The federal government unveiled Wednesday the first glimpse of how the overstressed Colorado River could be managed for decades to come.
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials shared five different management options: Some would keep more water in Lake Powell and impose large cuts on water use in Arizona, California and Nevada. Three options incorporate upstream reservoirs, like Blue Mesa in Colorado, and would require water cuts across the basin, including Colorado, in dry years — ideas that Colorado has staunchly opposed.
The news is a big deal for the 40 million people who rely on the Colorado River across the West. The drafted options form the foundation for new water management rules, which will start in 2027 and operate for years to come during an unpredictable climate future.
“We’ve been laser-focused on the post-2026 guidelines,” Acting Deputy Secretary of the Interior Laura Daniel-Davis said during a press conference Wednesday. “It’s really not easy. Building consensus never is.”
The details of each option, including their full impact on Colorado, aren’t yet clear. Reclamation plans to release analyses of the different options in December.
Three of the five alternatives represent major changes from the operating guidelines that have governed the river since 2007, which include the requirement that water be released from Lake Powell regardless of how much water it had collected in a given year.
That agreement drove the basin to a near-crisis: In 2021 and 2022, lakes Mead and Powell — which, combined, make up about 90% of the basin’s storage capacity — were at historic lows. Since then, storage has slightly improved. Lake Powell and Mead held 36.8% and 33%, respectively, of their capacity as of Wednesday.
The shrinking storage heightened concerns over the future water supplies for 40 million people, local economies, public health, recreation, electric systems, agriculture, the environment, 30 Native American tribes, part of Mexico and seven Western states.
In response, the Bureau of Reclamation launched two processes: one to address water management between 2024 and 2026, and the other to decide how the river will be managed after the current rules expire in 2026.
The seven basin states, including Colorado, have had a chance to weigh in on the process; however, each time, their talks have ground to a halt.
The states are currently at an impasse over how the basin should be managed after 2026. The officials have made little progress, publicly, over key sticking points, like who cuts water use and by how much when the river’s flows are low; which reservoirs should be involved in basinwide water management; and how long the new rules should last.
Several state officials have said they hope the Bureau of Reclamation’s list of options will help break the stalemate like it has in the past.
Once states saw Reclamation’s draft plans for conservation between 2024 and 2026, they had more reason to agree on how to cut back on water use. That federal process ended successfully in March.
“It was great motivation for us to come up with the 3 million acre-feet of conservation in the Lower Basin,” said Tom Buschatzke, Arizona’s top negotiator, in a meeting Monday about Colorado River management.
What options are on the table?
The Bureau of Reclamation shared a general overview of five water management options.
The first option includes no action, a required element of the process, and an unlikely choice for the final plan. Another would stick closely to the current rules, which were established in 2007 and are widely regarded as insufficient because they allowed the reservoirs to fall so low.
Under this plan, Lake Powell could release anywhere from 5 million to 9.5 million acre-feet down to the Lower Basin states — Arizona, California and Nevada. Other reservoirs, like Blue Mesa in Colorado, might be called on to help with these releases, and the Lower Basin could have to cut its use by up to 3.5 million acre-feet.
One acre-foot roughly equals the annual water use of two to three households.
The other three draft options depart from the status quo.
The first of these would require all basin states, even Colorado, to conserve water during times of shortage and it would involve multiple federal reservoirs, like Blue Mesa, the largest reservoir in Colorado.
Both are sticking points between state negotiators. Upper Basin officials from Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming and Utah argue they should not have to conserve water because the states already use less than their full share of the river. They also say the new management rules should only include lakes Mead and Powell.
The Lower Basin states say every stakeholder should make cuts in times of shortage and that reservoirs across the basin should be used to calculate how much water is available.
This alternative also includes explicit accounting of unused and undeveloped water supplies allocated to tribes.
Tribal nations play a significant role in the basin: Collectively, the 30 tribal nations in the basin have rights to about 25% of the Colorado River, but they have been unable to use some of their supply because of cost, regulatory and legal barriers.
Another option incorporates ideas from conservation organizations. Under this option, Lake Powell could release more water: Its maximum releases could reach 11 million acre-feet, which is higher than the 9.5 million acre-feet listed in other options.
