The Trump administration has released an outline of four new options for dealing with the Colorado River\u2019s deepening water shortages, and they could dramatically cut the amount of water available for Southern California. <\/p>\n
Several of the alternatives are \u201calarming\u201d because they could mean major water cutbacks for Southern California, said Shivaji Deshmukh, general manager of the Metropolitan Water District, which distributes water in the region.<\/p>\n
He said any of the alternatives would likely \u201clead to lengthy litigation.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThe various alternatives highlight the significant risks we could face if we don\u2019t reach an agreement,\u201d Deshmukh said. \u201cOur Colorado River supply cannot be randomly slashed.\u201d<\/p>\n
Officials from seven Western states are deadlocked over how to address the water crisis. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation report addresses water cutbacks that will have to be made after 2026, when current rules for handling water shortages expire. <\/p>\n
The Trump administration apparently intends to \u201climit the pain\u201d for the upper basin states, because the alternatives don\u2019t clearly spell out significant cuts for those states, and instead would have California, Arizona and Nevada bear the brunt, said Kyle Roerink, executive director of the Great Basin Water Network.<\/p>\n
He said that would mean \u201cunprecedented pain\u201d through substantial cutbacks under all the proposals.<\/p>\n
Federal officials stressed the importance of quickly putting a plan in place, ideally one the seven states can agree on.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn the face of an ongoing severe drought, inaction is not an option,\u201d said Andrea Travnicek, assistant Interior secretary for water and science.<\/p>\n
Representatives of California and six other states that depend on the river have been meeting regularly over the last two years to hash out a long-term plan to address shortages.<\/p>\n
Scott Cameron, the Bureau of Reclamation\u2019s acting commissioner, has urged state officials<\/a> to negotiate an agreement by mid-February.<\/p>\n As the Trump administration released its draft environmental review<\/a> Friday, Cameron said his agency hasn\u2019t chosen from among the four alternatives detailed in the report, \u201cgiven the importance of a consensus-based approach.\u201d An agreement is expected to \u201cincorporate elements or variations of these five alternatives,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n One of the four alternatives is just \u201cbasic coordination,\u201d which the federal report says could be done absent an agreement among the states. Others include different ways of apportioning water cuts, with plans blandly titled \u201cenhanced coordination,\u201d \u201cmaximum operational flexibility\u201d or \u201csupply driven,\u201d as well as a \u201cno action\u201d alternative.<\/p>\n The Colorado River provides water for cities from Denver to San Diego, 30 Native tribes and farming communities from the Rocky Mountains to northern Mexico. It has long been overused, and its reservoirs have declined dramatically amid unrelenting dry conditions since 2000.<\/p>\n In the last quarter-century, the river has lost about 20% of its flow. Research has shown that the warming climate<\/a>, driven largely by the use of fossil fuels, has intensified the long stretch of mostly dry years.<\/p>\n Lake Mead, the river\u2019s largest reservoir, is now just 33% full. And Lake Powell, its second-largest reservoir, is at 27% of capacity.<\/p>\n JB Hamby, California\u2019s lead negotiator, said the federal report \u201cunderscores the seriousness and urgency of this moment.\u201d<\/p>\n Hamby said California is prepared to shoulder a portion of the necessary water cuts to help prevent reservoirs from declining to critically low levels, and participation by other states will be key.<\/p>\n \u201cThe river will not wait. A sustainable solution requires all seven states to contribute,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n The negotiations have been mired in disagreements over how mandatory water cuts should be divided among the states. The three downstream or lower basin states \u2014 California, Arizona and Nevada \u2014 are at odds with the four states in the river\u2019s upper basin \u2014 Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico.<\/p>\n Becky Mitchell, lead negotiator for Colorado, said her state is committed to protecting its \u201csignificant interests in the Colorado River and continues to work towards a consensus-based, supply-driven solution.\u201d<\/p>\n The impasse has raised the possibility that the states could sue each other, a path riddled with uncertainty that water managers in both camps say they hope to avoid.<\/p>\n The Bureau of Reclamation is accepting public comments on its draft environmental document<\/a> until March 2, and plans to issue a final decision by Oct. 1.<\/p>\n The federal report<\/a> acknowledges that the existing rules, which were adopted in 2007, have not \u201csufficiently reduced risk,\u201d as reservoir levels have continued to decline despite a series of temporary water-saving deals, including one reached in 2023<\/a>. It says Interior Secretary Doug Burgum intends the new rules to be in effect for 20 years, but also says he \u201cremains open to a shorter duration or phased implementation.\u201d<\/p>\n The report warns of potentially \u201clarge and unprecedented\u201d mandatory reductions in water use. It says the Colorado River Basin is \u201cexperiencing increased aridity due to climate variability\u201d and that \u201clong-term drought\u201d is expected in the future.<\/p>\n