Details of first-of-its kind, short-term Colorado River plan revealed

The Trump administration is nearing intervention in the yearslong standstill between the seven states that share the Colorado River at a historic point of crisis.

A 10-year federal plan would require the states to return to the negotiation table every two years — something that Arizona officials revealed the first details about last week during a public meeting. This shift to a new, short-term agreement in the face of record low reservoir levels was a central tenet of Nevada’s recent proposal for a stopgap measure.

“There’s a lot of energy around the idea,” said John Entsminger, general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority. “I think that’s where most of the most productive discussions are occurring at the moment.”

The Colorado River Basin writ large is experiencing a harsh wake-up call this water year, as the Bureau of Reclamation was forced to both move water into Lake Powell from an upstream reservoir and reduce flows into Lake Mead following a record-low snow season. Lake Mead is projected to plunge 20 feet below its previous record low set in 2022.

A plan must be in place by Oct. 1, the start of the water year. Current sharing guidelines expire at the end of 2026.

As far as Entsminger, Nevada’s governor-appointed Colorado River czar, knows, the mandatory shortages under consideration would align with the voluntary cuts that the Lower Basin states of Nevada, California and Arizona have already acknowledged they would take in 2027 and 2028.

In total, that’s about 3.2 million acre-feet in cuts spread across three states. One acre-foot of water is roughly enough to sustain two single-family households for a year, by most estimates.

For Nevada, the fast-growing state with the tiniest share by far of 300,000 acre-feet, that could mean agreeing to slash its allotment by a sixth. A Lower Basin letter to the Interior Department indicated federal funding could help Nevada agree to a cut of an additional 50,000 acre-feet, which would be the most significant cut in modern history at a third of the total share, though that’s less of a possibility overall.

A paradigm shift

This framework could mark an end to a bitter fight between state officials, as well as a beginning of a new era that leaves behind previous notions of stability in the Colorado River Basin.

Maxwell Wilson, water resources adviser for the city of Phoenix, said during the meeting of Arizona officials that the Lower Basin proposal should be accepted in full, especially considering the Upper Basin states of Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming have not offered any cuts.

Arizona, which has publicly been posturing for a U.S. Supreme Court battle by appropriating millions for a legal defense, would be hit hardest by the proposal. Attack ads have warned residents that certain versions of the Bureau of Reclamation’s plans could effectively wipe the state “off the map.”

“I hope that everybody throughout the nation understands that there’s no more water after this,” Wilson said. “We can’t keep coming back to Arizona asking for more again and again and again to get this done.”

In response to a request for comment on the new Reclamation framework for a deal, California negotiator JB Hamby agreed that the cuts must align with what the Lower Basin has already proposed.

Anything past what Lower Basin officials offered must include the Upper Basin and Mexico, he said.

“I think this is a smart process approach to long-term planning because it allows the basin to adapt more regularly to variable hydrology, rather than making assumptions and being locked into them for decades,” Hamby wrote in an email. “It creates room for iteration, improvement, and better decision-making as conditions change.”

None of the Upper Basin states replied to a request for comment on the federal government’s plan except for New Mexico, which declined to provide a statement or an interview. Bureau of Reclamation spokesman Peter Soeth said the agency is continuing with its legally mandated environmental review, acknowledging officials have identified “preliminary elements” of a plan.

“Given the risk and uncertainty facing the Basin, these elements are designed to provide stability while allowing flexibility to incorporate consensus‑based recommendations as they develop,” Soeth said.

Add more water?

Meanwhile, for one of the first times since the re-negotiation of the 2007 Colorado River agreement began years ago, a renewed focus on so-called water augmentation has emerged. Those are the projects, like large-scale water recycling and ocean desalination, that could add water to the mix.

All seven states have renewed their plea for more federal funding from the Trump administration to help with both conservation and water augmentation.

The governors of those states are asking Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to release a remaining sum of $550 million from the Inflation Reduction Act, a Biden-era investment in climate action from Congress that the Trump administration has largely dismissed as unnecessary overspending.

“Distributed across the Basin, the remaining IRA funding will help buffer local economies from water supply reductions from near-term operational changes and driven by future needs,” the seven governors wrote in an April 30 letter.

Entsminger, of Nevada, said he didn’t have any idea what dollar amount could hold the basin over while levels at Lake Powell and Lake Mead are floundering.

However, it’s time for the nation to put drought on the same level of any natural disaster, he said. Congress and the federal government often pour billions into affected communities after a major event.

“Even though a drought is a lot slower moving than a hurricane, that’s probably the order of magnitude that you’re talking about in order to make our community safe in the Desert Southwest,” Entsminger said.