Colorado dodges water cuts for next 2 years in new federal plan for Colorado River

As the entire Colorado River basin grapples with the effects of drought and shrinking supplies, the three Lower Basin states will carry the brunt of water use cuts over the next two years, prompting a legal challenge from Nevada. 

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation released its 2027-28 operations plan for the basin’s two largest reservoirs Friday, Aug. 21, one month after finalizing the environmental impact statement for post-2026 Colorado River operations. This statement is intended to guide management and operations of Lake Powell and Lake Mead over the next 10 years, with the federal agency dropping new plans every two years through 2036.

The Colorado River is divided into an upper and lower basin by a 1922 compact agreement. While the Upper Basin states of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming rely predominantly on snowpack for their water supply, the Lower Basin states of Arizona, California and Nevada rely on releases from Lake Powell and Lake Mead. 

The first of the Bureau of Reclamation’s two-year plans, which covers 2027 and 2028, provides additional clarity on how it will operate the reservoirs in the current state of crisis — including where cuts will be made. 

HISTORIC LOWS

This month, Lake Powell and Lake Mead both hit historic lows after winter snowpack was 22% of normal in the Upper Basin. 

The latest 24-month projections from the Bureau of Reclamation estimate that Lake Powell will start the 2027 water year on Oct. 1 at an elevation between 3,540 and 3,510 feet, with the lower end matching the minimum level required “to support continued operational reliability at Glen Canyon Dam.” 

Under the plan, Arizona, California and Nevada will see their water supplies cut by 1.25 million acre-feet each year coming out of Lake Mead, while also calling on the states to voluntarily conserve and store at least 700,000 acre-feet of water during the two years. This mirrors a proposal offered by the three Lower Basin states in May. Colorado’s 2023 Water Plan estimates that one acre-foot of water can support two families of four or five people for one year.

The Upper Basin states will not face mandatory cuts, but have been called upon by the Bureau of Reclamation to implement voluntary conservation programs. 

The 2027-28 plan also calls for Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico and Utah to enter agreements with the federal agency to plan for future releases and operations at three reservoirs operated by Reclamation: Aspinall in Colorado, Flaming Gorge in Utah and Wyoming and Navajo in Colorado and New Mexico. This year, the agency used water from Flaming Gorge to increase inflows into Lake Powell and prevent it from falling below levels required to generate hydropower.

The federal government’s plan for the two reservoirs follows the inability of the seven basin states to reach a consensus during multi-year negotiations. This failure was driven in part by the upper and lower basin states’ disagreement over whose responsibility it is to cut water use. While the Lower Basin states contended that mandatory cuts should fall on all water users, the Upper Basin has maintained that the natural ups and downs of snowpack already force water cuts on users. 

NEVADA LAWSUIT

These arguments have continued to persist in response to the Bureau of Reclamation’s plan for the Colorado River — and have prompted a legal challenge from one of the Lower Basin states.

On Monday, Nevada filed a lawsuit in the state’s U.S. District Court to block the federal government from cutting its share, arguing that its two-year plan unfairly burdens the Lower Basin. 

Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo said in a statement that southern Nevada “could lose more than 70% of its already meager Colorado River allocation while the Upper Basin states of Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming are not required to contribute a drop,” adding that the lawsuit was not about political posturing but survival. 

This year, the Upper Colorado River Commission — which negotiates on behalf of the four Upper Basin states — projected that across the four states, users would see less than 40% of their water rights after the record-low snowpack.

“Operating decisions must be supply-based and acknowledge the hydrologic realities within the basin, including the fact that the upper division states strictly regulate water use and already experience mandatory reductions due to state regulation based on available supply,” said Becky Mitchell, Colorado’s water commissioner on the Upper Colorado River Commission, in a statement Friday. 

In a statement Monday, Lindsay DeFrates, public information officer for the Colorado River District, said that the agency will continue to ensure Western Slope voices are heard in discussions over the river’s future, particularly given conditions this year. 

“Communities across Colorado have spent this summer confronting the reality of a severely diminished water supply,” DeFrates said. “Water users have made difficult cuts, lost revenue and adapted in real time to conditions beyond their control.”

On Friday, Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs posted on X that she was glad the federal government implemented the Lower Basin states’ plan, while continuing to push for basin-wide cuts. 

“We’ve protected Arizona from disastrous and unacceptable forced federal water cuts,” Hobbs wrote. “… But the work is not over. Arizona’s water is for Arizonans, and we need to fight to keep it that way. As long as I’m governor, Arizona will continue defending our right to our water by every legal means necessary and stand up to Upper Basin states who refuse to cut a drop of water in protection of the river.” 

In a statement, Andrea Travnicek, the Interior Department’s assistant secretary of water and science, said the federal government was leaving the door open for the states to still reach an agreement.  

“These decisions provide a water management strategy for basin stakeholders to respond to the prolonged drought by incorporating flexible tools and voluntary actions while leaving room for consensus agreements,” Travnicek said. “The department and Reclamation will continue to work with all basin stakeholders to identify areas to maximize efforts throughout the basin to modernize infrastructure, develop conservation programs and identify innovative approaches to deliver water under changing conditions.”

PERMANENT SOLUTION

The clarity provided by the long-awaited operating plan is tempered slightly by many Colorado River stakeholders calling for a more permanent solution to the basin’s unprecedented drought crisis.

“Coloradans know how important it is to responsibly manage the Colorado River, especially in a year as painfully dry as this one,” said Colorado U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper in a statement, adding that “long-term action to protect this increasingly strained resource from prolonged drought and the effects of climate change is critical both for Colorado and the entire basin.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom shared a similar sentiment in a Friday statement, calling the two-year plan a “necessary step,” but also emphasizing that it “provides only short-term stability.” 

“In the coming months, each state across the basin must step up to conserve water and continue to work together across the basin to achieve a durable long-term approach that positions our region for future prosperity,” Newsom said. “Any long-term solution must share responsibility fairly across all seven states in recognition of the new reality of the Colorado River.”

For some, Reclamation’s plan does not get close to offering the types of solutions needed as climate change spells out a hotter, drier future for the Colorado River basin. 

Mark Squillace, a professor at the University of Colorado Law School specializing in natural resources, water and environmental law, said that Reclamation needs to “be more aggressive in pushing a permanent solution on the states.” 

“I give them some credit for coming up with at least a temporary solution,” Squillace said. “I’m a big fan of an adaptive management approach, but not one that is only good for two or three years. I just think that’s just kicking the can down the road.” 

While the framework offers some short-term solutions, Squillace added that what the entire basin needs to do “is find ways to permanently reduce our consumption of water, full stop.”

Squillace has also advocated for the basin to make bolder changes, including to how it divides available water. 

“There needs to be some agreement about how we’re going to divide up the river going forward, and the logical solution is by percentages,” he said, adding that while “negotiating those percentages is going to be very difficult,” it could be done by looking at each state’s existing uses.

“If we don’t agree to some equitable sharing based upon percentages of the river, then we’re going to have this fight every couple of years about who gets what water. And that just seems crazy to me,” Squillace said.