 |
|
|
|||||
The seven states that rely on the Colorado River to supply farms and cities across the U.S. West appear no closer to reaching a consensus on a long-term plan for sharing the dwindling resource. The river’s future was the center of discussions this week at the annual Colorado River Water Users Association conference in Las Vegas, where water leaders from California, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming gathered alongside federal and tribal officials. It comes after the states blew past a November deadline for a new plan to deal with drought and water shortages after 2026, when current guidelines expire. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has set a new deadline of Feb. 14. Nevada’s lead negotiator said it is unlikely the states will reach an agreement that quickly. As we sit here mid-December with a looming February deadline, I dont see any clear path to a long-term deal, but I do see a path to the possibility of a shorter-term deal to keep us out of court, John Entsminger of the Southern Nevada Water Authority told The Associated Press. An essential resource More than 40 million people across seven states, Mexico, and Native American tribes depend on the water from the river. Farmers in California and Arizona use it to grow the nation’s winter vegetables such as broccoli, cabbage, and carrots. It provides water and electricity to millions of homes and businesses across the basin. But longstanding drought, chronic overuse, and increasing temperatures have forced a reckoning on the river’s future. Existing water conservation agreements that determine who must use less in times of shortage expire in 2026. After two years of negotiating, states still haven’t reached a deal for what comes next. The federal government continues to refrain from coming up with its own solution preferring the seven basin states reach consensus themselves. If they don’t, a federally imposed plan could leave parties unhappy and result in costly, lengthy litigation. Not only is this water fight between the upper and lower basins, individual municipalities, tribal nations and water agencies have their own stakes in this battle. California, which has the largest share of Colorado River water, has over 200 water agencies alone, each with their own customers. Its a rabbit hole you can dive down in, and it is incredibly complex, said Noah Garrison, a water researcher at the University of California, Los Angeles. No deal emerges During a Thursday panel of state negotiators, none appeared willing to bend on their demands. Each highlighted what their state has done to conserve water, from turf-removal projects to canal lining in order to reduce seepage, and they explained why their state cant take on more. Instead, they said, others should bear the burden. Entsminger, of Nevada, said he could see a short-term deal lasting five years that sets new rules around water releases and storage at Lakes Powell and Mead two key reservoirs. Lower Basin states pitched a reduction of 1.5 million acre-feet per year to cover a structural deficit that occurs when water evaporates or is absorbed into the ground as it flows downstream. An acre-foot is enough water to supply two to three households a year. But they want to see a similar contribution from the Upper Basin. The Upper Basin states, however, dont think they should have to make additional cuts because they already dont use their full share of the water and are legally obligated to send a certain amount of water downstream. Our water users feel that pain, said Estevan López, New Mexico’s representative for the Upper Colorado River Commission. Upper Basin states want less water released from Lake Powell to Lake Mead. But Tom Buschatzke, director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources, said he hasnt seen anything on the table from the Upper Basin that would compel him to ask Arizona lawmakers to approve those demands. Within the coming weeks, the Bureau of Reclamation will release a range of possible proposals, but it will not identify a specific set of operating guidelines the federal government would prefer. Scott Cameron, the bureau’s acting commissioner, implored the states to find compromise. Cooperation is better than litigation, he said during the conference. The only certainty around litigation in the Colorado River basin is a bunch of water lawyers are going to be able to put their children and grandchildren through graduate school. There are much better ways to spend several hundred million dollars. Jessica Hill, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
