This is your problem to deal with. So this, it's tough, these are tough conversations.

[Yeager] So who's in the room for those discussions?

[Sorensen] Mainly, it's the principles of the seven states that share the Colorado River. So the principles of Wyoming, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Arizona, Nevada, California, and of course, the Republic of Mexico, it's a relatively small number of people. Of course, those people then go back to their stakeholders within their states, of which you can imagine there are many. And that's part of the challenge, right, is it's not just those people in the room that matter. It's all their stakeholders back home. Each state has its own unique politics that it also has to deal with. So yeah, these are really complicated conversations.

[Yeager] And I guess this is more of a lead story in government. But is there one group of our state that gets more say than the other because oh, we're bigger or smaller, or we have more demand?

[Sorensen] Not really, though, states and stakeholders can fall back on the priority system. And that's a lot of what we've heard out of the farmers in California, right is, it's just, hey, we have the highest priority, right? This is your problem, not ours. But I really feel like we've seen some movement there. I think that even those with the highest priority water rights, which include the farmers in both Western Arizona and in California, and so, you know, Native American tribes along the main stem of the river, I think all of them understand that. Okay, that's great, I can fall back on this priority system. But if that leads us to drain our reservoirs, and hit a dead pool, then we're all out of water, then the priority system at that point doesn't matter. So I think you'll see reasonable compromises or at least attempts at them.

[Yeager] And what's the timeframe on reasonability?

[Sorensen] Always so short, that's the problem. So the Colorado River system, lakes Powell and Mead, which are the reservoirs that feed the system, the largest reservoirs in the United States, operate under guidelines that were set in 2007. And those guidelines are set to expire at the end of 2026. And so right now, the States and the Republic of Mexico are desperately negotiating new operating guidelines for those reservoirs. And to put that in context, those new operating guidelines will basically dictate when shortage occurs, how deep those shortages are, and potentially who has to bear those shortages. So everything is at stake right now. It's a really big deal. And the federal government has signaled that there isn't much time to figure this out. I mean, it's already 2024. And whatever solution is arrived at, let's hope there is one for which the federal government still has to go through its whole NEPA environmental process, and then publish the documents for comments. So you know, I think people are hoping that some skeleton of an agreement can emerge this spring.

[Yeager] Wow. That would be, that would be tremendous. Because when did they all sit down and agree to actually be in the same room together, whether it's virtually or in person?

[Sorensen] That's interesting, you know, actually, the principles meet on a near constant basis and have been doing so for, I don't know, easily the last 10 years, I would say, if not longer, because it really, we really started to run into declining reservoir levels around the mid teens, right. And people started to realize that oh, boy, that, you know, the math on the river system does not look good. And since that time, people have been working very earnestly towards finding solutions. And there have been some great solutions that have come forward are all collective usage of the Colorado River, in the lower basin here between Arizona, California and Nevada is, is at its lowest point. You know, since I, I don't know, since the reservoirs were filled, or whatever, for a very, very long time, there's been into intentional voluntary agreements put forward to collectively used last, and those so far have been relatively successful in arresting the falling reservoir levels, whether those types of agreements can continue into the future. And what they look like is kind of the issue at that point.

[Yeager] The story how we found you, is you were in an Associated Press story about alfalfa farmers in Arizona, and we know in looking at government maps, there's a lot of alfalfa grown in Arizona and Nevada and parts of California, that is a water intensive crop is that at all figured into this discussion of, you know, maybe we shouldn't grow a water intensive cost. That's the use side of the equation that I think we talked about already.

[Sorensen] Certainly people talk about that. But but but let me say this, yes, there's a lot about the alfalfa grown in Arizona and California in particular, but there's a lot of alfalfa grown across the Colorado River Basin, including in Colorado and Wyoming and Utah, New Mexico, it's a common Western crop, particularly here in the southwest. And there's a reason it's grown here. You know, we have the hot and sunny climate that makes alfalfa grow very productively. So here in the desert southwest, farmers can expect to get something like 10 to 12 cuttings a year, which is very productive. If you look at places like Montana, or you know, other places where there's a shorter growing season, and it's colder, they might get what, two, four cuttings a year. So there's a reason it's grown here. And of course, the production of that alfalfa is important to the rural economy. So it's really important to at least recognize that right that there's a reason it's grown, it is important to these rural economies. But sure, agriculture uses the most water in the Colorado River Basin by far. And alfalfa uses the most water of the agricultural water use. So it's gotta be on the table. And it is a topic of conversation for sure.

[Yeager] In the area behind me is corn country, there's always this debate of food versus fuel. Yeah, well, what is it called in your region?

