My million-dollar hometown!? + Warmest water year + Trump guts more public land protections — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org)

Downtown Durango in the mid-1970s, when housing prices were about 1/100 of the current median price.

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

June 23, 2026

🏠 Random Real Estate Room 🤑

What in the holy gentrification hell is this news?! The median price for a single-family in-town home in Durango, Colorado, surpassed $1 million this month. Yes, a million buckaroos.

Sure, Aspen and Jackson and Park City and Telluride surpassed that revolting number long ago. But this is the town where I was born, grew up, ran around in the streets, and played in the river. It’s where we messed around among the old workings of the power plant and climbed on the splintery railroad freight cars on the siding behind Kroegers, where we fished and waded in the shadow of the massive uranium tailings pile at the base of Smelter Mountain, and where we had sword battles and BMX rallies up at the Test Trax. It was a tourist town, sure, and kind of a regional hub for doctors and lawyers, but it was also a ski-bum town and a working-class town and an agricultural town and a college town and one-time mining-service town on the edge of the gas patch.

It was a place where my parents — a freelance writer and a freelance artist without any independent wealth — could afford to buy a historic home in a lovely neighborhood just across the swinging bridge from downtown. They were not an anomaly. Our neighbors were working folks, too, from a chef to a bank teller to a sanitation worker to a day-care operator to a retired coal miner.

The house needed some work, I suppose, but I didn’t notice. I was too busy running around in the big yard, or climbing the old apricot tree that we outfitted with a treehouse, or sitting on the low-angled roof on the addition in the back that needed to be shoveled during big snowstorms. There was room for a garden and even an old garage that was a pretty nice clubhouse, black widows and all. The big maple in the front yard served as a good base for epic block-wide hide-and-seek contests on long, summer evenings, and the side streets were perfect for soccer games or setting up bike jumps.

I realize I’m romanticizing a bit, but Durango, especially that neighborhood, was a great place to be a kid. I’m sure it still is, and may even be better now: Today’s young Durangotangs don’t have to worry about radon-emanating uranium dust blowing across town, they can ride their bikes all the way through town without ever encountering a car — stopping by the beautiful library and the rec center in the process, and the river water has less metal loading than it did back then.

But those amenities come with an ever-increasing price tag. In the mid-eighties, after they split up, my parents sold the house for something like $10,000. About a decade later, it sold for $122,500, and the new owner pretty much gutted, rebuilt, and added on to it. According to Realtor.com, the same house would sell today for about $1 million (it’s not on the market). There are seven single-family houses in that neighborhood listed for sale on Zillow. They range in price from $850,000 to $3.2 million; a townhome six blocks away from our former house is going for $635,000.

Clearly, these kinds of prices are far out of reach of most wage earners. Even if you could come up with a 10% down payment for the townhome, your monthly payment would still be almost $3,500, which is considered affordable for someone making about $200,000 or more per year. There are just three in-town homes on the market for under $300,000: Two single-wide mobiles with $800-$1,100 monthly lot rents, and a small 80s-era condo. Even these would be a tough haul for someone making the local median wage of about $45,000. Paying rent in Durango isn’t much better, with advertised long-term monthly rates ranging from about $1,100 for a studio, to upwards of $4,000 for a big house.

Obviously, Durango’s not alone. The entire nation is grappling with a housing unaffordability crisis. But Durango and the public lands gateway towns/amenity economies in the West are among the worst, because not only are housing prices rising more dramatically (the statewide Colorado median sales price is about $560,000), but wages are not increasing proportionately.

The reason prices are so high is simply because Durango’s a desirable place to live, not because it is a high-paying job hot spot. And this kind of desire is bottomless, limited only by the amount people are willing to pay to own a piece of the place. And, it seems, a certain percentage of the population has virtually unlimited funds for investing in real estate, whether it’s a primary residence, a second home, or a short-term rental income property.

To be clear, this is not a critique of folks buying or selling real estate, or of the people brokering the deals. I don’t blame people for wanting to live in Durango or for paying market rates to do so, nor do I fault anyone for selling out while prices are high. Real estate agents, meanwhile, are just doing one of the few locally based jobs that can support a life in Durango; they don’t set the prices, the market does. And because their income is derived from the community, they are more likely to invest back in that community via philanthropy, volunteering, or running for public office.

People who are attracted to Durango’s unique amenities and spend big bucks to be here are also more likely to support improvements, whether it’s pushing for better sidewalks and services and more trails and recreational infrastructure, spending money on better restaurants, or donating to the arts and charity and nonprofits. Maybe they’ll bring in money from outside to start up new businesses, creating jobs while also adding to the pool of amenities, thereby potentially improving all residents’ quality of life.

I don’t think I’m stretching when I say that this phenomenon is exactly what a lot of forward-thinking locals, including my parents, were going for back in the 1970s and 1980s. The extractive industries that had built the town — and polluted it — were on their way out. Tourism, alone, couldn’t fill the resulting void. So they planned on banking on quality of life, or the not-yet-named amenities economy, to attract new, cleaner industries and the people to run them.

They didn’t seem to anticipate that the resulting feedback loop rotates in both directions. As the place becomes more desirable, it drives up home prices. Higher prices dampen entrepreneurship and innovation and imperil economic class diversity. The working class is pushed out to the only slightly more affordable surrounding communities, increasing traffic and pollution and making the roads even more unsafe. Businesses have a harder and harder time finding employees. And, eventually, quality of life will begin to suffer, and the Durango that folks bought into for a million bucks won’t be so desirable anymore.

Durango’s not near the breaking point, yet. There are still plenty of locals, young and old, who have been around since long before the market went berserk, and who are committed to the community. There are a lot of established businesses and, somehow, a handful of new, innovative ones have managed to get going and even thrive. And the place still attracts enough new, full-time residents, even ones who can’t really afford to live there, to keep it dynamic and vibrant.

There are also inklings of efforts to ease the housing crisis. The local school district has raised teachers’ starting salary to just above $50,000, which is still way less than they deserve, but it’s significantly higher than a decade ago. And it purchased a 35-unit apartment building for workforce housing; Fort Lewis College also owns an apartment building for staff housing. The city has several affordable housing projects in various phases of development, and a number of non-profits and other organizations have their own workforce/affordable housing initiatives in place.

Whether these efforts will be enough to keep Durango whole amid the rapidly escalating prices isn’t clear. I just hope Durango’s kids of the future, regardless of economic class, will be able to derive as much joy from the place as I did a half-century ago.

“Shaping an urban area” in the rural West — Jonathan P. Thompson

On the housing supply-side theory — Jonathan P. Thompson

A pumpjack in the Aneth Oil Field during a rain storm. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

🐓 Regulatory Capture Chronicles 🦊

THE NEWS: The Trump administration moved yesterday to roll back Biden-era oil and gas leasing reforms for public lands, and to do away with the Bureau of Land Management’s oil and gas waste prevention rule. The two-pronged assault continues the administration’s relentless evisceration of regulations aimed at protecting the land, air, water, climate, and American taxpayers from oil and gas drilling. The administration claims the rollback is to clear the way for its “energy dominance” agenda, which is code for helping petroleum corporations to rake in even more obscene profits (which are already high thanks to Trump’s war on Iran).

THE CONTEXT: The environmental movement gave Joe Biden a lot of grief for failing to shut down oil and gas drilling on federal land, for permitting big projects like Willow in Alaska, and for handing out quite a few drilling permits.

But throughout his term, the administration was doing important work to reform oil and gas leasing and to try to get a handle on pollution from oil and gas wells on federal lands. These new or revised rules included:

The oil and gas waste prevention rule: required oil and gas operators on federal lands to find and repair leaks in their infrastructure and to phase out flaring and venting of methane — a.k.a. natural gas. The rules complement the EPA’s similar regulations.

Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, having about 86 times the warming potential of carbon dioxide over the near-term. Oil drillers tend to vent or flare it and other associated gases, since it isn’t as profitable as oil. Between 2010 and 2020, oil and gas operations on federal and tribal land vented and flared an average of 44.2 billion cubic feet of methane annually. That’s as bad for the climate as burning around 9 million tons of coal. And since operators don’t pay royalties on gas they throw away, that cost American taxpayers some $166 million in lost revenue over a decade.

The rules aimed to rein that in by gradually decreasing the maximum amount of methane that can be flared or vented and charging royalties on the gases that are wasted. It was expected to slash greenhouse gas emissions and result in about $50 million annually in added royalty revenue.

Revisions to the BLM’s oil and gas leasing rules: Included raising the reclamation bonding rate from $10,000 to a minimum of $150,000 per lease, and $500,000 for all of a company’s wells in one state. This acts as an insurance policy to ensure the company pays at least some of the cost of plugging and reclaiming a well once it’s done producing, taking some of the burden off taxpayers.

The changes also increased minimum bids, ended non-competitive lease sales, and raised the 12.5% royalty rate to 16.67% to give taxpayers a slightly better return on their oil and gas.

Those are not onerous changes, by any means. They really are incremental ones, that don’t go nearly far enough: A statewide reclamation bond of $500,000 is a mere drop in the bucket for a major oil and gas company, yet it will only fund the cleanup of a handful of wells (whereas a company can have dozens to hundreds of wells in a single state).

Nevertheless, the Trump administration has decided that the rules are “being weaponized to penalize energy development,” which can be translated as: They are marginally reducing petroleum corporations’ obscenely high profits.

And so, the administration is:

Reducing the statewide reclamation bond amount to just $25,000, which might cover one-third of the cost of reclaiming a single well, potentially leaving you and me and other U.S. taxpayers to pick up the millions of dollars remaining on a single company’s cleanup tab.

Bringing back non-competitive leasing.

Shortening public comment periods on proposed leases from 90 days to just 10 days, effectively cutting the public out of the process altogether.

Reducing filing fees, and more.

And gutting the waste-prevention rule by eliminating waste minimization plan requirements and otherwise opening the door to more venting and flaring.

The “Big Beautiful Bill” already slashed the royalty rates back to the 100-year-old 12.5% rate.

Oy.

⛈️ Wacky Weather Watch⚡️

The May data are in and it’s now official: The first eight months of the 2026 water year were the warmest on record for the Southwest and much of the Northern Rockies. This isn’t all that surprising, given that it was also the warmest meteorological autumn, winter, and spring for the same areas.

This explains why the snowpack was so weak, and streamflows are now so dismal, even though precipitation accumulation has been closer to — but still below — normal so far this water year. June appears to be on pace to set another record average high temperature for the region, and forecasts are calling for a warmer-than-average July and August, as well. El Niño-driven monsoons could cool things off a bit, however, and soothe drought conditions.

That monsoon can’t come too soon. Several large fires are now burning in the Interior West, with the highest concentration in western Utah. Active blazes include:

Colorado must have made a deal with the Devil? It’s surrounded by fires on three sides, yet has avoided any catastrophic blazes — so far. Source: Watch Duty.

The 10,000-acre Cottonwood Fire near Beaver, Utah, which just blew up on June 22. By the time you read this it likely will be far larger.

The 3,800-acre Sawmill Fire, just east of the Nevada-Utah line.

The 24,000-acre Iron Fire four miles from Eureka, Utah.

The 20,000-acre Hastings Fire south of the Great Salt Lake.

The 566-acre Bonneville Fire on the foothills in northeast Salt Lake City. This one is scary because of its proximity to neighborhoods, but it was 43% contained as of Tuesday morning and no evacuations were in place.

The Kane Springs and Grapevine fires in eastern Nevada, each at about 15,000 acres.

There are also a number of blazes in Arizona.

#Colorado’s rivers and streams are expected to flow at only a quarter of normal levels during June and July, 2026, following what the NRCS referred to as an “unusual volatile winter” — #Aspen Times

Click the link to read the article on The Aspen Times website (Ali Longwell):

Colorado’s rivers and streams are expected to flow at only a quarter of normal levels during June and July, following what the Natural Resources Conservation Service referred to as an “unusual volatile winter” in its June water supply outlook. On the Western Slope, the outlook is even more grim, with the Colorado River headwaters basin expected to see streamflows 21% of normal and the Yampa-White-Little Snake basin 19% of normal during these two months. This year, Colorado’s snowpack accumulation was the lowest on record, affirmed Nagam Bell, a hydrologist for the Natural Resources Conservation Service in the state, at the June 16 Colorado Water Conservation Board’s water conditions monitoring meeting. In March, a heat wave spurred an early meltoff of the snowpack, causing streamflows to rise ahead of schedule. Bell reported that March streamflow was 140% of normal, “typically because we don’t have runoff that early.” While this depleted nearly half of the snowpack, the Natural Resources Conservation Service reported that cooler conditions and late-season snowfall [helped]…In mid-May, Colorado’s streams saw a second rise and peak that’s not uncommon to see that time of year, Bell said. The May peak, however, is normally the first — not the last — of the season…

Statewide, observed streamflows from March through May were 50% of normal, Bell reported. April and May alone saw streamflows at 41% of normal due to the March runoff skewing the agency’s seasonal comparison. Meltoff this year was 36 days ahead of schedule, Bell said. By June 1, owing to this early and accelerated melt, the Natural Resources Conservation Service reported that 91% of its SNOTEL stations were fully melted out — compared to the normal 56% for that date. Within the Colorado River headwaters, only 3% of normal snowpack for this date remained. The Yampa, White and Little Snake basin was the highest in the state, sitting at 30% of normal on June 1…Statewide snowpack was 100% melted by June 10.

The #ColoradoRiver is vanishing — and the fixes are getting weird: “The Law of the River is based on math that just doesn’t add up” — Jake Bittle (Grist.org) #COriver #aridification

Hite Marina and boat ramp on what once was the northern end of Lake Powell. Jonathan P. Thompson photo via The Land Desk.

Click the link to read the article on the Grist website (Jake Bittle):

June 23, 2026

Desalination. Pipelines. Cloud seeding. Those are just a few ideas for how the Trump administration should save the desiccated waterway.

The crisis on the Colorado River is simple: The seven Western states that border the essential waterway use more water than it contains. Chronic overuse [ed. allowed and caused by the “Law of the River”] has drained its two largest reservoirs, Lake Powell and Lake Mead, and a two-decade drought cycle has pushed them to the point of collapse.

The dream solution to this crisis is an agreement among all involved to use less water. Such a deal would decide who must reduce consumption, which means asking which cities would ban irrigating lawns and washing cars and which farmers would rip up their fields.

This has proven impossible. The states have been trying to work this out since the last dry spell, in 2022, but talks have ended in frustration and name-calling. The main sticking point is between the Upper Basin states, led by Colorado and Utah (along with Wyoming and New Mexico), and the Lower Basin states of Arizona, California, and Nevada. Each side believes the other has a legal and a moral responsibility to cut usage during dry years. The stalemate means the Trump administration must design a schedule of restrictions ahead of a crucial deadline in September. So far, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum has balked at resolving the quarrel.

Instead, the administration is turning to a far less controversial plan: Throw money at the problem. The Interior Department and Congress are pondering a slew of projects that could increase supply — a reversal of President Trump’s zeal for cutting federal grants. The seven state governors have sent Washington a “wish list” of over $50 billion, and several startups have their hands out as well.

