Snow #Drought Current Conditions and Impacts in the West — NIDIS

Click the link to read the update on the NIDIS website. Here’s an excerpt:

March 12, 2026

Record Snowpack Deficits Worsen in February; Conditions Expected to Deteriorate Further with Chances for Record Heat

Key Points

Snow drought worsened from February into early March due to record warmth, despite near-normal precipitation across much of the West. Some locations, such as the central and northern Cascades in Washington, were also drier than normal during this period. Every major river basin and state in the West is experiencing a snow drought.

Record-breaking high temperatures are forecasted for large parts of the West. Further, the 6-10 and 8-14 day outlooks from NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center lean toward drier-than-normal conditions for almost all of the West along with a strong probability of warmer-than-normal temperatures through March. Record-breaking snow drought conditions are expected to further deteriorate as snow melt begins much earlier for some.

Every major river basin in the West experienced its first or second warmest winter (December, January, and February) on record. The Great Basin, Rio Grande, Arkansas-White-Red, and Upper and Lower Colorado River Basins experienced their warmest winter on record, while the Missouri and Columbia River Basins recorded their second warmest.

As of March 8, Colorado reported record-low statewide snowpack. Stations in the Cascade Range in Oregon and Washington are reporting the greatest snowpack deficits in the West. Some states, such as California, are already experiencing an early melt out of snow.

The Colorado River Basin reports record-low snow water equivalent (SWE).

Basins like the Deschutes, Humboldt, Yakima, and Rio Grande continue to see snow drought conditions deteriorate.

Snow drought impacts are occurring and are expected to worsen. Municipal and agricultural water supply concerns and restrictions are increasing.

The Bureau of Reclamation’s most probable forecast for Lake Powell shows minimum power pool elevation being reached by December 2026. If the water drops below this point, the Glen Canyon Dam may no longer generate hydroelectricity.

The Bureau of Reclamation’s initial April–September water supply forecast for the Yakima Basin has those with pro-ratable water rights only receiving 44% of their full water allotments.

The North Platte River Basin is under priority administration issued by the Wyoming State Engineer’s Office based on the Modified North Platte Decree.

Snow Drought Conditions Summary

This update is based on data available as of Monday, March 9, 2026 at 12:00 a.m. PT. We acknowledge that conditions are evolving.

Quantifying snow drought values is an ongoing research effort. Here, we define snow drought as snow water equivalent (SWE) at or below the 20th percentile, which is a baseline guided by partner expertise and research. Note that reporting of SWE by Snow Telemetry (SNOTEL) stations may be unavailable or delayed due to technical, weather or other issues, which may affect snow drought depiction in this update.

Current Conditions

The last three months (December, January, and February) were the warmest or tied the warmest winter on record dating back to 1895 for Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. Arizona and New Mexico broke their previous records set in 2015 and 1907, respectively, by over 2°F. California, Idaho, and Montana experienced their second warmest winter on record; Washington experienced its fourth warmest.

Coming off of a record-dry January, near-normal precipitation fell over most, but not all, of the West in February and early March. Precipitation deficits are increasing in parts of Colorado, the Washington Cascades, New Mexico, Arizona, and the plains of Wyoming and Montana.

This winter brought record flooding, rain-on-snow events, record-warm temperatures, and record dryness across the West. Because of these conditions, snow melted early in many places and failed to accumulate in middle and lower elevations. Snow fell and is currently present at higher elevations where temperatures were cold enough to produce snow, but high-elevation snow does not offset overall deficits from the absence of middle and low-elevation snowpack. As a result, snowpack remains extremely low across the West. Some minor improvements occurred in some basins over the last month, but there was not enough snow to offset the substantial deficits.

If Precipitation Fell, It Fell as Rain for Many

February 1–March 9, 2026 precipitation for Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 6 basins across the West, shown as a percentage of the 1991-2020 median. Red hues indicate basins that received less than 50% of normal precipitation for this period. Only stations with at least 20 years of data are included in the station percentiles. Values are averages of high-elevation precipitation at SNOTEL stations and are not representative of all portions of the HUC, which extend to lower-elevation valleys. For an interactive version of this map, please visit the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Source: USDA NRCS.

Winter Concludes as the Record Warmest for Much of the West

December-February mean temperature percentiles based on an 1895-2026 period of record. Red hues indicate temperatures in the top third (warmest) of historical conditions, while blue hues indicate temperatures in the lowest third (coldest) of historical conditions. Graphic is from the Western Regional Climate Center’s Westwide Drought Tracker and the source data are from the PRISM Climate Group.

Winter Ends With More Record-Low Snow

SNOTEL and Cooperator Snow Sensor sites in the Western U.S. with snow water equivalent (SWE) values at or below the 30th percentile as of March 8, 2026. Stations above the 30th percentile are shown with a black “x.” We define snow drought as SWE below the 20th percentile (red, orange, and tan hues). This analysis only used stations with at least 20 years of data. This map does not show stations where the median SWE value for the date is zero. Data source: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service.

Rocky Mountain Snow Conditions (Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming)

Northern Rocky Mountains

54% of stations in Montana are in snow drought

59% of stations in Idaho are in snow drought

42% of stations in Wyoming are in snow drought

Snow drought conditions continue to be widespread across the region. Lower to mid-elevation and plains snowpack is almost non-existent across Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. February precipitation was near-to-above normal, except over northern Montana, as well as central and eastern Wyoming, which saw substantial precipitation deficits. Record-breaking warm temperatures in February worsened snow drought as precipitation that fell did so as rain. Snow accumulated mostly at the highest elevations across the Northern Rocky Mountains.

Snow water equivalent (SWE) in Idaho is 58-87% of median, with many SNOTEL stations in southwestern Idaho reporting record-low values. Record-low SWE is occurring at many SNOTEL stations across Wyoming’s Big Horn and Laramie Mountains. In western Montana, SWE is 78-95% of median, with several stations reporting record-low SWE values across the state.

Central Rocky Mountains

74% of stations in Utah are in snow drought

97% of stations in Colorado are in snow drought

Despite snowfall in February, snow drought continued across the Central Rocky Mountains of Colorado and Utah. Colorado experienced its warmest February on record, and Utah its third warmest on record. Though snow water equivalent (SWE) as a percent of median improved over the last month, seasonal deficits are so great that snow drought and record-low SWE persists in much of the region. For example, from February 10-20 several snow storms brought substantial, needed snow across the state of Colorado. However, the snow was not enough to alleviate deficits, and statewide average SWE remained at a record low.

Both the Upper and Lower Colorado River Basin are reporting record-low SWE. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service’s SWE projections for the Upper Colorado River Basin indicate that the most likely scenario peak SWE is around 10-30% of normal. These values could change depending on how conditions evolve. In Colorado, SWE in 1977 and 1981 was lower than in 2026, according to long-term snow course records with at least 50 years of data. However, this was due to less precipitation. Winter 2026 was much warmer than the winters of 1977 and 1981, while those years were much drier than this year.

Colorado statewide average SWE is at its record low, 63% of median. Utah statewide average SWE is the second lowest on record at 65% of median. All basins in the Central Rocky Mountains are below 70% of median SWE, except small portions of the Green River Basin in northeast Utah.

Record-Low Snow Water Equivalent Since Mid-January in the Upper Colorado River Basin

Water year observed (black line) and projected (dashed red line) accumulated snow water equivalent (SWE, in inches) in the Upper Colorado Region HUC 2 watershed. Water Year 2026 conditions are compared to the 1990-2020 median (gray line) and to the bottom 10th percentile of historical conditions (red), 10th-30th percentile (yellow), 30th-70th percentile (green), 70th-90th percentile (light blue), and 90th-100th percentile (dark blue). Valid March 9, 2026. SWE projections are based on historical observations and do not include future forecast data. The 50th percentile SWE projection is indicated by the dashed red line and the likely (30th-70th percentile) range by gray shading. Source: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).

Looking Ahead

Temperature and Precipitation Outlooks

Record-breaking high temperatures are forecasted for large parts of the West next week. Further, the 6-10 and 8-14 day outlooks from NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center lean toward drier-than-normal conditions for almost all of the West along with a strong probability of warmer-than-normal temperatures through March. Record-breaking snow drought conditions are expected to further deteriorate as snowmelt begins much earlier for some. Additional, early snow loss at middle- and low-elevation stations is likely to occur over the next two weeks. Some basins may melt completely weeks earlier than normal. These forecasted conditions would increase already critical water supply concerns across the West…

Water Supply Forecasts

Many regions are likely to see earlier and lower than usual runoff. Water supply forecasts from the Colorado Basin River Forecast Center are well-below average, with most sites forecasted to see less than 70% of average season runoff. The forecasted unregulated inflow into Lake Powell is only 35% of average, which would be the fifth driest over the historical record. Seasonal water supply forecasted volumes from the California-Nevada River Forecast Center dropped significantly after the late February snowmelt event in the Sierra Nevada, and most locations are forecasted to receive less than 70% of median April–July runoff. In the Northwest, April–September runoff volume forecasts are mostly near to below normal, according to the Northwest River Forecast Center. Forecasts from the Missouri Basin River Forecast Center range around 78% of average for the Missouri Basin above Fort Peck, Montana.

Wildfire

Without the presence of snow across the landscape, soils and plants may begin to dry out earlier than usual. Due to the record-breaking warmth this year, high temperatures can lead to increased and rapid dry down of the landscape, again leading to an early start to the fire season. An extended fire season is a critical concern but does not guarantee large fires, as ignitions would still be required to generate large wildfires.

For More Information, Contact:

Dan McEvoy
Desert Research Institute, Western Regional Climate Center
daniel.mcevoy@dri.edu

Jason Gerlich
University of Colorado Boulder Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences / NOAA’s National Integrated Drought Information System
jason.gerlich@noaa.gov

Amanda Sheffield
University of Colorado Boulder Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences / NOAA’s National Integrated Drought Information System
amanda.sheffield@noaa.gov

One year after landmark $100M #PoudreRiver settlement, work faces delays — Jerd Smith (Fresh Water News) #NISP #SouthPlatteRiver

Fly fishing on the Poudre River west of Fort Collins. Photo credit: Colorado Water Trust

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Jerd Smith):

March 12, 2026

More than a year after a landmark $100 million environmental settlement designed to improve the Poudre River was OK’d, little progress has been made to put the agreement into action.

The settlement, signed last February, came after Save The Poudre sued to stop the $2.7 billion Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP). The deal was crafted to allow NISP to move forward while paying to improve the Poudre and protect it from any harm the project could cause.

The Northern Integrated Supply Project, currently estimated at $2 billion, would create two new reservoirs and a system of pipelines to capture more drinking water for 15 community water suppliers. An environmental group is now suing the Army Corps of Engineers over a key permit for Northern Water’s proposal. (Save the Poudre lawsuit, from Northern Water project pages)

NISP is designed to serve roughly one dozen fast-growing cities along the Northern Front Range and will include two reservoirs and a pipeline.

The Community Foundation of Northern Colorado is leading the effort to implement the settlement, which includes projects that will make the river healthier for fish and aquatic habitat, improve water flows and water quality, and increase recreational opportunities.

The foundation is overseeing a six-member committee that began meeting last August. The committee will decide how to implement the ambitious environmental projects outlined in the settlement.

“We are taking time to be intentional,” said Jodie Riesenberger, the foundation’s vice president for community impact.

But work has also been slow because key payments from NISP participants to the foundation are tied to benchmarks in building the massive reservoir and pipeline system. The committee received its first $5 million payment last year when the settlement was signed and is supposed to get its next $5 million payment when construction begins, something that could have happened later this year but has since been delayed. The full $100 million is to be paid out over a 20-year period, Riesenberger said.

Since the settlement was approved, though, the project’s largest customer, the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District, has dropped out of NISP. A handful of other cities, including Evans, have also dropped out, citing concerns about soaring design and construction costs, as well as the cost of the environmental settlement.

In response, Northern Water, which is overseeing project construction, temporarily halted design work as it re-examined NISP’s size.

Now, construction isn’t likely to begin until 2027 or later, according to Northern Water spokesman Jeff Stahla.

“We did slow things down,” Stahla said, “but there is still a chance we can start in mid-2027.”

Save The Poudre River President Gary Wockner said the delays aren’t surprising.

The committee has “been moving slow because there is a lot to learn. If you want to fix problems on the river, you have to understand the river and know what the problems are,” he said.

Since the river committee began meeting in August, Riesenberger said work has focused on analyzing what the issues are and trying to figure out how and whether to spend the money they have on hand now.

The delays “don’t impact what we’re doing yet, but it could if it drags on longer. The dream is that these dollars could do transformational things for the river,” Riesenberger said.

More by Jerd Smith

The South Platte River Basin is shaded in yellow. Source: Tom Cech, One World One Water Center, Metropolitan State University of Denver.

#Arizona tribal leaders testify in support of Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement — KJZZ #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

The Colorado River flows beneath Navajo Bridge in Arizona on Dec. 27, 2019. Three tribes in Arizona are pushing for a settlement that would solidify their access to the River’s water and provide billions of dollars for water infrastructure. Photo credit: Mitch Tobin/The Water Desk

Click the link to read the article on the KJZZ website (Alex Hager). Here’s an excerpt:

March 11, 2026

Coverage of tribal natural resources is supported in part by Catena Foundation

Tribal leaders and U.S. senators spoke out in support of a measure that would solidify access to water for three tribes with land in Arizona during a Wednesday [March 11, 2026] hearing at the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement, or NAIWRSA, would settle claims to water by the Navajo, Hopi and San Juan Southern Paiute tribes, and provide $5 billion to build new water delivery systems and help the tribes access their water. The settlement would need to be authorized by congress to go into effect. At Wednesday’s Senate committee hearing, impassioned pleas to bring water to tribal communities ran up against federal concerns about the cost of a settlement, and talks of hesitation from some states that use the Colorado River.

“This settlement is more than a legal agreement,” said Lamar Keevama, chairman of the Hopi Tribe. “It is a path forward. It allows the Hopi tribe to remain and protect our homeland, supports economic development and ensures that our communities have the basic resources necessary to thrive.”

An official with the Interior Department said he was supportive of the settlement’s aims, but was concerned with the cost.

“$5 billion is a lot of money,” said Scott Cameron, Interior’s principal deputy assistant secretary for water and science. “We look forward to working with the committee and with the three tribes and the other interested parties, of which there are quite a few, to see if we can’t creatively come up with some ideas to still satisfy the purposes of the bill at somewhat less cost.”

Lamar Keevama, chairman of the Hopi Tribe, testifies in front of a U.S. Senate Committee on March 11, 2026. “This settlement is more than a legal agreement,” he said. “It is a path forward.” Photo credit: U.S. Senate Committee On Indian Affairs

NAIWRSA has partially been hung up by a unique geographical challenge and longstanding tensions between states that share the Colorado River. The river, which is at the heart of settlement talks, is divided into two regions — the Upper Basin and the Lower Basin. Its water is managed by the seven states that use it, and they have been deeply split about new policies to share water. They generally fall into two camps — the Upper Basin states of Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico, and the Lower Basin states of Arizona, California and Nevada. The Navajo Nation straddles both basins, with land in Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. Some of its land falls within a portion of Arizona that is technically part of the Upper Basin. Some Upper Basin states worry that the settlement would allow the Navajo Nation to take water from the Upper Basin and lease it for use in the Lower Basin, creating a precedent that could open the door to more transfers out of the Upper Basin. Buu Nygren, president of the Navajo Nation, pushed back on that suggestion.

“It is hard to imagine that any Upper Basin state would object to my people being able to use water that they have used for decades simply because of the fear of a potential precedent,” he said.

From the 2018 Tribal Water Study, this graphic shows the location of the 29 federally-recognized tribes in the Colorado River Basin. Map credit: USBR

Record-low #snowpack tests #Colorado’s recreation economy — Katy Marquardt Hill (CU Boulder Today)

Photo credit: University of Colorado at Boulder

Click the link to read the article on the University of Colorado website (Katy Marquardt Hill):

March 11, 2026

Colorado’s snowpack is at its lowest in over 40 years this winter, raising alarms not only for skiers but for the many communities whose economies depend on outdoor recreation. While the lack of snow is highly visible on ski slopes, its effects stretch far beyond lift lines and even beyond Colorado’s borders.

Natalie Ooi. Photo credit: University of Colorado at Boulder

Natalie Ooi, a teaching professor who is the director of the Masters of the Environment (MENV) program and leads the Sustainability in the Outdoor Industry specialization, studies sustainable tourism and recreation economies. CU Boulder Today recently spoke with Ooi about why this season stands out, how towns built around outdoor recreation can adapt, and what longer-term conversations communities across the Mountain West and beyond should be having.

How unusual is this winter’s snowpack, and what makes it significant?

Mountain and recreation-dependent communities are seasonal by nature, so they expect some year-to-year variation and understand that weather influences visitation. But as Russ Schumacher, the state climatologist at Colorado State University, has reported, this winter’s lack of snow is the most severe since SNOTEL data began in the early-mid 1980s. (SNOTEL, which stands for snowpack telemetry, is a network of backcountry weather stations that gather and transmit snowfall data.)

One of the challenges in talking about the outdoor recreation economy is that while we often focus on mountain resort communities, there are recreation-dependent communities across the entire state. What’s unique about this season is that all of Colorado is effectively experiencing drier than normal conditions. Typically, you might see some areas below average, others at or above average. This year, it’s widespread. That scale is worth highlighting.

It’s easy to focus on mountain resorts because snow—or the lack of it—is so visible. But it’s just as important to think about river-based and other recreation-dependent communities and what this will mean for them in the spring.

Beyond skiing, which activities feel the impact of a low-snow winter?

River-dependent activities like rafting, tubing and fly fishing are also affected. At these record low snowpack levels, some rivers may limit recreation from a conservation perspective to protect aquatic species and overall river health if water levels drop too low. That creates a difficult dynamic for communities whose economies depend heavily on outdoor recreation and visitation. This isn’t just about ski towns—businesses tied to camping, backpacking, guiding, gear rental, retail and campground operations also feel the effects when visitation patterns shift.

In mountain resort and ski communities, there’s always season-to-season variation. Many ski industry managers will tell you average snowfall years are actually the best for business. Too much snow can create operational challenges and even deter some visitors. But in an average year, there’s enough snow to keep serious skiers happy while still being manageable for beginners and intermediates.

Why is this season particularly hard for ski resorts?

I think this season is more challenging because you have that double whammy of not just a lack of snowfall, but high temperatures as well. If it’s cold and there’s a lack of snowfall, most ski areas can make enough snow to build a solid base and open a good percentage of terrain that the majority of visitors and residents will use. They can still operate at a capacity where people continue to ski and aren’t canceling vacations.

This year, though, the combination of low snow and high temperatures makes that much harder. It’s just not feasible to make enough snow when it won’t stick around. The energy and water demands required to make snow that quickly melts simply aren’t a sound management decision.

Westwide SNOTEL basin-filled map March 11, 2026.

What does low snowpack mean for spring and summer river economies?

Low snowpack affects not just total water levels but also runoff timing. Shorter, earlier runoff windows can compress rafting and fishing seasons, making it harder for outfitters to plan staffing and reservations.

How does wildfire complicate the picture?

Wildfire is a real challenge for Colorado and the West. One of the biggest issues is how far-reaching the impacts are because of smoke. There are legitimate public health and safety concerns about being outside and inhaling that level of smoke.

Even if Colorado doesn’t have a wildfire in a major tourism region, a fire in Wyoming, Utah or elsewhere can still affect the tourism season. As the climate warms and wildfire risk increases, that disruption could become more common across multiple states.

How do resorts try to adapt in the short and long term?

It’s hard to pivot in the short term. That kind of rapid adaptation is challenging. But over the years, many ski resorts have adopted diversification strategies to reduce their reliance on winter and ski tourism as their sole focus.

If you look at Alterra Mountain Company and Vail Resorts as examples, there’s a reason they own and/or manage resorts across the U.S. and internationally. This season, for instance, the East Coast is having a phenomenal year. That likely means above-average visitation and revenue there, which can help offset declines in places experiencing poor snow conditions. Geographic diversification is one key strategy.

What ripple effects are communities seeing beyond lift ticket sales?

Lift ticket revenue is obviously a key part of a ski resort’s business, but it’s not the only one. This season provides a clear illustration of that dynamic.

For example, Vail Resorts reported that season-to-date skier visits were down 20% compared to the prior year. But lift revenue was down just 1.8%. That gap is largely due to season pass sales, which provide more stable, upfront revenue.

At the same time, other categories saw much steeper declines: Ski school revenue was down nearly 15%, dining revenue down almost 16% and retail and rental revenue down about 6%.

So even when lift revenue appears relatively stable, the broader resort ecosystem is feeling much sharper impacts.

Lower visitation can also affect seasonal employment, reducing hours or shortening contracts for workers who rely on winter tourism income. That hurts resort companies, but it also impacts the supporting businesses—often mom-and-pop shops or other chains—that rely on visitation. When overall visitation drops, all of those businesses feel it. The ripple effect across the entire community is significant.

What conversations should communities be having right now?

Economic diversification is key. Outdoor recreation is a powerful way to bring in visitors and outside dollars, especially in rural places that can’t attract manufacturing or may never become the next tech hub. But communities need to think strategically about broadening their economic base and leveraging their outdoor recreation infrastructure as a quality of life attractor for other industries.

Some places are already doing this. Steamboat Springs, for example, has built out an entrepreneurial ecosystem that is rooted in outdoor recreation and the mountain lifestyle but is separate to the tourism economy. Grand Junction has leaned into mountain biking and its access to public lands, while also seeking to attract outdoor recreation brands to diversify its economy beyond traditional extractive industries. These kinds of investments help communities spread risk across seasons and industries.

It’s also about managing the visitation they do have and maximizing visitor spending. How do you encourage people not just to camp on adjacent BLM (Bureau of Land Management) land and leave, but to come downtown? How do you design trail systems so they start or end downtown, prompting visitors to buy an ice cream, a coffee or a meal?

Ian Billick on the favored mode of transportation at Crested Butte.

Mrs. Gulch’s landscape March 11, 2026

Mrs. Gulch’s landscape waking up March 11, 2026.

#Drought news March 12, 2026: The low #snowpack throughout the Central Rockies, especially #Colorado, remains a major concern heading into the spring

Click on a thumbnail graphic to view a gallery of drought data from the US Drought Monitor website.

Click the link to go to the US Drought Monitor website. Here’s an excerpt:

This Week’s Drought Summary

Following a drier-than-normal winter, a pattern change at the beginning of March resulted in widespread heavy precipitation (1 to 3 inches, locally more) and a 1-category improvement to parts of the Ohio and Middle to Lower Mississippi Valley. This drought improvement extended east to the Central Appalachians and the Northeast. However, a long-term drought continues for much of the Northeast. Despite the much-needed rainfall for portions of the Southeast and Southern Great Plains, severe (D2) to extreme (D3) drought persists for many areas. A low snowpack and early onset of snowmelt are a major drought concern for the West. As of March 10, drought of varying intensity was designated for parts of Hawaii. Alaska and Puerto Rico remain drought-free…

High Plains

Widespread drought of varying intensity continues across much of the Central Great Plains and Central Rockies. Drought expanded this past week to include all of southwestern Colorado and intensified for northwestern parts of the state. The low snowpack throughout the Central Rockies, especially Colorado, remains a major concern heading into the spring. As of March 10, snow water equivalent for the river basins of Colorado is running below 70 percent of the 1991-2020 average. There were a couple exceptions to the worsening conditions. A wet snow (1” or more, liquid equivalent) supported the removal of extreme (D3) drought across parts of the Denver metro area. Heavy rainfall (more than 1.5 inches) prompted small 1-category improvements to eastern Kansas and southeastern Nebraska…

Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending March 10, 2026.

