Recent developments across the Colorado River Basin show how changes in water supply are beginning to affect recreation, agriculture, and future water planning. While the seven Basin states remain divided over how to manage the river, communities are already dealing with the effects of lower flows and looking at new ways to protect their water.
Colorado River negotiators recently made a rare public appearance together, but there was little indication that the states are closer to an agreement. Representatives from the Upper and Lower basins continue to disagree over how future water reductions should be shared and whether the next plan should offer long-term certainty or act as a temporary bridge.
Nevada negotiator John Entsminger said the latest Lower Basin proposal could provide a workable plan for the next few years and help keep the states out of court while discussions continue. Colorado negotiator Becky Mitchell questioned whether returning to negotiations every two years would build stability or simply create another series of temporary fixes.
The negotiators also discussed mediation as a possible next step. One idea would involve choosing three mediators: one selected by the Upper Basin, another by the Lower Basin, and a third selected by the first two. The ongoing disagreement is also making it difficult for Mexico, which receives Colorado River water under international agreements, to prepare for future shortages.
While those larger negotiations continue, uncertainty is reaching businesses that depend directly on the river. KNAU reported that Grand Canyon rafting companies are watching lower water levels near Lees Ferry following a historically dry winter and reduced releases from Lake Powell.
Rafting trips are still operating, and visitors may not notice a major difference today. However, business owners and river guides are concerned about what lower and less predictable flows could mean in the future. One company reported that bookings were down about 25% this year, although it was unclear whether water conditions were the main reason.
The concern shows how Colorado River operations support more than drinking water, agriculture, and hydropower. Releases from Glen Canyon Dam also affect rafting companies, guides, tourism, and communities connected to Grand Canyon recreation.
Arizona is also looking at less traditional ways to increase its water supply. Voice of San Diego reported that a private utility proposed using Arizona funding to help treat wastewater from the Tijuana River. The water would be treated and returned to Mexico, while Arizona could seek part of Mexico’s Colorado River allocation in exchange.
The proposal could initially produce more than 14,000 acre-feet of water each year, with the possibility of increasing that amount through future development. However, the project is still being studied and would involve complicated questions involving water quality, cost, environmental review, and agreements between the United States and Mexico.
Colorado, meanwhile, has taken action to reduce the damage left behind when agricultural water is sold and transferred to cities. A new state law will require farmland in the Arkansas River Basin to be revegetated before irrigation water can be moved to another use.
The law addresses a practice known as “buy and dry,” where cities or developers purchase agricultural water rights, and the farmland is left without irrigation. Beginning next year, landowners seeking a transfer will have to establish native vegetation and take steps to control weeds, dust, and soil erosion.
The requirement cannot replace the agricultural production or local economic activity lost when water leaves a farming community. Still, it recognizes that water transfers affect more than the person selling the right. They can change the land, surrounding communities, and the future of a regional agricultural economy.
The Colorado River’s future is also receiving more attention in Washington. The U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee scheduled a hearing focused on the Basin and the development of post-2026 operating rules. The hearing gives lawmakers an opportunity to question federal officials about negotiations, river modeling, conservation funding, and tribal water rights.
Together, these developments show that Colorado River decisions reach much further than reservoir levels. They affect recreation businesses, agricultural land, international relationships, and communities that depend on the river in different ways. As supplies become less certain, water leaders will need to consider not only where water is going but what happens to the people and places it leaves behind.
What does this mean for CRIT?
For the Colorado River Indian Tribes, these developments are a reminder that every water decision comes with a larger impact. A transfer may provide additional water for a city, but it can also affect farmland, local economies, and another community’s long-term security. Changes in river releases can protect one part of the system while creating uncertainty for businesses and ecosystems somewhere else.
CRIT’s agricultural lands and senior Colorado River rights make these discussions especially important. Colorado’s response to “buy and dry” transfers recognizes that water cannot be separated from the land and community it supports. That same understanding is important for CRIT, where the river is closely connected to agriculture, culture, sovereignty, and future generations.
The Senate hearing also creates another opportunity for tribal rights to be included in discussions about the river’s next operating rules. CRIT’s rights should not be treated as an afterthought once the states and federal government have already developed their plans.
Through the Water Code, Water Resiliency Act, and Personhood Resolution, CRIT has established its own direction for protecting the river and the Tribe’s water future. As new exchanges, transfers, and operating plans are considered, CRIT can continue emphasizing that lasting solutions must respect senior rights, tribal sovereignty, and the health of the river itself.
Sources
Utah Public Radio/KJZZ
https://www.upr.org/environment/2026-06-09/colorado-river-negotiators-conference
KNAU Arizona Public Radio
https://www.knau.org/knau-and-arizona-news/2026-06-09/unease-trickles-into-the-grand-canyon-rafting-community-as-water-levels-dwindle
Voice of San Diego
https://voiceofsandiego.org/2026/06/08/environment-report-could-the-tijuana-river-help-get-arizona-more-water/
Colorado Public Radio
https://www.cpr.org/2026/06/09/new-water-rights-transfer-law-arkansas-river-basin/
Legis1
https://legis1.com/news/colorado-river-basin-hearing-post-2026-operations