Arizona is running dry, and one community north of Scottsdale is facing the harsh reality.

Rio Verde Foothills has more than 2,000 homes, and about 500 could run out of water in a few weeks. The community sits in unincorporated Maricopa County, without its own water system. Most residents get their water from private wells, and some rely on water haulers to deliver. Last month, the City of Scottsdale notified Rio Verde Foothills residents it would stop water-hauling services Jan. 1 as part of emergency water conservation measures.

Karen Nabity, who has lived in Rio Verde Foothills since 2014, said the community has no solution.

"Those of us that rely on hauled water, it's terrifying," she said. "I am getting calls from community members every single day asking what they can do to help figure out a solution. And unfortunately right now, it's out of the hands of the residents."

Even with the looming deadline, Nabity said it's important to think about long-term solutions as well as short-term. She said water provider EPCOR is in talks with Scottsdale to get water to the community, but no decision has been made.

EPCOR has also submitted an application to the Arizona Corporation Commission to provide a long-term solution. If it's approved, the company would have to acquire land and build the water-system infrastructure, which would take time. It also would mean a significant price spike for water service.

Nabity said a lot of consulting has taken place over the years. Community members proposed a water district to solve the issue, but that was denied.

"That solution - which would have contracted for water and had water available for our community on Jan. 1 - was turned down by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors," she said. "My view of this whole water situation is, it's just shocking."

The county said most residents didn't support the water district idea. This challenging situation is one result of what are known as "wildcat subdivisions" that are built in outlying areas, some without basic services required - such as a fixed water supply. Time is ticking, and Nabity said she hopes her community isn't left in the dust.

The State Water Board now says it will take another two years to finalize the San Francisco-San Joaquin Delta water management plan, and it is proceeding with voluntary agreements with water agencies in the meantime.

Conservation groups spoke out at a workshop held by the board late last week - and some are asking the board to scrap the voluntary agreements.

Ashley Overhouse - California water policy advisor with Defenders of Wildlife - said a new plan to put more water into the estuary is crucial since four species of native fish have made the federal endangered species list since 1992, bringing the total to 6.

"At this point, we're trying to avoid extinction for most native fish populations that rely on the Bay-Delta," said Overhouse. "We're talking about not just delta smelt, we're talking about all runs of salmon, longfin smelt, and sturgeon. They would be completely wiped out."

Over-pumping of freshwater, pollution and climate change contribute to poor water quality. Multiple water agencies pump water from the delta and send it to the farms of the Central Valley and to cities in Southern California.

Other agencies are resisting entreaties to release more water into the delta. The group representing public water agencies, the State Water Contractors, spoke out in favor of the board's decision to move forward with the voluntary agreements.

Overhouse said the whole process has dragged on far too long.

"One of the reasons why this has been held up is due to political reasons," said Overhouse. "Water agencies have delayed the planning process significantly in order to negotiate the amount of water that they would have to release."

The water board is taking public comment on the report that establishes the scientific basis for the voluntary agreements, now through February 8.

The Bay-Delta plan is supposed to be updated every three years but the last major update took place in 1995.

Disappearing mussel species and threatened water quality from development have prompted advocates to push for increased protections for Ohio's Big and Little Darby Creeks.

The Environmental Protection Agency's Outstanding National Resource Waters classification is the highest level of protection under the Clean Water Act for waterways with exceptional recreational or ecological significance.

Chris Tavenor, associate general counsel with the Ohio Environmental Council, said the deadline to submit public comments on the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency's review of the Darby Creeks is January 31.

"Ohio currently has no rivers, lakes or streams that received this level of protection," said Tavenor. "Essentially, the designation would significantly limit all future new point source pollution into the streams."

Submit comments online at 'theoec.org.'

Forty-one species of freshwater mussels live in Darby Creek waters - eight of which are on Ohio's endangered list, according to the state Department of Natural Resources.

The Pew Charitable Trusts says the federal government has been slow to use the special designation, despite mounting evidence of worsening pollution in the nation's freshwaters.

Environmental groups recently appealed the approval of a new wastewater permit that would double the amount of polluting discharge the Plain City water treatment plant is allowed to release into Big Darby Creek.

Tavenor said the "outstanding" designation would likely block any future discharge permits.

"It wouldn't change how things have been permitted in the past," said Tavenor, "but it would limit and change how any future permits would go on and make it very, very difficult for any new point sources to be created."

According to an Environmental Integrity Project Report published last year, 51% of assessed river and stream miles across the nation - around 700,000 miles of waterways - are polluted.

This story was produced in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.

Arizona's drought conditions are improving.

Erinanne Saffell, state climatologist, said it is important to note Arizona evaluates short-term and long-term drought, both of which have recently improved.

Saffell explained when looking at short-term drought, things like precipitation, soil moisture and vegetation are essential in understanding short-term effects. For long-term drought, Saffell pointed out she evaluates precipitation trends over 24, 36 and 48 months, incorporates temperatures, and essentially looks at how thirsty the atmosphere is.

"Both of those give a sense of where we are," Saffell remarked. "We've seen improvement with the short-term drought and the long-term drought, but some areas of the state remain entrenched in that drought. "

A map relating to short-term drought from the agency's Twitter feed showed a majority of the state is currently experiencing no drought or abnormal dryness. Some parts of Mohave and Coconino counties, however, still remain under a severe drought.

Saffell noted the last time these kinds of conditions were seen in Arizona was more than two years ago, and said a state which values water as much as Arizona should be happy to see the current levels.

She added while the monsoon season of 2020 was disappointing, the 2021 and 2022 monsoons brought significant rainfall. But more times than not, the water does not make it into the state's aquifers. Saffell emphasized what really leads to the recharge of Arizona's aquifers is the winter precipitation, which comes in the form of snowpack.

"Fortunately, snow water equivalent -- and that's kind of how we measure that snowpack here in the lower Colorado region and the lower Colorado Basin -- we are at 200% right now of our median at this time," Saffell reported. "Hopefully we can continue that, but we will see what happens."

She added according to projections, Arizona was expected to have a drier winter season but has so far been experiencing more moisture.