West

The low snowpack throughout much of the West is a major concern heading into the spring. As of March 10, snow water equivalent (SWE) is less than 40 percent of normal from the Cascades of the Pacific Northwest southward through the Great Basin and Four Corners region. 14-day temperatures, valid from February 25 to March 10, have averaged 5 to degrees F above normal. This warmer-than-normal end to February and start to March has led to an early onset of snowmelt for parts of the West. Although California remains drought-free, SWE is 53 percent of normal statewide according to the California Department of Water Resources. Overall, only minor changes were made this past week to the West Region. Based on increasing 60-day precipitation deficits and to reflect the low snowpack, abnormal dryness (D0) was added to parts of northern California. Drought expanded into southeastern Utah while intensifying to severe (D2) and extreme (D3) drought across northeastern and western portions of the state. Moderate (D1) drought was expanded across north-central to northeastern Washington along with central Oregon due to 30 to 90-day precipitation deficits and low snowpack…

South

Despite the locally heavy rainfall across the Lower Mississippi Valley along with eastern Oklahoma and Texas, only modest improvements were warranted as a favorable response among the various indicators was not enough to justify more widespread 1-week changes. However, targeted 1-category improvements were made to parts of northwestern Arkansas, eastern Oklahoma, eastern Texas, and the Lower Mississippi Valley where weekly precipitation amounts exceeded 2 inches. In areas that missed out on the beneficial rainfall, drought intensified for parts of west-central Oklahoma and the Oklahoma Panhandle. A majority of the South Region has received less than half their normal precipitation with a temperature departure of more than 6 degrees F above normal during the past 90 days. These 3-month precipitation and temperature observations are consistent with a La Nina wintertime pattern…

Looking Ahead

In the wake of a cold front, sharply colder temperatures are forecast to overspread the eastern U.S. on March 12. A second and even stronger cold front is expected to progress east from the Great Plains to the East Coast by March 16. Following this strong March cold front, subfreezing temperatures are forecast to extend as far south as Oklahoma and the Texas Panhandle. According to the Weather Prediction Center, 5-day precipitation amounts from March 12-16 are forecast to exceed 1 inch, liquid equivalent, across the Great Lakes and New England. Much needed rainfall is also anticipated for drought-stricken Florida. Elsewhere, drier weather is forecast for the Ohio Valley, Middle to Lower Mississippi Valley, and Great Plains. During mid-March, dry weather will be accompanied by an increasing chance of record heat across California, the Great Basin, and Southwest. A powerful Kona low will bring heavy to excessive rainfall to Hawaii through at least March 14. 

The NWS 6-10 day outlook (valid March 17-21) leans toward below-normal temperatures for the East, while above-normal temperatures are likely from the West Coast to the Great Plains. Above-normal temperature probabilities exceed 90 percent across most of California, the Great Basin, and Southwest. In contrast to the warmer–than-normal temperatures over the West, Alaska is likely to be colder-than-normal. A majority of the lower 48 states are favored to have below-normal precipitation from March 17-21 with the largest below-normal precipitation probabilities (greater than 50 percent) forecast across the Central to Southern Great Plains, Southwest, and much of California. The wet pattern is forecast to persist for Hawaii with enhanced above-normal precipitation probabilities.

US Drought Monitor one week change map ending March 10, 2026.

#Utah Senator Mike Lee and Representative Celeste Maloy look to Congressional Review Act to crush Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument, plan: Plus: Another #ColoradoRiver wonkfest; more public lands and #aridification news — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org) #COriver

Glen Canyon Dam, January 2022. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

Click the link to read the article on The Land Desk website (Jonathan P. Thompson):

March 6, 2026

🌵 Public Lands 🌲

Sen. Mike Lee and Rep. Celeste Maloy, both MAGA Republicans from Utah, have formally introduced legislation to use the Congressional Review Act to revoke the Biden-era management plan for Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. If successful, the move would also bar the feds from developing a new management plan that resembles the current one.

The current management plan is not draconian by any means. It was fashioned over years, with oodles of input and compromise, and is far less restrictive than the preservation-oriented alternatives It allowed for motorized vehicle use on designated routes and added almost no new restrictions for livestock grazing. Revoking it is not the same as rescinding the national monument or shrinking its boundaries, and will not open up any of the monument to new mining claims or oil and gas leases.

So it’s not clear what Lee and Maloy hope to achieve, except to strike a blow to a national monument that they don’t like and to throw oversight of 1.9 million acres of public land into disarray. Or maybe they’re just trying to build up their anti-public-land credentials to head off challenges from even more extreme candidates such as, say, Phil Lyman, who just challenged Maloy for her 3rd District congressional seat.

You still have time to let your representatives in Congress know how you feel.

While well-intentioned greens are parsing BLM director nominee Steve Pearce’s words for indications he might be inclined to sell off public land, the Trump administration is orchestrating a massive de facto transfer of public lands to oil and gas companies.

I’m talking about oil and gas leasing. And no, it’s not an actual transfer of public land; the lessee does not take title to the land, nor can they block public access, but they do get the rights to drill that land and preclude other uses on it. And, once it is drilled, the land is scraped of all vegetation, covered with heavy equipment, poked with a massive drill, hydraulically fractured, and becomes an industrial-scale, methane-, hydrogen sulfide-, and VOC-oozing hydrocarbon factory for many decades to come.

On the auction block this June is a good chunk of slickrock-studded landscape northwest of Moab, between Hwy. 191 and the Green River, along with some parcels in the Lisbon Valley. All in all, the BLM proposes selling off 39 parcels covering some 71,600 acres. You have until March 30 to give your two cents. https://eplanning.blm.gov/Project-Home/?id=6fad61fa-a7f2-f011-8407-001dd80bcf93

***

Of course, sometimes the BLM holds an oil and gas auction and no one comes. That was the case with the Big Beautiful Cook Inlet Oil and Gas Lease Sale (yes, that is the official name) held March 4 in Alaska, in which more than 1 million acres of offshore leases were put on the block. There were zero bids. Zilch. Nada. Someday, maybe every oil and gas lease sale will be like that.

***

A federal judge has halted construction of the Northern Corridor Highway through the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area near St. George, Utah, while an advocates’ lawsuit proceeds.

The BLM approved the contested project earlier this year. The Utah Department of Transportation, apparently wanting to get started before a legal challenge could take hold, began erecting fencing along the project, even though their development plan hadn’t been approved. This activity would have disturbed desert tortoise habitat.

The court did not approve, blocking further work until the lawsuit is resolved.

***

In other Utah road news, Garfield County began chip-sealing the first ten miles of the Hole-in-the-Rock Road in Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, drawing protest and a lawsuit from environmental groups.

The county has been aching to pave the gravel road, which often becomes riddled with potholes and washboards, for years, but failed to gain BLM approval. Environmental groups have resisted, saying that improving the road could lead to more paving or widening of primitive byways in the area, and would increase the number of people and their impacts on the fragile landscape.

The county has also wielded RS-2477 — an 1866 statute — in an attempt to wrest control over the byway, which leads to the famed Colorado River crossing of the 1879 Latter Day Saint expedition to Bluff. Last July, a federal court granted Garfield County quiet title to the section of the road within the county.

Garfield County interpreted that as a green light to chip seal the road.

That triggered a lawsuit from the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, pointing out that because the road crosses BLM land, the county must still get the agency’s go-ahead for major improvements. It didn’t, but the BLM has done nothing to stop the action, which SUWA says violates federal environmental laws.

🥵 Aridification Watch 🐫

I was accused recently of being all “doom and gloom” when it comes to this year’s snow levels, so I set out to find some good news to report. It didn’t go so well, but I did uncover a few tiny nuggets, including:

After the February storms, the Center for Snow and Avalanche Studies reported: “This is rare, but currently we do not have any dust on the snowpack.” That’s good news because dust on the snow decreases albedo (reflectivity), leading to faster snowmelt. We need what little we have to stick around as long as possible. Buzzkill: The really big dust events tend to come in the springtime.

I tend to rely on a handful of high-elevation SNOTEL sites as indicators of how the mountain snowpack is doing. One of them is in Columbus Basin in the La Plata Mountains. Like everywhere else, the snow water equivalent there is way below normal. However, it’s still above 2002 levels for early March, so that’s kind of heartening. I guess?

Hope lies in 1990: That year, snowpack levels in the Animas River watershed were lower on March 6 than they are today. But beginning in mid-March, storms pummeled the region, resulting in a May 3, 1990, snowpack peak that was 94% of normal and bringing runoff up to decent levels. We could see a repeat of that March-April-May miracle!

And … oh. I’ve just been informed that there is no more good news.

As grim as this may be, it also offers a glimmer of hope: The snowpack could still recover like it did in 1990. Source: NRCS.

Now back to our regularly scheduled doom and gloom, bullet style.

The late February-early March heat wave across most of the West shattered thousands of daily high temperature records and dozens of monthly ones, topping off the West’s warmest winter on record. Monthly records (121 tied or broken nationwide during the last week of Feb.) include:

Dinosaur National Monument in Utah hit 68° F on 2/26;

Imperial County, California’s airport reached 97° on 2/28;

Albuquerque airport, 77° on 2/25;

Hovenweep National Monument in Utah, 70° on 2/28;

Havasu, Arizona, and Malibu Hills, California, were both 93° on 2/27;

Sampling of daily records (845 broken or tied during the last week of Feb) include:

Mancos, Colorado, hit 50° F on 2/28; the aforementioned Columbus Basin (elev. 10,784 feet) reached 48° and Mineral Creek, Colorado, hit 51° that same day;

McClure Pass, Colorado, reached 49° on 2/28;

Needles, California, and Phoenix both hit 92° on 2/28;

South Lake Tahoe airport, 60° on 2/28.

Those kinds of temperatures melt the snow, even on north faces, causing this year’s snow water equivalent graph lines to uncharacteristically dip during a time of year when they normally would be shooting upward. They also heighten risk of wildfires in the low country. On the last day of February, a blaze broke out in Chautauqua Park in Boulder, forcing some evacuations before it was contained. Another one was sparked west of Boulder on March 4.

The North Fork of the Gunnison, which feeds the ditches in and around Paonia and Hotchkiss and the orchards, vineyards, and farms there, is in trouble. This year’s snowpack so far is in the same boat as it was on this date in 2002 and 2018, two very dry years when irrigation ditches were shut off early in the growing season.

Aside from the entire Upper Colorado River watershed, I’m also especially concerned about the North Fork of the Gunnison. Snowpack levels are at a record low for this date, or about the same as they were in 2018, and Paonia Reservoir is currently utilizing just 22% of its storage capacity (note the record high temp on McClure Pass above, at the headwaters of Muddy Creek, which feeds the reservoir). This does not bode well for the many small farmers who rely on the river for irrigation. In 2018, downstream senior rights holders made a call on the river in June, forcing junior irrigators in the North Fork to lose water perilously early in the season.

This bad situation could be exacerbated if the feds were to decide to release water from Paonia Reservoir in an attempt to buoy Lake Powell water levels. While this is hypothetical, it is not beyond the realm of possibility by any means.

And, saving for some sort of April-May miracle, the Colorado River runoff will be extraordinarily scant this spring and summer, almost certainly pushing Lake Powell to critically low levels.

***

That demands a plan, and the Bureau of Reclamation came up with several alternatives last month. Most of the major players have commented on the alternatives, and it’s safe to say that almost no one is satisfied with any of them — albeit for different reasons.

One of the more universal critiques is that none of the alternatives adequately address dry and critically dry scenarios on the river, like the one that is likely to occur this summer. The draft environmental impact statement itself states, “In critically dry periods, all alternatives have unacceptable performance.” That leaves many wondering what, exactly, the Bureau of Reclamation plans to do to keep the system from collapsing over the next nine months.

There is a lot here, and it gets pretty darned deep in the wonk weeds. Still, what I’ve included is a mere sampling of some of the comments from just a few of the commenters in the hope that it will give readers a better idea of where different stakeholders stand, and how complicated and difficult this situation really is.

For those who don’t like weeds, here’s the short version: It’s a tangled mess with a bunch of moving pieces and stakeholders who are digging in their heels to ensure that their constituents get the water they need to drink, irrigate crops, run industries, or whatever. And they’re all butting up against the reality that there simply isn’t enough water in the river to go around.

Ian James has a slightly less crunchy version for the Los Angeles Times.

Here are the comments and commenters:

Four Democratic members of Arizona’s congressional delegation feel that the Lower Basin is getting the dry end of the stick (their comments are similar to those of the Arizona Department of Water Resources):

Arizona is understandably displeased because they would take the greatest hit under any alternative. This is not because they are somehow inferior, but because the water rights to the Central Arizona Project, which delivers Colorado River water to Phoenix and Tucson, are junior to most other big users in the Lower Basin. “… each alternative, though broad in scope, will translate in practice specifically as drastic reductions to Arizona’s water supply.”

“We are deeply troubled that Reclamation all but abandons its increasingly critical role in ensuring the Upper Basin States fulfill their delivery obligations under the Colorado River Compact of 1922 (Compact).” This refers to the non-depletion or minimum-delivery obligation that I’ve written about before.

“The DEIS itself acknowledges that ‘widespread impacts on social and economic conditions may also be possible,’ including circumstances in which municipalities may need to pursue alternative or even hauled water sources to maintain basic services. Drastic cuts could have cascading consequences for human health and safety and destabilize the lives and livelihoods of Arizonans, tribal communities, and critical industries that rely on Colorado River supplies.”

They say the cuts will damage the state’s agriculture, manufacturing, and aerospace industries and that it will put at risk: “… the largest concentration of advanced semiconductor manufacturing investment in the country, representing roughly $200 billion in announced projects since 2020.” Semiconductor production is extremely water-intensive, with the average factory consuming up to 10 million gallons of ultra-pure water daily.

They call on any plans to “include verifiable Upper Basin conservation measures commensurate with Lower Basin conservation measures, including identifying tangible metrics that demonstrate Upper Basin water conservation.”

The Colorado River District, which represents water users on Colorado’s Western Slope, wasn’t so psyched about the alternatives, either:

“We believe that Reclamation must institute bold and meaningful changes but that those changes must be implemented in a manner that is consistent with the 1922 Colorado River Compact, the 1944 binational treaty with Mexico, the 1948 Upper Basin Compact, and the other foundational elements of the Law of the River.”

“Reclamation must prioritize hydrologic reality over predictability for Lower Basin users. The Draft EIS places undue emphasis on predictability1 for water users, a goal that is unattainable under future climate conditions unless system storage is replenished and overall demands are permanently reduced to match the supply.”

“… several alternatives include Upper Basin water conservation ranging from zero to 500,000 acre-feet annually … <but> … fails to analyze the environmental or socioeconomic impacts associated with these conservation volumes.” It adds that a 200,000 acre-feet reduction in the Upper Basin would require fallowing 52,000 acres on the Western Slope.

“Lower Basin water use must be reduced by 1.5 million acre-feet at all times, regardless of the alternative. This amount represents system losses (i.e., transit losses and reservoir evaporation) and should not be classified as shortage.” This is a longstanding issue. Reservoir evaporation and other such losses are counted against the Upper Basin’s consumptive use, in part because of the non-depletion obligation. The same is not true for the Lower Basin; when they say they use 7.5 million acre-feet, that does not include evaporation or seepage or other system losses, only what they pull out of the river.

“The range of alternatives must include option(s) that perform under critically dry hydrology. Currently, none of the alternatives in the Draft EIS perform under critically dry hydrology. At least one alternative must protect critical infrastructure and respond effectively to significantly lower river flows than historically observed.” We are approaching a critically dry situation this summer, when the feds will have to decide whether and how to keep Lake Powell from dropping below minimum power pool. So far there is no plan for this.

“Hydrology must drive Post-2026 operations. Operating guidelines based upon comparative reservoir elevations which do not factor in real time hydrology have been disastrous for protecting storage in Lake Powell and thus, have failed to provide the water supply certainty for the Upper Basin intended by the Law of the River …”

“Interbasin transactions must not be allowed in the proposed action.” That is, Upper Basin users with senior rights should not be able to sell their water to Lower Basin users.

The team of Anne Castle, John Fleck, Eric Kuhn, Jack Schmidt, Katherine Tara, and Kathryn Soren, river experts and academics who aren’t representing any specific water user, state, or basin, also weighed in. Their comments, as Fleck put it in his Inkstain blog, could be summed up as: “Tell us what you’re going to do.” And, also:

The group calls on Interior to “primarily focus on the Dry and Critically Dry scenarios. … We think it important to be mindful of the underlying year-to-year hydrology of the 21st century as we look to the future. … we are struck by the fact that 50% of the individual years of the 21st century have been Dry or Critically Dry, and only 27% of the years (including 2017, 2019, 2023) have been Moderately Wet or Wet.”

“We suggest that the DEIS include a description of an alternative that performs sufficiently well during Dry scenarios and an alternative that performs sufficiently well during Critically Dry scenarios.”

“ … it is imperative that Reclamation provide a clear picture of what actions will be implemented in the near term (i.e., next year, next 3 years, next 5 years) to protect critical infrastructure, and to protect public health and safety.”

Noting that lawsuits are inevitable regardless of which alternative the feds choose, they urge them to avoid “safe” options and go with a plan with “… the broadest possible interpretation of Reclamation’s and Interior’s authority to provide a predictable and resilient Colorado River so that the system can continue to operate in a reasonable manner while the lawsuits proceed.”

Call on the feds to “… explore these areas for possible inclusion in the preferred alternative:

Reduction of deliveries in the Lower Basin in excess of 1.48 MAF when insufficient water is available for release.

Provision for releases of water from the Colorado River Storage Project initial units as necessary to protect critical elevations in Lake Powell and ensure continued Upper Basin Compact compliance.

Operation of federal projects in the Upper Basin to store or use less water during critical periods.

Continuation, expansion, and modification of Assigned Water programs (such as Intentionally Created Surplus and Mexican Water Reserve) with improvements to ensure operational neutrality and minimize adverse impact to priority water.

Establishing a conservation pool in Lake Powell for storing Upper Basin conserved water to be utilized for Compact compliance purposes. For more on conservation pools, check out the Shannon Mulane’s explainer in the Colorado Sun.

The group finds fault with the plan for not addressing “the need for enforceable reductions in the Upper Basin.” They go with the Lower Basin’s interpretation of the non-depletion/minimum-delivery obligation, saying that the Colorado River Compact does not guarantee that the Upper Basin gets half of the water in the river. Plus, they point out that the plan’s demand forecasts for the Upper Basin are unrealistically high, putting more of the burden for cuts on the Lower Basin.

The Southern Nevada Water Authority and Colorado River Commission of Nevadaare especially critical, writing:

“Since the onset of drought in 2002, <Nevada water users> have reduced their overall Colorado River water consumption by more than 40 percent even as our population grew by more than 875,000 people. And they, unlike so many others, have not ignored the reality facing the basin by making the flimsy argument that our economy cannot prosper while water consumption decreases.”

Like Arizona, they bring up the minimum-delivery/non-depletion clause of the Colorado River Compact and call on the Upper Basin to comply with it.

Interior’s “… approach to protecting the Glen Canyon Dam river outlet works by reducing releases from Lake Powell—rather than making infrastructure repairs and improvements—is shortsighted and harms Nevada and the Lower Basin States.”

The Upper Colorado River Commission emphasizes the Lower Basin’s history of exceeding its Colorado River Compact allocation and failing to account for evaporation and other system losses. Colorado’s Upper Colorado River CommissionerBecky Mitchell submitted similar, very detailed comments that emphasized the Colorado River Compact’s equitable division of the river between the Upper Basin and Lower Basin. She points out that the Lower Basin’s interpretation of the minimum-delivery/non-depletion clause contradicts and even negates that division.

📖 Reading (and watching) Room 🧐

Must read: Teal Lehto’s and Len Necefer’s speculative fiction take on what might happen on the Colorado River, and to the people who rely on it, in 2030 if current climatic trends continue. It’s dramatic and sensational and catastrophic, but it’s also very well informed, smart, and not at all far-fetched, in my humble opinion.

In a tiny #Colorado town, infighting dissolved the government. Now the water’s running out: State officials are scrambling to help #Hartman, a town of 30 near the #Kansas border — The #Denver Post

Welcome sign and water tower (2013) in Hartman. By Jeffrey Beall – Own work, CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=28063112

Click the link to read the article on The Denver Post website (Seth Klamann and Sam Tabachinik). Here’s an excerpt:

March 8, 2026

The mayor had quit and three active trustees resigned, too. They locked up the town’s sole public building and dropped boxes of records off with the county. The town government had ceased to exist. There was no clerk to hold an election to replace the trustees, and there were no trustees to hire a clerk…More than a century after its founding, division among Hartman’s few dozen residents has led to the dissolution of their government, dropping the town into a bitter legal limbo with few analogs in Colorado’s recent history, all while its water supply stands on the brink of collapse. A tangled web of interpersonal feuds, played out in letters to the local newspaper, in social media posts and via legal filings in county court, has left the town with no clear path out of a situation that’s not covered by state law. The imbroglio has even reached the state Capitol, where Gov. Jared Polis directed state officials to visit the area and lawmakers are scrambling to devise possible solutions…

…unlike many other small towns, Hartman has its own water supply, and one of the trustees’ responsibilities was paying for and overseeing it.

After years of limping along, Hartman’s troubled water system is on the brink of failure. The money to keep its pump running — paid in advance before the trustees quit — will lapse in the coming months. The water will be unusable before it runs dry: The chlorine that cleans it will be exhausted as soon as next month. Without elected representatives, no one can hire a new operator to test the water, nor is there anyone to pay the local power company to keep the pump running. The town has been on a boil order since September. What’s more, the town’s combative reputation has made nearby authorities wary of stepping in to help.

“It’s a bad situation,” said Ty Harmon, a Prowers County commissioner whose district includes Hartman. “It’s a very bad situation.”

[…]

State officials and lawmakers are now scrabbling to find a way to help a town with no money, no government, a dwindling water supply and a wariness of outsiders. That effort may ultimately include rewriting state law, redirecting grant money to a water authority willing to help, and charting a future for a town whose democracy has collapsed under the weight of its residents’ mutual distrust. Some have argued that Hartman has already tried to work together, without success.

“We shouldn’t be a sovereign town,” said Glenn Packer, a town resident who’s married to one of the recently resigned trustees. “It’s obvious it doesn’t work here.”

Arkansas River Basin — Graphic via the Colorado Geological Survey

Report: Big Central #Arizona Project supply cuts would trigger huge economic hits, major job losses in Arizona — Tucson.com #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

A screenshot from a new Central Arizona Project video, which says if water deliveries to the canal system are cut too much it will “cripple our state, flatten our economy and weaken our national defense.” Provided by Central Arizona Project

Click the link to read the article the Tucson.com website (Tony Davis). Here’s an excerpt:

March 9, 2026

Arizona will take nearly a $3 trillion total economic hit and lose millions of jobs that would have come to the state by 2060 if Central Arizona Project deliveries are halted by the federal government, a new report from the project’s governing agency says. A CAP consultant’s report said the state’s total economic output would by 2060 be 11% to 14% lower than it otherwise would have been, under two proposed federal alternatives for managing the Colorado River. At worst, the state’s total jobs would shrink by 7.9% if the project’s supplies were eliminated, the report said. In addition, the state would see substantial declines in population and housing growth by then with massive CAP cuts, compared to what would have happened without them, said the report.

The three-county agency that runs the CAP’s canal system, stretching from Lake Havasu on the Colorado River to just south of Tucson, commissioned this report from the consulting firm WestWater Research, based in Boise, Idaho. The agency, known as the Central Arizona Water Conservation District, has managed daily operations for CAP since it was under construction in the 1970s. CAP submitted this report as part of its comments sharply criticizing the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s draft environmental impact statement on proposed alternatives aimed at curbing excessive water use by cities and farms in the seven-state Colorado River Basin. It comes out shortly after project officials released a video warning that such cuts would “flatten” Arizona’s economy. At the time the video came out, some outside water experts said it oversimplified and overestimated the impacts of CAP cuts, in part because the state and local governments have already stored huge amounts of CAP water underground to prepare for such emergencies. But the new report says those supplies will eventually be exhausted, forcing many cities to return to groundwater pumping, and that some shortages of groundwater supplies themselves also could begin in some regions as soon as the early 2030s.

Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0

Why wind & solar power won’t easily replace the energy being produced by the Glen Canyon Powerplant

Aerial view of a large concrete dam with water flowing below, surrounded by red rock formations. — ^{Photo of South Lake Powell and Glen Canyon Dam provided by The Water Desk. Photo by Alexander Heilner. Aerial support from LightHawk}

by Robert Marcos

The electrical power that’s being produced by new wind and solar farms cannot fully replace the power being lost as the output of the Glen Canyon Powerplant continues to fall.