[Sorensen] Yeah, you know, I don't know, I guess food versus cities. Yeah, I stuff and to put that in context, in Yuma, Arizona, in particular, the vast majority of the nation's winter vegetables are grown. It is highly productive agriculture. It is not federally subsidized. It is industrial agriculture. So you're not just talking about the water and sun and soil to feed these crops. You're talking about the skilled labor force, the refrigeration services that the transportation network, it's, it's highly productive agriculture. And it's important to the whole nation. But at the same time, of course, all the cities of the Southwest continue to grow. And so there is a natural tension there. Just like I'm sure there is in corn country.

[Yeager] There is and there's some of those vegetable production areas. Of course, today we're not growing tomatoes, but there are greenhouses that have come and they need water year round and they need energy year round. There was, COVID - kind of in that whole transportation logistics issue - really heightened a lot of people's awareness of 'Where's my food grown? How does it get to me then then maybe they'd follow it out. I always say COVID accelerated a lot of discussions that were being had. Is that the same in this case for you?

[Sorensen] No, I wouldn't say so. Because I think that we knew pre-COVID that our reservoirs were in trouble and that water levels in lakes Powell and Mead were falling. And so I would say that we've been working pretty diligently on this river system for more than 10 years, trying to figure out ways to collectively use less.

[Yeager] When you say we, I know you mentioned several states, where are you? In this you personally, in the center? Are you strictly an observer? And all of this? And are there other people in these rooms? That can be the will say, Cool hands? And let's, let's take this tension down a moment...

[Sorensen] Me personally, no, I am not in the room. Nor was I in the room when I was the director of Phoenix Water Services. The the person in the room really, who matters is the head of the state's Department of Water Resources, they are the deemed to be the head negotiator for the state of Arizona. But that and it's interesting, you ask that because you can imagine there are many stakeholders across all of these states, right. There are industries, you know, mines. There are farmers, there are Native American communities, the cities themselves, you know, there's a lot of stakeholders. And there's a lot of conversation about well, who should be in the room? Who's in the tent and who's not? I'm not sure that focus is necessarily productive, because to me, it matters a little bit less who's in the room, and more who has influence on what is said in the room. And those are not necessarily the same things, when there are ways to exert influence without actually being at the table. So I don't know I have a little bit of a different perspective on that.

[Yeager] When I look at Arizona as just we'll just take that example. Your state, you mentioned the growing population of an area when you are the head of the water in Arizona, you have it. It's I guess, like an election, there are a whole lot of people who vote this way. And I vote is probably not the right word in the election standpoint, but have influence on No, I need water to live in my house, but then maybe a smaller number, but maybe a greater number of economic input from the agriculture side. That's a tough spot for all of these people to be in, or am I just drawing too much conflict there?

[Sorensen] You know, it's interesting. Um, yeah, there certainly is conflict between the farmers in rural Arizona and the cities in central Arizona. And a good example of that is that the town of Queen Creek, which is east of Arizona, recently actually acquired water rights off of the main stem of the Colorado River, purchased them and and basically severed and transferred them which out out here, the West means they bought the water rights, and they're moving them somewhere else into central Arizona, it was enormously controversial, and that the farmers in Western Arizona are still extremely upset about this, because it is very likely that more of that will occur. So there is this natural tension. But I think, you know, one of the things that we have going for us on the Colorado River in particular is that for all there are many stakeholders, it is still a relatively small number of people. And everyone kind of knows everybody. We all meet up once a year in Las Vegas at the Colorado River Water Users Association, you know, kind of we've all been around each other, sometimes too much. And that helps, right? Those personal relationships help. And when you're negotiating very tough issues. It's really of paramount importance to understand the perspective of those who are sitting across the table from you. Right. And so I do think we have that in the Colorado River Basin. And I think we have people who are very, very earnestly trying to find reasonable solutions. So no.

[Yeager] That's exactly what I envision is happening. That's the way it's been reported and the way I read it. But I want to move just a moment to the east of you. I'm looking at Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, to an extent Wyoming, those that aren't necessarily directly in the Colorado basin, but are in their own water issues. Then you move to the Mississippi and the Ohio Valleys. There's all these water issues, what can or what should people in those states be looking at for guidance, where you're at and these two decisions that are being discussed about with the Colorado?

[Sorensen] You know, the first thing I would say is that I think they need to understand that they can get much, much worse than they even imagined today, right? That the climate is changing. And that may have impacts that are much larger than what they have seen historically, that the past is not necessarily a guide for the future behavior of these river systems. And so that that would be number one. And then, yeah, you know, and I'm sure they know this, but I'm getting in the room and fighting it out. I'm a big advocate of that. And I say fight. And I will tell you, sometimes it is, honestly, there isn't another way to do this, other than to have those extraordinarily hard conversations and to get angry with each other, and to caucus and to come back and try again. But I think we will see more and more of these conflicts. One of the issues that's that it's really difficult, I think we're seeing this in Nebraska, I think it is with the canal that might take water out of Colorado, do I have that right? As you know, one of the tenets of Western water law is use it or lose it. And if you're not using the water, then someone else has the right to use it, because it's a scarce resources. And of course, just everyone understands that possession is nine tenths of the law. And so that creates a perverse incentive for stakeholders and others to make more use of these resources to assert a stronger claim. So that's hard, right, that's a difficult thing to deal with. But I think it's important to understand when people do that they are doing it as rational actors, given the rules of the system.