A reader asks: I run a small business that supplies a product to major companies. To keep the details anonymous, lets say that we supply garments to a few mid-tier clothing retailers that you can buy in the mall. The problem is that one of my employees two levels down (he reports to someone who reports to me), Dave, behaves as though were making clothing for Gucci or Prada. This causes enormous production headaches. It means everything moves much more slowly through his department, because he is extremely conscientious about quality. That is admirable, but it results in things like being short with our subcontractors because they have not produced the products to his standard, even though they have produced them to industry standards. Weve lost freelance designers because theyre being asked to make Prada-level clothing for Old Navy-type wages. He also causes many things to be done over or redoes them himself. This dramatically drives up the cost of what we produce. He should be producing 5,000 items a year in order to justify his salary but he only produces 3,000. This means we have gotten to a point where it actually costs us more to produce these products than we are being paid for them. Both his manager and I have attempted to tell him directly that he is overdoing things. This angers him and causes him to dig in his heels. Weve said, You dont have to redo this work. It was fine the way the freelancers produced it. Just concentrate on the big issues like the overall cut of the fabric. What he apparently hears is, What you do doesnt matter. Youre wrong to be concerned about quality. His reaction is to stay up all night and work through the weekend to try and increase his numbers instead of just not doing everything twice. Daves heart is in the right place. This is tricky because its not like were asking him to do X and he refuses. Were asking him to do X, and he does X twice and then adds Y and Z! How can I motivate Dave to take a step back and be more in alignment with the market tier we serve instead of driving up cost and increasing everyones aggravation by overdoing things? Or perhaps he is just a bad fit for this job? Green responds: He might be a bad fit for the job. Whether his heart is in the right place or not, you cant keep someone on who refuses to work in the way that you need, wildly misses your production metrics, and drives up your costsand who, when spoken to about it, flatly refuses to change what hes doing. But first make sure you have been very, very clear with Dave. Not just Concentrate on X, not Y clear. This needs to be, If you do not immediately start doing X and stop doing Y, we are going to need to let you go clear. You need to say it that way to make sure Dave understands the stakes. Its possible that he has been hearing, We would like to have the level of care and quality that youre providing and obviously it would be better if we could, but sadly we cannot find a way to sustain it. And hes thinking, Let me show you how we can do it! So you need to be crystal clear that you dont want it and will not allow it. You also need to be clear about the consequences if he continuesthat you will fire him. If you dont spell that out explicitly and then you let Dave go, he sounds like he might be shocked because hes focused on how much he cares and how hard hes working (and in his mind, who would fire someone who cares so much and works so hard?). So its a kindness to let him know now that thats the path hes heading down. If you have this conversation and the problem continues, then youll know that he just cant do the job you need done. At that point, you can move forward with a clear conscience because youll have told him clearly what he needed to do to stay in the job and will have given him a chance to do it. Want to submit a question of your own? Send it to alison@askamanager.org. Alison Green
Category:
E-Commerce
Stocks rose in morning trading on Wall Street Friday and further trimmed losses from earlier in the week for several major indexes.The S&P 500 jumped 0.8%, adding to gains made on Thursday.The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 283 points, or 0.6%, as of 10:05 a.m. Eastern. The Nasdaq jumped 1% and is now on track for a weekly gain.Technology stocks with an focus on artificial intelligence once again led the market. Nvidia jumped 3.4% and Broadcom rose 2.4%.Oracle rose 7% on news that it, along with two other investors, had signed agreements to form a new TikTok U.S. joint venture. Oracle, Silver Lake and MGX each get a 15% share in the popular social video platform, ensuring that it can continue operating in the U.S.Company earnings and how companies are performing amid tariffs and inflation were a key focus for Wall Street.Nike slumped 9.6%, as the impact from tariffs overshadowed an otherwise strong quarterly profit report. Frozen potato maker Lamb Weston fell 19.8%, despite also beating Wall Street’s profit and revenue forecasts.Winnebago Industries jumped 10.7% after turning in profits and revenue for its latest quarter that easily beat analysts’ estimates.Japanese stocks rose after the Bank of Japan raised its benchmark interest rate to its highest level in 30 years. In Tokyo, the Nikkei 225 gained 1%, leading the rise across Asia’s key markets. Markets in Europe also gained ground.AP Business Writer Matt Ott contributed. Damian J. Troise, AP Business Writer
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||