As of March 11, 2026, the Powerplant is producing only 60% to 65% of its maximum output. At full capacity the plant can produce 1,320 megawatts. But because of Lake Powell’s low water level it’s currently producing between 800 and 870 megawatts. While new wind and solar power will cushion the impact of Glen Canyon’s decline, the hydroelectric power is a critical component of the regional power grid. Electricity from the Glen Canyon Powerplant is operationally superior to wind and solar mainly because it is dispatchable, highly flexible, and provides critical grid‑stability services that variable renewables cannot provide on their own.

Dispatchability and reliability

Glen Canyon can generate on demand, ramping output up or down quickly to follow load; flows and generation are deliberately increased during weekday business hours to match demand.

Hydropower at Glen Canyon is not dependent on real‑time sun or wind conditions, so it can produce power at night, during calm periods, and in cloudy weather, as long as water is available in Lake Powell.

The plant provides both energy and dependable capacity for resource adequacy, which is essential during extreme heat waves and other system‑stress events when solar and wind output may not align with peak demand.

Flexibility and ramping

Glen Canyon is explicitly operated for load following: its turbines adjust automatic generation control signals to continuously balance supply and demand, so actual output can be above or below the hourly schedule at any moment.

The dam is allowed to fluctuate releases to provide about 40 MW of regulation capacity, with short‑lived flow changes of roughly 1,200 cfs up or down that help stabilize the grid against second‑to‑second and minute‑to‑minute imbalances.

Turbines can ramp thousands of cubic feet per second within an hour (subject to environmental constraints), providing fast ramping that complements slower, weather‑dependent changes in wind and solar output.

Grid‑stability and system services

Conventional hydropower units like those at Glen Canyon provide inertia, frequency regulation, spinning reserve, voltage support, and black‑start capability, all of which are necessary to keep the system stable as variable renewables grow.

These services are inherently available from large synchronous hydro generators without needing extensive additional power‑electronics‑based equipment that wind and solar typically require for similar functions.

Glen Canyon’s participation in automatic generation control helps maintain area control error near zero, directly supporting system frequency and reliability.

Scale, efficiency, and cost characteristics

Glen Canyon has a total capacity on the order of 1,300 MW and produces roughly 4–5 billion kWh per year, enough for hundreds of thousands of households across seven Western states.

Modern hydro units have high conversion efficiency and very long lifetimes (often 50–100 years), which spreads capital costs over decades and yields low long‑run levelized cost of electricity compared with many newer wind and solar plus storage builds.

Revenues from Glen Canyon hydropower also fund environmental and river‑management programs in Glen and Grand Canyons, a co‑benefit not typically associated with individual wind or solar plants.

As Colorado’s winter dries up, so do revenues for weather dependent businesses — #Colorado Public Radio

Clear Creek rafting via MyColoradoLife.com

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Public Radio website (Haylee May). Here’s an excerpt:

February 16, 2026

The only thing snow shovels have been gathering recently is dust as Metro-Denver finds itself more than a foot behind its normal snowfall total this winter. Boulder National Weather Service Meteorologist, Russell Danielson, said the normal snow total through the end of January for metro-Denver is 27 inches. This year, just 13.4 inches fell. That’s a sharp drop from 2025, when the region saw 38 inches of snow over the same time frame. In the mountains, it’s even starker. Breckenridge typically sees 101.7 inches by the end of January. This year? Just 34 inches. The lack of snow has largely been framed as a ski industry problem. But across the Front Range and into Colorado’s river corridors, it’s become something broader — and more immediate. From car washes in southwest Denver to rafting guides scanning snowpack data in the high country, the dry winter is rewriting balance sheets in real time…For other weather-dependent businesses, the impact is far more dramatic.

“We calculated that we’re about 70% down,” said Amy Campbell, office manager for Bear Creek Tree Service in Englewood. In a typical winter, her crews plow at least every other week — sometimes multiple times depending on the storm…

The economic ripple from a dry winter won’t stop when the season changes. And that has small business owners who rely on summer tourism also worried. In Kremmling, co-owner of Downstream Adventures, Jonathan Snodgrass, is already watching the snowpack charts — not for ski conditions, but for river levels.

“I’m feeling a little worried,” he said. “If it stays on this track, we’re looking at not a lot of water to work with for rafting. That could have some big impacts on the duration of our season and the quality of our product.”

Rafting on Clear Creek and the upper Colorado River depends heavily on snowmelt. In low years like 2018, Clear Creek trips ended around the third weekend of July. In stronger years, they run into late August — sometimes up to Labor Day. Those final weeks are critical.

Westwide SNOTEL basin-filled map March 8, 2026.

A record warm winter could send #LakePowell to a historic low. Flaming Gorge may be its lifeline — The Salt Lake Tribune #GreenRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

A chart from the Colorado Basin River Forecast Center shows projected water supplies for the Colorado River basin compared to normal in 2026. (Provided by Colorado Basin River Forecast Center)

Click the link to read the article on The Salt Lake Tribune website (Brooke Larsen). Here’s an excerpt:

March 7, 2026

“Right now the hydrology that we have in front of us puts us in a very, very precarious situation,” said Gene Shawcroft, Utah’s Colorado River negotiator. Utah just wrapped up its warmest winter on record. Salt Lake City broke its previous maximum average winter temperature by 2 degrees Fahrenheit — a significant increase, according to the Colorado Basin River Forecast Center. While the state received similar precipitation compared to last year, much of that fell as rain, leading to the worst snowpack since 1981 in parts of the state. Now, the water supply outlook is “well below normal,” according to the center. The Bureau of Reclamation’s latest most probable forecast for Lake Powell shows it sinking below “power pool” — 3,490 feet — by December. At that level, water can’t make it through the turbines at Glen Canyon Dam that generate hydropower and keep the lights on across Utah and six other states. Powell could hit that dangerous low even sooner, though. The bureau’s most recent forecast was based on the Colorado Basin River Forecast Center’s February report. Since then, the center’s projection for water flows into Powell has dropped by 100,000 acre-feet. The bureau’s most probable forecast can also be optimistic. The agency’s minimum probable forecast, which shows a dry scenario that would statistically happen only 10% of the time, sometimes aligns more with reality. Last year, the April 2025 minimum probable study forecasted Lake Powell to hit 3,535 feet in elevation by the end of February 2026. The lake currently sits at 3,530 feet. The bureau’s latest minimum probable forecast shows the lake dropping below 3,490 by the end of August.

“It’s safe for us to assume that, unless Mother Nature is uncharacteristically generous, that Lake Powell elevations are going to fluctuate at elevations that we’re not comfortable with,” Wayne Pullan, Upper Colorado regional director for the bureau, said at a Glen Canyon Dam meeting last week…

To prop up Powell, the bureau will likely rely on another popular Utah reservoir: Flaming Gorge. The reservoir that straddles the border of Utah and Wyoming has the best water outlook in the basin, at 64% of normal, according to the forecast center. The Upper Green River, which flows into Flaming Gorge, is the “lone bright spot” for snow water equivalent — the amount of water snow holds…Under a 2019 plan, the bureau may form an agreement with Utah and the other states in the Upper Colorado River Basin — Colorado, New Mexico and Wyoming — to release water from Flaming Gorge and a few other reservoirs, such as Blue Mesa in Colorado, to maintain hydropower at Glen Canyon Dam. That’s what happened the last time forecasts showed Powell dropping to a dangerous low level in 2022. A record wet winter followed that dry year, though, boosting the reservoirs.

States blast USBR draft EIS of potential #ColoradoRiver options — Scott Franz (KUNC.org) #COriver #aridification

Lake Mead and the big “bathtub ring” as seen from next to Hoover Dam. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

Click the link to read the article on the KUNC website (Scott Franz):

March 6, 2026

The sluggish Colorado River negotiations have entered a new phase: Long and fiery letter writing.

Politicians, water negotiators and environmental groups recently submitted hundreds of pages of comments on the Interior Department’s playbook for how to manage the waterway. There are currently five possible options to deal with the river in the absence of a deal between the seven states in the basin.

The alternatives were published in January and could result in a variety of scenarios, ranging from significant water reductions in lower basin states to creating new incentives for states to conserve water.

And after the states missed two deadlines for reaching an agreement themselves on how to share and conserve the water, it’s becoming increasingly likely the federal government will piece together its own plan before the current guidelines expire in August.

Public comment on the Interior Department’s menu of alternatives ended Monday. And leaders from both the upper and lower basins are blasting them.

In a 45-page letter, Colorado’s water negotiator said the federal government lacks the legal standing to enact the alternatives it’s put on the table.

The state is generally calling for a plan that forces states in the lower basin to cut back more of their water use in the face of drought.

Udall/Overpeck 4-panel Figure Colorado River temperature/precipitation/natural flows with trend. Lake Mead and Lake Powell storage. Updated through Water Year 2025. Note the tiny points on the annual data so that you can flyspeck the individual years. Credit: Brad Udall

“The Colorado River has changed dramatically over the last two decades, and our operating rules need to change with it,” Colorado River Commissioner Becky Mitchell said in a statement. “The current rules have not done enough to protect Lake Powell and Lake Mead, and it’s clear that a future management framework must better respond to today’s reality.”

Mitchell said the river is nearing a crisis point. She wrote that under current operating guidelines for the two reservoirs, which have been in place since 2007, Interior has been releasing water to the lower basin “based on demand, largely ignoring worsening hydrology and dropping reservoir levels.”

Downriver in Arizona, leaders are also blasting the Interior’s list of proposals, saying they would result in disproportional and severe water cuts to the lower basin states.

The state’s Democratic congressional delegation said the cuts could hurt national security.

“Arizona’s agriculture, semiconductor and advanced manufacturing, aerospace and defense industries rely on the Colorado River,” the delegation wrote. “Reductions of the magnitude contemplated in the (feds playbook) would reverberate across rural communities and throughout the domestic food supply chain.”

The lower basin states of California, Arizona and Nevada are calling for mandatory water cuts in the upper basin states of Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming and Utah.

Leaders in those states have countered that they already enact water conservation measures during times of drought.

A coalition of conservation groups, including The Nature Conservancy and Trout Unlimited, also weighed in on Interior’s draft proposals. They wrote that stabilizing the Colorado River in the face of drought “depends on early, proactive management; flexible and coordinated use of storage; meaningful Tribal participation; and integration of ecological integrity and mitigation into operational considerations.”

“Frameworks that delay action, rely on rigid rules, or institutionalize emergency operations consistently perform worse under the hydrologic conditions the Basin is most likely to face.

The Interior Department plans to review the public comments and identify which option it prefers to manage the reservoirs sometime this spring.

Environmental groups have warned negotiators in the seven states against taking their fight to court, saying that path could hold up conservation plans that are needed to protect places like the ecosystem of the Grand Canyon.

#ColoradoRiver district head: Deal between states still possible, necessary — The #GrandJunction Daily Sentinel #COriver #aridification

General Manager of the Colorado River Water Conservation District Andy Mueller speaks at the district’s annual seminar in 2018. Photo credit: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism

Click the link to read the article on the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel website (Dennis Webb). Here’s an excerpt:

The general manager of the Colorado River District says that despite blown deadlines, a deal between states is still possible and needed to deal with the crisis regarding the river’s management. But Andy Mueller says time is running short to do so with an existing agreement due to expire later this year and drought and Lower Basin overuse of the river putting water levels in Lake Powell at perilously low levels.

“The best alternative from our perspective is still to have the seven states find an agreement that provides certainty. It’s really hard to do that in the middle of a really terrible drought. It’s a multi-decadal drought,” Mueller said…

Mueller said everyone has been good at pushing off the crises in the Colorado River. But the buffer at Powell and Mead in terms of stored water has disappeared due to the Lower Basin’s overuse and failure to account for system loss, and a changing river hydrology coming amidst warming temperatures, and as a result “we don’t have that buffer anymore, so it truly is hitting a crisis,” he said. The river has been beset by long-term drought for much of this century, reflecting what some refer to as aridification resulting from a warming climate…While Mueller remains hopeful that the states will continue to talk and keep the federal government from having to act on its own, the government needs to be prepared to move forward, he said. He said the next-worst alternative it is analyzing, which is called the basic coordination alternative but he considers to be the federal authorities’ alternative, imposes cuts first on Arizona, and specifically its Central Arizona Project as a junior water right in the Lower Basin. Mueller said that alternative also says the goal will be to deliver at least 7.5 million acre feet a year from Powell. He said that under most reasonably foreseeable hydrologies, that will put Powell’s infrastructure at risk. The water level would be in danger of falling below the intake tubes used to make power, which would leave the dam’s bypass tubes as the only way of getting water out of Powell and down into Grand Canyon. Those tubes have proven structurally problematic, subject to what is known as cavitation when a lot of water is moving through them, which has resulted in damage to them. Mueller said Reclamation has done a lot of work to try to repair them but no one he has talked to wants to rely on those tubes to get water below the dam..,Mueller said the federal alternative says that, to keep levels in Powell high enough to keep producing power and delivering water to the Lower Basin, it might have to take unspecified actions in the Upper Basin.

“Everybody in the Upper Basin, everybody in western Colorado should be very concerned about that statement because the question is, what do they mean by that?” he said.

He said that if the environmental impact statement is going to refer to contemplated actions, by law it needs to identify them and analyze their environmental and socioeconomic impacts. Because it doesn’t, the entire EIS process is legally flawed when it comes to the alternative most likely to be adopted by the federal government, and if it goes that route it could get sued not just by Arizona, which is facing the biggest cuts, but by the Upper Basin, Mueller said. He said the unspecified actions probably would start with massive releases of water from primarily Flaming Gorge Reservoir but also Blue Mesa and Navajo reservoirs.

#ColoradoRiver may deliver just a third of normal water supplies this spring, projections show: Record winter heat across basin has sapped water supplies, forecasters say — The #Denver Post #COriver #aridification

Click the link to read the article on The Denver Post website (Elise Schmelzer). Here’s an excerpt:

March 9, 2026

Extended warm weather across the Colorado River basin may reduce the amount of water delivered during the spring runoff to just a third of normal, according to federal forecasters. Modeling released late last week showed the river system on track to deliver a scant 2.3 million acre-feet to Lake Powell, one of the river system’s largest reservoirs. That’s 36% of the median of 6.4 million acre-feet recorded between 1991 and 2020. If the forecast comes true, it would be the fifth-lowest inflow to Lake Powell since the reservoir’s establishment in 1963, according to the National Weather Service’s Colorado Basin River Forecast Center.

“It’s not a pretty picture here,” Cody Moser, a hydrologist with the center, said of the basin’s snowpack during a briefing on the forecast Friday.

Already, federal officials predict water levels could fall so low at Lake Powell by August that water will no longer flow through the intake tubes for Glen Canyon Dam’s hydroelectric turbines. Lake Powell at the beginning of March was 24% full, while Mead — which is in Nevada and Arizona — was 34% full. Much of the Colorado River’s water begins as snow in Colorado’s mountains, which have been plagued by record-low snowfall this winter. The Colorado River headwaters’ snowpack sat at 66% of the median for this time of year on Monday — the lowest recorded level since measurements began in 1986.

“The Colorado headwaters are the worst this water year; they’re well below normal,” Moser said, noting that many winter storms missed the area.

Assessing the U.S. Temperature and Precipitation Analysis in February 2026 — NOAA

Click the link to read the analysis on the NOAA website:

March 9, 2026

Key Points:

February was the fourth warmest and fifth driest on record for the contiguous U.S. (CONUS) in the 132-year record.

Winter (December 2024–February 2025) ranked as the second warmest for the CONUS and was the driest in 45 years.

Arizona, New Mexico and Utah each broke their previous warmest-winter record by more than 2°F.

A historic “bomb cyclone” during Feb 22–24 brought blizzard conditions, hurricane-force wind gusts and heavy snowfall from the Mid-Atlantic to New England.

Alaska saw a particularly cold winter, recording much-below-average temperatures across parts of the central Interior.

Drought conditions expanded by more than 10% in February to cover more than half of the CONUS.

Map of the U.S. notable weather and climate events in February 2026.

Other Highlights:

Temperature

The CONUS average temperature during February was 40.4°F, 6.6°F above the 20th-century average. Extensive portions of the country west of the Mississippi River experienced much-above-average temperatures, while portions of the eastern seaboard observed below-average temperatures that ranked in the lowest third of their historical records. Seven states experienced one of their two warmest Februaries on record, including Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and Oklahoma, which each set new statewide records.

February 2026 U.S. Mean Temperature Percentiles Map.

The CONUS average temperature for meteorological winter (December–February) was 37.1°F, 4.9°F above the 20th-century average, ranking as the second-warmest winter in the 131-year record. Based on average temperatures across NOAA climate regions, the West and Southwest each experienced their warmest winter on record, while the Northwest, Northern Rockies and Plains as well as the South each ranked second warmest. In contrast, the Northeast climate region was cooler than average, ranking in the lowest third of its historical record.

Nine states recorded their warmest winter on record, with an additional five experiencing their second warmest. Daytime high temperatures were particularly notable, with the CONUS averaging 48.3°F—5.6°F above average—marking the warmest winter for daytime highs in the 131-year record and the first time the seasonal average exceeded 48°F. Eleven states also recorded their warmest winter for average maximum temperatures. At the county level, 585 counties—home to more than 116 million people, or roughly one-third of the U.S. population—experienced their warmest winter on record for daytime highs. Illustrating this exceptional warmth, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport recorded 16 days with maximum temperatures of at least 80°F, the highest seasonal total on record (since 1898) and about 60% above the previous record set in 2016–17.

Despite the widespread warmth, eight states stretching from Ohio to Massachusetts experienced below-average winter temperatures that ranked in the lowest third of their records.

The Alaska statewide temperature in February was 4.0°F, 0.8°F below the 1925–2000 average and ranked in the middle third of the 102-year period of record for the state. Much of mainland Alaska had below-average temperatures, contrasting with above-average conditions in southeast Alaska, the Aleutians and the lower Alaska Peninsula. Alaska’s average temperature for winter was 0.8°F, 2.8°F below the 1925–2000 average, ranking in the coolest third of the record. Much of the Alaska Interior recorded below- to much-below-average temperatures for the season, with Fairbanks Airport recording its coldest winter since 1970–71.

The Hawaiʻi statewide average temperature during February was 63.2°F, 0.2°F above the 1991–2020 average, ranking in the middle third of the 36-year record. For winter as a whole, the statewide average temperature was 64.4°F, 0.7°F above average, placing it in the warmest third of the record.

Precipitation

February precipitation for the CONUS was 1.37 inches, 0.76 inch below the 20th-century average and the driest since 2002. Significant precipitation deficits stretched from the northern Rockies and central Plains through the Midwest, Ohio Valley and Northeast, and from parts of the Southwest and southern Plains across much of the Deep South and Southeast. In total, 11 states recorded one of their 10 lowest February precipitation totals, including Mississippi, which broke its 1947 record receiving less than 30 percent of its average February precipitation. In contrast, above-average precipitation was largely confined to a narrow corridor from the northern Plains into the Upper Great Lakes, with isolated areas across parts of the West and Northwest.

February 2026 U.S. Total Precipitation Percentiles.

A historic blizzard on February 22–24 brought heavy snowfall and hurricane-force winds to portions of the Northeast. Providence, RI, reported its largest snowstorm on record, while several other cities recorded February totals not seen in more than a decade. The storm was classified as a major snowstorm based on NOAA’s Regional Snowfall Index (RSI), which estimates that snowfall affected more than 115 million people—about one-third of the U.S. population—including about 28 million people who received over a foot.

The CONUS received an average of 4.95 inches of precipitation during winter, 1.84 inches below the 20th-century average, ranking as the fifth-driest winter in the 131-year record. Large portions of the central and eastern U.S. experienced much-below-average precipitation—18 states recorded one of their 10 driest winters on record—while much of the western U.S. had near-average totals. A notable exception was Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, which received much-above-average to record winter precipitation.

Alaska’s average monthly precipitation in February ranked in the middle third of the 102-year period of record. For winter as a whole, precipitation across Alaska was also near average.

The Hawaiʻi statewide precipitation total during February was 8.11 inches, 3.01 inches above the 1991–2020 average, ranking in the wettest third of the 36-year record. Several records were set during the month as powerful Kona Lows delivered extreme rainfall, including over 25 inches in a single day on Oahu and a 72-hour total surpassing 30 inches on the Big Island. For winter as a whole, the statewide precipitation total was 16.22 inches, 0.33 inch below the 1991–2020 average, placing it in the middle third of the record.

Drought

According to the March 3 U.S. Drought Monitor report, about 54.9% of the CONUS was in drought, an increase of about 10.4% from the beginning of February. Drought persisted across much of the Rockies and the eastern seaboard and expanded or intensified across portions of the northern Rockies, Plains, Mississippi Valley, South and Southeast.

Monthly Report

Most of the CONUS is favored to see above-average temperatures in March, with the highest probabilities (exceeding 60–70%) centered over the South and Southeast, while Alaska is forecast to experience below-average temperatures, particularly in the Alaska Interior. Above-average precipitation is likely for a broad swath extending from the southern Plains through the Mississippi Valley and into the Great Lakes. Drier-than-average conditions are favored for much of California and Florida. Visit the Climate Prediction Center’s Official 30-Day Forecasts for more details.

Drought is expected to persist across much of the interior West, Southwest and High Plains, along with the eastern seaboard. However, significant improvement or drought removal is forecast for parts of the Southern Plains, across much of the Mississippi Valley and Hawaiʻi. Visit the U.S. Monthly Drought Outlook website for more details.

Significant wildland fire potential is above average across a wide region including the southern Plains, the Gulf Coast and the Southeast, extending northward into Virginia. For additional information on wildland fire potential, visit the National Interagency Fire Center’s One-Month Wildland Fire Outlook.

For more detailed climate information, check out our comprehensive February 2026 U.S. Climate Report scheduled for release on March 12, 2026. For additional information on the statistics provided here, visit the Climate at a Glance and National Maps webpages.

#ColoradoRiver outlook ‘not a pretty picture’ after warm, dry winter — AZCentral.com

Click the link to read the article on the AZCentral website (Brandon Loomis). Here’s an excerpt:

March 7, 2026

Key Points

A warm, dry winter has resulted in a disappointing snowpack across the intermountain West, affecting the Colorado River’s water supply.

Projected inflow to Lake Powell is at a near-historic low, complicating efforts to manage water shortages among states.

Arizona’s local water supplies, on the Salt and Verde rivers, are in better condition than last year, though still below average.

The federal government’s Colorado Basin River Forecast Center’s March report noted much of the drainage, especially in the mountains of Colorado and Utah, had experienced their worst snowpack since at least 1981. When meteorological winter ended on March 1, both Phoenix and Salt Lake City had broken records for maximum mean winter temperatures by 2 degrees Fahrenheit. The warmth that pervaded the West had melted much of the existing snowpack or caused it to fall as rain instead, encouraging evaporation and plant uptake and reducing the amount that will reach reservoirs this spring and summer.

“It’s not a pretty picture here,” forecast center hydrologist Cody Moser said while reviewing a color-coded watershed map emblazoned with red to indicate vast areas projected to deliver relatively little runoff.

The result, as of early March, was a projected Colorado River inflow to the critical storage pool in Lake Powell of just 2.3 million acre-feet, or 36% of the 1991-2020 average. If that projection holds up, it would be the lowest April-July boost for Lake Powell since the disastrous year of 2002 firmly entrenched this age of megadrought...This profound snow drought comes at an especially awkward time, compounding a quarter-century of regional aridification that has drained the nation’s two largest reservoirs to precarious depths. Lake Powell started March at just 24% of capacity, with much of that water functionally unavailable to flow downstream to Lake Mead and the Southwest because it’s below Glen Canyon Dam’s hydropower and bypass intakes. Lake Mead began the month at 34% of capacity. Both began this century essentially full. The lack of storage complicates the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s efforts to adopt new dam-operating and shortage-sharing guidelines without triggering a lawsuit from states and water users. Unless they do that by October, the current rules imposing cutbacks on Arizona and others will lapse, potentially worsening the shortage. Yet Arizona has panned the options that the agency initially studied because, officials say, they unfairly target the state for bigger losses while not enforcing the Colorado River Compact’s call for upstream states to let a minimum amount of water pass through.