Federal investment makes sense given the scale of the problem and the intractable impasse, said Jennifer Pitt, the Colorado River program director at the National Audubon Society and an expert on the governance of the river.

“It is something easier for people to agree on,” she said. “This is a slow moving crisis, but it is a crisis, and we do see the federal funding come in to address crises in other parts of the country. Just because this is a slow moving one doesn’t make it any less worthy.”

During a Senate committee hearing last week, the Interior Department’s top water official, Andrea Travnicek, said the agency has yet to vet the wish list. She didn’t offer a specific funding request, and urged lawmakers to be “thoughtful” about how they spend taxpayer money. But senators in both parties seemed to encourage new investments. “The basin should not be forced to choose between stabilizing the present and negotiating the future,” said Senator Martin Heinrich, a Democrat from New Mexico.

The possibility of new funding marks a return to the policy of Joe Biden’s administration. During the last extreme drought in 2022, the Interior Department paid farmers billions to leave their fields fallow, but that money, from the Inflation Reduction Act, has almost run dry.

The difference now is that the roster of proposals is far more ambitious, and some far less certain to bolster the basin’s water supply. They range from desalination plants and desert groundwater pipelines to forest ecosystem restoration.

Here are a few of the major solutions state officials and companies are proposing.

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

Desalination

As the Colorado River crisis has deepened, some cities in the Southwest have eyed desalination, which extracts salt from sea water. A company called Poseidon Water opened such a plant in San Diego in 2015 and tried for decades to open another in Los Angeles. The wish list to the Interior Department requests as much as $6 billion to build one across the border in the Mexican state of Baja California to supplement Arizona’s vanishing Colorado River supplies.

The Interior Department also signed an agreement in early June with San Diego’s water agency that explains how that plant would help. Rather than sending treated seawater inland, states would pay the city to take less from the Colorado River. Arizona stands to lose the most water during drought years, and it would be the most likely to participate in that exchange.

But desalination is expensive, requires enormous amounts of electricity, and state-of-the-art industrial technology. The Poseidon facility cost $1 billion, but San Diego has diversified its water portfolio so much that it no longer needs all the water it must purchase from the plant. Trading water could help it offset some of that cost.

Taming tech and power

Nevada uses less water than any state on the river and has cut usage in Las Vegas by replacing grass with artificial turf. It is now seeking money to slake some of its last thirsty industries: power plants and data centers. These facilities need a fraction of what agriculture requires, but they dominate usage in the Silver State.

The state’s wish list includes $300 million to retrofit its largest natural gas plant and reduce water consumption by an amount equivalent to more than 3,000 average homes. It also seeks $650 million to install zero-water cooling systems in airports, schools, and industrial facilities. These closed-loop systems, which recirculate the same cooled water or, in the case of data centers, blast hot servers with cold air, have become more popular in Western states amid concerns about the tech boom’s growing thirst.

A cloud seeding generator is located in Grand Mesa. The Colorado Water Conservation Board administers the state’s weather modification program, which permits cloud seeding operations. Colorado Water Conservation Board/Courtesy photo

Squeezing rain from the clouds

Whereas Lower Basin states like Arizona and California can draw from the Colorado River’s big reservoirs on demand, northern states at its headwaters only receive the rain and snow that feed it.

These Upper Basin states have been trying for decades to engineer more precipitation, with support from Washington, D.C. It sounds futuristic, but cloud seeding — spraying salt or silver iodide into clouds, forcing them to release water they might otherwise retain — has proven fairly effective on a small scale. Utah spends a few million dollars each year doing this, and officials say it could boost annual snowpack by as much as 10 percent.

In addition, a few startups are pitching cheaper and more scalable versions of this technology. Rain Enhancement, a Florida-based outfit, says it has brought about 15,000 homes’ worth of rain to a river tributary in Utah this year; another, Rainmaker, says it can produce 1,000 times that much by 2031. That’s enough to close the supply gap on the river. That promise is fanciful, but these companies could secure federal funding from an administration that loves the tech industry.

Mining a hoard of desert groundwater

The West teems with companies that have promised miracles, from building a 300-mile pipeline to tapping a hoard of groundwater in Nevada. But perhaps no project has had a longer and more turbulent history than Cadiz, a proposal, almost 30 years old, to export groundwater from an aquifer in the Mojave Desert.

This has drawn vicious opposition from environmentalists and the late California Senator Dianne Feinstein, who called it a “grave threat” to the desert. Cadiz experienced several setbacks during the Biden administration: It lost a federal permit, California ended its pipeline lease, Arizona declined to support it, and its stock price fell to almost zero. But Susan Kennedy, its CEO, says Cadiz is flowing again with a funding agreement from the Interior Department to study exchanges between Cadiz and the Colorado River.

The company still needs to finish two pipelines, one to the Central Valley and another to the aqueduct that carries Colorado River water to California. It also must build a plant to remove contaminants in the water, but Kennedy believes she can have the tap running by 2028.

“This isn’t a competition; it’s an all-of-the-above situation,” she said of the situation on the river. That may be so, but the seven states did not include Cadiz on the wish list sent the Interior Department.

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

Where do things stand with the #drought, and where are we headed? — Russ Schumacher (#Colorado Climate Center)

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado State University website (Russ Schumacher):

June 18, 2026

After the worst year for mountain snowpack since snowpack has been measured, we are now starting to see the extremely low river flows that were expected as a result. Some areas have received beneficial rains over the last couple months, but June has now started off very warm and dry. The monsoon season will be starting soon, and we have the potential for a “Super El Niño” later this year. What do all of these mean for Colorado’s drought and how it might evolve through the rest of 2026?

How this water year’s drought has unfolded

As you hopefully read in our monthly summary, May was pretty “normal” for Colorado, which may have felt unusual because we hadn’t had weather close to normal in quite some time. In some parts of the state like northern Colorado, precipitation in April and May brought some short-term drought relief, but the overall precipitation deficits across Colorado for the water year are very large. Taking a glance at our “water year at a glance” figure, we can see that May kept the statewide water year precipitation deficits from getting larger, but didn’t reduce them in any substantial way. And with the first half of June being warm and dry, those deficits are growing again.

Colorado water year 2026 temperature and precipitation at a glance. Top panel shows the temperature for each day of the water year with respect to the 1991-2020 average, and beneath are maps showing the monthly ranks and departures from average. The bottom panel shows the accumulated statewide precipitation surplus or deficit (corresponding to the vertical axis on the left in inches), along with the daily statewide average precipitation with black bars (using the vertical axis on the right in inches). Beneath are maps showing the monthly ranks and percent of average precipitation. From https://climate.colostate.edu/co_cag/index.html

Nearly the entire state is in drought on the June 16 US Drought Monitor, and nearly 80% of the state is in D2 (severe) drought or worse. As has been very widely discussed, the mountain snowpack this year was awful. Because the snowpack is the source of a majority of the water that flows into the river systems that originate in Colorado and flow in all directions, it was clear that streamflows were going to be extremely low this year. That expectation is now coming to pass.

Looking at hydrographs from a couple of the major river systems, we see that the Arkansas River is likely to end up with its lowest water-year cumulative streamflow—even worse than the previous record low in 2002—while the Colorado River is tracking pretty closely with the 2002 record.

