Federal Government Proposes Alternatives for Managing Colorado River System

The Colorado River region is split into a Lower and an Upper basin, which submitted separate plans for the river’s future and could not reach agreement.

Lightning strikes over Lake Mead near Hoover Dam, which impounds Colorado River water at the Lake Mead National Recreation Area in Arizona, on July 28, 2014. John Locher/AP Photo

Several potential alternatives for the long-term management of the Colorado River System have been proposed by the federal government after the Basin states—reliant on the river for essential services such as drinking water and electricity—failed to reach a consensus earlier this year.

The Colorado River region is divided into a Lower Basin, which includes Arizona, California, and Nevada, and an Upper Basin, which includes Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming.

In a Nov. 20 statement from the U.S. Department of the Interior, officials proposed five alternatives for replacing the 2007 interim guidelines for dealing with potential water shortages before the current rules expire at the end of 2026.

In March, the two basins submitted separate plans for the river’s future and could not reach a unified agreement. The Lower Basin states agreed to reductions but pushed for shared cuts across the whole river. The Upper Basin states submitted a plan that they felt would better reflect changing hydrological conditions in the region.

In response to the lack of agreement, the federal government released its alternatives, which will be analyzed in a forthcoming draft environmental impact statement.

Option one, suggested by the Department of the Interior, aims to “achieve robust protection of critical infrastructure within the Department and Reclamation’s current statutory authorities.”

Water releases from Lake Powell would be based on the lake’s elevation, with Lower Basin shortages distributed according to the region’s water rights priority system and triggered by the combined storage levels in Lake Powell and Lake Mead.

Option two is based on proposals and concepts from tribal nations, federal agencies, and other stakeholders. It aims to achieve robust protection of critical infrastructure while benefiting essential resources. Water releases from Lake Powell, under this option, would be determined by a combination of Lake Powell and Lake Mead elevations. Shortages would be distributed on a pro-rata basis.

Option three was developed through proposals from conservation organizations. Lake Powell releases would be triggered by Upper Basin system storage levels and recent hydrological conditions. Under this alternative, Lower Basin cutbacks would be determined based on the combined seven-reservoir storage capacity, hydrological conditions, and voluntary contributions from both basins.

The fourth option is a hybrid of the plans submitted by the Upper Basin and Lower Basin. The fifth alternative, referred to as “no action,” would involve reverting to the guidelines that were in place before 2007.

Acting Deputy Secretary of the Interior Laura Daniel-Davis said the alternative proposals reflect elements proposed by basin states, tribes, cooperating agencies, and nongovernmental organizations to appease all sides.

“We continue to support and encourage all partners as they work toward another consensus agreement that will both protect the long-term stability of the Colorado River Basin and meet the needs of all communities,” she said in the Nov. 20 statement. “The alternatives we have put forth today establish a robust and fair framework for a Basin-wide agreement.”

John Podesta, a senior climate policy adviser to the president, said in a statement, “The alternatives released today will help support ongoing efforts for all Basin partners to reach consensus on a sustainable path forward that will help ensure that Colorado River Basin communities are healthy and thriving, now and into the future.”