#Snowpack news March 9, 2026

Colorado snowpack basin-filled map March 8, 2026.

#Colorado, upper basin entities call for ‘durable,’ supply-driven management of #ColoradoRiver in federal comment period — Sky-Hi News #COriver #aridification

Coyote Gulch’s Leaf in Byers Canyon, cut by the Colorado River, on the way to Steamboat Springs August 21, 2017.

Click the link to read the article on the Sky-Hi News website (Ali Longwell). Here’s an excerpt:

March 8, 2026

The state of Colorado, Upper Colorado River Commission, the Colorado River Water Conservation District, the Southwestern Water Conservation District and several Front Range water providers were among those that submitted comments, asking for the Bureau to finalize an agreement that legally fulfills all water rights while making bold and sustainable changes that align with the hydrologic reality of the river.

“The Colorado River has changed dramatically over the last two decades, and our operating rules need to change with it,” said Becky Mitchell, Colorado’s water commissioner and lead negotiator in the post-2026 operations, in a statement. “The current rules have not done enough to protect Lake Powell and Lake Mead, and it’s clear that a future management framework must better respond to today’s reality. Colorado’s comments provide constructive, legally grounded recommendations to bring the system into balance.”

[…]

Since the reservoirs’ current operational guidelines were set in 2007, the Colorado River Basin has experienced deepening drought conditions, declining inflows to the reservoirs and shrinking storage in Powell and Mead. As of March 1, Lake Powell and Lake Mead were 25% and 34% full, respectively. As the upper and lower basin states sought to reach a consensus on the post-2026 guidelines for the reservoirs, disagreements were rooted in where cuts needed to be made to deal with these worsening conditions. Through the deadline for consensus, the Lower Basin states offered up some cuts and pushed for basin-wide water use reductions. The Upper Basin states, however, have pushed back, claiming they already face natural water shortages driven primarily by the ups and downs of snowpack. In February, the upper division said this winter’s critically low snowpack will result in natural reductions “greater than 40% of the proven water rights” across the four states. In the draft, the Bureau recognizes that with “critically low storage in Lake Powell and Lake Mead, significant hydrologic variability and the anticipation of drier future conditions,” an agreement must strike a balance between “potentially profound impacts of water-delivery reductions” and “the need to maintain reservoir storage.”

The latest Upper Colorado River Commission and Colorado comments to the Bureau of Reclamation called on the federal agency to root the post-2026 guidelines on what the river actually supplies. In its comment, the state of Colorado said that the “failures of the current set of guidelines developed in 2007 have driven the current crisis on the Colorado River.”

“We can no longer rely on the management strategies of the past to solve the challenges of the present and future,” said Lauren Ris, director of Colorado’s Water Conservation Board.

Coyote Gulch’s excellent EV adventure: 2026 #MonteVista Crane Festival

Sandhill Cranes just before sunrise March 8, 2026, Sange de Cristo Mountains in the distance.

We woke up to clear skies and very cold temperatures (6°F) for Sandhill crane viewing on March 8, 2026. The Sandhills spend the night on the ground, usually in shallow water as they do not perch, and then start stirring and looking for a good breakfast spot like the field in the foreground in the photo above.

Video of Sandhill cranes in the early morning on March 8, 2026, San Juan mountains in the background. Sound up!

Charging during the festival was easy as pie at the Colorado Welcome Center in Alamosa. For the trip home I charged in Salida (excellent food at Mojo’s Eatery) and Bailey. Charging to and from the San Luis Valley from Denver is convenient and reliable. There is no reason any longer in Colorado to drive a vehicle with a tailpipe and pollute the atmosphere.

Here’s a writeup from The Alamosa Citizen:

Monte Vista saw big crowds for the 43rd annual Crane Festival. The Outcalt Event and Conference at Ski Hi Complex was teeming with people participating in the crane tours and nature work sessions. The retail vendors reported healthy sales. The sandhill cranes themselves didn’t disappoint. The majestic long-legged creatures were in the tens of thousands in the fields around the Monte Vista Wildlife Refuge. The cranes will stick around a bit longer.

Video of Sandhill cranes at breakfast. After flying around looking for breakfast great numbers of Sandhills settle down for breakfast March 8, 2026. Sound up!

“A different way of managing water in the west”

by Robert Marcos

Even though the San Diego County Water Authority’s MOU has proposed an initial water transfer of only 10,000 acre feet annually, General Manager Dan Denham said the agreement, (if approved by other agencies), could clear the way for the first-ever interstate transfers of Colorado River water starting next year. He said, “It’s just a different way of managing water in the West”.¹

Claude "Bud" Lewis Carlsbad Desalination Plant — The Claude “Bud” Lewis Desalination Plant in Carlsbad, California. Photo by Robert Marcos

California Govenor Gavin Newsom has supported the idea, telling governors of the other six states in a recent letter that California would welcome joint investments in water recycling and desalination. Denham said Scott Cameron – the Trump administration’s acting head of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, also supports the idea.²

The laws which forbid or limit the transfer of water across state or county lines originated in the early 20th century as states sought to protect their local resources from being diverted to rapidly growing urban centers. The Colorado River Compact of 1922 was a landmark agreement that effectively “locked” water within specific basins to prevent faster-growing states like California from claiming the entire river under the “prior appropriation” (first-come, first-served) doctrine.

But the San Diego County Water Authority, Arizona Department of Water Resources, the Central Arizona Water Conservation District, and the Southern Nevada Water Authority, are exploring a strategy that could bypass these legal barriers to interstate water transfers by using “paper water” transfers rather than physically moving desalinated water across state lines.³

While this method avoids the physical impossibility of moving ocean water to the desert, it still requires federal approval from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and from existing rights holders like the Imperial Irrigation District and the Metropolitan Water District which will have to ensure that these transfers do not negatively impact their own legal entitlements.

The March 1, 2026 #Colorado Water Supply Outlook Report is hot off the presses from the NRCS

Click the link to read the report on the NRCS website (and to visit the data for the individual basins). Here’s an excerpt:

February Storms Brought Needed Snow, but Early Warmth Limits Seasonal Recovery — NRCS #snowpack #runoff

Click the link to read the release on the NRCS website:

March 6, 2026

February storms increased Colorado’s snowpack from 53 to 60 percent of median. Warm early season conditions and limited snowfall from November through January slowed seasonal accumulation, leaving runoff forecasts below normal entering March.

Statewide snow water equivalent (SWE) improved during February following multiple storm systems, increasing seasonal accumulation from 53 percent of the 1991-2020 median earlier in the month to 60 percent of median by month’s end. Climatologically, February contributes about 17 percent of total seasonal SWE, while March contributes approximately 16 percent, together accounting for roughly one-third of the seasonal snowpack buildup. March and April typically represent the final opportunity for material snowpack recovery prior to the onset of melt. Median March accumulation is 3.015 inches, meaning a near normal March alone would not bring snowpack back to median levels.

Through February, 82 percent of median precipitation has produced only 62 percent of median SWE, reflecting a lower-than-normal conversion of precipitation into stored mountain snowpack. Much of this divergence occurred early in the water year. Historical median October SWE accumulation is approximately 1.27 inches statewide, while water year 2026 accumulated only 0.39 inches despite receiving 3.46 inches of precipitation. This corresponds to roughly about a 1:9 precipitation to SWE ratio. Early season rainfall, particularly in October within the San Miguel-Dolores-Animas-San Juan (SMDASJ) basins, generated immediate runoff contributions rather than delayed meltwater. The approximately 12-foot rise at Navajo Reservoir reflects this front-loaded response. While beneficial for near term storage conditions, such inflows do not provide the sustained release characteristics of snowmelt driven hydrographs. As a result, reservoir storage metrics may appear relatively stable in aggregate (87 percent of median statewide), yet the underlying water supply outlook remains sensitive to late season snow accumulation.

Figure 1. Colorado basin level April-July streamflow forecasts at the 50 percent exceedance probability as of March 1, 2026.

Basin level streamflow forecasts reflect the limited hydrologic response to February storms (Figure 1). While February produced the largest monthly additions to snowpack this season, those accumulations were not sufficient to offset November – January shortfalls. As a result, forecast improvements were modest and uneven across the state. At the 50 percent exceedance probability, the statewide median April-July forecast is 58 percent of median. Most basins experienced downward adjustments between the February 1 and March 1 forecasts, including the Colorado Headwaters (58 to 56 percent), Gunnison (64 to 60 percent), Upper Rio Grande (60 to 56 percent), and Arkansas (63 to 57 percent). The South Platte continues to track higher than the rest of the state and remains at 76 percent of median. In contrast, the Laramie-North Platte basin remains the most constrained with runoff projections at 51 percent of median. Taken together outlooks indicate that February snowfall moderated forecast declines but did not materially shift the statewide water supply outlook. Without sustained accumulation through March and April, forecasts are likely to remain below typical levels for the 2026 water year. In southern basins such as the SMDASJ and URG, a meaningful portion of annual precipitation also occurs during the North American monsoon. Historical distributions show that roughly 30 percent of annual precipitation falls between June and September and contribute to late season reservoir inflows but typically arrives after the primary snowmelt driven irrigation demand period.

Another consideration is soil moisture antecedent conditions. Early rainfall events partially recharged upper soil profiles in southern basins. However, if late season snowfall remains limited, runoff efficiency during melt could decline as soils absorb a portion of the initial meltwater. Conversely, where soils are near saturation, a rapid melt scenario under warm spring conditions could compress the runoff window and increase short duration flow peaks while limiting volume. The timing and persistence of cold conditions through March will therefore influence both peak SWE and runoff shape.

* San Miguel-Dolores-Animas-San Juan River basin

* *For more detailed information about mountain snowpack refer to the Colorado Water Supply Outlook Report. For the most up to date information about Colorado snowpack and water supply related information, refer to the Colorado Snow Survey website.

#PagosaSprings looks at engaging in engineering contract for new #wastewater treatment facility: To explore declaring state of emergency for sewer — The Pagosa Springs Sun

Click the link to read the article on the Pagosa Springs Sun website (Derek Kutzer)

On March 3, 2026, the Pagosa Springs Town Council, which also sits as the board of the Pagosa Springs Sanitation General Improvement District (PSSGID), gave town staff direction to continue in its current relationship with Roaring Fork Engineering, while also engaging in a new separate contract to design and build a new wastewater treatment facility plant downtown. The council also gave town staff direction to explore the possibility of declaring its sewer system “a state of emergency.”

[…]

Roaring Fork has identified four major project goals for the downtown treatment facility:

Design a wastewater treatment facility which can serve the entire town population, including the ability for future expansion for either acceptance of a larger service area or PAWSD sewage.

The wastewater treatment facility should be a community-centric facility, which includes the ability for students and community members, to interact with the site safely and learn more about wastewater treatment and operations.

The building should be LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified, integrate into the natural landscape (green roof ), include renewable energy when possible and be designed by a local architect who understands the community’s infrastructure.

The treatment processes should be progressive, forward-thinking and regulatory resilient, energy-efficient, and long-term sustainable for a small community to operate. This shall include the ability to treat wastewater to nonpotable reuse standards for localized irrigation on properties nearby.

Coyote Gulch’s excellent EV adventure: 2026 #MonteVista Crane Festival

David Robbins at the 2026 Monte Vista Crane Festival.

Nothing like a water rights talk from David Robbins! This is the first time, in many trips to view the cranes, that I’ve run into someone I know. Woo hoo, water law! He took us from the Articles of Confederation to the Rio Grande compact and explained how well it works because Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas all share in shortages. Here’s the blurb from the Crane folks:

Drawing on decades at the forefront of Colorado water law and policy, David Robbins offers a clear-eyed look at how water is governed, protected, and contested in the West. This session explores the legal frameworks that shape rivers, aquifers, and instream flows — and why these decisions matter for ecosystems, agriculture, communities, and wildlife across the San Luis Valley and beyond.

Could Colorado River “conservation pools” provide a path out of deadlock? — Shannon Mullane (Fresh Water News) #COriver #aridification

A high desert thunderstorm lights up the sky behind Glen Canyon Dam — Photo USBR

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Shannon Mullane):

March 5, 2026

With little progress in the Colorado River negotiations, some water experts are looking to a conservation program — featuring pools of invisible water and some accounting magic — as a possible path forward.

The seven Colorado River states, including Colorado, remain deeply divided over how to manage the nation’s largest reservoirs, lakes Mead and Powell, after the current management rules expire this fall. But other water users have put forward several innovative ideas for how to manage the water supply for 40 million people after 2026 as the basin’s two-decade drought continues.

One idea, known as a conservation pool, is generating a lot of conversation. Some water experts say it’s the wave of the future. A path toward, finally, some agreement among basin states.

Others say it’s a flawed concept that could hurt economies, especially in rural, agricultural areas.

“They hold great promise. They do incentivize conservation. They do create tremendous operational flexibility,” said Kathryn Sorensen, director of research at Arizona State University’s Kyl Center for Water Policy. “I think people want to see them go forward. They just also know that there’s some things that need to be fixed.”

Under a conservation pool program, water users in Colorado River states would cut back on water use, track the saved water, store it in Lake Powell on the Utah-Arizona border and/or Lake Mead on the Arizona-Nevada border, and use it to help create a more secure water supply in the river basin.

Colorado River officials are worried about the state of the basin. The river’s average flow has declined, and scientists have attributed 10 trillion gallons in water loss to higher temperatures and climate change. Lakes Mead and Powell, which together make up about 92% of the reservoir storage capacity for the entire basin, are each around one-third full.

A pool of conserved water in Lake Mead and Lake Powell could help maintain higher water levels in the reservoirs and defer drastic cuts, Stephen Roe Lewis, governor of the Gila River Indian Community in Arizona, said during an early February meeting.

It could help bring the two subbasins — the Upper Basin and the Lower Basin — closer together in their negotiations, he said.

“In our view, it offers really the only path forward that we can see that addresses the core challenge of risk each basin is facing, and provides a shared tool to manage uncertainty … in the years ahead,” Lewis said.

So how would it work?

There are lingering questions around who can participate in such a program, who would control the pool, how (and whether) people would be paid to conserve, and how the water would be used.

In Colorado, the conservation pool idea would likely start with a water user, say, for example, a farmer who grows hay near Kremmling on the Western Slope.

Colorado River water users, like farmers and ranchers, have legal rights to use water for specific purposes, at certain times and from certain places. The legal water-sharing system, called prior appropriation, gives older, more senior, rights priority. In dry years, these senior rights get water first, while more recent, or junior, rights holders might get cut off earlier than usual.

This system, however, doesn’t incentivize conservation, Sorensen said. But conservation pools would change that.

The Kremmling farmer might normally divert 5 acre-feet of water each summer, sending it through rotating sprinklers to saturate soils and grow crops.

One acre-foot is enough to cover an acre of cropland a foot deep, or roughly the annual water use of two to three urban households.

When that farmer joins a conservation program, he or she might decide to cut their use down to 3 acre-feet one summer by not growing crops on certain fields.

The difference, 2 acre-feet, would be “conserved” water, but where does it go? Under the current water-sharing system, it would simply flow downstream, and any downstream farmer could use it on their fields.

This was one of the inherent problems in the Upper Basin’s recent pilot conservation program. In 2023, Colorado farmers and ranchers received almost $1 million to cut their use by about 2,000 acre-feet. In 2024, the estimated cuts totaled about 14,200 acre-feet and the cost was about $7 million.

Under a conservation pool program, Colorado farmers could rest assured that their conserved water would actually end up in Lake Powell.

The problem is that Upper Basin states don’t actually have ways to track that water — yet.

To reach Lake Powell, Colorado and its sister states would need to be able to shepherd conserved water past headgate after headgate, through different water districts and divisions — each with their own systems for managing water — and across state lines before it would reach Lake Powell.

“There are challenges for sure,” said John Berggren, regional policy manager for the healthy rivers department at Western Resource Advocates. “But you can overcome those challenges, and there’s a broader need to, which is to actually stay out of the courts and have an agreement.”

Once water reaches Powell, different groups want it to be used for different purposes. The Colorado River District, for example, says they will only support the idea if the water protects Upper Basin states from forced water cuts that could happen under water law if the basin’s supply falls to extreme lows.

“We do think a conservation program in the Upper Basin could be part of the solution and part of our future, but these programs should be designed and implemented in a thoughtful manner that minimizes and mitigates negative impacts,” said Raquel Flinker, the district’s director of interstate and regional water resources.

Berggren and other environmental groups are pushing for conservation pool water to be used to help Colorado River ecosystems in the Grand Canyon. The dam impacts sediment flow and water temperatures downstream from Lake Powell, which helps non-native fish species thrive and outcompete native fish.

The Bureau of Reclamation could take to their computers and “move” conserved water between Lake Mead and Lake Powell in the accounting books to make more of those releases, he said.

The art of invisible water

Many of the conservation pool ideas aim to keep the water “invisible” when the Bureau of Reclamation decides how much water to release from each massive reservoir.

The conserved water would physically be in a reservoir to keep the water levels from falling too low. At certain elevations, the dams can’t generate electricity or release water for millions of people across the West.

But when Reclamation officials look at the water accounting records, they would ignore the conserved water when calculating how much water to release and what kind of water shortages the basin states could face in dry years.

This approach would address one of the critical flaws in a similar program that has been happening in the Lower Basin since 2007, experts said.

That Intentionally Created Surplus program allows water users in Arizona, California and Nevada to cut their use and keep the water in Lake Mead to be used at a later date. In some cases, they can even divert water from other watersheds and import it into the reservoir, Sorensen said.

One of the biggest flaws of the Lower Basin program was that it artificially kept the physical water levels at Lake Mead higher than they would have otherwise been. Water levels have dictated Lower Basin shortages for the past 20 years, and the higher levels insulated the states from deeper water cutbacks, which delayed steps to adapt to the overstressed water supply in the basin.

The new conservation pools would try to correct this and expand the effort. Upper Basin, Lower Basin and tribal water users could also conserve water and use that water to help flows in rivers, protect infrastructure, and many other uses, Berggren said.

“That’s new. We didn’t have that ability before. That’s why it’s innovative,” he said.

The wave of the future?

The Department of the Interior in January laid out five options for managing the river. Three included some form of a conservation pool.

“Conservation pools are the way of the future for the Colorado River Basin,” Berggren said. “They allow for so much more flexibility in managing our reservoirs, managing our water. You’re able to respond to changing conditions quicker.”

Not everyone agrees. The Colorado River District said conserving up to 500,000 acre-feet of water in Colorado and other Upper Basin states, which is proposed in the federal options, would shrink agricultural land use and require water cuts in cities and towns.

“Conservation at this scale would have significant and potentially permanent adverse consequences, including economic impacts to communities,” Flinker of the Colorado River District said.

But — and this is a big caveat — the conservation pool concept cannot move forward without support from all of the basin states.

To set up a conservation pool program, states would need to launch new water-tracking systems. Someone would have to compensate the people conserving water. The way federal officials track, store and release water in the immense reservoirs would change.

And under its current legal authority, the federal government cannot move forward with conservation pools without risking expensive lawsuits that would tie up water management for years. But with a seven-state agreement, the feds could take action.

Arizona and Colorado, which often find themselves on opposite sides of Colorado River discussions, are open to the conservation pool idea.

The concept has merit, Tom Buschatzke, Arizona’s top water negotiator, said during an Arizona Reconsultation Committee meeting Feb. 2.

It is “something we should continue to pursue because I do believe that just formulaic attempts to deal with how you split up the water have been failing us so far,” he said.

Colorado and its sister states in the Upper Basin — New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming — have been consistently willing to do a conservation program that involves saving water in a pool within Lake Powell and potentially other upstream reservoirs, Becky Mitchell, Colorado’s top negotiator said.

“The particulars of the program and potential pool would depend upon the operational framework and/or other components of a seven-state consensus,” she said.

More by Shannon Mullane

Coyote Gulch’s excellent EV adventure: 2026 #MonteVista Crane Festival

Looking north from the Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge as the Sandhill cranes are flying in for their breakfast. (Sunrise March 6, 2026.)

I’m in the San Luis Valley for the 2026 Monte Vista Crane Festival. The Sandhills were very active this morning off Road 8S in the Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge.

I charged in Pueblo and Cañon City on the way here. It is a breeze charging between Denver and Alamosa, even if you need a CHAdeMO connector like my Nissan Leaf. (Posting will be intermittent this weekend because the Wi-Fi signal in my hotel room is very weak. I posted this from the hotel lobby.)

Sandhill cranes Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge March 6, 2026.

San Diego County Water Authority proposes water transfer to Arizona & Nevada

Read the full press release

Posted by by Robert Marcos, photojournalist

The San Diego County Water Authority’s Board of Directors today unanimously approved a landmark agreement to explore an interstate water transfer and exchange pilot program with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, and agencies in Nevada and Arizona.,

The memorandum of understanding (MOU) – which still needs to be ratified by the other agencies – creates a pathway that could eventually allow the Water Authority to “move” water from the nation’s largest seawater desalination plant in Carlsbad to areas in the drought-ravaged Colorado River Basin that need more water. If successfully developed, this would create the first program to transfer water across state lines within the basin.

Such a program could help reduce water costs for working families in San Diego County by optimizing the region’s investments in reliability. Water purchases from the Claude “Bud” Lewis Carlsbad Desalination Plant would generate new revenues and offset costs for residents, improving regional water affordability.

“This agreement could be a gamechanger for San Diego County and the entire Southwest because it creates the possibility of a new, collaborative path for moving water where it’s needed most while keeping reliability and affordability at the center for ratepayers,” said Water Authority Board Chair Nick Serrano. “Leveraging existing resources like our Carlsbad desalination plant in this moment simply makes sense for everyone.”

Water transfers or exchanges would occur “on paper,” meaning agencies would access supplies through existing infrastructure and avoid costly new infrastructure.

The demand is clear: In recent years, agencies in Arizona and Nevada have sought ways to tap the Pacific Ocean, but the costs of construction are prohibitive. The Arizona Department of Water Resources, Central Arizona Water Conservation District and Southern Nevada Water Authority are part of the new MOU.

For more than 20 years, the seven states in the Colorado River Basin have wrestled with drought conditions that have created growing imbalances between water supplies and demands. As the Bureau of Reclamation, Basin States, Mexico, and tribal nations consider new operating guidelines for the river, new management strategies and interstate partnerships are increasingly critical.

Over roughly the same period, the Water Authority has invested $3 billion in water reliability efforts, including the Carlsbad plant, which produces up to 54 million gallons per day. Additionally, the 2003 Colorado River Quantification Settlement Agreement – which generates conserved water in the Imperial Valley – and hard-wired conservation in the San Diego region have positioned the Water Authority to not only meet the region’s needs but also provide relief to other areas.

“Next-generation strategies must include interstate partnerships that deliver water where it’s needed most,” said Water Authority General Manager Dan Denham. “We appreciate the collaboration with the Bureau of Reclamation, Metropolitan Water District, Arizona and Nevada. New ideas are challenging to implement, but it’s in everyone’s best interest to make this work.”

Climate Change is altering rainfall’s chemistry

by Robert Marcos, photojournalist

Climate change is altering the chemical makeup of rainfall. It’s increased the concentration of dissolved carbon dioxide which makes rainfall more acidic¹. At the same time it has shifted the levels of atmospheric pollutants that wash out when it rains. This changing chemistry is a problem because it alters how water interacts with soils, plants, aquatic systems, infrastructure, and even the atmosphere itself. Increased acidity in rainfall acts as a chemical catalyst that destabilizes both terrestrial and aquatic environments through the following mechanisms²

Nutrient Leaching: Acidic rain strips the soil of essential buffering minerals and nutrients—such as calcium, magnesium, and potassium—which are vital for plant cell structure and growth.
Heavy Metal Mobilization: As soil pH drops, naturally occurring but normally stable metals like aluminum become soluble. This “mobile” aluminum is toxic to plants, damaging root systems and preventing them from absorbing water.
Microbial Disruption: Many beneficial soil bacteria and fungi are sensitive to pH changes. Increased acidity can suppress the microbial activity responsible for decomposition and nitrogen fixation, ultimately reducing soil fertility.
Biological Stress and Mortality: Many aquatic species have narrow tolerance ranges. At a pH of 5.0, most fish eggs cannot hatch, and lower levels can lead to the death of adult fish, amphibians, and insects like mayflies.
Gill Damage: Soluble aluminum leached from nearby soil enters waterways and clogs the gills of fish. This impairs their osmoregulation and ability to breathe, often serving as the primary cause of fish kills in acidified lakes.
Food Web Collapse: The loss of acid-sensitive “base” species, such as certain plankton and invertebrates, triggers a cascade effect that starves larger predators and simplifies the entire ecosystem.