Hydrograph showing 7-day average flow (in cubic feet per second on a log axis) for the Arkansas River at Salida. The current water year is in black, the median over two historical periods is shown in green dashed lines, and percentiles and the historical maximum and minimum flow years are also shown. More graphs at https://climate.colostate.edu/drought/#streamflow

Hydrograph showing 7-day average flow (in cubic feet per second on a log axis) for the Colorado River at Cameo. The current water year is in black, the median over two historical periods is shown in green dashed lines, and percentiles and the historical maximum and minimum flow years are also shown. More graphs at https://climate.colostate.edu/drought/#streamflow

Some rivers (such as the White River in northwest Colorado) are going to break the previous record low flow by a large margin, others (like the Rio Grande) are relative bright spots and won’t approach historic lows, but there’s not any stream in the state where flows will be “good” this year. (These interactive maps from the USGS show current conditions, and all the exclamation points really drive home the message about how concerning the flows are!)

The situation in 2002 is a good point of comparison, because it was probably the worst statewide drought Colorado has ever had. Precipitation in water year 2002 through May was quite a bit lower than even this year, but this water year has been much, much warmer. On the “quadrant chart” of temperature and precipitation for Colorado as a whole, those two water years are the farthest separated from any others in the historical record: 2002 for its extreme lack of precipitation, 2026 for its record-smashing warmth.

“Quadrant chart” showing precipitation on the horizontal axis and temperature on the vertical axis, with each October through May period for Colorado statewide shown by a circle; the current water year (2026) is highlighted with a star. From https://climate.colostate.edu/co_cag/quadrant.html

This illustrates the influence that temperature has had on drought and water availability this year: even though precipitation has “only” been in the bottom-10 of water years historically, the record warmth depleted the snowpack and increased evaporative demand such that this year will rival 2002 for the worst year for river flows across Colorado.

Reservoir storage is a mixed bag around the state. Some of the large reservoirs, like Lake Granby in northern Colorado, are storing just slightly less water than usual going into the summer, but others like Blue Mesa on the Gunnison River are at much lower levels. And the big reservoirs downstream on the Colorado River, Lake Powell and Lake Mead, are approaching all-time record lows.

Where are we headed?

Have you heard that there’s going to be a Super El Niño? Surely you have – at every talk I’ve given in the last few months, no matter the audience, someone has asked about this. And it isn’t all hype: El Niño conditions have officially emerged this month, and all indications are that it will be a strong one, meaning that waters in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of South America will be much warmer than average. But El Niño has its biggest influences on weather in North America during the fall through spring — before then, we have the North American Monsoon season, which in Colorado typically gets started in July and goes through September, and can bring regular thunderstorm rainfall to especially western and southern Colorado. As this nice explainer from the University of Arizona discusses, connections between El Niño and the monsoon are not all that strong. So before we get to El Niño, let’s look at what’s expected for the monsoon season.

All indications have been pointing to an active monsoon season, with odds tilted toward above-average precipitation across the southwest. The latest seasonal outlooks from NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center, just released this week, continue this message.

NOAA Climate Prediction Center Outlook for July-August-September 2026. The pin on the map is at Durango, and the pie charts at left show the probabilities of above, near, and below normal temperature and precipitation at that location. From https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions/long_range/interactive/index.php

For the main monsoon season of July, August, and September, the outlook shows increased odds of above-average precipitation across western Colorado. Note though that it’s not a *huge* tilt in the odds — the pie chart shows that at Durango, it only increases the probability of a wet monsoon season from the 33% that you’d get by throwing darts at a dartboard, to 42%. Even so, considering the long-term drought, having an active monsoon season would help to reduce wildfire risk, and reduce demand for water, even if it wouldn’t have much influence on water supply and extremely low river flows. There isn’t much signal in the outlook east of the Continental Divide, with “equal chances” of above, below, and near-normal precipitation there.

OK, now back to El Niño and what it might mean for later in the year. The graph below shows that by late fall/early winter, El Niño conditions are guaranteed, and there’s a greater than 60% chance that it will be very strong (aka “Super”).

ENSO strength probabilities from NOAA/CPC: https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso_advisory/ensodisc.shtml

What does El Niño typically mean for Colorado? In general, it tilts conditions away from drought and toward wetter patterns. Particularly in the fall, most of the state has had wet conditions during El Niños in the past, and during the few “Super El Niños” that have happened before, all of them have had above-average fall precipitation. This gives some reason for optimism that there could be drought relief in the coming months, even though conditions are in very bad shape right now.

Correlation between the the Relative Oceanic Niño Index and Colorado precipitation, using data from 1950-2025. Areas in green are wetter during El Niño, areas in blue are wetter during La Niña in the seasons shown. Only areas with 95% statistical significance in the relationship are shown. Figure courtesy of Peter Goble, Colorado Climate Center

NOAA’s outlook gives a message consistent with these historical correlations, with the entire state under increased probabilities of wetter-than-average conditions in the fall. However, with El Niño in Colorado, it’s important to keep in mind that nothing is guaranteed. The influences of ENSO on our weather are not as strong as they are in regions to our north and south, and there have only been a few instances of Super El Niños in the past to compare to, so we’ll have to see what the atmosphere throws at us. Still, there’s reason to be hopeful that there won’t be months and months more of worsening drought.

NOAA Climate Prediction Center outlook issued in June for September-October-November 2026.

State drought tour: support Colorado businesses!

In the first week of June, I went on the drought tour organized by the Colorado Water Conservation Board, around Grand County. We saw low reservoirs and rivers, and heard from local ag producers and owners of outdoor recreation companies. There were two key messages: first, that the drought is having significant impacts on their operations, whether from the lack of snow in the winter or the lack of available water in the summer. But second, Colorado businesses are still open and operating, and now is a more important time than ever to support those businesses by buying Colorado products and getting outside for recreation!

Western Water Assessment’s June 8, 2026 Intermountain West Briefing is hot off the presses

Click the link to read the briefing on the Western Water Assessment website:

June 8, 2025 – CO, UT, WY

May precipitation was generally below average, except for portions of northern and eastern Colorado, and temperatures were slightly above average. Snowpack conditions continued to deteriorate compared to average during May, and June 1 SWE conditions were near record-low in Colorado (14% of median), Utah (11%), and the Upper Colorado River Basin (9%). Except for northern Wyoming river basins, April – July streamflow volume forecasts are less than 50% of average, and record-low streamflow volumes are forecasted for the Bear, Upper Colorado, White, and Yampa River Basins.

May precipitation was below average for much of the region, with large areas receiving less than half of average precipitation. Southwestern Colorado, southern and western Utah, and northern Wyoming were the driest locations during May. Above average precipitation fell in northeastern Utah and southwestern Wyoming, as well as across a broad swath of northern and eastern Colorado.

After a relatively cool April, temperatures were up to three degrees above average for much of the region during May. Temperatures in western Utah and northwestern Wyoming were 3-6ºF above average, and isolated areas of Colorado and Wyoming were up to three degrees below average during May.

June 1 snow water equivalent (SWE) remained near record-low in Colorado (14% of median), Utah (11%), and the Upper Colorado River Basin (9%), and slightly above record-low SWE in Wyoming (36%). An early May storm brought some accumulating SWE to Colorado and Utah, and a late May storm bolstered SWE slightly in Wyoming. Percent median SWE worsened during May in all river basins except the Arkansas, Little Snake, and Yampa River Basins. Snow has completely melted from all sites in the Dolores, Escalante-Sevier Lake, Lower Green, Jordan, Powder, and Upper San Juan River watersheds. Cooler conditions during April and some accumulating May snow caused SWE conditions in most river basins with remaining snowpack to improve slightly compared to record-low April 1 SWE.

April-July streamflow volume forecasts were much below average with some basins forecasted at record-low streamflow volumes. Regional seasonal streamflow volume forecasts were less than 50% of average for all river basins except the Wind (93%), Shoshone (87%), Yellowstone (80%), Snake (73%), and Bighorn (61%) River Basins. Record-low April-July streamflow is forecasted for the Bear River (21% of average), Colorado River at Cameo (29%), Lake Powell (15%), White River (19%), and Yampa River (28%). Peak streamflow on regional rivers was extremely low to record-low. Unless a secondary peak in streamflow occurs during June or from monsoonal rains, record-low peak annual streamflow will be observed for the Arkansas, Colorado, Rio Grande, and San Juan Rivers during 2026.