This proposal also includes basinwide cutbacks, including more conservation in the Lower Basin — a maximum of 4 million acre-feet compared to 3.5 million acre-feet included in other alternatives.
The plan could help the Grand Canyon ecosystem and offer officials more flexibility in how they account for water between lakes Mead and Powell, said Jennifer Pitt, Colorado River program director for The National Audubon Society.
“It is good that the bureau put this out. It’s a broad range of alternatives,” she said. “The idea is to really explore the full range of possibilities.”
The last option aims to blend competing proposals submitted by upper and lower basin states and tribal nations. Under this draft alternative, Lake Powell might be required to release 12 million acre-feet and to pull water from upstream reservoirs depending on the conditions in the basin.
For context, the Colorado River’s average flow was about 12.44 million acre-feet per year 2000 and 2018. Lake Powell’s total capacity is 26 million acre-feet.
This alternative includes provisions to ensure tribal nations will be involved in water management. It calls for basinwide cutbacks when water is short and calls for less Lower Basin conservation — maximum cutbacks are listed as 2.1 million acre-feet.
It is good that three of the alternatives explicitly account for unused tribal water, according to the Southern Ute Indian Tribe, which has not yet put all its settled, quantified water to use.
“This will be helpful to all water users in understanding how much water they use actually belongs to the Tribes,” the tribal government said in a prepared statement. “This is an important first step to getting compensation to Tribes for that water.”
What happens next?
These options are not set in stone.
The draft released Wednesday is part of a long, federal process. For the new rules to be ready at the start of 2027, the federal government must have a finalized agreement in hand by August 2026. It may sound far off, but the process must include time for public comment, revisions, required waiting periods and more.
Basin states, tribal nations, agricultural interests, environmental groups and others across the basin are rushing to analyze the four-page document.
“These proposed alternatives underscore how serious a situation we’re facing on the Colorado River,” said U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper, a Colorado Democrat, in a prepared statement. “The only path forward is a collaborative, seven-state plan to solve the Colorado River crisis without taking this to court. Otherwise, we’ll watch the river run dry while we sue each other.”
Colorado River Commissioner Becky Mitchell could not comment directly on Reclamation’s alternatives Wednesday, according to a prepared statement Wednesday. However, the state continues to stand behind the Upper Basin proposal submitted to Reclamation in March, she wrote.
The proposal from Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming and Utah included voluntary conservation in the Upper Basin and mandatory cuts during dry years in the Lower Basin. Its goal was, in part, to curb overuse in the downstream states and tie river operations more closely to real-time river conditions.
“Colorado remains committed to working collaboratively with the other Basin States, the federal government, and Tribal Nations towards a consensus approach and also stands ready to protect our State’s significant interests in the Colorado River,” she wrote.
Some elements of Reclamation’s five alternatives do align with that Upper Basin proposal, which was heartening, said Steve Wolff, general manager of the Southwestern Water Conservation District.
Lake Powell may only be asked to release 5 million acre-feet of water in dry years, which could help protect the reservoir’s storage levels. Several plans also include significant cutbacks in the Lower Basin, and the emphasis on including tribes is key, he said.
“The whole state of Colorado is dependent on Colorado River water, and how we distribute it and share it across the basin — that’s important,” he said. “And we know the system, hydrologically, is in trouble.”
Colorado River stakeholders have until spring 2025 to work with Reclamation to adjust elements of the five alternatives.
If the seven basin states can agree, then the federal government will likely adopt their plan, according to several water officials representing their states in the negotiations.
Whatever form the final rules take, they will need to be able to bring stability to a basin that has been hard-hit by a changing climate.
Every person is banded together, and the basin has to come up with solutions collaboratively to move forward, said Ali Zaidi, White House national climate advisor, during the press conference Wednesday.
“The climate crisis does not pause for anybody on any continent, in any country. It doesn’t matter what your politics are: Climate change still impacts you,” Zaidi said. “Water is the key to growth. Water is the key to opportunity. A water-secure future is the only one where we can thrive.”
Print