Effects on Agricultural Production

The chemical and physical shifts in rainfall are fundamentally destabilizing the economic foundations of global food systems³.

Declining Crop Productivity: For every 1°C of warming, global yields of major staples are projected to decline significantly: maize by 7.4%, wheat by 6.0%, and rice by 3.2%.
Nutritional Degradation: Increased atmospheric and altered soil chemistry reduce the concentrations of protein and essential minerals like zinc and iron in crops like wheat and soybeans.
Increased Costs: Farmers must spend more on lime to neutralize soil acidity and additional fertilizers to replace leached nutrients like calcium and magnesium.
Direct Foliar Damage: Acidic rain erodes the waxy cuticle of leaves, making plants more vulnerable to dehydration, pests, and diseases.

Impacts on Commercial Fishing

Marine fisheries and seafood industries, which supported $319 billion in sales in 2023, face major disruptions as fish stocks move toward cooler poles or become less productive⁴.

Catch Potential Losses: Tropical regions are predicted to see declines of up to 40% in potential seafood catch by 2050 due to warming and acidification.
Shellfish Vulnerability: Ocean and coastal acidification (exacerbated by acidic runoff) hinder calcification, weakening the shells of oysters, clams, and scallops. This is estimated to cause consumer losses of $480 million per year by the end of the century.
Ecosystem Collapse: Acidified freshwater and marine environments disrupt reproductive cycles; for instance, at a pH of 5, most fish eggs cannot hatch, leading to the collapse of local populations and the industries that rely on them.

Impacts on Water Infrastructure

More acidic rainfall significantly deteriorates water infrastructure by accelerating the chemical breakdown of both metallic and cement-based materials. When rainwater’s pH drops—oftenhttps://www.gov.nl.ca/eccc/files/waterres-reports-drinking-water-study-on-ph-adjustment-systems-task-7-study-report.pdf due to sulfuric and nitric acids—it becomes highly corrosive, leading to structural damage and water quality issues. Acidic water targets the internal and external surfaces of the pipes that transport water.⁵

Chemical Dissolution: Acidic rain reacts with the calcium carbonate and calcium hydroxide in concrete, dissolving these components and leaving the structure porous and weak.
Structural Failure: As the concrete matrix dissolves, the protective layer around steel reinforcements (rebar) can fail. Corroding steel expands up to six times its size, creating internal pressure that cracks the surrounding concrete.
Surface Erosion: Prolonged exposure causes surface “spalling” or peeling, exposing coarse aggregates and increasing maintenance costs for bridges, dams, and treatment basins.

Challenges for Water Treatment

Water treatment facilities must expend more resources to manage increasingly acidic sources of water.
Increased Neutralization Costs: Facilities must add more alkaline substances, such as caustic soda or soda ash, to raise the pH to a non-corrosive range (typically 6.5 to 8.5).
Disinfection Interference: Efficient chlorination is more difficult in water that is too acidic or too basic, potentially requiring higher chemical doses to ensure safety.
Contaminant Mobilization: Acid rain leaches aluminum and other minerals from the surrounding soil into reservoirs, requiring more complex filtration to remove these additional contaminants.⁶

#Drought news February 5, 2026: As of March 3, snow water equivalent is less than 70 percent of normal across the Central Rockies, less than 50% in the Four Corners region #snowpack

Click on a thumbnail graphic to view a gallery of drought data from the US Drought Monitor website.

Click the link to go to the US Drought Monitor website. Here’s an excerpt:

This Week’s Drought Summary

Since the beginning of December 2025, drought expanded and intensified across the Lower Mississippi Valley and Southern Great Plains which is typical during a La Nina winter. Much needed precipitation at the end of February led to small improvements across parts of the Southeast and also at least briefly stabilized the drought status for this region. Widespread severe to extreme drought is designated for much of the Carolinas, Georgia, southeastern Alabama, and Florida. A longer-term drought continues to affect the Mid-Atlantic and portions of the Northeast. The unusually dry winter persisted across the Midwest through the end of February with additional degradations made this past week. These worsening drought conditions extend west to the Central Great Plains along with the Central to Northern Rockies. Below-normal snowpack remains a major concern for the West heading into the spring. Drought coverage decreased in Hawaii during the past few weeks, while Alaska and Puerto Rico remained drought-free…

High Plains

Although late winter is a relatively dry time of year across the Central Great Plains, periods of unseasonably warm temperatures and enhanced winds this past month led to intensifying drought across northeastern Colorado and Nebraska. 30-day temperatures averaged 6 to 10 degrees F above normal throughout the Great Plains. A 1-category degradation was made this past week to parts of Kansas and South Dakota. Widespread drought of varying intensity remains designated for much of Colorado and Wyoming. As of March 3, snow water equivalent is less than 70 percent of normal across the Central Rockies…

Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending March 3, 2026.

West

Water-year-to-date precipitation (October 1, 2025 to March 2, 2026) averaged below-normal for the Great Basin which led to a slight increase in moderate (D1) coverage across northeastern Nevada this past week. Following a drier- and warmer-than-normal February, a 1-category degradation was also made to parts of Montana. A 1-category degradation was also warranted for parts of Idaho, reflecting the below-normal precipitation and low snowpack this past winter. Even for areas of the West that have received above-normal precipitation since the beginning of October 1 such as the Northern Intermountain West and Northern Cascades of Washington, snow water equivalent (SWE) is running below normal. The low snowpack throughout much of the West is a major concern heading into the spring. As of March 3, SWE is less than 50 percent of normal from the Cascades of the Pacific Northwest southward through the Great Basin and Four Corners region. Although California remains drought-free, SWE is 59 percent of normal statewide according to the California Department of Water Resources…

South

Heavy rainfall (1 to 3 inches, locally more) resulted in a small 1-category improvement to parts of northeastern Tennessee. For the Lower Mississippi Valley and Southern Great Plains, drought continued to expand and intensify through the end of February and beginning of March. The major change this past week was a widespread 1-category degradation to Mississippi and also north-central Oklahoma. Since the beginning of December, precipitation has averaged less than 50 percent of normal across much of the Lower Mississippi Valley and Southern Great Plains. Impact reports from north-central Oklahoma include poor wheat conditions and surface water supply shortages. An expansion of moderate drought (D1) was also warranted for northeastern New Mexico. In addition to the drier-than-normal winter, 90-day temperatures have averaged 2 to 6 degrees F above normal. The lack of winter precipitation combined with periods of unseasonably warm temperatures and enhanced winds led to an increasing coverage of severe (D2) to extreme (D3) drought from the Mississippi River west through Oklahoma and Texas…

Looking Ahead

A major pattern change is underway which will promote multiple low pressure systems tracking across the Great Plains and Midwest during early to mid-March. The Weather Prediction Center (valid March 5-9) depicts a swath of heavy precipitation (1 to 3 inches, locally more) from eastern Texas and southeastern Oklahoma northeast through the Lower to Middle Mississippi and Ohio Valleys. This heavier precipitation is forecast to extend into parts of the Northeast, but little to no precipitation is expected from Virginia south to Florida. Much-needed snowfall is expected across the Northern to Central Rockies, while dry weather prevails across California and the Southwest. Much above-normal temperatures are forecast across the southeastern and central U.S. where daily record highs may be broken from March 5 to 9.

The NWS 6-10 day outlook (valid March 10-14) calls for an increased chance of above-normal temperatures for the East, Middle to Lower Mississippi Valley, Southern Great Plains, Southwest, and California. Below-normal temperatures are more likely from the Pacific Northwest east to the Northern Great Plains. Below-normal temperatures are strongly favored for Alaska. The 6-10 day outlook favors above-normal precipitation from the Mississippi Valley to the East Coast. Above-normal precipitation probabilities decrease west across the Great Plains. Above-normal precipitation is also favored for the Pacific Northwest and Northern Rockies. Near to below-normal precipitation is favored across Alaska, while large above-normal precipitation probabilities are forecast throughout Hawaii.

US Drought Monitor one week change map ending March 3, 2026.

Just for grins here’s a slideshow of US Drought Monitor maps for the past few years.

US Drought Monitor map March 3, 2026.
US Drought Monitor map March 4, 2025.
US Drought Monitor map March 5, 2024.
US Drought Monitor March 7, 2023.
US Drought Monitor map March 1, 2022.
US Drought Monitor March 2, 2021.
US Drought Monitor March 3, 2020.
US Drought Monitor March 5, 2019.
US Drought Monitor March 13, 2018.
US Drought Monitor March 7 2017.
US Drought Monitor March 1, 2016.
US Drought Monitor March 3, 2015
US Drought Monitor March 11, 2014
US Drought Monitor March 12, 2013
US Drought Monitor March 13, 2012
US Drought Monitor March 6, 2009.

Snowpack finally saw some above average gains last week — Northern Water #SouthPlatteRiver #ColoradoRiver

Snowpack finally saw some above average gains last week. Snowpack across our Upper Colorado River basin monitoring sites now sits at 64 percent of median and South Platte sites are at 67 percent of median for this time of year (up from 54 and 58 percent respectively). #cowx pic.twitter.com/dunWiam1sx
— Northern Water (@northern_water) March 3, 2026

Mining Monitor: Trump uranium mine? Or trolling? Also: A guest post on Glen Canyon Dam — Jonathan P. Thompson #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

The Henry Mountains, which are surrounded by and covered with mining claims, including the Trump 1-4 properties. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

Click the link to read the article on The Land Desk website (Jonathan P. Thompson):

March 3, 2026

The Bureau of Land Management’s Mineral & Land Records System seems like a strange place to get trolled. But I think it just happened. I was looking through the MLRS to try to get an idea of whether insanely high gold and silver prices, and relatively strong uranium prices, had inspired companies or speculators to stake new mining claims n southwestern Colorado and southeastern Utah, when I came across something that seemed almost satirical.

Late last year, Kimmerle Mining Company staked four 20.66-acre lode claims in Garfield County, Utah, on the east slope of the Henry Mountains (just east of Mt. Pennell). The claim’s names? Trump I, Trump 2, Trump 3, and Trump 4.

The Kimmerle family, of Moab, control hundreds of mining claims across southeastern Utah. But they generally don’t mine them, except, it seems, to make a point.

The Kimmerles are the ones who staked mining claims on a mesa just east of Hideout Canyon inside Bears Ears National Monument just months just before the Obama administration withdrew the area from new mining claims. After Trump shrunk the monument to exclude the White Canyon area in 2017, and just before Biden restored the boundaries in 2021, Kimmerle Mining staked five new claims in the area and acquired additional claims from another mining company. Kimmerle Mining promptly filed for a permit to do exploration work there, but the BLM said they had to demonstrate the claims “validity,” or show that they contained “valuable minerals.” The process for doing so would cost up to $100,000.

Shortly thereafter, Kimmerle joined the state of Utah’s lawsuit seeking to eviscerate the national monument, claiming that its establishment had caused him to lose out on mining profits.

No word on whether the firm plans on drilling or mining its Trump claims, but at least we know these folks’ political leaning.

There have been a handful of other notable mining claim locations in the area in the past six months, including:

Platoro West Inc., located in Durango, staked twelve 20.66-acre lode claims southeast of Ouray, Colorado, in the Bear Creek drainage near Darley and Engineer Mountains. The company is registered under the name of William Sheriff, who was recently named executive chairman of Verdera Energy, which has interests in in-situ uranium mining in New Mexico.

CCKC Inc., of Philadelphia, located three 20-acre placer claims in Dolores County along the Dolores River upstream of Rico.

Roughead Resources of Moab (but which has also been associated with a Houston address) staked fifteen 20.66-acre lode claims in the Lisbon Valley of southeastern Utah near the Mi Vida Mine and the Lisbon Valley Copper Mine. At the same time, the company also staked dozens of claims in Beaver County, Utah.

Fermi Metals of Cocolalla, Idaho, staked twenty-three 20.66-acre claims on the southern slope of the La Sal Mountains, just north of the settlement of La Sal. This is near Energy Fuels’ La Sal Complex uranium mines.

Geobrines International, of Littleton, Colorado, staked twenty-five 20-acre placer claims in Grand County, Utah, along I-70 between Green River and Cisco. This adds to a cluster of previously filed claims in the same area. They are probably looking to do lithium extraction.

Utah Brine Corporation, of Omaha, Nebraska, staked seventy 20-acre claims southwest of the community of La Sal in the Lisbon Valley. UBC appears to be a subsidiary of Omaha Value Inc., which has partnered with an Australian critical materials firm Neometals on its Utah Brine Project, which aims to extract lithium and potash.

Antimony Canyon Sovereign Reserve Inc, a division of Australia firm American Tungsten & Antimony, staked nineteen 20.66-acre lode claims near Antimony, Utah, in Garfield County. The plan is to develop an antimony mine here.

In other mining news:

Metallic Minerals has been eyeing and drilling into a copper deposit in the La Plata Mountains of southwestern Colorado. While actual mining may be a long ways off, concerned locals are already coming together to keep an eye on the project and push back, if necessary. The La Plata Mountains and Public Lands Coalition now has about 225 members from the region, according to Dan King, the coalition’s administrator. Metallic Minerals’ proposal was just one of the catalysts for the coalition, and its mission is much broader and more regional in scope.

Gold and silver prices have shot up tremendously over the last year, probably due to the Trump-effect on the economy and the U.S. dollar, which is stuck at a ridiculously low exchange rate. Gold is now around $5,000/oz, while silver is hovering around $100/oz., compared to just $30 when Trump took office. Uranium’s doing well, too, sitting consistently in the $80/lb to $90/lb range.

Which is to say, mining companies suddenly have a lot more incentive to invest in reopening existing, idle mines or even building new ones (assuming they have faith that the high prices will endure). So far, however, it doesn’t seem to have sparked a surge in new mining activity. Even the Revenue-Virginius silver mine near Ouray, which is purportedly ready to produce ore, remains idle.

The uranium sector does appear to be emerging from its long slumber, but mostly in the form of exploratory drilling, smaller companies selling claims to bigger ones, and staking mining claims on the increasingly sparse sections of public land that aren’t already claimed. Anfield continues work on constructing its Velvet-Wood mine in the Lisbon Valley, but it’s still a ways away from production (and its Shootaring mill is still mothballed and unlicensed).

Energy Fuels is about the only firm actually producing conventional ore. According to their SEC filings, they pulled about 1.5 million pounds of uranium from the Pinyon Plain mine near the Grand Canyon and 155,000 pounds from their La Sal Complex in 2025. Their White Mesa Mill recovered 1 million pounds of uranium, which is a heck of a lot more than in the past, but still is far short of the facility’s 8-million-pound annual capacity. Despite all of this, the company still lost $86 million in 2025.

Meanwhile, the silver and gold mining corporations raked in massive profits, including:

Canadian corporation Barrick, which owns major gold mines in Nevada (Fourmile and Nevada Gold Mines) reported an attributable EBITDA of $8.16 billion last year, the “highest shareholder returns” in the company’s history.

Newmont (which jointly owns Nevada Gold Mines with Barrick) reported an adjusted EBITDA of $13.5 billion.

Kinross, owner of Bald Mountain and Round Mountain in Nevada, Fort Knox and Manh Choh in Alaska, and Kettle River-Curew Project in Washington, reported adjusted net earnings of $2.2 billion

Rio Tinto’s “profit after tax attributable to owners of Rio Tinto (net earnings)” $10 billion.

SSR Mining, which owns a big mine in Nevada, only had a net income of $362 million; but that compares to 2024’s loss of $350 million.

Speaking of commodity prices and profits: American oil and gas companies are poised to make out like bandits thanks to the Trump-Netanyahu war on Iran.

Iran produces some oil and gas. But more importantly, it borders the Strait of Hormuz and has threatened any oil and gas tankers that try to pass through it, effectively closing the passage. That could stanch the flow of oil and gas to the global market, causing prices to rise. The West Texas Intermediate, or WTI, crude oil price has shot up to about $76, the highest it’s been since before Trump took office. This will cause gasoline prices to climb, but also make drilling in the U.S. more profitable, and could spur companies to start using the stockpile of public land drilling permits they’ve amassed over the last year or so.

Liquefied natural gas tankers also are unable to get through the Strait to European markets, which will cause prices of the fuel to skyrocket. It could also force European countries to turn to U.S. LNG exporters, which could echo back to natural gas producing states like New Mexico and Wyoming (and also may increase U.S. natural gas prices if the conflict drags on).

Glen Canyon Dam Must Be Modified to Avoid Draconian Water Supply Disruptions

A guest post by Ron Rudolph

Glen Canyon Dam with the river outlets in use as part of the high-flow experimental release. The outlets are only used occasionally and are not engineered for sustained use. Usually, all of the releases go through the penstocks and the hydroelectric turbines. But that won’t be possible if the lake drops below the level known as minimum power pool. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

Glen Canyon Dam, which impounds the Colorado River to form Lake Powell, is a single point of failure that poses an unacceptable risk to the functioning of the entire river system. Modifying the dam to allow more water to pass through or around it is an essential component of any plan for allocating the river’s dwindling supply.

The dam’s structural flaw limits the amount of water that can pass from Lake Powell downstream to Lake Mead. Lake Mead, the nation’s largest reservoir, is the primary repository of water for the Colorado River’s so-called Lower Basin states: California, Arizona, and Nevada. A paucity of water released from Lake Powell would eventually force reductions in the amount of water extracted from Lake Mead, diminish drinking water supplies for millions, harm agricultural productivity throughout the southwest, and embroil the federal government, seven states, more than two dozen Tribal Nations, Mexico, and others that share the river’s water in a cascade of costly court cases.

The back of Glen Canyon Dam circa 1964, not long after the reservoir had begun filling up. Here the water level is above dead pool, meaning water can be released via the river outlets, but it is below minimum power pool, so water cannot yet enter the penstocks to generate electricity. Bureau of Reclamation photo. Annotations: Jonathan P. Thompson

Due to Glen Canyon Dam’s physical limitations, when the elevation of Lake Powell reaches “minimum power pool” or lower, the only way to release water from the dam is through its river outlet works.¹ The persistent drought in the southwest, and continued demand for the river’s reduced water supply, makes it highly likely Lake Powell will fall to minimum power pool this year. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation estimated this month that Lake Powell could fall to minimum power pool by late July, and remain there or lower through 2027.²

The Bureau of Reclamation’s latest forecast for the Colorado River predicts Lake Powell will “most probably” drop below the critical minimum power pool level before the end of this year, jeopardizing Glen Canyon Dam’s structural integrity. In the worst-case scenario, it would do so before summer’s end. This could force the feds to operate the dam as a “run-of-the-river” operation to preserve the dam’s infrastructure and hydropower output, which would significantly diminish downstream flows and threaten Lower Basin water supplies.

In addition, the agency’s February forecast estimates that under “most probable inflow” conditions, Lake Mead would drop below elevation 1,040 in June. If conditions do not improve by the agency’s August forecast, mandatory reductions in water use would be required in Arizona, California, Nevada, and Mexico.³ If the annual amount of water let out from Lake Powell is restricted to the dam’s outlet works, it would result in less water reaching Lake Mead than any year this century, and could trigger even larger reductions in Lower Basin water consumption.⁴ Releasing water from reservoirs upstream from Lake Powell could forestall the reservoir reaching minimum power pool, however, that is a non-sustainable solution, that fails to address Glen Canyon Dam’s fundamental plumbing problem.

In January, the Bureau of Reclamation’s draft environmental impact statement — Post-2026 Operational Guidelines and Strategies for Lake Powell and Lake Mead —proposed several options for managing the Colorado River for the next 20 years. None of the alternatives includes remedying Glen Canyon Dam’s structural flaws.

The Bureau’s proposals have been criticized by some of the largest consumers of Colorado River water who have signaled a willingness to challenge the agency in court. For example, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which serves nearly 19 million people, noted the Bureau’s proposed alternatives “would likely lead to lengthy litigation.”⁵ The Central Arizona Project, the second largest consumer of Colorado River water, has identified several “legal deficiencies,” including non-compliance with the Colorado River Compact, and failure to adequately disclose and analyze the environmental, economic and socioeconomic impacts.⁶

Depending exclusively on the river outlet works to release sufficient water through Glen Canyon Dam is bound to fail, like relying on rainfall to grow crops in Arizona or southern California. The Bureau has warned relying on the outlet works would risk water supply disruptions to those who depend on Lake Powell and Lake Mead.⁷ The Director of the Bureau’s Technical Service Center has advised against using the outlet works as the sole means for releasing water from the dam,⁸ as previous high-capacity use of them for only 72 hours caused structural damage, which required nine months to repair. Despite the remedial effort, the Bureau concluded the repairs will not prevent future damage.⁹ The dam’s design flaw led the Arizona Department of Water Resources to conclude the structural limitations of Glen Canyon Dam must be alleviated.¹⁰

The calculus for equitably apportioning the diminishing water in the Colorado River is extremely complicated. But one variable in the equation is as obvious as the bathtub ring surrounding Lake Powell: a new system for conveying water sustainably through or around Glen Canyon Dam must be built. Without it, risks to the Colorado River system, and the communities, agriculture and ecosystems reliant on it, will escalate, as will pressure to impose compulsory reductions in consumptive uses throughout the basin.

Ron Rudolph, a former assistant executive director of Friends of the Earth, spent 35 years in various engineering companies, including MWH Global, CH2M Hill, Jacobs Engineering, and Cardno with a career focused on infrastructure development and environmental remediation.

1 U.S.Bureau of Reclamation, Technical Decision Memorandum, Establishment of Interim Operating Guidance for Glen Canyon Dam During Low Reservoir Levels at Lake Powell, March 26, 2024, page 9

2 https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/g4000/riverops/24ms-projections.html

3 When Lake Mead drops below elevation 1,040, a “Level 2 Shortage Condition,” mandatory reductions in water use by Arizona, California, Nevada, and Mexico are required by the 2007 Interim Guidelines for managing Lake Powell and Lake Mead, and the 2019 Lower Basin Drought Contingency Plan

4 The Bureau’s guidance for maximum release of water from each river outlet work (ROW) at minimum power pool elevation is 3,185 cubic feet/second (cfs). The agency has determined only three ROWs would be available simultaneously. If three ROWs operate at full capacity, they would release 9,555 cfs. 1 cfs sustained for a year = 724.acre-feet/year. 9,555 x 724.45 = 6,922,000 acre-feet/year. The maximum releases are specified in USBR, Technical Decision Memorandum, Establishment of Interim Operating Guidance for Glen Canyon Dam During Low Reservoir Levels at Lake Powell, March 26, 2024, page 2. The determination that only three ROWs would be available simultaneously in based on USBR, Near-term Colorado River Operations, Final Supplemental Impact Statement, March 2024, page 2-3. The least amount of water released this century was 7 million acre-feet in 2022, based on data from U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Colorado River Accounting and Water Use Report: Arizona, California and Nevada, 2000-2024

5 Statement of Metropolitan Water District’s General Manager, Shivaji Deshmukh, January 9, 2026

6 Patrick Dent, Assistant General Manager, Water Policy, Central Arizona Project, Report on Post-2026 Draft Environmental Impact Statement, February 5, 2026

7 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Near-term Colorado River Operations, Final Supplemental Impact Statement, March 2024, page 1-9, footnote 10

8 USBR, Technical Decision Memorandum, Establishment of Interim Operating Guidance for Glen Canyon Dam During Low Reservoir Levels at Lake Powell, March 26, 2024, page 9

9 USBR, Reclamation completes recoating of outlet tubes at Glen Canyon Dam ahead of schedule, June 18, 2025; https://www.usbr.gov/newsroom/news-release/5184

10 Email from Trent Blomberg on behalf of Tom Buschatzke, Director, Arizona Department of Water Resources, February 4, 2026

Central Arizona Project: Letter to Secretary Burgum about the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Post-2026 Operational Guidelines and Strategies for #LakePowell and #LakeMead — Terry Goddard and Brenda Burman #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Central Arizona Project map via Mountain Town News

Click the link to go to the Central Arizona Project website Colorado River Operations where you can find links to the relevant documents with respect to the DEIS.

