Transcript Highlights:

• Resources<00:20:37.200> in Uh Darren Learner, Water Resources in Uh Darren Learner, Water
• federal Clean Water Act.
• Eliminating demand water Maui followed.
• So Bill 2232 relating to clean water.
• We're relating to water heating systems.

Bills: HB2245, HB1618, HB1985, HB2079, HB1921, HB2232, HB1567, HB1984, HB2608, HB2435, HB1623, HB1774

Keywords: wastewater systems, denitrification, environment, pollution, coral reefs, nearshore waters, public health, shoreline regulations, cesspool conversion, cesspool replacement, wastewater, sewer connection, sewerage systems, septic system, pollution control, water pollution control revolving fund, Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority, HGIA, low-interest loans, forgivable loans

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills related to cesspools, wastewater, and clean water protections. On HB 2245, which would require additional denitrification capacity in wastewater systems near shorelines, the Department of Health offered comments, DLNR supported the bill, and multiple environmental and ocean groups testified in strong support, emphasizing nitrogen pollution from cesspools, reef damage, and the need to prioritize shoreline systems. Testifiers said the bill should move forward, with technical issues such as GIS mapping to be worked out later. No member questions or votes were taken on this measure. On HB 1985, concerning the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority and accessible conversion loans for cesspool homeowners, HGI supported the bill and suggested making the program a revolving loan fund; DLNR and the Public Utilities Commission also supported it, while the Department of Health supported the concept. Committee discussion focused on program design, possible forgivable loans for low-income homeowners, and whether the program should be administered through existing infrastructure rather than a new procurement process. The committee then moved to HB 1985’s companion discussion on cesspool conversion outreach and deadline extensions, where DLNR and DOH supported outreach but DLNR and ocean advocates expressed reservations about extending deadlines, especially for financial hardship, saying that issue would need careful work. The committee also heard testimony on HB 2079, which would reestablish the accessible upgrades inversion or connection income tax credit. The Department of Taxation raised administrative and fraud concerns about refundable credits, explaining that nonrefundable credits reduce tax debt while refundable credits can function like cash payments and require more oversight. DOH, DLNR, OPSD, counties, Hawaii Realtors, and environmental groups supported the bill, with one ocean coalition witness saying tax credits could help homeowners but grants would be preferable. Members asked about the difference between refundable credits and grants and about whether the credit would cover sewer connections versus individual wastewater systems. The committee then heard brief testimony on HB 1921, allowing certain priority-three cesspools to add a bedroom, with support from Hawaii Realtors and some other groups and no opposition discussion. HB 2232, preserving state water-quality protections at least as strong as the federal Clean Water Act, drew support from DOH and ocean advocates, with no questions. The committee also began hearing energy-related bills, including HB 1567 on energy equity and HB 1984 on self-certification for distributed energy resources, with a mix of support and some opposition or requested amendments, but no votes were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:27.599> We the Honolulu Border Water Supply. We the Honolulu Border Water Supply.
• testing<00:03:17.840> that irregularities of water testing that irregularities of water testing
• and our water resources.
• and our water resources.
• the water eventually goes to the ocean. the water eventually goes to the ocean.

Bills: SB2093, SB2095, SB2046, SB2096, SB2127, SB2155, SB2243

Keywords: fuel tank, environmental impact, groundwater, health and safety, military facilities, local communication, advisory committee, Hawaii legislation, PFAS, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, forever chemicals, toxic chemicals, environmental contamination, water pollution, drinking water, surface water, soil contamination, fish consumption, food safety, public health

Summary: The joint Senate Agriculture and Environment and Health and Human Services hearing opened with SB 2093, which would require the fuel tank advisory committee to meet at least quarterly and provide funding. The Department of Health offered written testimony, and multiple supporters, including the Honolulu Board of Water Supply, Sierra Club, and a public member of the advisory committee, said more frequent meetings were needed to keep Red Hill cleanup, water testing, and public engagement front and center. Senators asked about public participation and whether the bill should also require meetings outside business hours; testifiers urged at least one evening or weekend meeting to improve access. No vote was taken during the discussion shown. The committee then heard SB 2095, creating a PFAS working group within the Department of Health to study PFAS and related chemicals and report to the Legislature. DOH supported the concept but requested amendments and funding, while the Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity deferred to DOH. The Board of Water Supply supported the measure and asked to be included in the working group. Members asked about the bill’s reference to “other residuals,” and DOH explained it could refer to remaining PFAS components in soil, water, or other media. The discussion emphasized the widespread and long-lasting nature of PFAS contamination. Next, the committee considered SB 2046 on underground storage tanks and Red Hill-related cleanup. DOH and the Board of Water Supply testified, and a long list of community and environmental groups supported the bill. Testifiers argued the Navy caused the problem and should be held accountable for cleanup, while one witness said the bill was necessary because the Navy had delayed meaningful remediation. Senators asked whether the bill’s “large landowner” language could include the state or counties under existing statutes; DOH said it would check and later explained that cleanup responsibility generally falls first on the responsible party, then on large landowners if no responsible party exists, with the Navy currently understood to own Red Hill. The hearing then moved to SB 2096 on wastewater management, which the Department of Land and Natural Resources supported, noting PFAS can harm marine resources, and DOH’s wastewater branch offered comments. SB 2127 on water pollution drew support from Agra Business Development Corporation and opposition from the Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council, Hawaii Farm Bureau, and others. The main debate centered on runoff, NPDES permitting, and whether the bill could unfairly affect agricultural and public entities; senators and witnesses discussed how heavy rainfall, cesspools, and mixed land uses complicate responsibility and compliance. The transcript ends with the committee still in discussion on SB 2127, with no final votes or actions shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Drawing water from them risks collapsing the water line, cutting off Kennedy's water supply entirely.
• Our project includes replacing our entire water system, including the water main, adding a water tower
• For water currently? Yeah, water, sewer currently.
• Yeah, water, sewer water currently?
• , water quality, habitat, include water, water quality, habitat, and<00:35:07.680> other<00:35

Bills: HF2080, HF356, HF1968, HF228, HF569, HF603, HF692, HF1455, HF2224, HF1361

Keywords: contamination, water supply, municipal bonds, environmental mitigation, city funding, Sauk Rapids, PFAS contamination, drinking water, pollution control, bond issuance, Cokato, capital investment, school infrastructure, state bonds, HF228, Lakes Area Police Commission, Lindstrom, Chisago City, regional training facility, public safety facility

Bills: SF0050, SF0084, HB0133, HB0116, HB0011, HB0044

Keywords: groundwater, water resource management, state engineer, aquifer study, corrective controls, monitoring wells, public reporting, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, irrigation, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, conservation districts, supervisors, elections, agriculture, local governance, beneficial use

Transcript Highlights:

• water use reductions. water use reductions.
• water.
• of each water year to the select water of each water year to the select water committee<00:15:40.399
• So water districts are water project is.
• uses shepherd water when released water uses shepherd water when released water uses the<01:14

Bills: SF0050, SF0084, HB0133, HB0116, HB0011, HB0044

Keywords: groundwater, water resource management, state engineer, aquifer study, corrective controls, monitoring wells, public reporting, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, irrigation, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, conservation districts, supervisors, elections, agriculture, local governance, beneficial use

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, Texans expect their public water supply systems to provide clean, safe drinking water.
• drinking water.
• Generally, Senate Bill 2497 would require a public water system that obtains its water supply from an
• We are willing to pay for good water. We want good water. There's been two rate increases.
• So this was the water bill where we’re going after water loss data and just common sense.

Bills: HB630, HB685, HB1318, HB2692

Keywords: outboard motors, certificate of title, vessel regulation, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, marine documentation, HB 685, municipal utility rates, water rates, sewer rates, local government code, rate discrimination, tax-exempt entities, sales tax exemption, ad valorem tax exemption, nonprofit organizations, charitable organizations, municipal water service, municipal sewer service, utility billing, public utilities

Summary: The Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs met with no quorum at the start, but later reached quorum and took up several bills. House Bill 2692, codifying the San Antonio River Authority’s enabling legislation and making non-substantive modernization changes, received brief supportive testimony from the River Authority and was left pending before later being voted out favorably. House Bill 685, which would prevent municipalities from charging higher water or sewer rates to tax-exempt entities than comparable customers, also drew support and was reported favorably. House Bill 1318, clarifying compensation issues when a municipality decertifies part of a retail water utility’s service area, was heard without opposition and passed out of committee. House Bill 630, exempting certain older outboard motors from title requirements, likewise passed and was placed on the local and uncontested calendar. The committee spent the most time on Senate Bill 2497, relating to filtration systems for certain public drinking water systems. Senator Zaffirini described the bill as a response to ongoing secondary water quality complaints, while TCEQ testified that such contaminants are aesthetic rather than health-based and that the water remains safe to drink if primary standards are met. The Texas Rural Water Association opposed the bill as written, arguing filtration may not solve most water quality problems and could be costly for small systems, while a consumer witness from Floresville supported it and described repeated rate increases and brown water after a filtration system was removed. Members discussed narrowing the bill through a committee substitute and emphasized the need for flexibility and technical expertise; the committee substitute was adopted and the bill was reported favorably, with Senator Kolkhorst later asking to be recorded as voting no. The committee also heard Senate Bill 2850, which would create a pollinator task force to study habitat loss, public education, and best practices for protecting bees and other pollinators. Senator Menendez and invited witness Erica Thompson of Texas BeeWorks highlighted major colony losses and the economic importance of pollinators to Texas agriculture, and Environment Texas and the Texas Beekeepers Association supported the measure. Members discussed monarch butterflies, native grasses, milkweed, and conservation efforts, and the bill was reported favorably and sent to the local and uncontested calendar. After testimony, the committee also voted out several pending items, including House Bill 5560 with a committee substitute addressing water-loss penalties and infrastructure improvements, and then recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• Established over eight decades ago, the 1944 water treaty outlines the allocation of water from the Colorado
• As you know, the water, the Texas water code, any water in a Texas water course, is property of the state
• acre-feet of water.
• You have to water more early. Actually, a small tree would take less water.
• turning it into a new water source for potable drinking water.

Bills: SCR13, SB1248

Keywords: water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, TPWD, harvest reports, wildlife harvest data, public information act, open records, confidentiality, hunter privacy, angler data, game animals, game birds, fur-bearing animals, nongame animals

Transcript Highlights:

• The 1944 Water Treaty, established over eight decades ago, outlines the allocation of water from the
• You know, usually when you impound water, you do a water deal.
• A small tree would take less water. Less water.
• new water source for potable drinking water.
• a new water source for potable drinking water.

Bills: SCR13, SB1248

Keywords: water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, TPWD, harvest reports, wildlife harvest data, public information act, open records, confidentiality, hunter privacy, angler data, game animals, game birds, fur-bearing animals, nongame animals

Summary: The Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs met without a quorum at first, then later established quorum and proceeded with testimony and votes. Senate Bill 1248, by Chair Perry, was explained as a narrow Open Records Act exception to protect harvest report location data collected through Texas Parks and Wildlife’s digital tagging system. Support testimony came from Matt Wagner of the Texas Chapter of The Wildlife Society, who said the bill would protect private land and sensitive biological information while preserving useful wildlife data. No one testified against the bill, and it was left pending until later in the meeting. The committee then heard Senate Concurrent Resolution 13, which urges the State Department and the International Boundary and Water Commission to press Mexico to comply with the 1944 Water Treaty and deliver its share of Rio Grande water. Senator Hinojosa, farmers, municipal officials, and other witnesses described severe water shortages in South Texas, low reservoir levels, crop losses, the closure of the Valley sugar industry, and the need for alternative supplies such as desalination, reuse, and drainage-runoff projects. Members also discussed treaty enforcement, regional drought, and the role of cartels and Mexican water storage, while emphasizing that Texas must also invest in its own water infrastructure. The committee also considered Senate Bill 740, which the committee substitute amended to require the Public Utility Commission to adopt a standardized application form for system improvement charges and complete related rulemaking by September 1, 2026, applying only to applications filed on or after that date. Members discussed concerns about water wholesalers using the process to delay cases and drive up costs, and the need for more transparency and PUC resources. The committee voted to adopt the substitute and report SB 740 favorably. After returning to the earlier items, the committee voted SB 1248 out favorably and recommended it for the local and uncontested calendar, and voted SCR 13 out favorably as well. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• They ultimately fall down on the people, the land, the water, the crops, and the insects.
• years' worth of water in the basin.
• Furthermore, identifying the total amount of water or years of water in a basin could signify that that
• years' worth of water in the basin.
• Furthermore, identifying the total amount of water or years of water in a basin could signify that that

Bills: SB1005, SB1202, SB1278, SB1279, SB1280, SB1287

Keywords: cosmetics, animal testing, prohibition, manufacturers, sales regulation, state preemption, groundwater, water conservation, Arizona water resources, drought management, water quality, solar radiation management, environment, regulation, Arizona Revised Statutes, weather modification, licensing, environmental impact, public safety, cloud seeding

Summary: The Natural Resources Committee approved the minutes from January 20 and January 27, 2026, then heard several bills related to weather modification, water policy, wildlife, cosmetics, and groundwater management. SB 1278 would ban intentional solar radiation management in Arizona and bar public entities or recipients of public funds from supporting related technology development. Supporters argued it was needed to stop harmful geoengineering, while opponents said it would block research and distract from real pollution problems. The committee voted 5-2 with one not voting to give SB 1278 a do pass recommendation. The committee then considered SB 1279, which would regulate weather modification licenses, require ADWR and ADEQ review of chemicals, public notice, and public meetings, and—under a proposed strike-everything amendment—shift complaint enforcement to ADWR and require rulemaking. Testimony was largely in support from stakeholders and SRP, while ADEQ was neutral but warned it lacked standards, resources, and expertise to develop the required chemical limits on the bill’s timeline. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed the bill as amended 5-2 with one not voting. Members next passed SB 1005, which would prohibit the sale of cosmetics developed with animal testing, with supporters citing cruelty concerns and industry alternatives; the bill received a do pass recommendation 4-2 with two not voting. SB 1202, requiring ADWR to include more detailed data in five-year groundwater supply-and-demand assessments, drew opposition from ADWR over feasibility, cost, and the risk of misleading conclusions, but still received a do pass recommendation 4-2 with two not voting. The committee also passed SB 1280, which would bar Game and Fish from using public funds to transport Mexican gray wolf pups into Arizona; wildlife advocates opposed it as harmful to recovery, while Game and Fish said it would not affect core responsibilities and was neutral. Finally, SB 1287, with a conforming amendment, was approved 5-1 with two not voting to extend certain irrigation grandfathered-right groundwater uses to subsequent active management areas. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then on the third page, you'll see the clean water heritage fund.
• If you turn to the fourth page, you'll see the clean water fund, and the clean water fund is largely
• the clean water council revised recommendations.
• You'll see the clean water... Sorry, line 215.
• For Lassard-Sams, there's 33% for water.

Bills: HF2563

Keywords: HF2563, legacy finance bill, Legacy Amendment, outdoor heritage fund, clean water fund, parks and trails fund, arts and cultural heritage fund, Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, Clean Water Council, Minnesota legacy funds, habitat conservation, prairie restoration, wetland restoration, forest conservation, riparian buffers, water quality, groundwater protection, drinking water, septic systems, watershed planning

Transcript Highlights:

• The Clean Water Fund is largely the Clean Water Council revised recs.
• The Clean Water Fund is largely the Clean Water Council revised recs.
• That and that's in the clean water fund.
• in the metro that we get in the water in the metro that we get in the water<00:57:27.920> you
• <01:03:02.079> We Sams or the Clean Water Council. We Sams or the Clean Water Council.

Bills: HF2563

Keywords: HF2563, legacy finance bill, Legacy Amendment, outdoor heritage fund, clean water fund, parks and trails fund, arts and cultural heritage fund, Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, Clean Water Council, Minnesota legacy funds, habitat conservation, prairie restoration, wetland restoration, forest conservation, riparian buffers, water quality, groundwater protection, drinking water, septic systems, watershed planning

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, 70% of the water in there is for Houston and 30% of it is basically allocated to us in water rights
• Um, 70% of the water in there is for Houston and 30% of it is, is basically allocated to us in water
• surface water—I'm assuming most of those water rights are allocated to Tarrant County Regional Water
• or develop their water.
• water changes ownership hands as it moves from surface water to groundwater.

Bills: HB24, HB27

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management

Summary: The committee met to hear House Bills 27 and 24 on groundwater issues in East Texas, with members and witnesses focusing on a proposed large-volume groundwater export project and the need for more science before major permitting decisions are made. HB 27, which was within the special session call, would direct the Texas Water Development Board to conduct a hydrogeologic study of the aquifers in the affected area and temporarily pause new export permits while the study is underway. HB 24, a separate bill that would limit certain production and export permits to 5% of modeled available groundwater, was laid out but the chair said it would not be moved out of committee. Testimony on HB 27 was largely supportive, though some witnesses were neutral. Supporters, including representatives from a water supply corporation, the Trinity River Authority, Environmental Defense Fund, and the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association, said the region lacks enough hydrologic data, that the proposed pumping could affect private wells, surface water, and local economies, and that the state needs better information on sustainable yield and groundwater-surface water interaction. Several witnesses emphasized that groundwater conservation districts need clearer tools and better data, while also noting concerns about property rights and the rule of capture. Committee members discussed the scale of the proposed project, the absence of a groundwater conservation district in Houston County, and the possibility that the study should examine desired future conditions and maximum sustainable pumping rather than only modeled available groundwater. The committee adopted the committee substitute for HB 27 and voted it out favorably to the full House with a recommendation that it do pass, be printed, and be sent to the Committee on Calendars. The roll call was unanimous, 11 ayes and 0 nays. After the vote, members briefly reflected on the complexity of the issue and the need to continue working on broader groundwater policy in the interim and next session. HB 24 was discussed later in the meeting, but no final action on that bill was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a water session.
• of water resources.
• For watering the landscape.
• The, the, the historic water use. There hasn't been water use from that utility yet.
• , to conserve water.

Bills: HB24

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's Texas Water Code 16315, um.
• Water, sewer systems, all of that is sewer, electricity.
• Um, so you said you provide water and sewer to some.
• It's all grazed cows, and they don't want water.
• Our water is supplied by a co op, but we do provide the roads.

Bills: HB24

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management

Bills: SF0069, SF0084, SF0050, SF0109, HB0069, HB0098

Keywords: wastewater, stormwater, infrastructure, environmental quality, public data, data collection, funding, study, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, irrigation, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, groundwater, water resource management, state engineer, aquifer study, corrective controls

Transcript Highlights:

• One of the challenges in that area is finding someplace that has utilities, meaning particularly water
• Electricity is not hard, but water and sewer was difficult to come by.
• On this property that we've located at the Life Resource Center, there is water and sewer that connects
• There is water and life resource center.
• There is water and sewer<00:05:26.400> that<00:05:26.880> connects<00:05:27.199> the

Bills: SF0069, SF0084, SF0050, SF0109, HB0069, HB0098

Keywords: wastewater, stormwater, infrastructure, environmental quality, public data, data collection, funding, study, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, irrigation, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, groundwater, water resource management, state engineer, aquifer study, corrective controls

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's expect our public water supply systems to provide clean, safe drinking water.
• Deterioration of drinking water wells and the delivery of poor water quality while also raising water
• drinking water.
• You to the water company.
• We are willing to pay for good water. We want good water. There's been two rate increases.