[Yeager] In Iowa, specifically here, I'm going to use the reference of our backyard. Our rivers here drain eventually into the Mississippi. And that's an that has seen low levels and shipping grain. But the bigger discussions have been, I think it's much more of a discussion that happens around you if we've had data centers come and they come to our area because of the accessibility to water. The discussions have started now, maybe late because some of these facilities are here. Have we missed the boat on paying attention to what's happened? And is there any way to reverse things like that? Not saying that's what we should do? Or could do. But is it too late? 

[Sorensen] You know, no, I don't think so. And it's interesting that this may not be the case in the Midwest, because you guys actually get free water that falls from the sky of which we are very jealous. But here in the southwest, of course, agriculture is, is, in most cases, the most intensive use of water that you can apply per acre, right? Like it on an acre foot per acre basis. Agriculture generally uses the most amount of water. Some exceptions to that are mining, semiconductor manufacturing, and data centers, which are all very intensive, you know, water or water intensive industries. I don't view it as a zero sum game. I view it as trade offs and choices. You know, do we want to grow cotton? Do we want to grow semiconductors, it can be both. But you have to plan very methodically for the adequacy of the water supplies, to support the industries that your community chooses. And that has long been the attitude of us here in central Arizona, because water is scarce and we know it. We know that whatever those land use choices are, we have to plan very carefully to make sure water is adequate, and that the impacts of those land use choices don't fall disproportionately on existing users. But that's hard. I'm not saying...  

[Yeager] I know it is. But those are the same types of phrases that are talked about all the time here. I mean, we're hearing those same things that I've been reading about in your region for years. And now the land use issue, whether it's solar, or hydro electric, or whatever it is that you're going to use the land for the land usage factor. So I guess I'll ask you this one, Kathryn. There's an old phrase I believe it's a Mark Twain ``whiskey's for drinkin', ' water's for fighting for'.  Is that still an accurate statement? 

[Sorensen] Always will be. Always will be. Yeah, I mean, and I think you'll see more and more of that in parts of the country that haven't had to face that issue before. Water is scarce and it will only become scarcer. But I want to end on a positive note. And that is that solutions are known. Right? And for all that it can be, people have been moving water from where it is to where they want it to go for literally 1000s of years. It is something that humans are actually really good at. If you look back in ancient history, Roman aqueducts, the Indus River Valley, I mean, people had this figured out a very long time ago. And fundamentally for all that, it is very expensive to move water from where it is to where you want it to go. It's expensive. It's politically difficult. All of those things have socio-economic impacts. It is less difficult and less expensive than keeping ocean water out of cities. So look, Emin City's got its follow up. Every community has a problem with water. From my part, I'll pick this one.

[Yeager] Yeah, it's it. We have a little bit of a deadline push, I guess we act best as Americans with that deadline. Okay, maybe that's just us procrastinators. When that deadline is coming in. You're saying it's just a couple of years away? I guess we can still end positive here, Kathryn. But what happens if that deadline is missed? Is there one of those can we extend it for two years while we work? A debate? Work an extension?

[Sorensen] Wow, that's tough. So the federal government, of course, is threatening that if the seven States and Mexico can't figure this out, they will come in and take unilateral action. They always threaten that. But in the end, that's great. They should threaten that. But I will tell you that the last thing that any political administration wants to do is say who gets water and who doesn't? Right, because you can't win that. But yes, I think they can exert pressure, and that there's probably some odd legal ways to extend deadlines, though, you know, let's, let's just hope we don't have to go there that you know, and let's hope we can avoid litigation. That's really the biggie. 

[Yeager] Yeah. And avoid. Just can't we just all get along? Right. Right, Kathryn. Kathryn Sorensen, I appreciate your time and insight on an issue that we know is not going away and always good to get a different perspective. Thank you.

[Sorensen] Thanks for your time. I appreciate it.

[Yeager]  New episodes come out each and every Tuesday. You can find them wherever you get your podcasts or you can watch us on YouTube, subscribe today. We appreciate any feedback that you want to give guests topic ideas, or just general Hey, Paul, why aren't you wearing that gray sweatshirt this time? We'll see you next Tuesday when a new episode drops. Bye bye.