Click the link to read the letter on the Central Arizona Project website (Terry Goddard and Brenda Burman):

Secretary Burgum:

On behalf of the Central Arizona Project and twenty-two Arizona Participating Entities that rely on the Colorado River, I am submitting the attached comments that express our deep concerns regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Post-2026 Operational Guidelines and Strategies for Lake Powell and Lake Mead and the devastating impacts the alternatives therein would impose on Arizona.

All the alternatives proposed in the DEIS disproportionately harm Arizona and are unacceptable. Specifically, the Basic Coordination alternative proposed in the DEIS that Reclamation claims could be imposed without Arizona’s consent all but severs much of Central and Southern Arizona from Colorado River supplies that have been relied upon on for four decades, betraying the promise of sustainable water supplies that underly Arizona’s economy and potentially causing “widespread impacts on social and economic conditions. . . .” that may force cities and towns to “haul water . . . as an alternative to support continued services.”1 Arizona will not tolerate devastation and destabilization, particularly when the DEIS allows other Basin States to increase their water use.

The waters of the Colorado River are foundational to the economy and people of Central and Southern Arizona, supporting 6 million Arizonans, many tribal communities, a thriving advanced microchip manufacturing industry, and critical mineral and agricultural production. Arizona has cultivated a flourishing desert society over the past 40 years through careful and prudent use of Colorado River water supplied by the Central Arizona Project—more than doubling the State’s population while managing at the same time to use less water. The DEIS alternatives threaten to tear apart a generation of careful water management and topple the architecture supporting Arizona’s economy which is home to the heart of the American semi-conductor manufacturing and AI infrastructure industries.

The DEIS alternatives are not just a failure of policy but also include fatal legal deficiencies, and we respectfully request that the Department of the Interior withdraw the document. The United States must implement a decision that is consistent with the Colorado River Compact of 1922 (Compact), the Law of the River, and wise water policy—the DEIS fails on all counts. The enclosed comments highlight several critical flaws in the DEIS, including but not limited to:

Inconsistency with the Compact and the Law of the River: Absent agreement by the Basin States, the operating criteria for the Colorado River must comply with the foundational authority on the Colorado River: the Compact. All subsequent statutes, regulations, contracts, and other agreements are subject to compliance with the Compact and the DEIS ignores this foundational issue by proposing alternatives that would result in a breach thereof.

Failure to Analyze Upper Basin Delivery Obligations: The DEIS fails to consider or model the impacts of Upper Basin delivery obligations due to a Compact deficiency, including required releases from Colorado River Storage Project Act Upper Initial Units and curtailment in the Upper Basin necessary to prevent a breach of the Compact. This analysis is particularly important at this time, as a breach of the Upper Basin’s Compact delivery obligations could occur within the next 12 months.

Failure to Analyze the Devastating Socioeconomic Impacts to Arizona: The DEIS fails to analyze the widespread destabilizing social and economic impacts on Arizona that would be caused by the deep cuts to Arizona’s Colorado River supplies proposed in the document and could cause Arizona’s economy to lose over $2.7 trillion.

Failure to Evaluate Reasonable Alternatives: The range of alternatives is too narrow and neglects to evaluate the reasonable and feasible Lower Basin Alternative which would equitably share cuts needed to stabilize the Colorado River System among all seven Basin States and Mexico.

Illegal Implementation of the so-called “Junior Priority” on the Central Arizona Project: Arizona never agreed and the law does not make the Central Arizona Project a junior user to the Upper Basin. The DEIS fails by proposing deep cuts to Arizona’s water supplies without Compact compliance or required reductions to the Upper Basin. Further, the “junior priority” described in the Colorado River Basin Project Act and used to distribute the DEIS cuts to the Lower Basin is a facially unconstitutional imposition on Arizona’s sovereignty and illegally attempts to make Arizona a second-class citizen among the other Lower Basin States.

For these reasons and others described in the attached comments, the current DEIS does not provide the “hard look” at environmental consequences required by law. Proceeding with this document is highly likely to lead to legal challenges and long-term environmental damage that has not been analyzed.

We welcome the opportunity to work with the Department of the Interior to ensure the revised DEIS is robust and legally durable. Arizona has been a willing partner in attempting to negotiate a consensus solution to the management challenges facing Colorado River operations and continues to stand ready to find a compromise with the Secretary, the other Basin States, and additional Colorado River stakeholders based on shared sacrifice and a recognition that everyone must reduce their uses to stabilize the system. A revised DEIS is essential to comply with NEPA and properly inform the public and decision-makers and to avoid protracted litigation.

Federal Water Tap, March 2, 2026: Reclamation Outlines Options to Prop Up Shrinking #LakePowell — Brett Walton (circleofblue.org) #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Click the link to read the article on the Circle of Blue website (Brett Walton):

The Rundown

Interior Department overhauls its environmental review procedures.

GAO says NOAA, which has oversight authority, should do a better job of tracking cloud seeding and other weather modification.

Senate passes a bill to allow southern Nevada’s water authority to build a water-supply pipeline beneath a national conservation area.

EPA staff decreased 7 percent in the nine months through June 2025, GAO found.

Army Corps directive aims to speed up infrastructure work, prioritize projects.

House Democrats from the D.C. region ask Congress to fund the repair of a major sewer pipe break.

And lastly, Bureau of Reclamation officials outline options for propping up a shrinking Lake Powell.

“I think it’s safe for us to assume that unless Mother Nature is uncharacteristically generous, that Lake Powell elevations are going to fluctuate at elevations that we’re not comfortable with.” – Wayne Pullan, Bureau of Reclamation Upper Colorado regional director, speaking about the possibility that Lake Powell drops low enough later this year that Glen Canyon Dam cannot generate hydropower.

In context: Two-Decade Hydropower Plunge at Big Colorado River Dams

By the Numbers

7 Percent: Decrease in EPA staff between September 2024 and June 2025, according to a Government Accountability Office audit.

10: States that have weather modification programs, typically cloud seeding to induce rainfall, according to a GAO report.

News Briefs

Interior NEPA Changes
The Interior Department overhauled its environmental review procedures, aligning them with recent court decisions, congressional action, and Trump administration priorities.

The final rule sets page limits (150 pages in most cases, up to 300 for actions of “extraordinary complexity”) and time limits (generally two years) on environmental impact statements.

The new rules do not require public comment on draft environmental impact statements. The only mandatory opportunity for public comment is after the department issues a notice that it intends to prepare an EIS.

Reviews already in progress, those with “applications that are sufficiently advanced,” will be held to the previous standard.

Illustration from the report, “Antique Plumbing & Leadership Postponed” from the Utah Rivers Council,
Glen Canyon Institute and the Great Basin Water Network. Courtesy of Utah Rivers Council

Lake Powell Options
Officials at the Bureau of Reclamation, the federal agency that manages Colorado River dams, outlined several actions they are considering in the coming months to boost water levels in a rapidly shrinking Lake Powell, which could drop to a record low later this year that would halt hydropower production from Glen Canyon Dam for the first time.

The Colorado River’s second-largest reservoir behind Lake Mead is entering one of the most difficult periods in its six-decade history. The basin is drying due to a warming climate. Powell is just a quarter full, and projected to drop lower this year. Winter has been a dud, with warm temperatures and a historically bad snowpack in the Colorado mountains that feed into the reservoir.

Reclamation officials discussed their options during a meeting last week of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group, an expert committee that advises on the dam’s ecological impacts.

A 2024 decision allows Reclamation to “consider all tools that are available” to keep Powell from dropping below 3,500 feet, an elevation that provides a little wiggle room for maintaining hydropower production. Powell today sits at 3,531 feet.

The tool from the 2024 decision is Section 6(E), which grants Reclamation the authority to restrict water releases from Powell to as low as 6 million acre-feet. The planned release this year is 7.48 million acre-feet, so the Section 6(E) authority represents a potential 20 percent reduction.

A cut of that magnitude might not be necessary because Reclamation has another tool it can use in tandem.

That option is releasing more water from Flaming Gorge and other smaller reservoirs located higher in the watershed. This is called a DROA release after its authorizing document. Pullan said this action, which states in the lower basin are advocating for, is being discussed and the volume of those releases would be determined in the spring, around April or May.

In context: Big Decisions Loom for a Rapidly Shrinking Lake Powell

Southern Nevada Water Pipeline
The Senate passed a bill that allows southern Nevada’s water provider to tunnel beneath Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area in order to build a pipeline to increase the water-supply system’s reliability. The bill now goes to the president’s desk.

Studies and Reports

‘Army Mode’ for the Army Corps
Adam Telle, head of the Army Corps of Engineers, issued a collection of directives aimed at reducing paperwork and speeding up water infrastructure construction.

In one memo, Telle called for an “Army Mode” mobilization. He ordered a bottom-up approach whereby officials will select at least 20 projects nationally to prioritize. The list is due March 20.

A separate memo lists seven focus areas for infrastructure work. In descending order of importance: human life and safety, economically or strategically important infrastructure, efficient navigation and supply chains, human property, aquatic ecosystems, state-level infrastructure, and municipal infrastructure.

In yet another memo, he said that project investigations – part of the planning phase – should take no more than three years and $3 million.

Cost of Natural Hazards for the Defense Department
The Defense Department lacks data to understand fully the costs of natural hazards to its installations, according to a Government Accountability Office report.

The GAO made five recommendations, including resilience planning, data collection standards, guidance, and procedures. The Defense Department agreed with all of them.

Weather Modification
The GAO also looked into NOAA’s tracking of activities to induce rainfall or otherwise change the weather.

Thanks to a 1972 law, NOAA has oversight authority over weather modification and any entity that shoots silver iodide into clouds to make it rain is required to file a report with the agency. Solar geoengineering, which attempts to reduce air temperatures, is far less common but also covered under this authority.

The GAO found that NOAA’s database is incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable. One fifth of interim and final reports had at least one error, the GAO estimates.

“Consequently, NOAA is not fully aware of the extent of weather modification activities that have occurred and are occurring within the U.S., how they are being conducted, or potential effects,” the GAO concluded.

On the Radar

How to Sue the EPA
The EPA is proposing to change the process for filing citizen lawsuits, moving from mail delivery to electronic submissions.

Public comments are due March 26. Submit them via http://www.regulations.gov using docket number EPA-HQ-OGC-2024-0557.

Water Infrastructure Funding
In the wake of a large-diameter sewer line rupture along the Potomac River, House Democrats from Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia wrote to leaders of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee asking for funding for repairs.

The letter also asked for the Army Corps of Engineers to prioritize a study of a backup drinking water source for the capital region, which relies on the Potomac.

“Unlike other major metropolitan areas, the region lacks a secondary water supply, which would provide critical redundancy in the event of a future crisis.”

Federal Water Tap is a weekly digest spotting trends in U.S. government water policy. To get more water news, follow Circle of Blue on Twitter and sign up for our newsletter.

How much water remains in aquifers of SE #Colorado? — Allen Best (BigPivots.com)

Corn in Baca County. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots

Click the link to read the article on the Big Pivots website (Allen Best):

February 28, 2026

Study being completed will help guide decisions about continued mining of groundwater in the Springfield area. Ogallala will be gone within 20 years, but deepest formation could last a century.

Before center-pivot sprinklers powered by rural electrification in the mid-20th century, farmers in Colorado’s southeastern corner necessarily relied upon what came from the sky for water. HIgh-capacity pumps, first used in the Springfield area during the late 1940s allowed the farmers to go underground, to more lucratively plumb a series of aquifers and deliver far-higher crop yields.

The Ogallala — also called the High Plains — is the water-bearing geologic formation nearest the surface, followed by the more water-rich Dakota and Cheyenne formations. Underlying both is a far larger reservoir yet called the Dockum Group.

How long will that water last? A new report commissioned by Colorado, still in rough draft stage, finds that a little more than 2,000 wells mine these formations in Baca County and a portion of adjoining Prowers County. The vast majority of the water, 97%, irrigates alfalfa, corn and other crops. Remaining water goes to hog farms, stock ponds, and domestic wells for farmhouses as well as municipal supplies in Springfield and several even smaller towns.

An average 157,000 acre-feet were mined annually from these subterranean deposits from 2020 through 2024. To put that into perspective Denver Water delivers an average 232,000 acre-feet to the 1.5 million residents in Denver and adjoining jurisdictions.

The answer to the question about how long the water will last has not been fully answered. At current rates of pumping, the Ogallala will be gone by 2045, according to this draft study. The next two deeper formations, Dakota and Cheyenne, have been depleted more rapidly but have more water.

The deepest water, in the Dockum, could last a century or more. It depends partly on the quality of water extracted at greater depths. There seem to be some unknowns about this. Cost of extraction is also a factor. Deeper wells cost more money to drill. It also takes more electricity to pump water to the surface. Would crop prices justify the added expenses?

Pueblo can be seen in the upper left-hand corner of this map, and the southern high plains district is designated by lavender.

With those asterisks in mind, the study estimates nearly 33 million acre-feet of water can be economically recovered from the four water-bearing geologic formations in that southern high plains groundwater district.

On average, Colorado consumes 5.3 million acre-feet of water per year, although some of that water gets reused. Think of runoff from farm fields or treated sewage that reenters streams and rivers. When that is added up, Colorado’s total diversions hit 15.3 million acre-feet. This southern plains basin bordering Kansas and Oklahoma is just a small part of Colorado.

Unlike Colorado’s rivers, which are mostly derived from snowmelt and rainfall, the groundwater recharges but much more slowly than the extraction. This study estimates an annual recharge of 32,000 acre-feet compared to the 157,000 acre-feet withdrawn.

Apart from the river valleys, dryland areas of southeastern Colorado were among the last places homesteaded in Colorado. First came the settlements of Denver, Colorado Springs, and Boulder with their access to water from the mountain streams and rivers and proximity to the mountain mining camps. Very quickly, water was diverted to create farms.

Homesteading of the high plains began about 30 years later. By then, the buffalo were gone, and the last battle with Native Americas had occurred in 1869 at Summit Springs. Settlement near Springfield, Walsh and other Baca County towns continued through the 1920s. Peak settlement occurred in about 1930, before the weather turned hotter and drier and the skies filled with dust. Baca County during the decade of the Dust Bowl and the Great Depression lost more than a third of its population.

Baca County since then has continued to lose population as farm sizes have grown. While groundwater extraction has provided a modicum of prosperity, the county ranked 57^th among Colorado’s 64 counties in per-capita income as of 2022.

The hydrogeology that is believed to exist in this basin can be seen in this west-east profile. Some formations, including the Graneros and Kiowa shales, contain no water and act as barriers.

The Colorado Ground Water Commission — created in 1965, before groundwater became a common word — has legal purview over extraction. The commission can set limits on the allowable rate of depletion.

The southern high plains district limits new wells within a half-mile of existing high-capacity wells. But it is still possible to get a permit for a new well. That is in dispute. Some think the basin needs to be “closed,” to bar future wells and hence prolong the life of the aquifers.

Cimarron River Basin. By Shannon1 – Drawn by myself; shaded relief data from NASA SRTM North America imagery here, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=12115861

This groundwater basin in southeastern Colorado is very different from the Republican River Basin of northeastern Colorado in one crucial way. The aquifers do not deliver water to a river subject to a multi-state compact. The Cimarron River nicks the extreme corner of Colorado, but testimony to the poverty of water in this “river” is provided by those traveling to Santa Fe in the 19^th century. Nearly all followed the Arkansas River, not the Cimarron, despite the latter route being much shorter.

In contrast, a compact struck in 1943 governs flows in the Republican River. It arises far from Colorado’s mountains and is instead nourished by water seeping out of the Ogallala in places like Holyoke and Yuma and Burlington. Mining of groundwater in the basin to grow crops reduced flows to the extent that Kansas sued Nebraska, which in turn sued Colorado. Now, farmers in the basin are trying to reduce their withdrawals by voluntary retirement of 25,000 acres from active irrigation. The 19,000-plus acres retired so far have been induced by financial incentives that tap federal but also state funds.

Without a compact to force reduced pumping in southeastern Colorado, the state can adopt its own rules.

Residents of southeastern Colorado appear to be somewhat conflicted about whether new rules governing withdrawal are needed and what they should look like. Baca County’s Herald Plainsman in March 2023 reported on a “highly charged” meeting in Springfield called by the state’s Division of Water Resources. Tracy Kosloff, the deputy state engineer, explained that a group from the community had requested a rule change in the previous year.

Their intent was to block the issuance of new permits for high-capacity wells. Kosloff asked for the community to come to a consensus, if possible.

No consensus was evident at that meeting. at least according to the Plainsman Herald report. One speaker said that “without high-capacity wells, there will be no people left in the county.” Tim Hume, who is the region’s representative on the Colorado Ground Water Commission, said that without irrigation, two thirds of the people in the room would not be there. He also noted that one of the 67 monitoring wells had actually shown higher levels in the previous 20 years. But another speaker, Jack Dawson, said to keep irrigation going for quite some time, there was a real need to start conserving water.

With aid of a special $250,000 appropriation by state legislators, the Division of Water Resources commissioned a study by Wilson Water Group and HRS Water Consultants to provide new estimates of how much water remains that can be recovered economically. These consultants are also creating a planning tool to allow groundwater basin users to evaluate future groundwater use scenarios.

At a meeting scheduled for March 16 in Springfield, the consultants hope to glean insight from farmers about what constitutes economically viable extraction. How deep into the Dockum can they go and hope to be able to make money? How much water treatment is required and feasible? The big question is whether new rules will be needed to limit extraction.

Also to be determined are the goals under future conditions. How fast should the groundwater be mined? Or should there be limits beyond those few already in place? The consultants are to submit a final report before the end of 2026.

What comes of this new knowledge? It’s possible — maybe even likely — that some residents of southeastern Colorado will then file a petition with the Colorado Ground Water Commission to adopt new rules restricting extraction. This study sets up the facts for helping make that decision of whether to do so, and if so, how.

The draft study says a range of viewpoints can be expected. Some stakeholders will favor the status quo. Others might favor restricted pumping from specific aquifers or even from new wells, conceivably all wells. Expansion of irrigated acreage cold be curbed — although in some cases land has been taken out of irrigated production already.

Also relevant is the shifting climate. The study mentions climate change just once, noting that hotter or drier conditions may occur in 50 years, affecting crop irrigation requirements. Already, however, the hotter temperatures of southeastern Colorado cause crops to need a third more water than those grown 200 miles north.

The most direct parallel to a ban on new wells in southeastern Colorado would be a similar ban on new wells in the upper Crow Creek drainage northeast of Greeley near the Wyoming border. The alluvial, Fan and White River aquifers within the designated basin were declared over-appropriated effective April 14, 2017.

Hydrogeology of Colorado’s southeastern corner has been studied several times. First was a studyby the U.S. Geological Survey in conjunction with the Colorado Water Conservation Board completed in 1954. It recorded springs and creeks and pumping from wells for house and towns and stock ponds, with some of the records gleaned by New Deal workers in the 1930s. It made no attempt to quantify groundwater storage volume. Aquifer mining was non-existent in that area as high-capacity pumps had been created less than a decade before.

A 1967 study by R.W. Beck and Associates did attempt to quantify the groundwater resources. It estimated that groundwater extraction of 13,200 acre-feet in 1950 had grown by 1964 to 118,700 acre-feet.

The study projected that groundwater extraction in the basin would grow to 276,000 acre-feet by 2017. It is somewhat less. That study also projected that population of Baca County would grow to 4,700 by 2017. Actually, it declined to 3,500.

That study made no mention of the Dockum, the formation now believed to have the most water, based on well logs and other lines of evidence.

That study also recommended creation of a groundwater management district to assist in “development” of the extraction. That district was created.

Southeastern Colorado’s groundwater was also part of a six-state study of the Ogallala Aquifer in 1983.

Most recent were two related reports in 2002 by McLaughlin Water Engineers. This new study differs in a substantial way in that it uses data deeper than the 200 feet of the Dockum and hence increases the volume of water that may potentially be extracted. It also employs newer tools to figure out what exactly is going on down there in the dark, although exactly how much sharper insight this report delivers is not yet clear.

The Division of Water Resources also has conducted three studies in this century that define a steady but not dramatic decline of the aquifers in southeastern Colorado.

See Updated Southern High Plains Groundwater Study Draft Report and Planning Tool at the High Plains Study website.

Colorado River District Responds to the Bureau of Reclamation’s Proposals for Post-2026 #LakePowell and #LakeMead Operations #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Click the link to read the release on the Colorado River District website (Lindsay DeFrates):

March 2, 2026

Last week, the Colorado River District submitted comments and specific recommendations to the Bureau of Reclamation on the recently released Post-2026 Operational Guidelines and Strategies for Lake Powell and Lake Mead Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). In its comments, the River District calls for future operational decisions that reflect hydrologic realities, address Lower Basin overuse, and move the Colorado River System beyond constant crisis management.

“A core part of our mission is safeguarding, for all Coloradans, the waters of the Colorado River to which our state is entitled under the various laws, agreements and compacts that govern the river,” said Raquel Flinker, Director of Interstate and Regional Water Resources at the Colorado River District. “Our water users have adapted to the reality of variable hydrology. We are living with a river that has 20% less water and this trend is expected to continue. It is past time that our neighbors in the Lower Basin learn how to live within the means provided by the river.”

“What is very clear in these proposals is that we still have a basic math problem,” said Colorado River District General Manager Andy Mueller. “Every year, around 1.5 million acre feet of Colorado River water disappears due to evaporation and transit loss in the Lower Basin, yet this amount is unaccounted for in the Bureau’s water deliveries. If we want to move out of crisis response mode, every proposal must begin by reducing consumptive use in the Lower Basin by this amount every single year before discussing shortages. If we had fixed the math to align with the laws of nature twenty-five years ago, we would have almost 30-million-acre feet of storage still available in the system today.”

The River District’s letter includes 13 specific recommendations organized around several key themes. First, it calls for post-2026 operations that align demand with available supply and put hydrologic reality, not predictability for the Lower Basin, at the center of decision-making. The River District urges Reclamation to evaluate alternatives that perform under critically dry hydrology, provide a fair, transparent analysis of actions and impacts, and clearly disclose Upper Basin shortage risks in the main body of the analysis.

The letter also stresses that Lower Basin use must be reduced by roughly 1.5 million acre-feet at all times, defined as system losses rather than “shortage,” and that Upper Basin conservation assumptions and scale must be re-evaluated. In addition, the River District calls for clear, durable guidelines and definitions, including fully defining and analyzing “gap water” and “additional Upper Basin actions,” and for CRSP initial unit water to remain in Lake Powell. Finally, it raises Law of the River concerns, including that inter-basin transactions must not be allowed.

The River District’s full comment letter is available here:

Click to access 20260227-CRD-Letter-CommentsOnDraftEIS-Post2026.pdf

Reclamation formally published the DEIS on January 16, 2026, opening a 45-day public comment period. The Bureau of Reclamation must consider public feedback when developing a preferred alternative for management of the system, and the basin states will continue their negotiations alongside this process with the hope of reaching a seven-state consensus. The current guidelines expire at the end of September 2026.

#Snowpack news March 2, 2026

Westwide SNOTEL basin-filled map March 1, 2026.

Colorado snowpack basin-filled map March 1, 2026.

The graphs below show missing data over the weekend.

Balmy winters heighten water worries — AlamosaCitizen.com #RioGrande #SanLuisValley

Man shining a red motorcycle on the left and a woman sunbathing on the right — Tomas Miera shining his Harley left and a woman sunbathing. Credit: The Citizen and Dennis Schoenfelder

Click the link to read the article on the Alamosa Citizen website:

February 28, 2026

Rancher Greg Higel usually opens a barn door for his cows to enter during the cold winter nights. Lately he’s been leaving the cows out at night because “the less you mess with them, the better off they are.”

The February weather has been warm enough not to mess with the cows.

The last two Februarys – 2025 and 2026 – have seen the daily maximum temperature average 50 degrees-plus in Alamosa, according to National Weather Service data. That has never happened before in the Valley’s climate history.

