Analyzing News Reports on the Colorado River Crisis

Source of the scientific information in the Arizona Daily Star article by Tony Davis 

Tony Davis article was based on a study titled “The bathtub ring. Shrinking lake mead: Impacts on water supply, hydropower, recreation and the environment”. The study was conducted by four masters students, Ning Jiang, Season Martin, Julia Morton, and Skyler Murphy and published in mid-2015. The University of California-Santa Barbara students were directed by Douglas Kenney, a renowned Colorado River water researcher at the University of Colorado in Boulder (Davis, 2015). The objective of the study was to address the gap in the lack of clarity about the dwindling water levels of River Colorado and Lake Meade through justification of the crisis and highlighting implications on the environment and stakeholders.

Expertise of the scientists (and others) involved in the study discussed by Davis 

According to Davis (2015), the reactions to the study, despite questions about the vigor of methodological approaches, have been largely positive. Kenney, one of the experienced researchers involved in the study observed that the students approach was good, solid, and credible. One can argue that the observation was informed by the fact that no previous study had looked at the Colorado Rivers crisis from a similar perspective (Davis, 2015). Only through similar future studies on the same can credibility issues about the study be settled. However, it does not imply that credentials of the researchers are questionable. The four masters students who conducted the study have since graduated. The four had solid foundations on the field as students at Ben School of Environmental Science and Management. External input was provided by qualified and experienced researchers including the faculty advisor Naomi Tague, Ken Nowak and Bob Wilkinson (external advisors), and Douglas Kenney (client), all with doctorate degrees. The latter was a representative of the Western Water Policy Program and largely experienced in the field.

Discussion of Davis Alternative View 

It is important to point out that Davis does not offer individual views about the conclusions of the study in relation to Colorado River crisis but compares and contrasts views expressed by the researchers of the study and other stakeholders directly implicated by the study. The alternative views expressed in Davis (2015) article justifies the assertions by Kenney, Bates, Bensard et al. (2011) about Colorado River being the most studied, debated, and contested natural resource in the world. Therefore, is understandable that conclusion drawn from the study by Jiang, Martin, Morton et al. (2015) were likely to be met by contrasting from different stakeholders. For instance, the most evident alternative view in Davis (2015) article is the assertion about preexisting measures to address potential challenges highlighted by the study. On the declining water levels, relevant authorities posit that strategies have been in place to ensure reservoirs come into play in time of need; and that drought is seasonal. In addition, the decline in water levels are attributed to heavy consumption rather than climate change. In relation to potential rise in cost of electricity, power generators and suppliers observe that already consumers are paying higher prices for the same (Davis, 2015). Similarly, economic implications of the Colorado River crisis on Lake Meade were met by contrasting views including the inability to predict the effect on visitation based on water levels, and that this was only one of the multitude factors impacting recreational levels. Nevertheless, the study raises pertinent issues that cannot be ignored on the basis previous data showing the opposite.

Comparing Information in the Arizona Daily Star article and another Source 

An article by Zielinski (2010) preceded the publication of the infamous study by Jiang et al. (2010). Information presented in Zielinski (2010) and Davis (2015) articles have many similarities, but there are also notable differences. One outstanding difference is that the former explores the causes of the Colorado River crisis, while the later highlights implications of the crisis on stakeholders. However, there is a consensus between the two articles about the contribution of water consumption towards the decline in water levels. Zielinski (2010) explored the crisis from both human and natural perspective. They posited that the building of dams and diversion of water from the river to cities and irrigation schemes since the 1920s siphons off more than 70% of its water. On the other hand, Zielinski (2010) observed that geologists predict climate change to cause a 5-20% decrease in water level in the next 40 years. Similar concerns are raised by Davis (2015), but largely from a utilitarian perspective. While Zielinski (2010) article opines that engineering triumphs in contributing to the siphoning of water and thus may be perceived as crime to nature, the opposite is true in Davis’ article where the contributions of such achievements to the economy are heralded as key to advancement of humanity. In fact, it is evident that Davis’ article places emphasis on stakeholders concerns with drawing maximum benefits from the resource, whereas Zielinski focused on contributions of such objectives to the river’s water levels, which is of concern in both articles, though from different point of view.

Major stakeholders in the conflicting demands on the Colorado River source 

The escalation in the conflicting demands on utilization of the river’s water is largely informed by evident lack of interest from Western Area Power Administration and the likes, in reviewing the study and its predicted implications (Davis, 2015). According to Kenney et al. (2011), the Colorado River is an economic lifeline and a cultural marker engineered to provide steady flow of water for power, cities, farms, and industries, while retaining enough to sustain its diversity of wildness and environmental amenities. However, the study highlights both of these roles to be diminishing. Stakeholders involved in the management of the river’s water are in constant altercations at the expense of collaborating to find a lasting solution (Kenney et al., 2011). The Hoonver Power dam management and the Central Arizona Project are key stakeholders with significant influence. Arizona Power contractors and farmers are other stakeholders experiencing the effects of rising cost of electricity, and the need for alternative water sources in groundwater. Lake Meade management and environmentalists are also major stakeholders with influence on policy on how the resources can be used and preserved. Davis article shows that these stakeholders are biased towards advancing economic gains from the river at the expense of its preservation.

Possible solutions to the problem are discussed in Davis’ article 

The solutions to the Colorado River crisis are highlighted by Davis (2015), but only to a smaller extent. The main approach advocated for by stakeholders is the replenishment of the rivers water, a role that is the mandate of Arizona Water Banking Authority, which recharges CAP water for future use, and Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District, which stores CAP water the ground to compensate for groundwater pumped for new suburban developments. However, institutional frameworks, which Kenney et al. (2011) argued to be inevitable in addressing the crisis are lacking in the article. Stakeholders appear concerned with maximizing benefits from the river while giving defending their stance against predictions made in Jiang et al. (2015). The study highlights pertinent issues that all stakeholders must collaboratively address to save the vital river.

References

Davis, T. (2015). Study: Colorado River shortage could hit Arizona hard. Arizona Daily Star. Retrieved from http://tucson.com/news/science/environment/study-colorado-river-shortage-could-hit-arizona-hard/article_18e2c791-99fd-576f-b4cc-708b6e60bc68.html

Jiang, N., Martin, S., Morton, J., Murphy, S., & Colorado River Governance Initiative. (2015). The bathtub ring. Shrinking lake mead: Impacts on water supply, hydropower, recreation and the environment. Retrieved from http://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1154&context=books_reports_studies

Kenney, D., Bates, S., Bensard, A., & Berggren, J. (2011). The Colorado River and the inevitability of institutional change.  Pub. Land & Resources L. Rev. ,  32 , 103.

Zielinski, S. (2010). The Colorado River runs dry. Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/the-colorado-river-runs-dry-61427169/?no-ist