Regional drought coverage decreased slightly during May and now covers 97% of the region. Extreme drought covers 41% of the region and exceptional drought encompasses the Colorado River Headwaters. Above average May rainfall in northern and eastern Colorado caused a 2-3 category improvement in drought conditions, though drought conditions still persist.

Pacific Ocean temperatures warmed to near El Niño levels, and long-term forecasts suggest a 90-98% chance of El Niño conditions forming by June-August and persisting through mid-winter. Pacific Ocean temperature models project sea surface temperatures to warm to 2 degrees Celsius above average by early 2027, potentially causing a strong El Niño. NOAA precipitation forecasts suggest an active monsoon season with an increased probability of above average precipitation during May for southern Colorado and an increased probability for above average precipitation for most of the region during June–August. NOAA seasonal forecasts suggest an increased probability of above average temperatures for June-August.

Significant May weather event. Up to three feet of snow fell on May 5-6 along the northern Front Range of Colorado and southeastern Wyoming. Estes Park and Rocky Mountain National Park saw snowfall totals from 2 to 3 feet. Cheyenne, Wyoming experienced its largest snowfall of the year with 11.6” while Boulder recorded 11” and Denver International Airport recorded 5.8”. Despite the significant snowfall in parts of Colorado and Wyoming, the storm did little to relieve persistent regional drought conditions.

Drinking Song: Muddy water vs. the infrastructure, and seven people, that stand like a dam on the #ColoradoRiver; “Protecting what we love is a journey without end” — Morgan Sjogren (https://wildwords.substack.com) #COriver #aridification

“Colorado River Negotiators” in Cataract Canyon. No clue how the gal in the Earth First! shirt slipped in there? Photo credit: Wild Words

Click the link to read the article on the Wild Words website (Morgan Sjogren):

On Monday, June 15, a new cadre of representatives from seven Colorado River Basin states convened below Cataract Canyon for water negotiations. The open-air meeting was held in an eddy flanked by a thick layer of the Dominy Formation.¹ Silt tumbled into the banks in low runoff conditions as the Upper Basin (Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico) and Lower Basin (California, Arizona, Nevada) prepared statements about how to reduce over-consumption of the shrinking Colorado River.

While this meeting was not public or real, it attempted to be more inclusive by allowing the river to attend. A few great blue herons and minnows also popped in. The Upper Basin kicked things off with the state rep from Colorado, who insisted they did not need to make any water cuts because Mother Nature makes those for headwater states. Utah led the group in prayer, offered to pay farmers to stop farming, and insisted that the public can be trusted to do the right thing and make voluntary water cuts. Wyoming ranted about the emergency water releases draining Flaming Gorge Reservoir, with impacts to the recreation economy. New Mexico was too stressed to speak since the Rio Grande is also running dry.

Lower Basin negotiators let a lawyer representing Nevada take the lead while boasting their effective long-term water-saving measures. California reminded everyone that it is the fourth-largest economy in the world, and that stronger municipal water conservation efforts are underway. Arizona presented the dire effects to the state when water to the (junior rights status) Central Arizona Project is cut. Still, all three states agreed to cut Colorado River water use.

The impromptu Colorado River standoff theater was not real. It was a beach game intended to explain water overallocation. That it still resulted in imaginary litigation speaks loudly to this moment in history. The ability to take this lunchtime activity a little too literally was also because the participants were members of Glen Canyon Institute and guides for Holiday River Expeditions. These shenanigans took place in the final hours of a five-day river trip in Cataract Canyon to support GCI’s ongoing efforts for the restoration of Glen Canyon.

The group was certainly highly astute to Colorado River current events to throw down such an intricate dialogue on the spot. Instead of making a list of the very real solutions to distribute Colorado River water to forty million people, the group recognized what is literally standing in the way: seven state representatives who are just as responsible for the looming potential for a Colorado River crash as Glen Canyon Dam.

The basin-wide impasse is by far the most frustrating aspect of explaining the current problems and future management of the Colorado River. The potential solutions are abundant, even obvious. Everyone in the basin needs to use less water.

Other critical changes, like giving all thirty Colorado River-connected tribes a seat at the negotiating table and updating the 1922 Colorado River Compact to actually meet river flows where they are at in 2026 (an average of 12.5 million acre-feet down from 15 million acre-feet a century ago), are long overdue. Not to mention, ensuring the Colorado River’s right to flow, in line with the Colorado River Indian Tribe’s legal personhood status for the river under their Tribal law.

Beyond the dam, is the Colorado River’s most glaring problem, both concealed and amplified by the water crisis-–is this what democracy is supposed to look like? And what can a citizen of the Colorado River watershed actually do about it?

Despite this broken system, advocacy, especially in the long-term, can move the needle. Until recently, opposition to Glen Canyon Dam was viewed by some as a fringe environmental cult.

Yet Glen Canyon Institute has maintained a constant presence on the front lines of this issue. Since 1996, GCI “embarked upon a multi-year campaign to protect and restore Glen Canyon and reverse the decline of Grand Canyon’s fragile ecosystem.” The Fill Mead First plan takes a hard look at the long-term realities of keeping two major reservoirs, Powell and Mead, more than half empty. Then, in 2024, the Bureau of Reclamation made an announcement that opened minds (and some hearts) to consider that Glen Canyon Dam is a major part of the current problem.

Through persistent love and devotion of these advocacy efforts, awareness for the recovery of Glen Canyon continues to gain momentum. So does dealing with Glen Canyon Dam’s outdated infrastructure which is becoming more mainstream and realistic everyday. In a recent letter, the Lower Basin states urged the Bureau of Reclamation to make dam modifications.²

While it is electrifying to be on the pulse of a major change that stands to benefit Glen Canyon and the lower Colorado River, the current negotiation process is still a dystopian nightmare circus.³

Holiday named a new raft Dominy to spur conversation among guests. Some of us felt superstitiously avoidant of this boat during the rapids. Photo credit: Wild Words

The “Dominy” formation. Photo credit: Wild Words

During the GCI member trip, new bets from the states and cards from the feds were again being waged. Colorado River states traveled to Washington, D.C., and testified in front of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee. Meanwhile, without a consensus proposal between states, the feds are drafting up a plan to be released next month. The White House will need to sign off on the plan. Litigation by at least some of the states is expected.

Utah reps are urging a withholding of federal spending on states that choose the courtroom. Utah Sen. Mike Lee stated, “Taxpayers should not be asked to subsidize litigation among states.”⁴ More promising, Lower Basin states announced a Memorandum of Understanding for the San Diego Water Authority to sell surplus desalination water to these states to offset Colorado River water use.

Did I mention mud? Our put-in situation at Mineral Bottom on the Green River was enhanced by recent emergency releases and fish management pulse flows from Flaming Gorge Dam. Holiday’s guides insist this put-in is more challenging than the old North Wash Boat Ramp, which is now repaired and fodder for a different story. Photo credit: Wild Words

For some folks, like myself, this shit show is so fascinating that we are keen to immerse ourselves in the muck. However, even if you care deeply for the Colorado River, this can be overwhelming, especially amid the persistant horrors of this era. Naturally, our instinct may be to turn away. This came up during a riverside policy talk on the trip led by GCI’s projects and development manager Anna Penner and me. With so much going on and the constant information overload online, it is important to trust your gut instinct and give yourself space away from the news. Just don’t pull your heart from the Colorado River itself. [ed. emphasis mine]

The Colorado River carries hope. The side effects of drought, overallocation, and indecision is the steady return of a free flowing Colorado River and Glen Canyon emerging from a shrinking reservoir. I’ve written before that many of us were too late to experience Glen Canyon before the dam, but we are now right on time to witness its resurrection. Cataract Canyon is an ideal place to experience the changes in motion. From muddy sediment-rich river flows and returning rapids to strongholds of native plants like box elders and seep willows propagating in tributary canyons.