National Weather Service records as far back as 1948 show only the past two Februarys so warm that ranchers like Higel, who are in the midst of their calving season, worry less about their cows at night and more about their grassfields and what the warm winter means for the ground itself. Included in that are overnight temps averaging in the double digits and frequently in the 20s.

“I don’t think it’s good for the farm ground,” Higel says. He was hopeful the heavy October rains that had flooded his meadows would leave water frozen in the fields through the winter months. But the water hardly froze and the worry now is the anticipated light spring runoff and available water for the grass growing season ahead.

Of the 28 days in February this year, 20 have seen the daily maximum temperature exceed 50 degrees. The highest temperature for the month was 65 degrees on Feb. 25, following 64 degrees on Feb. 24, which established a new high for the date.

February 2025 was just as warm and warmer, with an average daily high temperature of 52.8 degrees. It was a year ago when the phenomenon of average 50-degree weather days was first noted after the mercury hit 60 degrees on 5 of the first 7 days of last February.

Suffice it to say, if it is this warm in February in the high mountain desert, the snowpack is going to suffer. The Upper Rio Grande Basin enters March measuring 55 percent of median on a snowwater equivalent index, which is what worries irrigators.

And it’s not just ranchers and farmers who should be paying attention.

Adam Moore, supervisory forester with Colorado State Forest Service, says trees around the home need watering when the winter months are this warm. The constant threat of wildfire is another reason to pay attention.

“The SLV and the plains are still facing red flag warnings. There have been large grass fires in Oklahoma and Kansas. The conditions for those fires are not much different than what we have in the SLV. Just like the red flag warnings all year long, wildfire preparedness should occur all year,” he says.

Just don’t get too far ahead. Gardeners should stick to the normal planting times, with mid-April being the earliest for any tree planting.

“Don’t let the warm weather fool you and plant early,” Moore says. “We still stand the chance of late frosts.”

Tell that to Tomas Miera.

“I’ve been riding all winter. My goodness, today is going to be like 64,” he says, standing in his front yard in a short sleeve shirt, shorts and shining his Harley Davidson. “I’m going for a ride later on.”

February allows for it. It’s never been this way.

It’s getting hot in here … and it ain’t just the January Thaw: Plus: #ColoradoRiver Chronicles; Big Bend Border Wall boondoggle — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org) #COriver #aridification

Click the link to read the article on The Land Desk website (Jonathan P. Thompson):

February 27, 2026

🥵 Aridification Watch 🐫

Back in the late 1990s and early 2000s, when I lived in Silverton, Colorado, elevation 9,318 feet, we often experienced a “January thaw.” It was a period of a few sunny, warm days between storms that usually fell in January but could also occur in February. If you could find a south-facing deck that was protected from the wind and free of dangling, skull-piercing icicles, you could sit out in shirtsleeves, soak up some vitamin D, and maybe even get a little bit of a suntan. Then winter, below zero temperatures, and super snowy San Juaners would return, finally and grudgingly departing sometime in late May.

A pretty big swath of the Southwest is about to experience a February thaw of its own, according to National Weather Service forecasts, including in these hot spots:

Phoenix’s mercury could climb into the low- to mid-90s this weekend [February 28 – March 1, 2026], with overnight lows in the 60s.

Durango, Colorado, is expecting to hit 66° F on Sunday (with lows staying above freezing).

It will be prime bike-riding weather in Moab, where the highs could climb into the low 70s.

And even Silverton will get up into the 50s, with the overnight lows dipping only a few degrees below freezing — bad news for the snow.

Denver is under a red flag warning for fire danger today, and will see temperatures in the high 60s.

During a “normal” winter, this wouldn’t be alarming in the slightest. In fact, it would be a welcome respite from winter. Now it threatens to wipe out any indication that it even is winter by potentially erasing the snowpack gained during last week’s storms. The Upper Colorado River Basin’s snowpack is exactly at the same level as it was on this date in 2002. Ohhh boy, if those March storms don’t arrive it’s going to be a long, dry summer.

The trouble with normal … — Jonathan P. Thompson

💧 Colorado River Chronicles 🐟

As a deal between the seven Colorado states for how to divvy up massive consumption cuts seems less and less likely, Arizona is getting a bit more aggressive.This week the Protecting Arizona’s Lifeline Coalition launched a PR campaign, complete with videos, attempting to pressure the Upper Basin states to let more water flow downstream to its Lower Basin neighbors.

Arizona is understandably worried: The Central Arizona Project’s water rights are junior to most of the other large users in the Lower Basin, meaning they would be among the first to take cuts if there were a shortage. The window for a dramatic improvement in Upper Basin snowpack is rapidly closing, thereby increasing the likelihood of a shortage later this year.

The campaign includes a series of videos with various officials making their case. There are also a few educational ones that do a nice job of explaining the Colorado River Compact, and are really worth a watch. However, I should warn you that they are coming from a Lower Basin perspective, meaning they interpret one clause of the Compact, Article III(d), significantly differently than the Upper Basin states. And yet, that’s what their entire argument relies on.

That clause states that the Upper Basin must “not cause the flow of the river at Lee Ferry to be depleted below an aggregate of 75 million acre-feet” for any 10-year period.

The Upper Basin sees this as a “non-depletion obligation,” meaning it blocks them from exceeding their 7.5 MAF/year allocation if it causes the Lee Ferry flow to fall below a 7.5 MAF/year average. The Lower Basin sees it as a “minimum delivery obligation,” meaning that the Upper Basin is obliged to send an average of 7.5 MAF past Lee Ferry no matter what, even if that means draining all of its reservoirs and drying out its fields and cities.

Keeping that in mind, check out the video:

A Colorado River glossary and primer — Jonathan P. Thompson

The Colorado River Crisis is Here — Jonathan P. Thompson

President Trump wants to build a wall through Big Bend National Park.

One of the most sacred places in Texas.

Texans have a message for him: Come and take it. pic.twitter.com/k7hpYEaRqC
— James Talarico (@jamestalarico) February 26, 2026

🤯 Oh, the Humans! 😱

In a comment on Tuesday’s dispatch, reader Steve Harris suggested a story on the U.S. Customs and Border Protection fast-tracking a 200-mile segment of border wall through Big Bend National Park.

This is a super important issue. And it’s not only in Big Bend: The entire border wall is an environmental disaster, slashing through biologically diverse, beautiful country and cutting off migratory routes and movement for mountain lions, javelina, coyotes, ocelot, deer, desert bighorns, and even jaguars. Keep in mind that it’s not just a fence, it’s a giant piece of infrastructure that requires bulldozing all the vegetation and even blasting through the landscape. Besides that, we taxpayers are forking out billions of dollars for something that isn’t all that great at doing what it’s supposed to do.

For me it’s especially heartbreaking to see the wall cut through the borderlands south of Tucson, down in the Patagonia Mountains. Many years ago my dad took my brother and I along some little road through there right up against the border, which at the time was just a barbed wire fence. It was incredible country, so quiet and mostly humanity-free.

The stakes are equally as high in the Big Bend area, where both ecological and cultural treasures are at risk. Unfortunately I’ve never been to Big Bend, and it’s a little ways outside the region I normally cover, so I’m not going to try to pretend to know what’s going on there. But a lot of other smart folks have written about it and are trying to block the new stretch of wall, so I’ll share some of that here:

Border Patrol map of existing, planned, and awarded segments of wall, including the stretch through Big Bend — which consists of about 100 miles of actual physical wall plus segments of “detection technology” in the most rugged areas.

The Border Wall Map with videos showing what’s at stake.

The Texas Observer has a good story on the wall plans and the way the “Big Beautiful Bill” not only allocates $46.5 billion to build the monstrosity, but also erased existing protections for some areas.

The Texas Tribune and Inside Climate News worked together on a story that talks about local opposition.

Peer-reviewed study on how the border wall impedes wildlife movement.

Trump’s border wall to destroy the National Butterfly Sanctuary along the Texas border with Mexicopic.twitter.com/m2NTn2GbZj
— Alfons López Tena 🦇 (@alfonslopeztena) February 25, 2026

🌵 Public Lands 🌲

Environmental groups and environmentally-oriented media outlets are making a pretty big stink over the confirmation hearings for Steve Pearce, Trump’s pick to lead the Bureau of Land Management. There’s a good reason for this: Pearce is well known for his hostility toward the BLM and the public lands it oversees, and he has also indicated a desire to sell off public land — a stance he failed to renounce during this week’s hearings.

Pearce is a bad choice for this job. But is it worth spending a lot of resources to get him ousted? Probably not.

If the Senate does not confirm Pearce, then the administration will just find some other bozo to do the job, which in this case is basically a middle manager tasked with carrying out the agenda of Interior Secretary Doug Burgum. Burgum, in turn, is merely executing the Trump administration’s, i.e. Project 2025, policies.

Which I have to say is disappointing and sad. Before he was a cabinet member, Burgum seemed like a reasonable enough guy. Sure he has ties to oil and gas interests, but he also appeared to be a Teddy Roosevelt Republican — an old school conservative and conservationist who valued public lands. He even managed to garner the endorsement of outdoor retailer REI’s board along with that of the hook and bullet crowd.

Instead, he has prostrated himself to the extractive industries, embraced coal mining and oil and gas drilling, and shattered environmental protections for public lands left and right. His distinguishing features as a cabinet member have been his unwavering sneer-like grin and his tendency to fawn over Trump — and coal.

***

Your energy and outrage might be better spent on convincing Congress to shoot down Sen. Mike Lee’s, R-Utah, attempt to use the Congressional Review Act to revoke the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument management plan. If the “resolution of disapproval” passes both chambers of Congress with a simple majority vote, it would erase the plan and bar the Bureau of Land Management from issuing another plan that is “substantially the same” in the future.

Republicans in the current Congress used the CRA — which allows Congress to revoke recently implemented administrative rules — to do away with resource management plans in Alaska, Montana, and North Dakota. That’s in spite of the fact that RMPs are not considered “rules,” according to a January 2025 opinion by the Interior Department’s Solicitor. National monument management plans aren’t rules, either, but that’s not a hindrance for Lee.

This wouldn’t change the boundaries of the monument, but would likely cause management of the area to revert back to the 2020, Trump I-era plan. That plan was not only less protective than the newer one, but only applied to a much smaller area, since in 2017 Trump had significantly shrunk the national monument. Revoking the current management plan, then, would leave vast areas of the monument in a sort of management limbo.

It would also open the door to revoking other national monument management plans (e.g. Bears Ears), allowing the GOP to carry out Project 2025’s goal of shrinking or eliminating national monuments in a less visible, more underhanded manner.

Just a couple reminders from a few years ago that it does snow, and it will snow again — just maybe not this spring. Jonathan P. Thompson photos.

Making sense of a chaotic planet: How understanding weather and climate risks depends on supercomputers like NCAR’s

Antonios Mamalakis, University of Virginia

Have you ever stopped to wonder how forecasters can predict the weather days in advance, or how scientists figure out how the climate might evolve under different policies?

The Earth system is a vast web of intertwined processes, from microscopic chemical reactions to towering storms. Ocean currents circulating deep in the Atlantic, forests exchanging carbon with the atmosphere, and humans altering the composition of the air all have effects that ripple through the system. These processes are governed by physical laws, such as conservation of mass, energy and momentum.

All of this plays out on such a large scale that no single human mind can truly grasp it in full. And yet, the system is so sensitive that a small perturbation, given enough time, can steer its trajectory in a dramatically different direction. This sensitivity is called “chaos,” also known as the “butterfly effect.” The planet is, at once, immense and delicate.

Despite this complexity and scale, scientists are able to simulate and anticipate how the climate will change.

How is this even possible? Behind the long-term climate projections that affect our lives sits one of the most remarkable scientific achievements of the modern era: climate models that run on supercomputers.

I am a climate data scientist. My colleagues and I try to understand extreme weather and long-term climate risks by using virtual versions of Earth inside these machines.

What a climate model really is

Here is the simplest way to picture a climate model:

Imagine dividing the entire planet into 3D boxes. At the surface, each box might represent an area 50 to 100 kilometers across. Then we stack boxes upward into the atmosphere and downward into the oceans to create a 3D grid wrapping around the globe.

Each box contains numbers: temperature, wind speed, humidity, sea ice thickness, soil moisture and hundreds of other variables. The model contains mathematical expressions that describe how these variables influence one another: how heat moves, how air rises and sinks, how moisture condenses into clouds, how the ocean absorbs and redistributes energy.

A globe with boxes around it and a close-up of some calculations taking place in one of those boxes. — Climate models are systems of differential equations based on the basic laws of physics, fluid motion and chemistry. They divide the planet into a 3D grid, apply the equations and evaluate the results. Within these models, the atmosphere component, for example, calculates winds, heat transfer, radiation, relative humidity and surface hydrology. NOAA

We then let the model march forward in time, solving the math and updating every variable in every box. Then again. And again.

Now scale that up. Millions of grid boxes. Hundreds of variables per box. Calculations carried out millions of times to simulate decades or even centuries.

And because the system is chaotic, we do not run the model just once. We run it many times with slightly different initial conditions – what scientists call an ensemble – to make sure the result is in fact a true system response to the considered scenario, such as warming temperatures due to increased emissions, and not an effect of chaos.

The result is an astronomical number of calculations. Performing them requires computers capable of executing quadrillions of operations per second – what are known as petaflop-scale supercomputers. A petaflop equals 1 quadrillion – 1,000,000,000,000,000 – calculations per second!

From simulation to real-world decisions

These simulations inform decisions that affect everyday life: how high to elevate homes in flood-prone areas, how to design power grids resilient to prolonged heat waves, how to manage water resources during drought.

Urban planners, engineers, emergency managers and policymakers all rely on information derived from these models.

Dozens of major climate models have been developed around the world by universities, national laboratories and government agencies. Each modeling center builds its own code, makes its own physical assumptions, chooses its own grid resolution and operates its own supercomputing systems. Through international efforts such as the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, modeling centers agree on common experiments: the same greenhouse gas scenarios and the same volcanic eruptions, for example.

When you hear that extreme rainfall is projected to intensify in a warmer world, or that the Arctic Ocean could become seasonally ice-free within decades, those conclusions are not the result of calculations carried out by a single scientist, a single team of scientists, or even a single model run. They emerge from dozens of independently developed models, run on room-sized supercomputers, under pre-agreed and carefully coordinated experiments.

A map created by an ensemble with multiple computer models shows areas of agreement. — In this example of the use of multiple models, areas in color and without hashmarks indicate regions with high agreement among models, where more than 80% of the models agree on the signs of change. The projections for annual maximum daily precipitation change were made using the Multi-model Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5). IPCC

This global collaboration is one of the reasons scientists know so much about climate change. These shared simulations allow scientists around the world to test hypotheses and explore future risks based on models’ consensus.

It is no surprise that the 2021 Nobel Prize in physics recognized pioneers of climate modeling. These models fundamentally transformed humanity’s ability to understand a complex planet.

There is no alternative way to answer “what if” questions about the future climate system. What happens if carbon dioxide doubles? What if emissions decline rapidly? What if a major volcanic eruption injects aerosols into the stratosphere? Because the climate system is so complex, and forces can push it outside the range of historical experience, the past is no longer a reliable guide to the future. So statistical models aren’t enough.

Artificial intelligence cannot replace this foundation either. AI has made impressive progress in short-term weather prediction, learning patterns from vast historical datasets, and producing forecasts with remarkable speed.

But climate projections require extrapolating to conditions the planet has not experienced in modern history – such as higher greenhouse gas concentrations. AI can accelerate simulations and analyze massive amounts of data today, but it cannot replace solving the physical equations that govern the system.

National supercomputing centers are essential

In the United States, major climate modeling efforts have been supported by national laboratories and federal centers, including NASA and the National Center for Atmospheric Research, or NCAR, along with a few research universities.

At NCAR, scientists developed the Community Earth System Model, a comprehensive climate model that’s arguably one of the best models to date and is used by researchers across the country and around the world to study climate change, severe weather, climate effects on wildfires, and atmospheric patterns. It has helped position the United States at the forefront of climate science and enabled the global research community to tackle some of the most pressing challenges of our time.

Running large ensembles with this model requires powerful hardware, data storage systems capable of handling petabytes of output, and engineers who keep these systems operational. This is not a matter of downloading and running a program on a laptop. It is a national-scale scientific enterprise that makes NCAR and its supercomputer essential.

In a warming climate, the stakes are high. The ability to simulate the Earth system at scale is one of the most powerful tools humanity has to prepare for the risks ahead.

Antonios Mamalakis, Assistant Professor of Data Science and Environmental Science, University of Virginia

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Utility-scale battery energy storage facility planned in Hayden — Steamboat Pilot & Today

The estimated 30- to 40-acre utility-scale battery energy storage facility planned by Jupiter Power to be built in 2027 southwest of the Hayden Power Station would look similar to this facility completed in 2024 in Houston. Jupiter Power/Courtesy photo

Click the link to read the article on the Steamboat Pilot & Today website (Suzie Romig). Here’s an excerpt:

February 26, 2026

A utility-scale battery energy storage facility was approved last week by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission with the project planned for construction southwest of the Hayden Power Station within the town limits of Hayden. Megan Castle, communications director for the Public Utilities Commission, said the 400 MW project was approved as part of 10 total bid projects accepted by the state commission. The project in Hayden will be led by Jupiter Power, a developer and operator of utility-scale battery energy storage systems with corporate offices in Austin, Houston and Chicago. The proposed energy storage facility would be located on a 72-acre site on Routt County Road 51 near the Hayden power plant and Yampa Valley Regional Airport and would connect by a new transmission line to the Mount Harris substation southeast of the main Hayden station. The stored energy would be sold to Xcel Energy through a Power Purchase Agreement, said Michelle Aguayo, senior media relations representative at Xcel.

“This project is a Power Purchase Agreement, where another company builds and maintains the project, and we purchase the power produced,” Aguayo said Tuesday.

Hayden Town Manager Mathew Mendisco said municipal leaders are excited about the forthcoming facility, and that Jupiter Power staff already has worked through the preliminary application process with the town and is expected to submit a formal application later this year. Mendisco said the town leadership is happy to have more light industrial development to continue to boost the local tax base.

“Development like this is always good,” Mendisco said. “The energy sector has been part of our economy for many years, and this fits right in. We are excited to have land near the airport developed, and we think this seems to be a good fit.”

Winter plagued by ‘freakishly bad’ atmospheric pattern, meteorologists say — The #Durango Herald #snowpack #drought

Click the link to read the article on The Durango Herald website (Scout Edmondson). Here’s an excerpt:

February 26, 2026

Last week, Southwest Colorado saw enough snow to cancel school and snarl travel. A week later, winter appears to have vaporized – replaced by clear skies, dry roads and temperatures warm enough for sandals and T-shirts. According to the National Weather Service, high temperatures in Durango reached 63 degrees Thursday. It is the latest episode of weird winter weather this year. Jonathan Harvey, an associate professor of geosciences at Fort Lewis College, said in an email to The Durango Herald that winter’s absence is because of stubborn high-pressure ridges steering the jet stream – a belt of fast-moving winds that separates warm tropical air to the south from cold arctic air to the north – toward the northern United States.

“We have spent most of the winter under a ‘ridge’ in the jet stream, which has prevented cold air and storms from hitting our region,” he said.

That, according to National Weather Service forecaster Lucas Boyer, is because of warm seawater temperatures in the Eastern Pacific Ocean.

“We’ve had ample warm water in the in the Eastern Pacific for a lot of the winter,” he said. “We’ve really seen the jet stream get pushed north, which means warm air to the south. It’s been really devastating for any kind of snowfall production.”

Boyer said any storms that have managed to break through that high-pressure ridge were followed by periods of temperatures 10 to 15 degrees above the historical average…The warm, dry winter has hurt snowpack in the San Juan Mountains. Boyer said the water equivalent in the San Juan River Basin is at 17% of the historical median, while the snowpack in the San Juan Mountains is 40% to 50% of average. Unfortunately, Harvey said there is not much time left for mid-elevation snowpack. But, there is still time for high-elevation snowpack.

Colorado Drought Monitor map February 24, 2026.

Wolf Creek Ski Area receives nearly 5 feet of snow, #snowpack jumps — The #PagosaSprings Sun

Westwide SNOTEL basin-filled map February 28, 2026.

Click the link to read the article on the Pagosa Springs Sun website (Clayton Chaney):

February 26, 2026

A “real” winter storm rolled through Pagosa Country last week, leaving behind 1-2 feet, or more, of fresh snow in spots around the county. Meanwhile, Wolf Creek Ski Area reported nearly 5 feet of new snow, with a total of 59 inches falling from Feb. 17 through Feb. 21. According to reports entered into the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail and Snow (CoCoRaHS) network five-day period ranged from 15.8 inches downtown up to 18.6 inches uptown. The highest totals were seen in the northern part of the county, ranging from 24 inches near Lake Hatcher up to 31.5 inches along the Mineral County border. As of Feb. 25, the ski area reported a year-to-date snowfall of 164 inches with a midway depth of 82 inches and a summit depth of 89 inches…

According to the Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS), as of Feb. 24, the San Miguel, Dolores, Animas and San Juan River basins were measured to be at 64 percent of its 30-year median snowpack. The statewide snowpack as of Feb. 25 was at 63 percent. A post by Shawn Prochazka from Pagosa Weather notes that the snowpack in the basins jumped from 42 percent to 60 percent during last week’s storm. “That’s an impressive jump this late in the season,” Prochazka writes. As of 11 a.m. on Wednesday, Feb. 25, Wolf Creek Pass, at 10,930 feet, had a snow water equivalent of 14.7 inches. The current amount is 64 percent of that date’s median snow water equivalent…

According to the U.S. Drought Monitor’s most recent map released on Feb. 19, which was valid as of Feb. 17, 100 percent of Archuleta County is in an “abnormally dry” drought stage, with 47.89 percent of the county (the northern half) in a “moderate drought” stage. The far northwestern portion of Archuleta County — 2.17 percent of the county — is in a “severe drought” stage.

Bringing the crowds back to Arches National Park, other national parks: And other public lands briefs — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org)

Click the link to read the article on The Land Desk website (Jonathan P. Thompson):

February 24, 2026

🌵 Public Lands 🌲

Just when you thought the GOP’s assaults on public lands couldn’t get any worse, the Trump administration launched a new blitzkrieg on environmental protections.That includes eviscerating the National Environmental Policy Act, the federal law requiring agencies to analyze, mitigate, and avoid impacts of major federal projects and projects on public land.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum this week announced the “rescission of more than 80% of Interior’s prior NEPA regulations.” The changes, which includes limiting public comment, are aimed at streamlining permitting across the board, much as the department did with its “emergency permitting procedures” for oil and gas, uranium, coal, and critical minerals projects on public lands.

Associate Deputy Secretary Karen Budd-Falen, who is in hot water over potential ethics violations, lauded the changes, saying in a statement: “These reforms will help unleash American energy, strengthen rural communities ,and deliver real results faster for the American people.” As long as they are fossil fuels, that is, since Interior has put a de facto blockade on solar and wind developments on public lands.

Burgum finalized the NEPA rules a few days after opening 2.1 million acres of previously protected public lands in Alaska’s Dalton Corridor to new mining claims and oil and gas drilling.

***

An oil and gas drilling and hydraulic fracturing operation in the Greater Chaco Region near where the BLM plans to sell more leases this August. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

The Bureau of Land Management is, thankfully, still taking comments on proposed oil and gas leases, though it’s not clear that they will pay them any heed. You have until March 23 to give your two cents on the Farmington Field Office’s plan to auction 12 parcels covering about 16,856 acres this August. The parcels are on the checkerboard, with the biggest block of them about 20 miles east of Chaco Culture National Historical Park.

Find more information and comment at the agency’s project page.

***

This week confirmation hearings begin for Steve Pearce, Trump’s pick to lead the BLM and oversee some 245 million acres of public land.

Pearce is a hard-right Republican, former congressman from New Mexico, and no friend of public lands or environmental protections. Pearce’s political career was infused with hostility toward the agency he has been nominated to oversee. Pearce has opposed new national monument designations, is a fan of drilling public lands, has tried to weaken or eliminate the Endangered Species Act, lied about wolves in an effort to defund the Mexican wolf recovery program, received a 4% score from the League of Conservation Voters.

