Could Trump Compromise the West's Most Vital River?
Drought funding remains unaccessible, causing rising concerns throughout the West.
TroibNews 
A Native American tribe with a significant water claim presented an ultimatum to the Trump administration: allocate funding to safeguard the Colorado River or face a battle over the future of the vital waterway in the West.
In a surprising move, the Trump administration conceded.
Just eight days later, the Interior Department released $105 million to reimburse the tribe for efforts to line leaky canals and implement other measures aimed at preserving a water source that is crucial for farms and cities across seven states.
This was a win for Arizona’s Gila River Indian Community and marked a rare success in the ongoing struggle among cities, farmers, and tribes for drought funding stemming from the Democrats' significant climate legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act.
This previously unreported incident from last month highlights the deep concern of Western officials regarding the Trump administration’s freeze on hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding for the Colorado River, which serves 40 million people and supports a $1.4 trillion economy but has faced a megadrought for over two decades.
The Gila River tribe remains one of the few groups to have its funding released. Many organizations with federal contracts for water-saving initiatives are still awaiting payment.
The funding freeze is just one aspect of the unprecedented actions taken by the Trump administration that alarm officials tasked with ensuring the continued flow of water across a vast portion of the West, encompassing cities like Denver, Phoenix, Los Angeles, and San Diego.
This includes the president’s immediate executive order aimed at increasing water deliveries to California, which resulted in a sudden release of billions of gallons that nearly inundated farms downstream.
Additionally, Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency has executed severe staff reductions at the Bureau of Reclamation, jeopardizing its capacity to manage the complex network of reservoirs, canals, and pumps that distribute water throughout the region.
The ongoing disruption of funding comes at a critical time. States that rely on the overcommitted waterway are striving to establish new governing rules, and negotiators consider the next few months crucial to avert potentially paralyzing litigation.
Federal drought dollars have been a key element in those negotiations.
“This is now a major, major problem,” said Sen. Mark Kelly, who has sent multiple letters to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum regarding the hold on payments from a $4 billion fund established by the Inflation Reduction Act designed to compensate cities, farms, and tribes for reducing water deliveries and financing significant long-term water conservation projects.
The 10,000 acre-feet withdrawn by the Gila River tribe last month is negligible compared to Lake Mead, the largest reservoir in the U.S., straddling the Arizona-Nevada border. However, in the intricate domain of Western water management, it was a significant warning signal.
"We have given the Department every opportunity to avoid what would be a calamitous break in our longstanding partnership, with terrible consequences for the entire Basin,” Stephen Roe Lewis, the community’s governor, articulated in a letter to Burgum on February 11, prior to withdrawing the water from Lake Mead and relocating it to a storage facility in Arizona.
The gambit paid off, as the Interior Department unfroze the tribe’s funding on February 19.
An Interior Department spokesperson stated that the agency is “dedicated to providing life-sustaining water and harnessing the significant hydropower the river offers.”
“We are actively engaging in dialogue with the Colorado River Basin partners as we work towards long-term operational agreements for the river after 2026. Throughout this effort, we remain committed to ensuring fiscal responsibility for the American people,” the spokesperson mentioned in an email.
Currently, the Gila River tribe stands as the sole entity to withdraw water. However, since 40 percent of Lake Mead's supplies belong to cities, farms, and tribes, a trend of withdrawals by other entities could rapidly deplete reservoir levels. This outcome would necessitate severe reductions to the states in order to maintain Hoover Dam's capacity to generate hydropower and ensure downstream deliveries.
The chaos created by the Trump administration is unsettling officials tasked with ensuring continuous water supply to cities, farmers, and tribes.
“We’re in an increasingly uncertain world,” remarked Tom Buschatzke, director of Arizona’s Department of Water Resources.
**Impact on State Negotiations**
The Colorado River, long a battleground due to a century-old miscalculation that allocated more water to the states than the river can provide, has seen a shift in strategy as climate change has diminished flows—scientists report a 20 percent reduction over the last 25 years. The states have opted for cooperation to manage the dwindling resource rather than continuing conflicts over its reduced yield.
This collaboration has been facilitated by federal funding, including $1.2 billion allocated for a 2023 agreement among California, Arizona, and Nevada, aimed at encouraging farmers, cities, and tribes to retain water in Lake Mead while new rules are established.
Even though the drought-related funding originates from the Inflation Reduction Act—a law from the Biden administration that President Trump has pledged to dismantle—Western officials had anticipated this funding would remain secure under the new administration. The $4 billion fund is small in comparison to the total funding of hundreds of billions allocated for various climate initiatives, and the work has enjoyed bipartisan support across both red and blue states.
“These are not greeny environmental programs,” commented Anne Castle, who was appointed by the Biden administration to the Upper Colorado River Commission. “A lot of this money is going to rural farmers to reduce their diversions who are counting on that money.”
This funding was expected to be just the start. As states engage in critical negotiations to establish new regulations governing the drought-stricken river after 2026, there is widespread agreement that substantial financial backing will be necessary to facilitate any agreement.
