• The Bureau of Reclamation is working on a new set of drought guidelines for the Colorado River, but still lacks a consensus for one approach.
• Tribes are urging the Bureau of Reclamation to incorporate the Northern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement into the new river plan.
• The Hualapai and Kaibab Paiute tribes have expressed concerns that the draft plan fails to fully protect their water rights and resources.

With several key Colorado River management agreements set to expire this year — including the 2007 Colorado River Interim Guidelines for drought management — tribes have submitted comments on the draft environmental impact statement for a replacement plan.

The draft EIS aims to guide adoption of more reliable, predictable rules, but doing so is challenging due to low reservoir levels, variable water supply and a drier future, according to the Bureau of Reclamation, which manages the reservoirs on the Colorado.

Federal law requires the Secretary of Interior to coordinate reservoir operations. New operational guidelines for Lake Powell and Lake Mead will begin in 2027.

“We are grateful for the ongoing tribal leadership an collaboration with us on Colorado River matters and the Post-2026 process,” said Carly Jerla, senior water resources program manager with the Bureau’s Lower Colorado River Basin, during a presentation on the new guidelines. “We’ve been engaging with tribes in several ways, through government-to-government consultation…since the beginning of the EIS process.”

Jerla said the EIS process began with a notice of intent in June 2023, followed by a public scoping period and development of alternatives. The public comment period closed in early March, and feedback will be considered to help identify a preferred alternative.

“The current guidelines have not been sufficient to protect water supplies, hyrdopower and infrastructure,” said Jerla. “Low reservoir levels have persisted due to long-term drought and increasing aridity.”

Tribal settlement: In push for landmark Arizona water deal, tribal leaders huddle with feds

Navajo officials want to link settlement and river plan

Several tribes, including the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe, submitted comments for consideration. Along with the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, they recently testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, urging support for the Northern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement. Reclamation support for the settlement was emphasized in comments submitted regarding the draft EIS from both Hopi and Navajo.

“It is critical for the Navajo Nation to secure and develop its water rights.,” Navajo officials said in their comments. “The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act is pending in Congress and is stalled due to a lack of consensus among the seven Colorado River Basin states.” The Navajo Nation asked the bureau to acknowledge the settlement in the final Environmental Impact Statement.

The landmark agreement settles claims to water in Arizona for the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe, and with $5 billion in planned infrastructure, will deliver clean drinking water to thousands of people who lack reliable supplies.

The Navajo Nation said two key mechanisms in the settlement that address Colorado River operations can be applied across all alternatives in the draft EIS. The first proposal is a water savings pool in Lake Powell that could store up to 321,000 acre-feet over 20 years. It would help offset impacts across all modeled alternatives, support reservoir elevations and rely on some of the most reliable water in the Colorado River system.

The second is a potential program for tribes to lease Upper Basin water to the Lower Basin in Arizona. This would allow water to continue generating hydropower at Lake Powell while temporarily helping address shortages in Arizona as the system adjusts to drier conditions.

“We respectfully urge all stakeholders in the Basin to view (the settlement) not as a complication to Post-2026, but as an opportunity, a chance to take an incremental step forward that benefits tribal communities and the Colorado River system alike,” Lamar Keevama, chairman of the Hopi Tribe, told the Bureau. The settlement, he said, “represents progress that can be achieved now.”

Colorado River Basin: With Utah water deal in place, Navajo Nation urges Congress to pass AZ deal

Kaibab Paiutes seek attention for water supplies

To provide stability and predictability for Basin water users, the Interior Secretary proposes an interim period of about 20 years, while remaining open to a shorter or phased approach as consensus develops on post-2026 operations.

The Bureau of Reclamation will lead the development and implementation of the guidelines under the National Environmental Policy Act, with support from five cooperating agencies: the Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, Western Area Power Administration, and the U.S. Section of the International Boundary and Water Commission.

Tribes such as the Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians, located north of the Grand Canyon along the Arizona–Utah border, have asserted aboriginal and federally reserved rights to surface water, including Kanab Creek, a tributary of the Colorado River. Tribal officials suggest that when resources are affected, support should go directly to tribes, and any preferred alternative should include long-term programs, funding, and monitoring to address impacts on tribal economies, resources, and ecosystems.

“Our Tribe is one of the last tribes in Arizona whose water rights have yet to be partially or fully quantified, either through litigation or in settlement, and the flows of Kanab Creek and its tributaries are a critical component of our water supply that is needed to meet the permanent Tribal homeland needs for our People,” wrote the tribe’s chairman Roland Maldonado.

As the EIS continues to develop, the tribe asked that the Bureau of Reclamation:

• Provide additional tribal comment and consultation opportunities regarding the development and adoption of a preferred alternative;
• Continue to engage with the tribe in the development of the agreement;
• Analyze hydropower impacts specific to tribal WAPA contracts, including the associated economic impacts; and
• Incorporate mitigation measures in the Post-2026 guidelines to address impacts to tribal resources.

Seven-state plan: Colorado River plan could wipe Arizona from the map, officials say

Alternatives outline strategies, but most lack tribal input

The Hualapai Reservation is downstream from Lake Powell and upstream from Lake Mead and encompasses approximately 1 million acres in northwestern Arizona. The Colorado River forms the northern boundary of its tribal lands through a 108-mile portion of the Grand Canyon.

“The Reservation is arid and has no significant surface water streams other than the Colorado River. It has very limited groundwater resources, on which the tribe currently depends for all its water needs,” wrote attorneys from the firm of Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Endreson & Perry for the Hualapai Tribe.

“Water availability is even worse elsewhere on the reservation. There is a small groundwater well on the east side of the reservation that provides water to ranchers and wildlife in that area, but this water is not potable for human consumption.”

The tribe’s attorneys wrote that the draft EIS evaluates five strategies for managing Colorado River shortages after 2026. While it includes extensive information on tribal water rights and potential impacts, they argue the analysis is fundamentally flawed because it does not consider any option that fully protects all federally confirmed tribal water rights, such as those held by the Hualapai, from reduction during shortages.

The alternatives presented in the draft EIS by the Bureau of Reclamation are:

• No action alternative
• Basic Coordination Alternative (formerly the Federal Authorities Alternative)
• Enhanced Coordination Alternative (formerly the Federal Authorities Hybrid Alternative)
• Maximum Operational Flexibility Alternative (formerly the Cooperative Conservation Alternative)
• Supply Driven Alternative
• Continued Current Strategies Comparative Baseline

“What you don’t see is a preferred alternative, as there was no preferred alternative identified in the draft EIS because of a lack of a kind of consensus-based approach to the post-2026 reservoir operations among basin entities,” said Alan Butler, hydrologic engineer with the Bureau of Reclamation Lower Colorado Region.

Butler said the bureau anticipates identifying a preferred alternative after the publication of the draft EIS.

Hualapai attorneys noted that the draft document takes a narrow view by assuming there is no viable option to fully protect tribal water rights during shortages, effectively treating reductions to some congressionally approved or court-recognized rights as unavoidable in dry years.

“But of course, this outcome is not inevitable and the department sets forth no factual basis to support its assumption that this outcome is unavoidable,” wrote the tribe’s representative. “Instead, the DEIS could and should — indeed must — consider a different available alternative for managing shortages, one that would not impose any shortages on tribal water rights that have been confirmed by Congress and/or by final court decrees.”

Arlyssa D. Becenti covers Indigenous affairs for The Arizona Republic and azcentral.com. Send ideas and tips to arlyssa.becenti@arizonarepublic.com.