For one guest, Tom, these watershed moments for Glen Canyon are major bookends in his life. As a young lad, his family crossed the old Hite Ferry at Dandy Crossing in their station wagon during a road trip. They then drove up the rock-rutted and sandy North Wash, sans road, before it became Highway 95. He also boated on Lake Powell in 1965, before it filled completely, and vividly recalls seeing the fully exposed Hole-in-the-Rock site. Now age seventy seven, Tom and his lifelong friend Paul make time every year to return to the Colorado River with GCI. He has been a member for twenty-one years

Photo of Dandy Crossing: Photo credit: Cindy Stafford

North Wash travel. Credit: Cindy Stafford

This was Aaron’s first Cataract River trip, and a deserved reward for living with my Colorado River obsession. His perpetual and ever-widening smile affirmed how important quality time with the river is, now and always. Post-trip, he told me his favorite part of the trip was “watching the swirling eddy lines at sunset, while sitting on the beach with the group.”

Right now, we are all in an eddy. The decisions made, or not, in 2026 will ripple beyond our lifetime. But so will our unrelenting love for the river and the water that sustains life in the West. Impossible dreams, like the EarthFirst! symbolic crack in the dam, may come to life in yet unimagined ways, so long as we do not give up.

Glen Canyon Institute 2026 river trip group photo. Photo credit: Wild Words

Charles L. Bernheimer. Credit: “Path of Light” — Morgan Sjogren

On our final night, the group pulled out our finer attire in an homage to explorer Charles L. Berheimer, the gentleman explorer, who in 1929 made a concerted effort to prevent Glen Canyon Dam. Now, as Glen Canyon claws its way back from the reservoir, it deserves our best effort and utmost respect. Beside the murmuring current, Lauren Wood, Holiday Expeditions’ trip director, played their guitar while we all sang Katie Lee’s “Drinking Song.”

Of The Drinking Song, Lee wrote:

In Lee’s ranting prologue to “Folk Songs of the Colorado River,” she wrote:

To this, I pause and take another swig of whiskey and muddy water. This spring, I had more than one interview with so-called major environmental groups that sounded more like public relations agents for Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Powell.

Lee continued:

Exhausting? Perhaps. But better tired than apathetic. With tin cups filled with muddy water, this moment asks us to stand with all who have defended the Colorado River in the past and will continue on into the future. Protecting what we love is a journey without end.

To support efforts to restore Glen Canyon and ensure continued water deliveries below Glen Canyon Dam, consider becoming a supporter of Glen Canyon Institute.

Or pick up a Glen Canyon Backcountry Club hat! A portion of the proceeds will support GCI.

Desert guide John Wetherill, an OG Glen Canyon Defender.

This also spills the beans about a new venture Aaron and I are launching in September! More to share about that soon.

Wild Words is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

¹ The reservoir sediment left behind as Lake Powell drops is not so affectionately named in reference to Floyd Dominy, the former Bureau of Reclamation Director responsible for the creation of Glen Canyon Dam. Some of us have thoughts about this. I am saving these for my next book, Riverside, to be published by Torrey House Press in 2027.)

² GCI breaks down the Lower Basin letter here.

³ CC the millions of dollars being spent to extend boat ramps in Lake Powell, but that is for another story.

⁴ This week, Sen. Mike Lee’s scheme to use the Congressional Review Act to overturn Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument’s management plan failed when the Senate missed a 60-day deadline to vote on it.

A bend in Glen Canyon of the Colorado River, Grand Canyon, c. 1898. By George Wharton James, 1858—1923 – http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/ref/collection/p15799coll65/id/17037, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=30894893

South Platte River Basin #climate summary for the week ending June 22, 2026

Below is the Precipitation Accumulation in South Platte graph from the NRCS for June 15, 2026. Precipitation is at 73% of the median (down 1% one week) and 57% of the water year median (down 1% one week), this morning. There are 100 days left in the water year.

There is a chance for thunderstorms Thursday and Friday in the central mountains. There is a s slight chance for thunderstorms today, a chance for thunderstorms Tuesday and Wednesday, showers are likely Thursday, with a chance for thunderstorms Friday in the northern mountains. There is a chance for thunderstorms today through Friday down here about 80 miles from Grand Lake, where The Grand Lake Shootout of 1883 took place, on July 4, 1883. From Grand Chalet: “In the 1880s, Grand County, Colorado, was embroiled in a heated political contest over which town would serve as the county seat. The two contenders were the town of Grand Lake and Hot Sulphur Springs. In 1882, a closely contested election saw Grand Lake win by a narrow margin of 93 to 71 votes. The outcome of the election further deepened existing divisions within the county government. As the dust settled, tensions grew within the political landscape. A Grand County commissioner resigned, and another was arrested for murder. The aftermath left only Commissioner J.G. Mills to oversee county matters. The governor, aiming to restore order, appointed two new commissioners: E.P. Webber and Barney Day…The tension reached its boiling point during the Commission’s next scheduled meeting on July 4, 1883. The meeting was to be held in Grand Lake, but as the commissioners prepared to convene, violence ensued. Sheriff Royer, Bill Redman, and Commissioner J.G. Mills had secretly plotted an ambush to prevent Webber, Day, and County Clerk Thomas Dean from reaching the courthouse. Royer, Redman, and Mills donned black bandanas and positioned themselves by the west edge of the lake, hiding behind boulders as their political rivals approached. As Webber, Day, and Dean neared the ambush site, shots rang out. A chaotic shootout followed, leaving Webber and Day fatally wounded. Dean was also struck, but managed to escape amid the gunfire. Mills, one of the key conspirators, was killed during the shootout—likely shot by one of his own allies in the chaos. His death would mark the end of the ambush, but the consequences of the event would continue to reverberate throughout Grand County.”

Illustration of the Grand County Shoot Out. Credit: Grand Chalet: https://www.grandchaletcolorado.com

Grand Lake and Mount Craig. CC BY 2.5, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=814879

Here’s a look at the 7-Day Colorado precipitation map through June 21, 2026 from the High Plains Regional Climate Center. Precipitation in the South Platte Basin along the Continental Divide of the Americas ranged from 0.00” to 0.25”.

Here’s the 7-Day percent of normal precipitation map through June 21, 2026 from the High Plains Regional Climate Center. Precipitation in the South Platte River Basin along the Continental Divide of the Americas ranged from 0% to 25% of normal.

Here’s the 7-Day Quantitative Precipitation Forecast issued June 22, 2026 by NOAA. Precipitation is anticipated for the mountains of the South Platte River Basin and may total 0.50”.

Below are the 8-14 day outlooks from the Climate Prediction Center, issued June 15, 2026, for temperature and precipitation, for the week starting June 22, 2026. The CPC expects above normal temperatures and near normal precipitation for the mountains of the South Platte River Basin.

Below is the Colorado Drought Monitor map from June 16, 2026. There were one class degradations in Larimer, Morgan, Adams, Arapahoe, Elbert, and Park counties, and a very small one class improvement in Elbert County. Drought and abnormal dryness covers 100% of Colorado. The South Platte Basin is experiencing Abnormally Dry, Moderate, Severe, Extreme, and Exceptional drought conditions.

