… Today, more than 27 million people in the three states rely on water from the Colorado River—roughly two-thirds of the total population that the river serves. Yet even as that dependence on the river grew, a collision between human and environmental needs was brewing. … For municipal and agricultural water managers who depended on the Colorado, the growing list of endangered species was a wakeup call. It spurred a decade-long effort to craft a multi-party agreement that allowed water agencies to continue delivering water to their users while staying ahead of the mounting endangered species issues. That effort has largely proven successful, but as the program now crosses the 20-year mark, new questions are arising about how to keep it strong for the next three decades in the face of grinding drought, contentious negotiations over the river’s future, and new uncertainties about the federal government’s role in its continued implementation.

Other endangered species news:

• Inside Climate News: How the Trump administration’s interpretation of one word—‘harm’—could gut habitat protections for endangered species
• The New York Times: Trump administration aims to redefine ‘harm’ for endangered species
• The Guardian: Trump administration moves to narrow protections for endangered species
• Colorado Public Radio: Destroying endangered species’ habitat wouldn’t count as ‘harm’ under proposed Trump rule
• Bay Nature: Blog: This Trump change could ‘eviscerate’ the U.S. Endangered Species Act
• Phys.org: Blog: How did environmentalism become a partisan issue?