Western states are on a collision course as they rush to reach an agreement to significantly decrease their utilization of the drought-affected Colorado River before the March deadline set by the Biden administration.

There is currently a dispute between states that depend on the main water source in the Western region of the United States. This disagreement will have a significant impact on the economies of cities such as Denver and Los Angeles, as well as highly productive agricultural regions. It also presents a challenge for President Joe Biden, who may face complications in his political decisions in four key states: Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, and California, where many of his wealthy supporters reside.

During the annual conference at a Las Vegas casino, tensions arose among negotiators who were representing technocrats, tribes, and farmers responsible for managing the river’s water. Heated words were exchanged from the podium, making the tensions apparent.

“Ideally, it would be beneficial if all seven states within the basin could reach a mutual agreement. However, I want to emphasize that we cannot agree to something that further depletes the system and puts 40 million individuals in jeopardy,” stated Becky Mitchell, the passionate primary negotiator representing Colorado. She has voiced opposition to her state’s acceptance of decreased water usage.

Over the past year, there have been changes in the borderlines of the seven states that are connected by the river. In the previous autumn, the main tension was between Arizona and California, as water levels in the main reservoirs were rapidly declining towards a potential crisis. However, the unexpectedly wet winter and a conservation agreement worth $1.2 billion, funded by the Inflation Reduction Act, helped prevent this disaster and resolved many conflicts between the two states.

The current conflict now involves the states of Arizona, California, and Nevada downstream, facing off against Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and New Mexico upstream.

If the division is not resolved quickly, the problem will likely be handed over to the Biden administration during the intense 2024 election period.

In the past, both Democrat and Republican administrations have chosen to let individual states handle their disputes. However, with the decreasing water levels in the river and the looming threat of climate change exacerbating the issue, these discussions have become increasingly tense. As the head of the Department of the Interior, Deb Haaland has the authority to intervene and push for a resolution or make cuts to the states herself.

The state’s negotiators are acutely conscious of the potential consequences of Washington’s involvement.

Brenda Burman is in charge of overseeing the extensive canal network that supplies water to cities such as Phoenix and Tucson in Central Arizona. During her time as Bureau of Reclamation commissioner under President Donald Trump, she successfully navigated through the political tensions and brokered a drought agreement between states. She also played a crucial role in finalizing a water-sharing agreement with Mexico.

In an interview at the conference, she stated that the goal is not to politicize water, but rather to ensure its functionality.

The present Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, Camille Touton, has intervened in the past year to pressure Arizona and California to reach a deal. This led to their agreement in May to prevent a potential crisis at the two main dams on the river. However, it is uncertain if a lower-ranking political appointee can continue to intervene in a conflict that the White House would likely prefer to address after the November election.

At the end of the conference on Friday, Touton’s speech was noticeably calmer compared to last year. She gave a general message of support to the states, and shared a professionally-made video from the Bureau of Reclamation highlighting the significance of the Colorado River basin.

She informed the audience that our dedication lies in supporting you and fostering conversations, offering technical assistance, participating in ideas, and directing the creation of other options for the negotiations.

If the states are unable to come to a negotiated agreement, the worst possible outcome would be federal intervention from either the Biden administration, Congress, or the Supreme Court.

J.B. Hamby, the lead negotiator for California and a director of the Imperial Valley farm district, compares Russian roulette to the Supreme Court or Congress – it may seem exciting and profitable at first, but it can turn out badly. The Imperial Valley farm district holds the largest portion of Colorado River water.

The state negotiators face a dire challenge that has been made infinitely harder by climate change. Even before the persistent drought that is diminishing the Colorado River, it rarely delivered as much water as expected under the 1922 compact that divvied up its supplies. Now, rising temperatures and changing precipitation patterns have walloped the sprawling river basin, shrinking flows by more than 20 percent over the past two decades — and it’s only expected to get worse.

The states in the Upper Basin did not fully utilize the water allotted to them by the century-old compact, while the drier Lower Basin states have reached their maximum allocation. However, with the impact of climate change, this situation has become unsustainable.

The current focus is on whether the Upper Basin states should also bear the burden of reducing water usage to match the declining supply. Representatives from Arizona, Nevada, and California claim to be nearing a long-term agreement that would limit their water usage to historic levels, closing the gap known as the “structural deficit.”

However, this only addresses the issue of over-allocation that has been present for a century. These reductions are likely not enough to handle the consequences of the damage caused by natural disasters, and the states in the Lower Basin believe that the responsibility should be shared by Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Mexico, who also receive a portion of the river’s resources.

Tom Buschatzke, the main negotiator for Arizona, stated that they will take ownership of the structural deficit. However, it will be a collective responsibility to stabilize the river, shared by all seven states and Mexico.

The river will need to be regulated by new rules by 2026, when the existing guidelines expire. The Biden administration intends to publish a preliminary environmental review for the new rules by the end of 2024, which is a crucial step in establishing the legal basis for them. Negotiators report that Touton has set a deadline of March for the states to submit their proposals for this analysis.

If the seven states are unable to come to an agreement on a plan, the Biden administration will have the responsibility of determining the next steps. The potential impact of this decision during a tense election season was a major topic of discussion at the Las Vegas conference.

Currently, government officials state that they must resolve the issue on their own.

John Entsminger, Nevada’s representative for the river, stated that the most feasible approach for achieving a solution that satisfies all parties is through negotiation. This involves making compromises, which unfortunately has become a frowned upon concept in current political discussions.