Colorado Drought Monitor map June 16, 2026.

Below is the Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending June 9, 2026.

Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending June 16, 2026.

Here’s the US Drought Monitor Map from last week along with the one week U.S. change map.

US Drought Monitor one week change map ending June 16, 2026.

Finally, Western Water Assessment published their May Intermountain West Briefing on June 9, 2026. They write: “May precipitation was generally below average, except for portions of northern and eastern Colorado, and temperatures were slightly above average. Snowpack conditions continued to deteriorate compared to average during May, and June 1 SWE conditions were near record-low in Colorado (14% of median), Utah (11%), and the Upper Colorado River Basin (9%). Except for northern Wyoming river basins, April – July streamflow volume forecasts are less than 50% of average, and record-low streamflow volumes are forecasted for the Bear, Upper Colorado, White, and Yampa River Basins.

May precipitation was below average for much of the region, with large areas receiving less than half of average precipitation. Southwestern Colorado, southern and western Utah, and northern Wyoming were the driest locations during May. Above average precipitation fell in northeastern Utah and southwestern Wyoming, as well as across a broad swath of northern and eastern Colorado.

Hernando de Alarcón’s 1540 Expedition into the Lower Colorado River

hernando alarcon, spanish, portuguese,navigator,coronado,cortez, — ^{Portrait of Hernando de Alarcon on the left, and an example of a Spanish “tender” or “begantina”with a lateen sail and rowers on the right.}

by Robert Marcos, photojournalist

California got its name from a popular Spanish romance novel that was published in 1510. The book, “Las Sergas de Esplandián” described California as a mythical island that was inhabited by Amazons and was filled with gold and pearls. So when Hernán Cortés arrived at the southern end of the Baja peninsula in 1535, its elongated appearance led him to believe they had found the legendary island. This misconception became so deeply embedded that European cartographers continued to publish maps that showed California as an island well into the 18th century.

Five years after Cortez’s expedition the Portuguese navigator Hernando de Alarcón set sail from Acapulco with two Spanish caravels, a tender, and 45 crewmen and headed back to the Sea of Cortez. Alarcón’s mission was to transport supplies to the 2,000 man Coronado Expedition that had left from the State of Nayarit, in Mexico, three months earlier. Alarcon and his men were ordered to rendezvous with a detachment from the Coronado Expedition at the confluence of the Colorado and Gila Rivers, just north of present-day Yuma.

map,ancient,mariner, atlas,sea,california,old,historic, — ^{Map that shows California as an island, which was created in 1657 by Nicolas Sanson, a French cartographer.}

Alarcón and his vessels enjoyed favorable winds and arrived at the northern edge of the Sea of Cortez in early August. Alarcón quickly determined that California was in fact not an island because there was no open-water passage that led back to the Pacific Ocean. The men made their way up through the Colorado river delta and by doing so made history by becoming the first Europeans to explore the lower Colorado River. But before long the conditions became perilous, as the ships encountered a terrifying natural phenomenon known as a tidal bore. The massive wall of water that was caused by incoming ocean tides colliding with the river’s outward current, nearly destroyed the fleet. The raging waters ran the caravels aground, tilting them dangerously and threatening to smash the hulls. But through strict discipline and skilled seamanship the crew somehow managed to stabilize the vessels and survive the furious tides.

When the river finally became too shallow to continue Alarcon ordered for the larger ships to be anchored, then he launched “tenders” (called Bergantinas). Historic illustrations show these small ships as having a single “lateen” sail and oar placements for rowing. Alarcon and a contingent of sailors then began the exhausting effort of rowing northward, against the river’s powerful current. Alarcon stopped at native villages along the way to converse with Indigenous groups and gather intelligence. Again – his primary objective was to rendezvous with a detachment of soldiers from the Coronado Expedition at the confluence of the Colorado and Gila Rivers. The soldiers would then use horses and wagons to transport the much-needed cargo back to the main column of Coronado’s expedition, which had continued to push northward to explore what is now the United States.

Weeks later Alarcón and his men finally reached the Gila River, near modern-day Yuma. But vastness of the terrain and the lack of communication tools prevented the two forces from meeting. When Alarcón finally because tired of waiting he buried a hoard of supplies and letters, at the base of a marked tree, then sailed back to his ships that were anchored in the delta. Several weeks later Captain Melchior Diaz found Alarcon’s letters and the supplies, and would’ve carried out his mission had he not been killed in an accident two days later. But that’s a story for another time…

If AZ and other states sue over Colorado River, Utah senator warns they could lose $354M in aid

by Marcus Reichley, Cronkite News
June 10, 2026 Cronkite News offers an audio version of this story using an automated voice created by AI. Errors in pronunciation, pacing and intonation may occur. If you notice an error please contact cronkitenews@asu.edu.

WASHINGTON – The chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee warned Arizona and two other states that rely on the Colorado River on Wednesday that they will lose access to hundreds of millions in conservation aid if they pursue litigation over water rights.

Roughly $354 million is still available under a 2022 climate law. But the funds expire at the end of September.

“States that choose to sue their fellow basin states over Colorado River operations should not expect Congress to reward that decision with additional federal funding,” Sen. Mike Lee, a Republican from Utah – one of the four Upper Basin states, said at the outset of a hearing on the stalemate among the seven states that share the river. “Federal taxpayers should not be asked to subsidize litigation among the states.”

Glen Canyon Dam holds back Lake Powell on Nov. 2, 2022. States upstream and downstream of the dam have different ideas about how to manage the amount of water released from the reservoir, which has become a key sticking point in ongoing negotiations about the Colorado River’s future. (Photo by Alex Hager/KUNC)

Arizona, California and Nevada have been at odds with Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming over how to divide the dwindling water supply when the most recent 19-year deal expires at the end of 2026.

The funds Lee threatened to block are a key element of the Lower Basin’s most recent proposal from May 1, which relies on the funding to incentivize voluntary water conservation as an alternative to mandatory cuts.

The $354 million comes from the Inflation Reduction Act signed in 2022 by President Joe Biden, which set aside $4 billion for drought mitigation and compensation for voluntary conservation. Funds that remain unused when the current fiscal year ends Sept. 30 will revert to the Treasury.

By then, the Bureau of Reclamation, part of the Department of the Interior, plans to finalize a federally imposed plan to allocate water to the seven states over the next decade. One alternative in the draft the bureau issued in January would impose cuts up to 77% for Arizona, with a 6% cut for Nevada. The other states could continue taking water at current rates.

The states missed a deadline last November to submit a consensus plan to federal regulators.

The White House tried to facilitate progress by convening Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs and her counterparts in January. With the stalemate continuing, Lee used Wednesday’s hearing to add more pressure on the states to find a solution.

He chastised officials in the Lower Basin states for, among other things, taking out newspaper ads attacking Upper Basin states.

Negotiators appeared to be “preparing actively for litigation,” he said – and in fact, key officials in both camps have told Cronkite News in recent days they are preparing for that possibility.

Congress “will not be a bystander in this process,” Lee said, noting that under the Constitution, Congress holds approval authority over any long-term interstate compact.

He also expressed sympathy with the Upper Basin’s stance, warning that any proposal asking those states to absorb greater operational burdens without regard to the river’s existing legal framework “will face a difficult path forward” in Congress.

The chairman framed the moment as a failure of collective will, cataloguing a string of missed deadlines. “The basin can no longer afford to wait,” he said.

After Lee delivered his rebuke, Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, a Democrat, pressed the Trump administration from the opposite direction.

Gallego asked Andrea Travnicek, assistant secretary for water and science at the Department of the Interior, how the department plans to weigh Arizona’s economic stakes as it finalizes its decision.

