Opinion: Agreement on Reduced Diversion of Colorado River Water Proving Elusive

Under the 1922 Colorado River Compact about 16 million acre feet of water are allowed to be diverted from the Colorado River each year by seven US states, numerous Native American Tribal Nations, and the country of Mexico. However, since 2000 the average annual flow in the river is only about 12 million acre feet. Dealing with this roughly four million acre feet deficit has been the subject of discussion amongst the parties and the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), which manages the Colorado River. The existing agreement is set to expire at the end of 2026 and the USBR has indicated it will allocate water diversion rights as it thinks best if the parties cannot agree on a plan. The parties have been working on a deal for several years but announced in November of this year, that they have not reached agreement on a basic framework, let alone a detailed agreement. This misses a key milestone in the timetable USBR has established for resolving the issue.

The lower basin states (California, Nevada and Arizona) have the oldest water rights and over the years have taken substantial steps to reduce their demand for Colorado River water. They argue that they have immutable rights and that since they have already significantly reduced their demand, they should not have to do much more in the way of demand reduction. The upper basin states (Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico) argue that they have not taken their full allocation in the past thereby making some of their share available for lower basin state use, that they are now growing rapidly and need their full allocation, and that since the lower basin states use more water they should take a bigger cut in demand. Add to the state demands recognized water rights of 22 Tribal Nations and unresolved water right claims of an additional 12 Tribal nations, and a treaty with the country of Mexico allocating water rights.

The USBR has set August of 2026 as a deadline for the parties to propose an agreement and indicates it may impose an allocation plan on the parties if they do not meet this deadline. All parties recognize the benefits of a negotiated settlement over one imposed on them, but thus far the hurdles to an agreement have been too high to move forward.

Regardless of whether reductions in diversion stem from a voluntary agreement or an imposed plan, California is looking at having to reduce its dependence on the Colorado River. The question is how big a cut we will face. Chances are that it will be substantial.

Cuts in Colorado River water imports will have minimal direct impact on Riverside as Riverside Public Utilities does not take any Colorado River Water and Western Water uses only a small amount for non-potable uses like irrigation. Some of our neighbors, like the City of Corona however, depend heavily on Colorado River water to serve their customers. Even water providers that do not use Colorado River water will be affected as loss of Colorado River water will increase the competition for other water sources like the State Water Project and local ground water. This will contribute to water shortages and increase costs.

2026 Water Outlook: November was an exceptionally wet month and hopefully will lead to a good rain and snow season. California's reservoirs are almost all above average storage and we have gotten some good ground water recharge across the state. We should be in good shape for the year with the prospect of increasing storage with good rainfall and snowpack. The Colorado River issue hopefully will be resolved one way or the other and we will incorporate that result into future water planning and infrastructure development. It should be an interesting year. Hang on for the ride!