Tribal leader’s statement on Colorado River negotiations

Statement on P26 guidelines progress:

After a frenzy of meetings among the basin states and the federal government, including two days of meetings here in Arizona, we have reached a deadline established by the federal government for the basin states to reach an agreement in principle about how to share Colorado River shortages in this age of aridification.

By all accounts, despite the best efforts of the federal team to forge a consensus among the basin states for a shared path forward together, it appears that limited progress has been made, though all of the basin states appear ready to keep trying.

 The limited progress in these discussions to date is due at least in part to the fact that some of the basin states appear to have engaged in more gamesmanship than statesmanship. It is also likely due to a hyper-focus on only one aspect of the crisis — managing the releases from Lake Powell to Lake Mead. This ignores other critical elements of a comprehensive plan that would:

• Ensure Mexico contributes its fair sharDevelop new supplies of water to reduce our over-reliance on the Colorado River,
• Develop more efficient ways of using the limited Colorado River supply we all have,
• Use creative concepts of federal and shared state pools of water to allow for untapped supplies of water, tribal water supplies for example, to be brought to bear on the problem of water scarcity overall, and
• Reduce an unhealthy reliance on underground storage of Colorado River water, and existing ICS storage in Lake Mead.

Creative problem-solving and statesmanship have been the hallmark of the past 20 years among the water leaders in the basin states. This approach has been successful thus far in delaying the Colorado River crisis that is now at our doorstep. The community has been an integral player in most of those actions across the past 20 years, and has tried to play a similar role in the P26 negotiations.

To date, the community has developed numerous proposals that would both reduce water use (including the community’s) while also ensuring flexible water management tools are in place to help mitigate the impacts of reduced reliance on the Colorado River, as we all make the transition to more efficient water use and alternative water supplies.

To date, our proposals have not been integrated into the more comprehensive approach we think is essential for the basin states to come to an agreement. Accordingly, any progress made in the negotiations to date is merely rationing a reduced supply, not actively managing and augmenting it as a shared resource with strategies and tools that can benefit the entire Basin.    

The community appreciates the federal government keeping the seven basin states at the negotiating table, but the community expects a broader perspective will be necessary to ultimately succeed. The community, along with every other tribe in the basin, also expects that the federal government will begin to seriously address its trust responsibility to protect their respective water rights as it makes decisions on how the Colorado River is managed for the next 20 years.

To date, we, and the other tribes in the basin have been told that we should  be patient as our issues and ideas will be dealt with “in the next phase” of negotiations. To some, that may seem reasonable. To tribes, and particularly the community, who has too often in the past heard similar assurances only to be granted water supplies that are now the most at risk, our water delivery facilities built last, if at all, and our ancestral rights trampled, this is  unacceptable.

The community will continue to be a constructive player in the discussions if it is engaged in good faith. If not, it will most certainly act strongly to protect its interests as it has in the past. This will include withholding its agreement and consent to any plan, as well as looking to the courts to ensure that its rights are upheld. The community will not stand for any plan that takes away its water rights without its consent and agreement, and we would remind all parties in the Basin that while the community will continue for now its efforts to find a path to “yes” that will benefit all in the basin, we can and will simply say “no” if we believe that our trust-protected water rights are not being protected and respected as they need to be. 

The Gila River Indian Community has more at stake in these post-2026 Colorado River negotiations than almost any other party in the basin, and while we will remain a constructive partner, we will not agree to — and will fight in the courts if necessary — any plan that ignores tribal water rights or treats us as an afterthought.

Real leadership now requires more than simply determining releases from Lake Powell; it demands a comprehensive plan that honors the federal trust responsibility and harnesses tribal innovation for basin-wide solutions.

Editor’s note: Stephen Roe Lewis is in his third term as governor of the Gila River Indian Community. He grew up in Sacaton. Please submit comments at yourvalley.net/letters or email them to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines.