Developing state water roadmaps is essential

Three dozen people gathered in the first-floor conference room of the North Texas Council of Governments in Arlington, Texas, on April 29 to discuss the water needs of people living in Dallas-Fort Worth and other parts of North Texas. Agricultural representatives. Environmental organizations. Municipal water planners. Attendees represented groups and interests that state law requires be part of the state’s water planning process. Together, they examined such topics as projections for population growth and water needs in a region that houses the nation’s fourth-largest metropolitan area.

The late spring meeting was not their first gathering. Not by a long stretch.

Ever since 1997 – when Texas legislators passed a water-planning measure signed by then-Governor George W. Bush – regional leaders across the state and designated local parties have been convening to identify their water needs and supplies for the next five years. This bottom-up approach changed how the state had attempted to meet water needs since the 1950s. Instead of starting at the state level and planning down, the current method involves active participation of local citizens, the expertise of regional and state water authorities, and the presence of a steady flow of data.

Every five years, for instance, a new plan for the Dallas-Fort Worth region is submitted to the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB). The state body must ultimately sign off on the proposal for each of the state’s 16 regional water planning groups.

Once TWDB does so, the agency compiles the regional plans and publishes them in the state’s water plan. The document doesn’t prescribe what regions must do. Rather, it provides a guide for the next five years. Then the process starts over.

The plan includes about 5,800 strategies for the whole state. If implemented – which is always a challenge – the strategies would allow water users to meet needs across Texas through 2070. If the strategies aren’t implemented, about 25% of the state would have only about half the municipal water supplies needed during a drought of record.

The tedious work involved in planning is key to not only understanding needs, but also to unlocking the money to develop necessary supplies. Texas voters have passed two major state water funding initiatives over the last dozen years largely because the state knows what needs must be met, has identified helpful projects, and involved local communities in developing solutions.

California has its own version of a modern state water planning process. The effort dates to the 1950s, although the state has refined the process since then. Now, the California Water Plan is updated every five years.

State law requires input from a policy advisory committee. The members include representatives from agriculture, urban, and rural water suppliers; environmental organizations; businesses; and other interested parties. They consult with the California Department of Water Resources in updating the state plan.

Gathering their input is important. A plan will have no staying power if a state’s relevant stakeholders don’t help create or review the strategies.

Local leaders in California use the state plan as a guide. The 336-page document doesn’t require specific actions or approve funding for projects. Still, the 2023 update of the plan, which the department released this spring, emphasizes that the revision can be used by “water managers, water districts, cities and counties, and tribal communities to inform and guide the use and development of water resources in the state.” The California Department of Water Resources also uses the plan to help lawmakers and key partners advance recommendations.

The latest version understandably focuses on the demands that recent wildfires, droughts, heat waves, and flooding present to America’s most-populous state. And, as required by law, the document reviews the latest trends in California’s natural resources, examines water supplies, and reports on water demands under various scenarios for agricultural, urban, and environmental needs.

In contrast with Texas and California, Arizona doesn’t have a statewide water plan. The state does have some guiding documents and programs, such as the 2014 Strategic Vision. But the state largely has compartmentalized planning, where “active management areas” (AMAs) concentrate on meeting the supply needs of their regions. In high-growth areas like Phoenix and Tucson, the goal is to withdraw no more groundwater than is being replenished each year.

“Planning is crucial. And it must be honest about the challenges of a changing climate. Droughts. Flooding. Wildfires. Those are just some of the ways states must shift their strategies to meet existing as well as future need.”

No state agency, however, strings together the action plans of these communities or develops an overarching document for the rest of the state. A roadmap could help the whole state know how to best allocate resources to meet their fast-growing state’s water needs.

Forecasts do take money, of course. Texas’ water planning process requires several million dollars a year to support local efforts. That includes securing the input of experts who can help laypeople understand the data about their communities.

Any strategy must fit the culture of a state, too. One approach doesn’t fit all.

Still, planning is crucial. And it must be honest about the challenges of a changing climate. Droughts. Flooding. Wildfires. Those are just some of the ways states must shift their strategies to meet existing as well as future needs, including how they finance those strategies.

The city of San Antonio, Texas, offers a good example of how a statewide plan can help a major metropolitan area adapt. Through the work of a south-central Texas regional planning group, which is part of the state’s planning process, San Antonio has diversified its water sources.

The city, the largest in the region, has reduced demand through conservation efforts. It has developed a range of water supplies, including taking the brine out of brackish groundwater so the public can reuse the water. And it has educated citizens about the hurdles that the main water provider faces in meeting the community’s needs.

“This shift is important, and it’s part of the state meeting its demands. Understanding those needs now and into the future requires the state to know them first.”

Diversification ensures that often-arid San Antonio and its neighbors do not rely upon just one source. That would spell disaster for a major American city and region that is not awash in water.

Similarly, Las Vegas, Nevada, and its surrounding communities have few local supplies. In fact, the Las Vegas Valley depends upon the Colorado River for 90% of its water. Recognizing that the river cannot be nearly the sole source for the future, conservation is playing a heightened role.

The Las Vegas Valley Water District, which supplies water to the 1.5 million Nevadans in and around Las Vegas, reports that the community’s per capita water use declined 58% from 2002 to 2023. That’s despite the population increasing by more than 786,000 residents during that period.

This shift is important, and it’s part of the state meeting its demands. Understanding those needs now and into the future requires the state to know them first. That’s why it is crucial that Nevada is working to modernize the state’s water plan.

Nevada’s Division of Water Resources (NDWR), the last plan was published in 1999. The group advising NDWR on its new roadmap includes representatives from water districts, tribes, agriculture, environmental organizations, and other stakeholders. NDWR on its new roadmap includes representatives from water districts, tribes, agriculture, environmental organizations, and other stakeholders.

An up-to-date guide could provide all Nevadans realistic initiatives for the future. That includes access to groundwater. Underground water sources play a key role, even though the Colorado River is the major driver of water discussions in the state.

Arizona state officials decided in 2023 to stop issuing certificates of water supply for some Phoenix suburban developments. That was because of a lack of groundwater to sustain the growth of rooftops and businesses. Governor Katie Hobbs made it clear that the state isn’t running out of water tomorrow, nor will all new construction cease. But stopping some building permits provides a window into how important it is to look ahead and match up projections for new growth with the realities of water supplies today and tomorrow.

Colorado isn’t immune to these pressures. The Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation reports that the state’s population growth has outpaced the national average in every decade since the 1930s. Denver’s metropolitan population, for instance, is projected to grow to 3.6 million by 2030 from 3.2 million residents today.

Importantly, the state has a water planning process, even though it’s relatively new. Colorado produced its first water plan in 2015. The Colorado Water Conservation Board released the latest one in 2023. The 254-page document looks 10 years ahead while allowing for annual operational updates.

“Data is a building block for a state’s management of water resources.”
— Bill Mullican,  former head of water planning for the Texas Water Development Board

As the plan points out, Colorado has multifaceted needs, from ranching and farming in the east to maintaining rivers and streams in the mountainous, recreational parts of the state to vibrant communities like Denver and Colorado Springs.

To its credit, the Colorado Water Plan includes “vibrant communities” as one of its core pillars.

The 2023 proposal says it “requires a continuous planning process in which we assess our trends and progress and adjust to new realities. In this way, Colorado can make sure that strategies and actions are undertaken to mitigate future risks.”

The identification of strategies that help the state adjust is crucial for a place like Denver, the state’s largest city. And it’s critical for Colorado as a whole.

The 2023 plan sums up the challenge this way: “New projects are needed: Colorado continues to grow, and $20 billion may be needed for municipal supply and conservation projects alone.”

At that North Texas water planning meeting in late April, numbers flew throughout the session. Bar charts showed where predictions for the region’s long-term water demands were three years ago versus where long-term projections are today. (About the same.) They also showed how regional supplies look through 2030 as well as 2070. (Largely better, thanks to two new North Texas reservoirs.)

None of these projections could happen without access to quality data. And developing adequate models about water availability and population projections doesn’t just guide water planners. Such data can inform how many permits local authorities should allow in a region.

“Data is a building block for a state’s management of water resources,” explains Bill Mullican, the former head of water planning for the Texas Water Development Board.

The Colorado Water Conservation Board uses an elaborate set of data tools to help planners and residents alike understand such things as available supplies in natural lakes and streams and the impact of snowpack on Colorado basins. The ability to analyze such phenomena is crucial in a state whose plan recognizes that Colorado doesn’t have enough water to meet all needs at all times.

Arizona State University’s Kyl Center for Water Policy has created a detailed water blueprint that takes an in-depth look at many of the state’s issues. The online platform includes information about the adequacy of aquifers in certain areas, changes in groundwater levels, and shortages in the all-important Colorado River. Although not an official state document, this blueprint is an example of how data are made available for planning and managing water resources.

The American West long has faced water challenges, but today’s demands are often bigger and more complex. Meeting them requires foresight, the collaboration of different voices, an understanding of needs and supplies, a diverse range of strategies, financing of those strategies, and reliable data that planners and citizens alike can draw upon. These guiding principles will allow cities and states in the West to face the challenges Rice’s Richard Smalley warned about two decades ago and realize a future of growth and opportunity.

About the series

Waters of the West is a special report from the George W. Bush Institute. This four-part series aims to answer key questions surrounding urban development: Will water availability hinder growth in Western U.S. cities? What can be done to ensure that these high-opportunity places are sustainable?

To answer these questions, we spent months speaking with policy experts and stakeholders. We also looked at water usage data and state water plans where available.

Read the full series