The Colorado River flows all the way from Colorado to the Gulf of California. Its basin stretches into seven states and Mexico — all of which rely on the water.
The Colorado River is vital to Arizona. It’s one of the main water sources of the Phoenix metro area, and we use it for countless things, including agriculture, generating electric power and, of course, drinking.
For 100 years, the seven basin states have followed the guidelines of a compact outlining what each entity’s water allocations are. But the demand on water has grown and the amount of water has diminished over time, largely due to warming temperatures.
Negotiations continue among the seven states about how to make due with less are ongoing, and the federal government could ultimately play a big role in determining allocations. Arizona Department of Water Resources Director Tom Buschatzke said at a recent roundtable that under the Trump administration, the state could be better positioned than it was under the Biden administration.
“The federal government under this administration has engaged in a much more meaningful way than where we ended up with the prior administration,” Buschatzke said at the Central Arizona Project Roundtable.
But cuts are inevitable.
“The federal government has historically deferred to the states to come up with their own solutions,” said Arizona State University professor Andrea Gerlak, a longtime researcher of water resource issues. “That’s how we even started with [the U.S. Bureau of] Reclamation. Back in the late 1800s and mid-1800s, states and communities tried to do it on their own, and when they realized they couldn't, they went to the feds.”
The federal government isn’t expected to step in unless there’s a “stalemate” — which is how Buschatzke described the current situation.
Gov. Katie Hobbs emphasized the need for collaboration across the board.
“This is a river that’s shared across seven states, 30 tribes, 40 million people and 5 million acres of agriculture, so everyone who benefits from the river has to be a part of the solution,” she said at the University of Arizona’s Water Resources Research Center’s annual conference.
The states are rapidly approaching the deadline they need to have a plan by, which is next summer. Hobbs said at a water conference that the federal government needs to apply pressure to the Upper Basin.
Those states — Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming — have never come close to using their full allocation of Colorado River water. The Lower Basin states — Arizona, Nevada and California — have two large reservoirs above them: Lake Mead and Lake Powell. Therefore, the Upper Basin says cuts are the Lower Basin’s problem.
In fact, some Upper Basin states say they want to siphon more water off the river.
“The reason why the system hasn’t crashed up until now is because the Upper Basin hasn’t been using their allocation,” Gerlak said. “If they had, right, if you did the math, we would have been way over. Like, Mead and Powell would have been empty.”
Hobbs said it’s “unacceptable” for Arizona to take on the most severe cuts alone.
Arizona has already had to take river cuts.
But thanks in large part to Arizona tribes who agreed to leave some of their water allocation in storage, the state has been able to avoid disaster.
“Lake Mead would be 100 feet lower today without the actions we’ve taken over the past 20 years, and especially accelerating around 2014,” Buschatzke said. “So right now the elevation of Lake Mead is about 1,059. You can do the math: We’d be at 959 — 890 is dead pool.”
“Dead pool” is the point where water gets so low in the reservoir that no more water can be released downstream and the Hoover Dam would not be able to generate power.
Buschatzke emphasized that it is important the Central Arizona Project — a 336-mile system of pumping plants, aqueducts and pipelines that supplies Colorado River water to Arizona cities and communities — doesn’t take the full brunt of future cuts, because it would have a huge impact on tribes, as well as water supplies in Phoenix and Tucson.
The internal Arizona battle over who will take cuts looms on the horizon.
It’s not clear yet who in the state will have to take cuts, but farmers are likely to be affected. Arizona’s agricultural industry is often on the chopping block over water issues because it uses such a large amount of water.
“We need the federal government to take a leadership role and show risk to all of the partners across the basin in order to force a collaborative outcome where everybody knows they have to compromise and give something up,” Hobbs said.
Under the Biden administration, the Lower Basin states sent a proposal to the federal government offering to take 1.5 million acre-feet of water cuts per year. Arizona would cut the most, at 750,000 acre-feet.
The Biden government rejected the Lower Basin’s proposal and issued an “alternative report” on Jan. 17, almost the last day of the administration. Buschatzke objected to the feds’ explanation that the state's proposal didn’t protect Lake Powell.
“What they didn't look at was the part of the Lower Basin alternative that put reductions onto the Upper Basin, and if the Upper Basin would reduce their use, the level of Lake Powell would have been higher and our alternative would have performed better,” Buschatzke said.
There’s a great deal of uncertainty as to what the federal government’s priorities are regarding the river — as there was under Biden.
To a degree, stakeholders are now trying to cozy up to the Trump administration.
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen (R-Gilbert) has met with officials in the new administration and says he was sure to remind them of Arizona’s importance to the nation for things like technology security and food production.
“We wanted to put that on their radar,” Petersen said. “We want to make sure that they knew we weren't being greedy. I don't want to name specific states, but we wanted to say that going forward, it should be similar to what it's been in the past. And going forward, we wouldn't want to see big shifts favoring specific states at the expense of other states.”
Petersen went on to say he also wants the federal government to tie in expensive infrastructure projects to the negotiations, and not just river-related infrastructure, but maybe even a desalination plant in California.
Petersen said if Arizona were to help pay for that, then Arizona could take some of California’s Colorado River allocation.
“Let's say there's more, there's some dollars provided for infrastructure for them, and then they allow less, they take off less from the Colorado, and then there's a larger water allocation,” he said.
Gerlak says it’s somewhat common for negotiations to include other issues, but it does open up a can of worms.
“You could concede over here but get something over here; it could make negotiations better or stronger, lead to a better agreement, but it could also create more conflict, because you’re bringing in lots of diverse issues that really don't have anything to do with the situation,” she said.
President Donald Trump hasn’t nominated someone to head the Bureau of Reclamation yet, and that is a critical position in terms of water negotiations. It took Biden’s team until mid-June of their first year in power, so the time frame is not unusual, but it does leave a vacuum in terms of states having a leader to turn to.
The bureau also took large staffing cuts recently through the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) reductions, amounting to about 25% of its workforce, which Arizona U.S. Sen. Ruben Gallego asked the federal government to reconsider in a letter signed by other senators representing basin states.
Whoever Trump picks will also have to go through a Senate confirmation process, which could take months.
The Reclamation commissioner is one of three federal figures leading Colorado River negotiations, along with the secretary of the Interior and the assistant secretary for Water and Science.
Trump has selected nominees for those latter two positions, but neither is from a basin state.
The Bureau of Reclamation declined interview requests for this story, but sent this statement:
“The Department of the Interior and Bureau of Reclamation are dedicated to providing life-sustaining water and harnessing the significant hydropower the river offers. We are actively engaging in dialogue with the Colorado River Basin partners as we work towards long-term operational agreements for the river after 2026. Throughout this effort, we remain committed to ensuring fiscal responsibility for the American people.”
Arizona U.S. Rep. Greg Stanton said there was no “forward progress” under Biden because the White House didn’t put pressure on the states. He said the problem with the federal government coming in and forcing the states to comply with their mandated proposal is the legal fallout from disgruntled states who will want to fight back.
“We are significantly better off with a negotiated solution rather than litigation or the administration coming in and unilaterally making the decision, not a decision among the states, but rather an administrative decision, which inevitably will lead to litigation,” Stanton said.
Buschatzke announced at the University of Arizona’s Water Resources Research Center’s annual conference that the Trump administration is open to amending that federal alternative report from Biden’s team.
“I can be optimistic and have anxiety. That's how it works when you're negotiating. I think we’re on a better path than we were, and I give kudos to the federal team for stepping up to the plate and taking more of a leadership role,” Buschatzke said.
