The Colorado River crisis is no longer a distant threat but a present emergency, and the four Upper Basin states at its headwaters are still acting as if the old rules will somehow hold. As federal officials warn that existing guidelines for the water supply for 40 m people are expiring, these states are clinging to legal arguments and historical use instead of planning for a drier future. I see their stance as a collective denial that a looming water disaster will hit them as hard as their downstream neighbors.
Colorado
Colorado sits at the center of the Upper Basin, yet its leaders have resisted committing to specific long term cuts even as the Colorado River’s main reservoirs shrink. Federal negotiators warn that Several key operating rules expire after 2026, forcing a new plan that could shape allocations for decades. While Lower Basin states like Arizona, California and Nevada have floated proposals for sharing shortages, Upper Basin officials argue they already take “involuntary cuts” when nature delivers less water.
That posture is evident in Upper Basin plans in which the four states, including Colorado’s delegation, refuse to accept formal reductions even as Lake Powell and Lake Mead decline. One analysis notes that the Upper Basin, including Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming, historically uses less than its full legal share, around 5.7 million acre feet, and relies on that history to claim it is already conservative. In practice, that leaves cities, farm districts and tribes downstream carrying more of the risk if climate change further erodes the river.
Utah
Utah is aggressively pursuing new diversions, including high profile pipeline proposals, even as it joins other Upper Basin states in missing federal deadlines for a post 2026 deal. Reporting on stalled Colorado River talks notes that Utah and its neighbors failed to submit a unified plan by a key Nov milestone, even though Current guidelines for the water supply for 40 m people are running out. At the same time, Utah officials emphasize that they use less than their full legal allocation and therefore should not face mandatory cuts.
The tension surfaced when In November, Arizona Gov Katie Hobbs accused Upper Basin negotiators of a “complete refusal to implement water conservation commitments” while Lower Basin states were already taking reductions. Utah leaders counter that, Unlike the Lower Basin, their communities lack giant buffers like Lake Powell and Lake Mead and are forced to absorb natural shortages each dry year. That argument may play well at home, but it sidesteps the reality that Utah’s growth plans deepen reliance on a shrinking river and heighten the risk of abrupt, court ordered curbs later.
New Mexico
New Mexico is already flagged as the only state in the country facing “extremely high” water stress, with a risk score comparable to the United Arab Emirates, according to research on New Mexico and global scarcity. Yet as part of The Upper Basin, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyomin have not announced concrete, enforceable reductions that would guarantee deliveries to the Lower Basin as climate change cuts flows. Instead, New Mexico leans on the fact that Upper Basin use has historically stayed below its legal ceiling.
That strategy looks increasingly fragile. Due to climate change and a lack of storage infrastructure, The Upper Basin, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyomin may be unable to provide the required water to the Lower Basin in dry years, even if they technically comply with their own plans. For farmers along the Rio Grande and small communities that already depend on groundwater, a shortfall on the Colorado River would compound local depletion. Without binding conservation targets, New Mexico is effectively gambling that federal negotiators will not force deeper cuts later, a bet that could leave rural users and tribal nations most exposed.
Wyoming
Wyoming, the smallest of the Upper Basin states, often portrays itself as a marginal player, but its stance is pivotal to any basin wide compromise. The four states that comprise the river’s upper basin, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, Wyoming, have not announced any concrete plan to share additional pain even as storage in the two main reservoirs has continued to worsen. Under the current Upper Basin proposal, Under the four states do not take any cuts, even as reservoir levels fall, effectively shifting the burden to downstream users.
State officials argue that Wyoming and its neighbors have already limited growth and that Seven Colorado River states must recognize historic patterns of use. But as Jan meetings in Washington bring governors and lead water negotiators together, the Upper Basin’s refusal to outline specific future reductions is drawing sharper criticism. If Wyoming continues to prioritize new storage and irrigation projects over basin wide conservation, it will help lock the region into a collision course with federal regulators and the communities that depend on a stable river.
More from Morning Overview