Bills: HB630, HB685, HB1318, HB2692

Keywords: outboard motors, certificate of title, vessel regulation, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, marine documentation, HB 685, municipal utility rates, water rates, sewer rates, local government code, rate discrimination, tax-exempt entities, sales tax exemption, ad valorem tax exemption, nonprofit organizations, charitable organizations, municipal water service, municipal sewer service, utility billing, public utilities

Transcript Highlights:

• They own the well that supports and supplies water.
• Central Arizona Project water that is currently allocated to the State Land Department to parcels of
• Central Arizona Project water that is currently allocated to the State Land Department to parcels of
• Central Arizona Project water that is currently allocated to the State Land Department to parcels of
• Central Arizona Project water that is currently allocated to the State Land Department to parcels of

Bills: HB2150, HB2262, HB2267, HB2268, HB2351, HB2425, HB2426, HB2427, HB2755, HB2781, HB2913, HB2943, HB2956, HB2975, HB2985, HB4009

Keywords: state land department, mineral lease, renewals, indexed royalties, land use planning, auditor general, five-year plans, geospatial data, Arizona Geological Survey, resource analysis, geographic information systems, wildlife protection, public nuisance, renewable energy, wind farm, solar farm, residential property, public health, local regulations, state land

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 2150, which would continue the State Land Department until July 1, 2030. Members discussed a Griffin amendment requiring quarterly updates from the commissioner, a public hearing on the department’s strategic plan in 2028, changes to conceptual land use plans and five-year disposition plans, and legislative findings. The hearing focused heavily on State Land Department practices, including whether it is subject to state agency statutes, the department’s internal ASAP application review process, backlog levels, appraisal and consultant use, audit findings, privileged documents in the Fondomonte matter, Proposition 207 notices, and the Coyotes land auction. Members also raised concerns about land sales, leases, special use permits, and the department’s compliance history. The amendment was adopted and HB 2150 was passed as amended on a 6-4 vote. The committee then considered House Bill 2975, which would suspend the department’s solar scoring map and require new mining and housing resource maps, with a Griffin amendment extending the mapping deadline to ten years or earlier and requiring website posting. Supporters argued the bill would restore neutrality, improve planning, and maximize trust revenue; opponents said the solar map is only a guidance tool and that removing it could reduce transparency and harm solar development. The State Land Department said it was neutral but noted the solar layer is used as guidance and that additional staff or consultant support might be needed to create the new maps. The bill passed as amended on a 6-4 vote. House Bill 2781 followed, proposing county or municipal decommissioning standards and financial assurance requirements for solar energy power plants, along with a remediation fund. A Griffin amendment narrowed local authority to decommissioning standards only and limited applicability to projects receiving permits after the effective date. The sponsor and several witnesses from Pinal County planning and zoning supported the bill, saying solar projects should be required to post real financial assurance so land can be restored if operators go bankrupt or abandon sites. The committee adopted the amendment and passed HB 2781 as amended on a 6-4 vote. Finally, the committee began House Bill 2267, which would classify certain renewable energy projects within four miles of residential property as a public nuisance, with a Heap amendment narrowing it to new utility-scale wind or solar farms and preserving existing projects. The sponsor argued the bill responds to concerns about large wind and solar projects near homes, property values, and wildlife impacts. Testimony and questioning centered on nuisance standards, property value effects, and environmental and health concerns, but the transcript cuts off before final action on HB 2267.

Bills: SB 243, SB 1586, SB 1891, SB 1959, SB 2159, SB 2568

Keywords: wastewater treatment, environmental permits, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, package plant, environmental protection, water utilities, sewer services, ratemaking, regulatory authority, Class A B C D utilities, rate proceedings, financial integrity, aquifer, Edwards Aquifer, water injection, environmental regulation, groundwater management

Bills: SF0085, SF0056, SF0084, SF0104, SF0109, SF0120, SF0050

Keywords: internet crimes, children, task force, law enforcement, funding, education, victim assistance, kratom, regulation, healthcare, age restrictions, manufacturing standards, water conservation, Colorado River, drought, irrigation, water rights, voluntary program, interstate agreements, higher education