The unpredictability surrounding funds that they believed were already secured is complicating these discussions.
Sen. John Hickenlooper, who played a pivotal role in securing the IRA drought funding, affirmed that the freeze is “absolutely” affecting the negotiations.
“So much of what we're negotiating is dependent upon, ‘You get this, we get that,’” he noted.
“There are seven different states. They all have to be satisfied with the compromises that emerge from this, and to achieve that, you’ve got to know what the funding is,” he added.
California Sen. Alex Padilla described the freeze as having “harsh, devastating” consequences for the discussions.
Negotiations over the Colorado River represent one of the largest climate adaptation efforts in the country, and they involve difficult decisions about how to reduce water usage without undermining urban, suburban, and agricultural economies—or inciting political backlash.
Discussions among the states have been fraught, marked by rising tensions and threats of Supreme Court litigation that could cause turmoil throughout the region. Nevertheless, negotiators have been convening more frequently in recent months. The upstream states—Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Wyoming—began to rally around a more comprehensive water conservation initiative in late January.
Funding for that initiative would likely have been drawn from the IRA allocation, Castle explained. The freeze not only delays the program but also complicates the task of persuading water users—predominantly wary farmers—to participate.
“The uncertainty in the system has a broader effect, leading people to question whether this is a legitimate program they can rely on,” she cautioned.
**California Dam Dumps Reverberate**
Simultaneously, the Trump administration’s management of dam operations has alarmed water managers. In late January, following days of misattributed blame by the president regarding Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s water policies for the catastrophic fires in Los Angeles, the White House instructed the Army Corps of Engineers to release water from two dams in Central Valley, California.
This surprise decision bewildered officials across the West, who understood that the water would not physically reach Los Angeles and that the magnitude of the releases initially ordered by the White House could have posed risks to downstream communities.
While this incident didn’t directly affect the Colorado River system, Castle asserted that it “absolutely” raised concerns among water managers in that region, particularly in the upstream states home to federally owned reservoirs, whose operations are crucial in ongoing negotiations.
“I think that is a very significant concern for the federal reservoirs in the Upper Basin based on what we observed at the end of January in California,” she stated.
For the moment, state officials are striving to maintain composure, hoping for stabilization once the Trump administration appoints individuals to key positions within the Interior Department. The Bureau of Reclamation, which is instrumental in Western water management, is awaiting the appointment of a new commissioner by Trump.
“There’s a federal-shaped hole in the post-2026 process that’s waiting to be filled,” remarked J.B. Hamby, California’s lead negotiator for the river as chair of the Colorado River Board of California.
Ian Smith for TROIB News
In a surprising move, the Trump administration conceded.
Just eight days later, the Interior Department released $105 million to reimburse the tribe for efforts to line leaky canals and implement other measures aimed at preserving a water source that is crucial for farms and cities across seven states.
This was a win for Arizona’s Gila River Indian Community and marked a rare success in the ongoing struggle among cities, farmers, and tribes for drought funding stemming from the Democrats' significant climate legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act.
This previously unreported incident from last month highlights the deep concern of Western officials regarding the Trump administration’s freeze on hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding for the Colorado River, which serves 40 million people and supports a $1.4 trillion economy but has faced a megadrought for over two decades.
The Gila River tribe remains one of the few groups to have its funding released. Many organizations with federal contracts for water-saving initiatives are still awaiting payment.
The funding freeze is just one aspect of the unprecedented actions taken by the Trump administration that alarm officials tasked with ensuring the continued flow of water across a vast portion of the West, encompassing cities like Denver, Phoenix, Los Angeles, and San Diego.
This includes the president’s immediate executive order aimed at increasing water deliveries to California, which resulted in a sudden release of billions of gallons that nearly inundated farms downstream.
Additionally, Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency has executed severe staff reductions at the Bureau of Reclamation, jeopardizing its capacity to manage the complex network of reservoirs, canals, and pumps that distribute water throughout the region.
The ongoing disruption of funding comes at a critical time. States that rely on the overcommitted waterway are striving to establish new governing rules, and negotiators consider the next few months crucial to avert potentially paralyzing litigation.
Federal drought dollars have been a key element in those negotiations.
“This is now a major, major problem,” said Sen. Mark Kelly, who has sent multiple letters to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum regarding the hold on payments from a $4 billion fund established by the Inflation Reduction Act designed to compensate cities, farms, and tribes for reducing water deliveries and financing significant long-term water conservation projects.
The 10,000 acre-feet withdrawn by the Gila River tribe last month is negligible compared to Lake Mead, the largest reservoir in the U.S., straddling the Arizona-Nevada border. However, in the intricate domain of Western water management, it was a significant warning signal.
"We have given the Department every opportunity to avoid what would be a calamitous break in our longstanding partnership, with terrible consequences for the entire Basin,” Stephen Roe Lewis, the community’s governor, articulated in a letter to Burgum on February 11, prior to withdrawing the water from Lake Mead and relocating it to a storage facility in Arizona.