A few months ago we would have considered his confirmation a slam-dunk, since at the time most Republicans were still willing to debase themselves to any degree to curry favor with Trump. But with Trump’s approval rating plummeting as he suffers from more frequent cognitive mishaps and more revelations of his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein, the Senate may not be so friendly to Pearce.

***

The News: The National Park Service “expands access,” a.k.a. limits or eliminates timed-entry reservation systems, at Arches, Yosemite, Glacier, and Rocky Mountain National Parks, sparking fears that unmanageable crowds will once again overwhelm the popular parks.

The Context: In the wake of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, when Zoom boomers flooded Western communities and the masses descended on the surrounding public lands, people became increasingly concerned about the resulting crowds at national parks and at popular non-park trails and sites. Not only did the crowds risk damaging the parks’ resources, but they also potentially screwed up the visitors’ experiences.

In Arches National Park, for example, cars backed up at the entry gate for close to a mile, parking lots were crammed with vehicles and trail-jams weren’t uncommon, and on especially busy days park officials had to actually shut the gates and turn folks away — even those who may have traveled from abroad to see Delicate Arch.

To ease the pressure, the National Park Service in 2022 instituted a timed-entry reservation system during the busiest months of the year. This limited the number of people entering the park, but it also ensured the ones that made a reservation that they wouldn’t be turned away. The system led to a sharp drop in visitation during its first year, though the number of people entering the park averaged around 4,000 per day. But it has climbed every year since, including in 2025 when other Canyon Country parks saw visitation decline.

Still, some locals, presumably those of the quantity over quality variety, pushed back, saying the new system was diminishing visitation and hurting the local tourism industry. Last fall, Grand County Commissioner Brian Martinez asked the park service to revoke the timed-entry system and to build up the park’s infrastructure to enable it to maximize visitor numbers. The Trump administration’s park service apparently listened, and now timed-entry is no more.

Neither fire, smoke, nor searing heat can stop the public land swarms — Jonathan P. Thompson

You wanna know how old I am? I’m old enough to remember, way, way back to the days of yore, when federal officials and gateway-town chambers of commerce were wringing their hands in concern over a nationwide decline in visitation to national parks. Over a 13-year period, visitor numbers to 58 “nature-based” national parks—Arches, Yosemite, Yellowstone, …

🐓 Regulatory Capture Chronicles 🦊

Trump’s apparent disdain for clean air (and a healthy public) was manifested in recent weeks as the administration not only rolled back the EPA’s “endangerment finding,” which authorizes it to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, but also the Biden-era mercury toxic air standards.

Mercury emissions are an environmental and public health hazard. The Four Corners-area coal plants once kicked out more than four thousand pounds of mercury each year, along with thousands of pounds of selenium and copper and hundreds more pounds of lead, arsenic, and cadmium, not to mention sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, and other pollutants.

Aquatic Mercury Cycle. Graphic credit: USGS

Those emissions have decreased considerably over the years as federal regulations kicked in and as coal plants were shuttered altogether. Still, the Four Corners plant puts out about 150 pounds of mercury each year, along with varying quantities of other toxic metals. Most of these pollutants are then deposited in the surrounding water, on the land, and on homes. For years, rain and snow falling on Mesa Verde National Park have contained some of the highest levels of mercury in the nation, and elevated levels have even been found on Molas Pass, just south of Silverton. The mercury is then taken up by bacteria in lakes and rivers, which convert it to highly toxic methylmercury, which then enters the food chain. Mercury messes with fishes’ brains, and even at relatively low concentrations can impair bird and fish reproduction and health. It’s not so good for the people who live near the plant, drink the water, or eat those fish, either.

Because most existing coal plants in the West already complied with the Biden regulations, Trump’s rollback isn’t expected to have a significant effect in most cases (unless power plants dismantle existing pollution-control equipment). However, it is expected to allow the Colstrip coal plant in Montana — one of the nation’s worst polluters — to continue to operate (the operators complained that compliance with the Biden rule would have forced it out of business).

The San Juan Generating Station back when all four units were still operating, and spewing mercury and other nastiness on the area and its residents. The plant was shuttered in 2022 and has mostly been demolished. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

🐐 Things that get my Goat 🐐

I probably shouldn’t put this here, but geez, really? Aren’t we over the whole “The West is a big empty space that we can clutter up with our myths and technology and nuclear waste” complex? I guess not. I’m sure this guy, who is clearly from somewhere that is not the Western U.S., means well. But he needs to figure out that the West’s “empty” spaces are actually full of life and beauty and, well, space, which most of us value quite highly.

Granted, the spaces shown in this guy’s pictures do look like they may have been extensively grazed, but that does not mean they are appropriate places for a bunch of damned power- and water-guzzling data centers and their associated energy facilities.

Data Centers: The Big Buildup of the Digital Age — Jonathan P. Thompson

🤖 Data Center Watch 👾

🌞 Good News! 😎

A new study has shown that it is possible, in some cases, to build large-scale solar systems without destroying the desert on which they sit.

The Gemini Solar Project in southern Nevada is one of the nation’s largest such facilities, covering about 5,000 acres of desert land. During its construction in 2022, the developers refrained from the full “blade-and-grade” site preparation that is typical, and instead worked to minimize disturbance and leave some areas of vegetation and soils completely intact.

A group of researchers from the Desert Research Institute and the U.S. Geological Survey surveyed the plant population — with a focus on the rare and sensitive threecorner milkvetch — before and two years after construction. Their hypothesis was that the facility would detrimentally affect the plant, and that the areas nearer the panels would see the biggest impacts.

What they found is that not only did the milkvetch survive, but it actually thrived “within the novel environment created at Gemini.” The plants found after construction were larger and more fecund than those found off-site. “Our results suggest that the altered environment created by panel arrays did not alter threecorner milkvetch survivorship at Gemini.”

It’s just one study focused on one solar installation and one plant. But it does suggest that, if done correctly, utility-scale solar development does not have to be a desert’s death knell.

In related, but less sunny news: Lawmakers from a handful of states have proposed bills that would make it easier for residents and businesses to install plug-in or balcony solar panels. While these panels don’t generate a ton of electricity, they are relatively inexpensive and, as the name indicates, are pretty simple to hook up. They are common in parts of Europe, especially Germany, and are gaining popularity in the U.S. since the Trump administration has killed most federal rooftop solar subsidies. The legislation is mostly aimed at allowing folks to plug these things in without a permit or go-ahead from the utility.

Last year, Utah, of all places, actually passed one of these bills. But so far this year plug-in solar legislation has died in Wyoming and in Arizona, after utilities expressed concerns. Come on! The California bill seems to still be alive.

Parting Note

I’ll be leading a couple of workshops and giving a talk at this year’s Entrada Institute “Writing from the Land” on May 14-16 in Torrey, Utah. Check it out:

#Durango City Council approves feasibility study for #AnimasRiver surf wave — The Durango Herald

Click the link to read the article on The Durango Herald website (Christian Burney). Here’s an excerpt:

February 28, 2026

City Council approved a $44,000 feasibility study last week that will explore where a new surf wave could be optimally built along the Animas River in Durango. The nonprofit Animas River Surfers proposed the feasibility study and a partnership with the city to get it done. It raised $13,000 to contribute to the study. The city budgeted $40,000 plus a 10% contingency from the 2015 sales tax fund for the study, which City Council approved last week along with budget appropriations for a wide scope of other projects. Parks and Recreation Director Scott McClain said it has received proposals for the study, and the chosen consultant will identify possible locations for a surf wave and narrow them down to one. The consultant will engage with commercial organizations and Animas River users during the study…City spokesman Tom Sluis told The Durango Herald the city hasn’t yet hired a consultant to conduct the feasibility study and it will be another week or so before a consultant is selected.

Parallels between today’s conditions and the conditions that forced the Ancestral Puebloans to migrate

By Robert Marcos

For decades people believed that the Anasazi, (later renamed the Ancestral Puebloans), had vanished suddenly and under mysterious circumstances. But over the years a host of scientific disciplines has produced evidence that has largely resolved that mystery. Scientists shifted from viewing the Ancestral Puebloans’ departure as a “mysterious disappearance” to a deliberate migration triggered by a combination of environmental and social factors.

Ancient stone ruins surrounded by desert vegetation under a blue sky.

The Ancestral Puebloan great house, Pueblo del Arroyo, in Chaco Culture National Historical Park, New Mexico. Photo by Rationalobserver.

Types of evidence produced by recent studies

Prolonged megadroughts like the “Great Drought” (1276–1299) coincide with widespread abandonment of large Four Corners settlements and severe maize shortfalls.¹

Tree rings and other proxies show multi‑year to multi‑decadal droughts during the broader Medieval Climate Anomaly (roughly AD 800–1300).²

Environmental degradation including deforestation and topsoil erosion around major centers like Chaco and Mesa Verde, reducing fuel and soil productivity.³

Deer bones decline and turkey bones increase after about AD 1150, suggesting overhunting of wild game and heavier reliance on domestic turkeys that competed with people for maize.⁴

Hydrologic stress and extreme variability: Ancestral Puebloan societies were highly dependent on winter snowpack and limited runoff; summer rains were unreliable and often arrived as intense, erosive storms.In earlier droughts (AD 150–950), people were already resorting to melting cave ice for drinking water, indicating that marginal sources became critical during dry spells.⁵

Climate stress resulted in conflict, and the migration of Numic‑speaking groups onto the Colorado Plateau, and rapid changes in religious and political systems.⁶

Crop failures undermined rain‑making rituals and institutions, social cohesion and the legitimacy of leadership likely eroded, encouraging relocation.⁷

In short, highly climate‑sensitive dry land agriculture, local deforestation and soil loss, and repeated multi‑year droughts combined with social pressures, all combined to make life untenable in the Mesa Verde and Chaco Canyon regions.⁸

Conditions in today’s American Southwest are strikingly similar.

The environmental conditions in today’s American Southwest continue to be characterized by a high-desert environment, which is defined by extreme aridity, and unpredictable precipitation patterns. In many ways this mirrors the volatile climate that challenged the Ancestral Puebloans. Much like the late 13th century—a period marked by the infamous “Great Drought”—the modern region experiences significant moisture deficits and high evaporation rates.

Farmers today contend with a bimodal precipitation cycle: winter snowpack provides the primary source of groundwater and spring runoff, while intense, localized monsoon storms in late summer offer brief but erosive bursts of rain. These erratic shifts between prolonged dry spells and sudden deluges force a reliance on micro-climates and elevation-specific planting, as the short growing season is often bracketed by late spring frosts and early autumn freezes.

Soil conditions that consist largely of alkaline, nutrient-poor substrates, are highly susceptible to erosion. In areas like the Colorado Plateau, the soil is often a mixture of sandy loams and heavy clays that lack the organic matter found in more temperate zones. These soils are prone to crusting and salinity buildup, which can inhibit seedling emergence and water infiltration.

Just as the Ancestral Puebloans utilized check dams and lithic mulching (using stones to preserve soil moisture), modern land managers must navigate these “thin” soils that offer little buffer against environmental stress. The persistence of lithic soils and wind-blown loess ensures that any successful cultivation requires sophisticated water-harvesting techniques to prevent the precious topsoil from being stripped away by the elements.

#Colorado is debating whether to incentivize data centers. Western Slope leaders ask: What about water? — The #GlenwoodSprings Post Independent

State Highway 133 crosses the Crystal River several times as it flows downstream to its confluence with the Roaring Fork River in Carbondale. Some proponents of a federal Wild & Scenic designation are pushing for a quick timeline while others want a more cautious approach. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Click the link to read the article on the Glenwood Springs Post Independent website (Robert Tann). Here’s an excerpt:

February 27, 2026

Colorado lawmakers are asking themselves: Can they bring more data centers to the state while ensuring the power-hungry facilities don’t burden ratepayers and the environment? Dueling bills in the legislature both claim to have the answer. One would push Colorado to join the ranks of many other states that offer tax breaks to incentivize data centers — the backbone of today’s technology landscape. The other would impose more stringent regulations on the industry to protect consumers and the environment from potential harm. As the debate unfolds, some Western Slope leaders are raising concerns over what the push for data centers could mean for their communities’ most valuable resource — water…

Researchers say a large-scale data center can use up to 5 million gallons of water per day to cool down its systems. That’s enough water to serve a town of between 10,000 and 50,000 people daily, according to reporting by the Washington Post. If Colorado chooses to entice more of the thirsty facilities to set up shop, largely in metro areas, Western Slope leaders say that could mean more water being diverted from mountain communities in an era of severe drought…“We’ve struggled for a couple generations with the water of the Western Slope, which is where the water is in Colorado, moving eastward,” said Eagle County Commissioner Matt Scherr. “This is setting up even more fights with our Front Range friends than I think is necessary.”

This year’s record-low snowpack, growing drought concerns and unresolved Colorado River negotiations further punctuate that point, said Kristin Green, a water policy adviser for the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments Water Quality/Quantity Committee.

“Any kind of water use needs to be heavily scrutinized because of the dire straits we are in,” Green said.

In which my colleagues and I share thoughts on the future of #ColoradoRiver governance — John Fleck (InkStain.net) #COriver #aridification

Colorado River “Beginnings” where the snow accumulates. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism

Click the link to read the article on the InkStain website (John Fleck):

February 27, 2026

It is hard to know where to begin. The Department of the Interior’s Post-2026 Colorado River draft environmental impact statement, and the deep questions it raises, is an “everything including the kitchen sink” sort of process.

But at its root, the question it raises is simple: Tell us what you’re going to do.

It is easiest to quote the Draft EIS itself on the central question: “In critically dry periods, all alternatives have unacceptable performance.” Roger that. Tell us what you’re going to do.

In the short run, with a meager snowpack and no clear explanation of how federal and state managers are going to operate the reservoir system, the basin’s dams and diversions now, we have no clear picture of what will happen in 2026. Tell us what you’re going to do.

Some specifics

The ad-hoc collective that Allen Best dubbed “the Traveling Wilburys of the Colorado River” – Anne Castle, Eric Kuhn, Jack Schmidt, Kathryn Sorensen, Rin Tara, and me – took yet another stab at offering our suggestions in comments we submitted yesterday to Interior’s P26 EIS process.

I’ve been mentally largely elsewhere lately, finishing up the book and managing my health (I’m doing great! Thanks for asking!), so I mostly show up at the last minute on these things to dub my vocals, but my friends are very kind and inclusive, and they do good work. In particular, stuff like this full of both useful NEPA-speak and also substance:

As I said: Tell us what you’re going to do.

As I said: Tell us what you’re going to do.

This one’s on you, Secretary Burgum. We do offer suggestions, but if you don’t like ours, then tell us your alternative: Tell us what you’re going to do.

This one has seemed for a long time like a no-brainer to me:

This one’s on my Upper Basin leaders: Really?

Again, Secretary Burgum: Tell us what you’re going to do.

The colossal failure of the Colorado River Basin leadership is on display in this simple sentence from the draft EIS: “In critically dry periods, all alternatives have unacceptable performance.” [ed. emphasis mine]

You’ve spent the last few years telling us what you can’t do. It’s on you now: Tell us what you’re going to do.

(Lots more in the full comments, it’s a useful primer on the current state of play.)

Soil-moisture system will yield information for farmers, foresters and forecasters — Christopher Outcalt (#Colorado State University)

Helen Silver has helped lead a statewide effort to improve soil-moisture monitoring and to make data widely available. She is co-director of the Integrated Rocky Mountain-region Innovation Center for Healthy Soils. Photography: Matthew Staver.

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado State University website (Christopher Outcalt):

February 10, 2026

Key takeaways

CSU scientists have installed dozens of new soil moisture monitoring sensors across the state, increasing capacity by 60%, and have received additional funding to install more sensors this year.

Researchers have also launched a new web-based platform that allows anyone to view both historical and real-time statewide soil moisture data.

Interest in soil moisture is skyrocketing, and the data is useful to farmers, foresters, scientists, water managers, weather forecasters and others.

Colorado State University is leading an effort to track a critical but unseen resource in Colorado: water stored in soil. This statewide effort to enhance soil moisture monitoring is producing important insights that can help everyone from farmers to weather forecasters better predict water supplies, understand the risk of wildfire and assess the impacts of drought.

“Soil moisture is one of the most under-monitored natural resources, yet it is a foundational driver of ecosystem services and risk management,” said Helen Silver, co-director of CSU’s Integrated Rocky Mountain-region Innovation Center for Healthy Soils, or IN-RICHES, which is helping to lead the work. “Because soil moisture data are both scarce and difficult to access, this project addresses both challenges by expanding monitoring infrastructure while making the resulting information openly available and usable for land managers, policymakers and researchers.”

In Colorado, estimates suggest that the amount of water stored in soils is more than twice the amount that flows on the surface. As the Western U.S. faces growing challenges with water availability due to drought, climate variability and competing demands, there is heightened interest in better understanding and monitoring this critical resource. The work is being done in collaboration with the Colorado Climate Center and the CSU’s Department of Computer Sciences.

Historically, soil moisture monitoring in Colorado has been concentrated in high-elevation mountains, with croplands and forests underrepresented. This imbalance has limited the ability of land managers and others to fully understand soil-water dynamics across areas where water scarcity, wildfire risk and agricultural drought are most acute.

Aimed at filling this critical gap, the federal government allocated $1.45 million to CSU in spring 2023 to lead an expansion of the number of in-ground sensors, create a publicly available platform to increase access and expand other precipitation monitoring efforts. From May to October, a team of researchers installed 64 additional sensors at underrepresented sites across the state, expanding Colorado’s monitoring capacity by roughly 60%. This project was known as the Colorado Open Soil Moisture Monitoring Network. CSU recently received additional funding from the state’s Colorado Water Plan Grant Program to install another 15 sensors this year.

In addition to installing new sensors, CSU has launched Quench, a web-based monitoring platform that collects real-time soil moisture data from multiple networks into a single location.

An above-ground apparatus is connected to below-ground moisture sensors that help scientists understand the amount of water stored in soils. Photo credit: Colorado State University

Beneficial collaboration

There are several entities monitoring soil moisture in Colorado, including the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service, which operates snow telemetry, or SNOTEL, sites; the Roaring Fork Observation Network, supported by the nonprofit Aspen Global Change Institute; and the CSU-run Colorado Agricultural Meteorological Network, which operates automated weather stations capable of tracking soil moisture.

Quench is the first centralized tool for viewing all available soil moisture data, including historic data, in Colorado.

“The integration of soil moisture data into a single platform is a monumental advancement,” said Megan Machmuller, IN-RICHES co-director and a research scientist in CSU’s Soil and Crop Sciences Department. “This publicly accessible tool will streamline comparisons across the state, providing critical insights for managing water resources and proactively addressing risks.”

Expanding the soil moisture network and launching Quench involved input from dozens of water managers, farmers and ranchers, researchers, and state and local officials. Elise Osenga, who works for the University of Colorado in partnership with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Integrated Drought Information System, said she appreciated the collaboration. “There’s so much interest in soil moisture, especially in the Western U.S., because of recent intense droughts,” Osenga said. “But a lot of people aren’t really sure where to find that information.”

She added, “This work is beneficial not just for the information itself, but also as a model of collaboration; CSU did a great job of reaching out to different groups to develop this platform.”

Eric Schroder, a soil scientist with the U.S. Forest Service, is looking forward to sharing Quench with Forest Service personnel in Colorado. “The ability to easily access real-time soil moisture data from multiple partner networks and explore historical trends to see how conditions are changing over time will support and improve our ongoing management of USFS lands in Colorado,” Schroder said.

Schroder emphasized that the Forest Service relies on soil moisture data to support disaster preparedness and to inform ongoing land and water management operations, including fire prediction, controlled burn operations, drought forecasting, landslide risk, flood risk, reforestation initiatives and timber management.

In addition to installing new sensors, the CSU team plans to continue to upgrade Quench, eventually integrating satellite-based soil moisture data and other features.

Helen Silver | Co-director of IN-RICHES

Soil science • Soil water dynamics • Drought and water resilience • Soil data systems

Helen Silver is an environmental policy expert focused on soil health, water and sustainable food systems in the Rocky Mountain West, bridging science, law and data to support farmers, land managers and climate resilience efforts.

Arrange an interview

The Quench Open Knowledge Platform brings data collected from in-situ soil moisture sensing stations across a range of monitoring networks into one easy-to-use platform. Users can view current conditions, compare trends across regions, and access satellite-derived soil moisture data.

With no end in sight to dry days and high #wildfire risk, #Colorado eyes multiagency task force — Jerd Smith (Fresh Water News) #drought #aridification

West Drought Monitor map February 24, 2026.

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education website (Jerd Smith):

February 26, 2026

Colorado has started preliminary planning for a multiagency drought task force to help cope with what most experts fear will be a summer seriously low on water and high on wildfire risk.

The task force would include agencies focused on water, agriculture and emergency management, among others, according to Emily Adrid, water planning and climate impact specialist at the Colorado Water Conservation Board. Her comments came at a meeting of the state’s Water Monitoring Committee this week. When the task force could launch hasn’t yet been determined.

The last time such a task force was called into action was in the 2020-21 drought, according to the board. If needed, the task force can work with ad hoc groups and the governor’s office to coordinate release of state emergency funds.

The news comes as Colorado continues to struggle with a deeply dry and warm winter and forecasts showing the trend continuing this spring.

Colorado measures its water supplies using a calendar that runs from Oct. 1 through Sept. 30, a period known as the water year.

The first four months of the 2026-27 water year are the warmest in 131 years, said Russ Schumacher, state climatologist at Colorado State University’s Colorado Climate Center.

“This is breaking the record by a huge margin,” Schumacher said.

And there is little if any relief in the spring forecasts.

“We might hope for a miracle this spring,” he said, “but this is not what’s in these forecasts.”

Statewide reservoir storage levels are holding steady above 80%, but streamflow forecasts indicate Colorado is likely to receive just 63% of its normal water flows, and possibly less, according to the Natural Resources Conservation Service in Lakewood.

In response, cities will also coordinate efforts to alert the public to the potential for water and fire emergencies. Their hope is that a unified approach to watering restrictions will reduce water use.

The city of Westminster is among cities gearing up for an ultradry summer. Drew Beckwith, the city’s water resources manager, said getting plans in place early and encouraging everyone to share the same message will be critical this year and next.

“We haven’t had a big drought since 2002,” Beckwith said. “We’re all out of practice.”

Even if major spring snowstorms occur that could lessen water shortages and fire risks, 2026 is still expected to be strikingly dry and warm.

And that is not as worrisome as the prospect of a follow-on drought in 2027, Beckwith said.

“It’s not the one-year drought that is our Achilles’ heel,” he said. “It’s multiple dry years in a row when things get concerning. Since we don’t know what next year’s snowpack is going to look like, we don’t want to not do anything. Instead, we’re saying, ‘Hey, we don’t know what’s going to happen so let’s all get on the same page now.’”

More by Jerd Smith

Key Points

Snow Drought Conditions Summary

Current Conditions

If Precipitation Fell, It Fell as Rain for Many

Winter Concludes as the Record Warmest for Much of the West

Winter Ends With More Record-Low Snow

Rocky Mountain Snow Conditions (Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Utah, Wyoming)

Northern Rocky Mountains

Central Rocky Mountains

Record-Low Snow Water Equivalent Since Mid-January in the Upper Colorado River Basin

Looking Ahead

Temperature and Precipitation Outlooks

Water Supply Forecasts

Wildfire

For More Information, Contact:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

How unusual is this winter’s snowpack, and what makes it significant?

Beyond skiing, which activities feel the impact of a low-snow winter?

Why is this season particularly hard for ski resorts?

What does low snowpack mean for spring and summer river economies?

How does wildfire complicate the picture?

How do resorts try to adapt in the short and long term?

What ripple effects are communities seeing beyond lift ticket sales?

What conversations should communities be having right now?

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

This Week’s Drought Summary

Looking Ahead

Share this:

Like this:

🌵 Public Lands 🌲

🥵 Aridification Watch 🐫

📖 Reading (and watching) Room 🧐

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Key Points:

Other Highlights:

Temperature

Precipitation

Drought

Monthly Report

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: