What could future #ColoradoRiver water cuts look like? States look to this year’s weak #snowpack to find out — Shannon Mullane (Fresh Water News)

Hoover Dam with Lake Mead in the background December 3, 2024.

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Shannon Mullane):

April 17, 2025

Colorado River officials are debating six options for how to manage the overstressed river after 2026 with the goal of reaching a seven-state agreement by May. Under this year’s ultra dry water conditions, all of the proposed plans would call for mandatory cuts in the three Lower Basin states with reductions ranging from 1.3 million to 3.2 million acre-feet. The basin’s legal share of the river is 7.5 million acre-feet, although estimates say its actual use is higher.

Under most of the different management options, Colorado and its sister states in the Upper Basin would be asked to voluntarily conserve up to 500,000 acre-feet of water. One acre-foot roughly equals the annual water use of two to three households.

In Arizona, the state that would be hardest-hit, cities, farms and tribes are already making alternative plans, Tom Buschatzke, Arizona’s Colorado River negotiator, said.

“The impacts are going to be meaningful,” Buschatzke, who is also director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources, said. “They are going to have some pain attached to them.”

It’s been a tough water year for parts of Colorado and the Colorado River Basin. In Colorado, the snowpack on the Western Slope — where the Colorado River starts — ended up with a below average peak this winter.

Across the basin, more than 20 major reservoirs and tributaries can expect a lower-than-usual water supply between April and July, according to the Colorado Basin River Forecast Center.

Lake Powell, one of the immense reservoirs that provides storage for millions of water users in the basin, will likely receive less than 70% of its normal inflows from the Upper Basin region of Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming and Utah.

It’s the kind of water year that starts to worry officials about late-summer irrigation supplies and wildfire risks, according to fire officials, irrigators and water providers.

With this year’s conditions, Colorado River states would be conserving or cutting back on their water use under any of the six plans dominating current planning discussions: two competing proposals from basin states — one from the Upper Basin and one from the Lower Basin — and four options from the federal government.

The fifth federal option, called the “no action” alternative, is theoretical and a required part of the federal planning process. It would not sustainably manage the river, officials say.

The final management plan won’t be decided until later this year or early in 2026.

Colorado snowpack basin-filled map April 20, 2025 via the NRCS.

How would the Upper Basin manage the river?

If the Upper Basin’s proposal were being used to manage the river basin, the Lower Basin states would be reducing their use by 1.5 million acre-feet this year.

The proposal calculates cuts by taking a snapshot every Oct. 1 of the water level at Lake Powell and the amount of water stored in Lake Powell and Lake Mead. This year, Powell’s surface was 3,577 feet above sea level and the combined storage in both reservoirs was 17.8 million acre-feet on Oct. 1, about 36% of their combined capacity, according to Colorado’s Colorado River team.

Colorado and the other Upper Basin states would take more voluntary action, like conserving water or releasing water from reservoirs further upstream if needed.

Sticking to voluntary conservation would be a win for the Upper Basin, where officials have said they should not be required to cut their use because their water supply is already unpredictable and limited by each year’s precipitation.

The Upper Basin, located upstream of the basin’s biggest reservoirs, lakes Mead and Powell, relies on smaller reservoirs to try to pace the flow of water from year to year. The Lower Basin depends on the vast storage in lakes Powell and Mead to pace its water supply, which offers more predictability over a longer time span.

What would cuts look like under the Lower Basin’s plan?

Arizona, California, Nevada and Mexico would also cut their use by a total of 1.5 million acre-feet this year if their own proposal were to manage the river basin.

Arizona would cut its use by 760,000 acre-feet; California, by 440,000; and Nevada, 50,000. Lower Basin officials estimated Mexico would have to cut its use by 250,000 acre-feet, but those reductions are being decided in separate negotiations between Mexico and the U.S.

The Upper Basin would not be required to cut its use at all this year under the Lower Basin proposal, Buschatzke said. (If the basin’s water supply was even worse, the Upper Basin would be required to share in the water cuts instead of voluntarily conserving.)

In Arizona, one water project, the Central Arizona Project, would take the brunt of the hit, Buschatzke said.

Central Arizona Project map via Mountain Town News

The 336-mile water delivery system serves cities, like Phoenix and Tucson, and several tribes, including one of the project’s largest users, the Gila River Indian Community.

Other cities and farms along the Colorado River, like Bullhead City, Lake Havasu City, Kingman and the Cibola Valley Irrigation District, could also take a hit. That’s dependent on how Arizona decides to distribute cuts inside the state, Buschatzke said.

“We will be able to continue to live sustainably within the CAP service area, but it’s going to cost more money,” he said.

It will mean that creative things, like treating wastewater so it can be used to drink, will have to be developed and deployed, which also means significant infrastructure costs of hundreds of millions of dollars, Buschatzke said.

The state will face tough decisions about how to use water, like choosing between restoring ecosystems along rivers or diverting that water to support other uses.

“We’ve been talking about these things for many, many years, but it’s coming to the fore now where some policy decisions are going to have to be made,” Buschatzke said.

What would water cuts look like under the federal plans?

The Lower Basin states are ready to face 1.5 million acre-feet in cuts, but some of the federal plans would call for cuts up to 3.2 million acre-feet in a year like 2025, according to an analysis by the Upper Colorado River Commission.

The commission used a federal study of reservoir levels and projected inflows from February to gauge the minimum, maximum and probable water cuts in the Lower Basin. The Lower Basin’s outlook hasn’t changed much since February, Chuck Cullom, the commission’s executive director, said in early April.

Under water sharing agreements, California can use 4.4 million acre-feet of Colorado River water; Arizona, 2.8 million acre-feet; and Nevada 300,000 acre-feet.

For Colorado and other Upper Basin states, cuts will not be mandatory under the federal plans. Instead, the states would commit to other actions, like voluntary conservation.

There’s not enough detail at this point in the negotiations to say exactly how much the Upper Basin would try to conserve based on this winter’s water conditions, Cullom said.

Under a former water conservation pilot project — the System Conservation Pilot Program — the Upper Basin has been able to cut its use by a maximum of 37,800 acre-feet. That was in 2023, a very wet year with a much higher snowpack across the Western Slope than in 2025.

“What we’ve observed is that there’s greater participation in voluntary programs when there’s more water in the system. So that’s what the modeling reflects,” Cullom said. “The commitment is that we would develop conservation programs. They’re voluntary, so they would be targets to achieve, not requirements.”

More by Shannon Mullane

Udall/Overpeck 4-panel Figure Colorado River temperature/precipitation/natural flows with trend. Lake Mead and Lake Powell storage. Updated through Water Year 2024. Credit: Brad Udall

Governor Polis’ Administration and Department of Agriculture Announce New #Climate Resilience Funding for #Colorado Farms and Ranches

September 2013 flooding via AWRA Colorado Section Symposium

Click the link to read the release on Governor Polis’ website (Olga Robak and Shelby Wieman):

April 21, 2025

Broomfield, Colo. — Today, Governor Polis and the Colorado Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Drought and Climate Resilience Office (ADCRO) announced new grant opportunities to support climate resilience projects within the state’s agricultural sector. 

“In Colorado we are committed to mitigating the risk associated with climate change, by investing in innovative clean energy technologies, and providing economic avenues for our farmers and ranchers to continue to provide healthy and fresh produce to all Coloradans for generations to come,” said Governor Polis. 

Climate resilience is the ability to anticipate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from hazardous events, trends, or disturbances related to climate. The Climate Resilience Grants are designed to provide crucial financial assistance to farmers and ranchers who have experienced adverse effects due to climate change-induced disasters and are seeking to enhance their resilience against future climate-related challenges. 

“Dealing with extreme weather, resulting from climate change, and an increasingly dry environment is an everyday challenge for Colorado’s farmers and ranchers,” said Colorado Commissioner of Agriculture Kate Greenberg. “This funding will help producers who have experienced these challenges or are at risk for worsening climate disasters to be better prepared to withstand these events now and into the future.” 

This is the first grant opportunity at CDA focused on helping producers who have experienced a disaster. Specifically, this funding addresses a critical need producers have to ensure their operations are resilient and can better withstand future climate pressures. 

Climate change affects all sectors of agriculture, from workforce and the supply chain, to livestock and farm and ranch profitability. This funding will help tackle issues throughout the supply chain and invest in leaders around the state, who can later serve as positive examples or resources for their neighbors. Climate-related disasters are only increasing, and this funding can create demonstrations on what it means to recover in a resilient way. CDA will select a few priority climate impacts to focus on each funding cycle, based on needs around the state. This year, priority projects will be those that address impacts of drought, snow events, and wildfire. In future years, CDA will work with partners to determine priorities based on needs. Other disasters that are exacerbated by climate change include flooding, extreme heat, and severe storms. 

Farmers and ranchers are eligible, as are producer-facing organizations, tribes, and local governments. Grant applications must demonstrate how producers will benefit, how the grant deliverables will address future climate disasters, and feasibility of the project. Matching funding is not required, though applicants will receive more points if they use matching funds. The maximum grant award is $30,000. 

The online application is available on the ADCRO website. Grant applications are due on May 29. 

The ADCRO team will hold an informational webinar on Wednesday, May 7, at 2:00 p.m., and interested participants can register via Zoom or find the registration link on the ADCRO website. The informational session staff will present an overview of the eligibility criteria and application process and answer producer questions. 

This initiative represents a significant step forward in supporting Colorado’s agricultural sector in adapting to and mitigating the impacts of climate change and fostering a more resilient and sustainable agricultural landscape for the future. These grants also align with CDA’s strategic priorities, especially Direction Three: Environmental Stewardship and Climate Resilience. These grants will work with other CDA programs to create healthy and resilient farms, ranches, and food supply chains. 

#RioGrande lawsuit scheduled for June trial in Philadelphia: Mediation will continue in the meantime — Danielle Prokop (SourceNM.com)

The Rio Grande at Isleta Blvd. and Interstate 25 on Sept. 7, 2023. (Photo by Anna Padilla for Source New Mexico)

Click the link to read the article on the Source NM website (Danielle Prokop):

April 16, 2025

The federal judge overseeing the lawsuit between New Mexico, Texas and Colorado over Rio Grande water has ordered a 10-day trial in Philadelphia starting June 9 at the request of all the parties, who are also pursuing mediation talks to resolve the lawsuit in the meantime.

The case, officially called Original No. 141 Texas v. New Mexico and Colorado, began more than a decade ago, sparked by escalating legal disputes around Rio Grande water below Elephant Butte between Texas and New Mexico.

The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the federal government — which operates a network of dams, and nearly 140 miles of irrigation canals to deliver water to two irrigation districts in the region and Mexico — to enter as a party to the case in 2018.

In the February status hearings, the federal mediator and attorneys for all three parties told United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Chief Judge D. Brooke Smith, who is overseeing the case, that they were still seeking a resolution to the 12-year old case.

Jeffrey Wechsler, the lead attorney representing New Mexico, said setting a trial date would help mediation talks.

“Deadlines help negotiations rather than hinder them,” Wechsler said, according to transcripts of the hearing.

The New Mexico Department of Justice and other parties’ attorneys confirmed to Source NM that mediation talks are ongoing as of April, with another mediation session scheduled for April 22, according to NMDOJ Chief of Staff Lauren Rodriguez. “Meanwhile, the trial—focused on determining liability and establishing a baseline for apportionment under the compact—remains on schedule,” she wrote in a statement, “if an agreement is not reached by then.”

Any potential settlement or recommendation from Smith based on a trial would still need approval from the U.S. Supreme Court, the only court that handles interstate waters disputes.

Last year, U.S. Supreme Court justices struck down a deal proposed by New Mexico, Colorado and Texas to end the litigation in a close 5-4 decision. They sided with objections from the federal government that the states’ deal unfairly excluded the “unique federal interests,” and sent the case back to the negotiation table and potentially trial.

The alliances between the state and federal government in the case have dramatically shifted since 2022 as the nature of the dispute changed. Initially, Texas and the federal government agreed that New Mexico pumping below Elephant Butte threatened Rio Grande water for both Texas irrigation and treaty obligations to Mexico.

However, since Colorado, New Mexico and Texas proposed a deal to measure Texas’ water at the state line and include transfers of water between New Mexico and Texas irrigation districts to balance out shortfalls, the federal government is going to have to build its own case.

“Texas and the United States are no longer aligned,” federal attorney Thomas Snodgrass told Smith in February. He said the federal government was still preparing a case that New Mexico should be held liable for groundwater pumping impacts on the Rio Grande since 1938.

The court already held one part of a two-part trial in October 2021, but the proposed settlement delayed the second part indefinitely.

Weschler told Smith in February that if the case does proceed to trial in June, it will be shorter than the three-months set aside for trial in 2021.

“The case is prepared for trial. In fact, it’s halfway through trial,” Weschler said. “We’ve completed our discovery, we’ve completed disclosures — there’s really not much more to do other than to begin.”

Rio Grande and Pecos River basins. Map credit: By Kmusser – Own work, Elevation data from SRTM, drainage basin from GTOPO [1], U.S. stream from the National Atlas [2], all other features from Vector Map., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=11218868

Federal Water Tap, April 21, 2025: Agencies Fast-Track Controversial #FossilFuel and Mining Projects in Great Lakes, #Arizona — Brett Walton (circleofblue.org)

Click the link to read the article on the Circle of Blue website (Brett Walton):

April 19, 2025

The Rundown

  • Army Corps expedites permit process for Line 5 oil tunnel that crosses beneath the Great Lakes.
  • White House fast-tracks 10 mining projects in its quest for domestically produced minerals.
  • FEMA cancels grant program meant to prepare communities for weather hazards, while USDA overhauls climate-smart agriculture grant program.
  • Federal agencies intend to shrink wildlife habitat protections under the Endangered Species Act.
  • Judge sets a trial date for Rio Grande lawsuit between New Mexico and Texas.
  • EPA extends public comment period for health risk assessment of PFAS in sewage sludge.

And lastly, the Justice Department seeks to end an agreement to improve sewage infrastructure in Alabama.

“The DOJ will no longer push ‘environmental justice’ as viewed through a distorting, DEI lens. President Trump made it clear: Americans deserve a government committed to serving every individual with dignity and respect, and to expending taxpayer resources in accordance with the national interest, not arbitrary criteria.” – Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, as reported by Inside Climate News.

Dhillon is referring to a Biden-era civil rights agreement with the state of Alabama that sought to improve sewage infrastructure in the state’s poorest counties, which are also majority Black. The Justice Department is trying to end that agreement.

The agreement directed Alabama agencies to take a number of actions, such as halting referral of home wastewater violations to law enforcement and expanding a public health campaign about the dangers of raw sewage. It included a sewage system assessment and an infrastructure plan for at-risk areas.

By the Numbers

$882 Million: Funding that FEMA is rescinding from the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program, which was meant to prepare towns for floods, sea level rise, hurricanes, and heat. FEMA is canceling the grant program, Engineering News Record reports.

$3 Billion: Biden-era funding for the Partnership for Climate-Smart Commodities that is being retooled by the Trump administration. The U.S. Department of Agriculture said it will reevaluate the program it has rebranded as Advancing Markets for Producers to ensure that less money is spent on administrative costs. Expenditures under the previous grants that were incurred through April 13 will be paid out.

Great Lakes satellite photo via Wikipedia.

News Briefs

Line 5 Tunnel Expedited
The Army Corps of Engineers determined that the Line 5 tunnel, a proposal to drill an oil pipeline tunnel beneath the strait that separates lakes Michigan and Huron, is being put on the permitting fast track.

The determination is in response to President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national energy emergency in order to speed up the permitting and construction of fossil fuel infrastructure.

Carrie Fox, an Army Corps spokesperson, told Circle of Blue that the new permit review procedures and timeline are not known right now.

“We are coordinating with the applicant, who is Enbridge, and also coordinating with the Council on Environmental Quality, who will assist in establishing the review timeline,” Fox said. “So until those steps take place, we don’t have a timeline. And so we won’t know how exactly it’ll change yet. We just know right now that the permit has been placed under emergency procedures, but the timeline is to be determined.”

Enbridge proposes drilling a 3.6-mile tunnel beneath the Straits of Mackinac. The existing seven-decade-old pipeline sits exposed on the lakebed. It has been hit by ship anchors and a rupture would be calamitous for Great Lakes ecology, tourism, and water supplies.

Six Great Lakes tribes, after learning in March that the project permitting would likely be expedited, withdrew from the federal review process in protest, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports.

Mining Projects Fast-Tracked
The White House put 10 mining projects on the fast-track for regulatory approval, continuing the administration’s desire for more domestically produced minerals.

Oak Flat, Arizona features groves of Emory oak trees, canyons, and springs. This is sacred land for the San Carlos Apache tribe. Resolution Copper (Rio Tinto subsidiary) lobbied politicians to deliver this National Forest land to the company with the intent to build a destructive copper mine. By SinaguaWiki – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=98967960

The list includes the Resolution Copper mine, in Arizona, which would be located on land that is sacred to the Apache people. Tribe members have petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to halt the project, the Arizona Republic reports.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, the lead permitting agency for the Resolution project, will update the timeline by May 2.

The other mining projects would produce gold, phosphate, copper, lithium, and other critical minerals.

Redefining the Endangered Species Act
Two federal agencies that oversee the Endangered Species Act intend to eliminate the definition of “harm” because it does not fit with the new administration’s interpretation of a recent Supreme Court ruling.

The National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had considered harm to mean habitat destruction. No longer, after the Loper Bright decision that the administration reads as curtailing agency authority in this matter.

The only wrongful actions under the ESA would be those that “take” an animal, meaning to capture, injure, or kill it.

The proposed change would apply only to new permits and would not affect existing actions. Public comments are being accepted through May 19 via www.regulations.gov using docket number FWS-HQ-ES-2025-0034.

Studies and Reports

Army Corps Water Storage Agreements
The Army Corps could improve its communication with utilities about the fees it charges them for water storage space in its reservoirs, according to a Government Accountability Office report.

The fees are a portion of the cost to operate and maintain the reservoirs. The Corps had 438 water storage agreements nationwide, as of 2023.

Tile Drainage and Transportation
The U.S. Geological Survey published a report describing how drainage from farm fields affects downstream flows.

The only wrongful actions under the ESA would be those that “take” an animal, meaning to capture, injure, or kill it.

The proposed change would apply only to new permits and would not affect existing actions. Public comments are being accepted through May 19 via www.regulations.gov using docket number FWS-HQ-ES-2025-0034.

Studies and Reports

Army Corps Water Storage Agreements
The Army Corps could improve its communication with utilities about the fees it charges them for water storage space in its reservoirs, according to a Government Accountability Office report.

The fees are a portion of the cost to operate and maintain the reservoirs. The Corps had 438 water storage agreements nationwide, as of 2023.

View of runoff, also called nonpoint source pollution, from a farm field in Iowa during a rain storm. Topsoil as well as farm fertilizers and other potential pollutants run off unprotected farm fields when heavy rains occur. (Credit: Lynn Betts/U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service/Wikimedia Commons)

Tile Drainage and Transportation
The U.S. Geological Survey published a report describing how drainage from farm fields affects downstream flows.

Tile drains, common in the Midwest, move water from beneath fields into ditches.

The report was supported by state transportation departments, which want to build roads, bridges, and culverts that can withstand high water flows.

On the Radar

Future Army Corps Projects
The Army Corps is seeking proposals from states, tribes, and regional bodies for projects to be considered for future feasibility studies or improvements.

Proposals are due August 15.

PFAS in Sewage Sludge
The EPA is extending the public comment period for its draft risk assessment of two PFAS in sewage sludge, also known as biosolids.

Comments are now due August 14. Submit them via http://www.regulations.gov using docket number EPA-HQ-OW-2024-0504.

In the assessment, the agency evaluated risks to people living on or near lands where these biosolids are applied. The analysis, which looked at PFOA and PFOS, also considered risks for people whose primary consumption of water and food comes from these lands. It is not intended to assess risk for the general public.

Rio Grande and Pecos River basins. Map credit: By Kmusser – Own work, Elevation data from SRTM, drainage basin from GTOPO [1], U.S. stream from the National Atlas [2], all other features from Vector Map., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=11218868

Rio Grande Lawsuit
The lawsuit between Texas and New Mexico over water supply from the Rio Grande will have a 10-day trial starting June 9, Source NM reports.

The parties to the case, which include Colorado and the federal government, are continuing to seek a mediated solution before the trial begins.

Federal Water Tap is a weekly digest spotting trends in U.S. government water policy. To get more water news, follow Circle of Blue on Twitter and sign up for our newsletter.