The gambit paid off, as the Interior Department unfroze the tribe’s funding on February 19.
An Interior Department spokesperson stated that the agency is “dedicated to providing life-sustaining water and harnessing the significant hydropower the river offers.”
“We are actively engaging in dialogue with the Colorado River Basin partners as we work towards long-term operational agreements for the river after 2026. Throughout this effort, we remain committed to ensuring fiscal responsibility for the American people,” the spokesperson mentioned in an email.
Currently, the Gila River tribe stands as the sole entity to withdraw water. However, since 40 percent of Lake Mead's supplies belong to cities, farms, and tribes, a trend of withdrawals by other entities could rapidly deplete reservoir levels. This outcome would necessitate severe reductions to the states in order to maintain Hoover Dam's capacity to generate hydropower and ensure downstream deliveries.
The chaos created by the Trump administration is unsettling officials tasked with ensuring continuous water supply to cities, farmers, and tribes.
“We’re in an increasingly uncertain world,” remarked Tom Buschatzke, director of Arizona’s Department of Water Resources.
**Impact on State Negotiations**
The Colorado River, long a battleground due to a century-old miscalculation that allocated more water to the states than the river can provide, has seen a shift in strategy as climate change has diminished flows—scientists report a 20 percent reduction over the last 25 years. The states have opted for cooperation to manage the dwindling resource rather than continuing conflicts over its reduced yield.
This collaboration has been facilitated by federal funding, including $1.2 billion allocated for a 2023 agreement among California, Arizona, and Nevada, aimed at encouraging farmers, cities, and tribes to retain water in Lake Mead while new rules are established.
Even though the drought-related funding originates from the Inflation Reduction Act—a law from the Biden administration that President Trump has pledged to dismantle—Western officials had anticipated this funding would remain secure under the new administration. The $4 billion fund is small in comparison to the total funding of hundreds of billions allocated for various climate initiatives, and the work has enjoyed bipartisan support across both red and blue states.
“These are not greeny environmental programs,” commented Anne Castle, who was appointed by the Biden administration to the Upper Colorado River Commission. “A lot of this money is going to rural farmers to reduce their diversions who are counting on that money.”
This funding was expected to be just the start. As states engage in critical negotiations to establish new regulations governing the drought-stricken river after 2026, there is widespread agreement that substantial financial backing will be necessary to facilitate any agreement.
The unpredictability surrounding funds that they believed were already secured is complicating these discussions.
Sen. John Hickenlooper, who played a pivotal role in securing the IRA drought funding, affirmed that the freeze is “absolutely” affecting the negotiations.
“So much of what we're negotiating is dependent upon, ‘You get this, we get that,’” he noted.
“There are seven different states. They all have to be satisfied with the compromises that emerge from this, and to achieve that, you’ve got to know what the funding is,” he added.
California Sen. Alex Padilla described the freeze as having “harsh, devastating” consequences for the discussions.
Negotiations over the Colorado River represent one of the largest climate adaptation efforts in the country, and they involve difficult decisions about how to reduce water usage without undermining urban, suburban, and agricultural economies—or inciting political backlash.
Discussions among the states have been fraught, marked by rising tensions and threats of Supreme Court litigation that could cause turmoil throughout the region. Nevertheless, negotiators have been convening more frequently in recent months. The upstream states—Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Wyoming—began to rally around a more comprehensive water conservation initiative in late January.
Funding for that initiative would likely have been drawn from the IRA allocation, Castle explained. The freeze not only delays the program but also complicates the task of persuading water users—predominantly wary farmers—to participate.
“The uncertainty in the system has a broader effect, leading people to question whether this is a legitimate program they can rely on,” she cautioned.
**California Dam Dumps Reverberate**
Simultaneously, the Trump administration’s management of dam operations has alarmed water managers. In late January, following days of misattributed blame by the president regarding Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s water policies for the catastrophic fires in Los Angeles, the White House instructed the Army Corps of Engineers to release water from two dams in Central Valley, California.
This surprise decision bewildered officials across the West, who understood that the water would not physically reach Los Angeles and that the magnitude of the releases initially ordered by the White House could have posed risks to downstream communities.
While this incident didn’t directly affect the Colorado River system, Castle asserted that it “absolutely” raised concerns among water managers in that region, particularly in the upstream states home to federally owned reservoirs, whose operations are crucial in ongoing negotiations.
“I think that is a very significant concern for the federal reservoirs in the Upper Basin based on what we observed at the end of January in California,” she stated.
For the moment, state officials are striving to maintain composure, hoping for stabilization once the Trump administration appoints individuals to key positions within the Interior Department. The Bureau of Reclamation, which is instrumental in Western water management, is awaiting the appointment of a new commissioner by Trump.
“There’s a federal-shaped hole in the post-2026 process that’s waiting to be filled,” remarked J.B. Hamby, California’s lead negotiator for the river as chair of the Colorado River Board of California.
Ian Smith for TROIB News
