Nevada water official seeking short-term solutions amid stalled Colorado River talks

Editor's note: Este artículo está traducido al español.

Don’t expect “a peace in our time” on the Colorado River.

That’s how Nevada’s lead negotiator describes the state of talks over water sharing among the seven Western states dependent on the river. With a long-term agreement off the table, John Entsminger is now pushing for a short-term deal to protect supplies for the 40 million people who rely on the Colorado.

“I have been on the phone a number of times today — I think there is a short-term solution,” said Entsminger, the general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority who since 2014 has been Nevada’s lead negotiator on Colorado River matters. “Do I think there is a pending 50-year panacea to be announced? A peace in our time? No.”

Entsminger discussed the ongoing negotiations during the fourth annual Southern Nevada Water Summit on Wednesday at Springs Preserve. The event was hosted by U.S. Rep. Susie Lee, D-Nev.

The summit comes as several agreements governing Colorado River facilities and management are set to expire at the end of 2026. An intense drought has only raised the stakes, parching the Western landscape and leaving Lake Mead at its lowest level ever — 1,040.09 feet, recorded Monday.

Talks on new agreements began in late 2023 but have since lagged, missing several deadlines to reach consensus.

As the drought causes the river to shrink, states remain unwilling to agree on who should bear the brunt of the loss.

Lower Basin states — Nevada, Arizona and California — have taken on most of the responsibility for the decreased water supply. Upper Basin states — Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming — believe the river should be split 50/50; the Lower Basin is still using more than half.

At the end of July, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the federal steward of the river under the Department of the Interior, released a 10-year management framework for the agreement. It sets rough parameters for managing the river but imposes no specific long-term plan.

The framework would require Lower Basin states to cut their use of Colorado River water by about 20% over the next two years, while Upper Basin states would continue voluntary reductions.

The cuts are expected to mirror a proposal the three Lower Basin states floated earlier this year, officials said. The Upper Basin states — Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming — are not expected to face mandatory cuts under the plan.

The Upper Basin states operate under a different legal framework dating to the 1922 Colorado River Compact, which requires them to deliver water to the Lower Basin but does not subject them to the federal shortage-sharing mechanism that triggers mandatory cuts. They may, however, voluntarily conserve up to 200,000 acre-feet depending on hydrology, under the new framework.

Entsminger said Nevada is still negotiating with the federal government and other states behind the scenes. He would not disclose the subject of those conversations but characterized some as positive and others as negative.

An acre-foot of water — 325,851 gallons — is enough to supply about two and a half average Las Vegas households for a year.

“There are positive people who want to get something done, and there are some people that, you know, see maybe breaking off negotiations,” he said.

While he believes a short-term agreement can be reached, Entsminger would not rule out litigation if the federal framework does not change in ways Nevada sees as appropriate.

“Well, at the end of the day, we have to protect our legal interest,” Entsminger said. “The Colorado River is 90% of the water supply for 76% of Nevada; we’re not just going to lose. If negotiations fail, we will protect the people who need help.”

If no agreement is reached by the end of December, the federal government would issue a decision for an unspecified number of years, Entsminger said. At that point, states would decide how to respond.

“Everybody has got to decide there and then if you challenge that decision,” Entsminger said.

Mike Connor, a senior federal water and infrastructure official who served in the Clinton, Obama and Biden administrations, strongly discourages litigation, calling it counterproductive and a drain on time and collaborative investment. Lee also opposed litigation.

“It would be in the best interest of all of us that litigation should be the last, if not never, option,” Lee said.

If a short-term agreement is reached, Connor said negotiations should pivot immediately to securing a long-term deal.

“It’ll give people the space and opportunity to go back and think through long-term solutions,” Connor said.

To reach a long-term solution, Connor said states would need to negotiate past entrenched positions — such as the Upper Basin accepting some cuts and the Lower Basin accepting a decrease in water supply. A long-term solution would also require federal support.

Even if Colorado River negotiations fail, Nevada’s years of water-conservation efforts should allow the state to continue meeting its needs.

“We’ve been preparing for pretty much exactly the circumstances we’re facing for the last 20 to 25 years,” Entsminger said.