Colorado River managers deadlocked on how water will be shared in the future
Both Upper and Lower basin reps say their alternative is best
Luke Runyon/The Water Desk
LAS VEGAS — At the largest annual gathering of the basin’s water managers on Thursday, speakers invoked “Dr. Strangelove,” “The Hunger Games” and “Alice in Wonderland” to convey the dire, darkly dystopian and illusory state of the negotiations for how the Colorado River will be shared in the future.
The seven representatives from the Upper Basin states (Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming) and the Lower Basin states (California, Arizona and Nevada) are deadlocked in disagreement and for the first time in recent years did not appear on stage together at the Colorado River Water Users Association Conference at the Paris Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas. This year, representatives from the two basins had separate panels, underscoring their failure thus far to reach a consensus on how to share shortages and operate the nation’s two largest reservoirs, Lake Powell and Lake Mead, after 2026.
Each took the opportunity to double down and reiterate their differing positions in competing proposals submitted to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in March. Lower Basin water managers say all seven states that use the Colorado River must share cuts under the driest conditions, while Upper Basin officials maintain they already take cuts in dry years because they are squeezed by climate change and shouldn’t have to share additional cuts because their states have never used the entire 7.5-million-acre-foot apportionment given to them by the Colorado River Compact.
“In the Upper Basin, it’s the Hunger Games,” said Colorado’s top negotiator Becky Mitchell. “We are hungry all the time. There is never enough.”
During their nine-month-long standoff, the two basins have not moved any closer to a consensus. Mitchell said she had expected the seven state representatives to have their customary meeting before the conference started.
Support Local Journalism
“I’ve been here since Monday thinking that we would be meeting all day Tuesday and that did not occur,” Mitchell told the Colorado delegation at a breakfast Thursday morning. “I am hopeful that we can still come together again to talk and work towards a mutually agreeable solution.”
The current river management guidelines were developed in response to drought conditions in the first years of the 20th century and set shortage tiers based on reservoir levels that spell out which states in the Lower Basin will take cuts as levels fall. But these guidelines did not go far enough to protect reservoir levels from drought and climate change, and in 2022 Lake Powell flirted with falling below a critical elevation to make hydropower.
Perhaps to spur the basin states toward a solution, in November, Reclamation released an outline of five potential paths forward, including a “No Action” alternative, which is unlikely to be chosen. None of the management options adopted either the Upper or Lower basin proposals, but instead include a “basin hybrid” that is a mash-up of elements from both.
Carly Jerla, a senior program manager with Reclamation, gave an overview of each of the options Thursday and said the agency intends to publish a report with more detail on the alternatives by the end of the year. Maximum cuts could range from 2.1 million acre-feet to 4 million acre-feet and could be shared based strictly on priority of who has the oldest rights or distributed proportionally across the three Lower Basin states.
Upper Basin officials said in a prepared statement that they cannot speak directly to Reclamation’s potential alternatives and need more information before they can analyze them.
“The Upper Division States continue to stand firmly behind the concepts embodied in the Upper Division States’ Alternative, which performs best according to Reclamation’s own modeling and directly meets the purpose and need of the federal action,” the statement reads.
Reclamation officially kicked off the post-2026 guidelines development process in June 2023 with a Notice of Intent. The current guidelines expire at the end of 2026 and new ones must be in place by August of that year, meaning water managers have just over a year and a half to complete the National Environmental Review Act process for implementing new management rules.
“We have a year and a half left to identify a preferred alternative, put out a draft EIS, put out a final EIS, develop the implementation and adopt a record of decision,” Jerla said. “So we need to be moving as a basin a lot faster in the second half than we did in our first half.”
On their panel, Lower Basin representatives gave an overview of their proposed alternative, plus their water conservation tallies over the past two decades, some of which were forced by the shortage agreements under the current guidelines.
“We’re asking the Upper Basin to come with us to help further protect the river, but only in those really hot, dry (years),” said Tom Buschatzke, Arizona’s top negotiator.
At this year’s conference, there was talk about the longtime elephant in the room, something Colorado River water managers have previously said they want to avoid at all costs: litigation over the Colorado River Compact. Upper Basin water managers believe that as long as they don’t use more than the 7.5 million acre-feet allocated to them, they will not violate the compact. But Lower Basin officials believe that regardless of the Upper Basin’s use, the upstream states could be subject to a compact call if they don’t deliver 7.5 million acre-feet a year.
As river flows continue to decline due to climate change, the basin states could be inching closer to a compact call, which could force cuts on the Upper Basin.
Buschatzke addressed his September request of Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs to set aside $1 million for litigation in case of a compact call.
“Compact compliance is out there, it is a potential issue,” Buschatzke said. “I have to do my due diligence for all potential outcomes.”
But the principals remained committed to finding agreement among the seven states. Top Nevada negotiator John Entsminger said he wants the Upper Basin states to know he’s not looking for a fight.
“I want everybody from the Upper Basin to hear from Nevada: We believe compromise is possible,” he said. “We think it’s the first, second and third best option. But we need a dance partner. So let’s get back to the table and make this happen.”
This story is provided by Aspen Journalism, a nonprofit, investigative news organization covering water, environment, social justice and more. Visit aspenjournalism.org.