“The Colorado River is a lifeline for Arizona,” Gallego said, noting the state is home to the most advanced semiconductor manufacturing hub in the Western Hemisphere and that the success of its industries are essential to the nation.

“The technological industries, the domestic food supply, and energy security are all top priorities for the United States, including the president’s agenda,” he said.

Travnicek said the department cannot accept either the May 1 proposal from the Lower Basin nor the latest Upper Basin proposal as they currently stand.

“We have some concerns and areas where we think that there should be adjustments,” she said.

She confirmed that the Interior Department is coordinating with the Energy Department and U.S. Department of Agriculture, among other agencies. She said an interagency water subcabinet meeting will be held Thursday.

The hearing laid bare the tension that has made a seven-state deal so elusive, with senators from both basins on hand.

Travnicek fielded pressure from both directions without committing to either.

The stakes are straightforward and very high.

Decades of drought have pushed water levels to dangerously low levels even as demand and population grow. The river now provides barely half the amount of water each basin has been legally entitled to draw.

“Delay carries its own consequences,” Lee said, “and the basin can no longer afford to wait.”

This article first appeared on Cronkite News and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Moratorium on data centers approved by Archuleta County Board — #PagosaSprings Sun

One of Pagosa Springs’ oldest parks, Town Park straddles the San Juan River in the heart of downtown Pagosa Springs. The site of many events, Town Park is by far one of the most popular parks in Pagosa Springs. Photo credit: Town of Pagosa Springs

Click the link to read the article on the Pagosa Springs Sun website (Clayton Chaney). Here’s an excerpt:

June 17, 2026

During a regular meeting held by the Archuleta County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) in Arboles on June 16, the board unanimously approved Resolution 2026-47, putting a six-month moratorium on data centers in the county. The matter was brought up by Commissioner Veronica Medina earlier that day during a BoCC work session, where she explained that she had talked with other counties across the state about issues with data centers, “and just the draw on power and water that they tend to use,” noting that they don’t seem to be a good fit for Archuleta County. Medina also mentioned technologies do change and that moving forward things may look different with data centers, but that the county’s current infrastructure and water situation would not support a data center.

“Colorado is in a fight for its life for water,” she said, adding, “If we don’t have water, we don’t have life.”

Medina explained that the county can only do a six-month moratorium at a time, suggesting that she would like to take the matter to the voters at some point and engage the community on if it should be a long-term ban. Medina then stated that for most counties that have data centers, they draw the majority of power in the community.

The Pagosa Area Water & Sanitation District board authorizes upcoming move into drought stage two — #PagosaSprings Sun #SanJuanRiver

San Juan River Basin. Graphic credit Wikipedia.

Click the link to read the article on the Pagosa Springs Sun website (Josh Pike). Here’s an excerpt:

June 17, 2026

At its June 11 meeting, the Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD) Board of Directors authorized the district manager to enter stage two drought when the appropriate trigger points are reached, which staff predicted will be in the near future. District Engineer Justin Ramsey explained to the board that, based on water levels in Hatcher Reservoir and the San Juan River, the district was still in drought stage one, but was “just a couple inches away” from having to enter stage two according to the district’s drought management plan. Both the San Juan River and Lake Hatcher are sources for the water processed at PAWSD’s water treatment plants.

Ramsey predicted that the district would likely enter drought stage two within a week, adding that Hatcher Reservoir is losing between a quarter and a half inch in water level a day and a drop of 3 inches would place the district in drought stage two. He requested that the board authorize District Manager Andrew Connor to move the district into drought stage two once the trigger points are reached, avoiding a need for the board to have a special meeting in the near future to authorize the move.

Summer Solstice is #ShowYourStripes day! It’s your chance to show off your city’s stripes and communicate the climate challenge!

MAGA (#Utah U.S. Senator Mike Lee) fails to derail Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument plan; Trump looks to tweak WSA management, climbing rules; Plus, a guest commentary on #ColoradoRiver allocation — Jonathan P. Thompson(LandDesk.org) #COriver #aridification

A monarch butterfly in Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

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

🌞 Good News! 😎

THE NEWS: Sen. Mike Lee, the ultra-MAGA Utah Republican, failed once again to diminish public lands protections when his bid to use the Congressional Review Act to revoke Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument’s management plan expired before getting a vote.

THE CONTEXT: This spring, Lee and Rep. Celeste Maloy, also a Utah Republican, introduced a joint resolution of disapproval in both houses of Congress aimed at repealing the 2024 management plan. That started the clock ticking on a 60-day time-limit for a simple majority vote to overturn the plan. The deadline passed on June 11 without any action, meaning that any effort to toss the plan now would be subject to the Senate filibuster, so would need 60 votes to pass — a highly unlikely prospect.

Had the resolution passed, the national monument’s management would have reverted back to the weak and inadequate 2020 Trump I-era plan, which allowed more grazing, more damaging “vegetation management,” and more off-road vehicle use. Plus the 2020 plan only covered the 1 million acres left in the national monument after Trump removed about 900,000 acres from its boundaries, meaning almost half of the national monument would in a sort of management limbo.

This would have sown chaos and confusion, yet it wouldn’t have diminished the national monument or the protections that were baked into the establishing proclamation. The monument boundaries would have remained intact, along with the prohibition on new oil and gas drilling, mining claims, and other energy development.

Nevertheless, it clearly was intended as an attack on the national monument and the attendant protections, which have been a sore spot for Utah sagebrush rebel-leaning politicians since Bill Clinton established it under the Antiquities Act 30 years ago this September. What Maloy or Lee hoped to actually achieve with the attack is a little less clear, even if it had hit its target.

Maloy likely was trying to brush up on her anti-federal-land-management credentials before what could be a bruising primary. Her challenger is notorious sagebrush rebel Phil Lyman, who led an illegal OHV-ride down the archaeologically rich Recapture Canyon in 2014 to protest what he called “federal overreach.”

So far, Maloy is winning the fundraising race by a healthy margin. Utah Political Watchreports that the Defend our Values Super PAC run by former Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, just donated $900,000 to Maloy’s campaign. The American Conservation Coalition PAC, which says it “helps elect leaders who champion American energy dominance, environmental conservation, and cutting-edge innovation,” has spent over $150,000 in support of Maloy, as well. Maloy isn’t exactly living up to the conservation part of that, but I’m not sure the PAC folks care too much about it, either.

And then there’s Lee. Sometimes it feels as if he’s taking up the tasks Project 2025 guided the Trump administration to execute, but that the administration has backed off from because of how deeply unpopular they have turned out to be. It’s almost as if the administration is tasking Lee with feeding some red meat to the MAGA base, but also is setting him up to fail.

Rock climber in Unaweep Canyon, Colorado (not a wilderness area). Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

THE NEWS: The U.S. Interior Department is launching a “review” of rock climbing management and wilderness study area policies. On June 15 it opened the 60-day public comment period on its proposals to establish “a consistent approach to recreational rock climbing management across designated wilderness areas,” and to evaluate whether “existing wilderness study areas and lands with wilderness characteristic policies should be updated, clarified, or revised.”

THE CONTEXT: Any time the Trump administration decides to “review” something, it pays to be wary, since more often than not the review leads to the evisceration of some sort of environmental protection. They tend to couch it in euphemisms, however, such as this bit from an Interior press release: “… Interior is focused on expanding outdoor recreation opportunities, removing unnecessary barriers to access, and use, and managing public lands in a way that benefits the American people.”

Wilderness areas are designated by Congress and are governed by a set of specific rules that can’t be altered by the administration. However, the question of whether installing fixed climbing bolts and anchors is permitted or not is vague and has shifted over the years (what is clear is that power drills cannot be used to install them). The administration is looking to clear this up, and to allow fixed anchors in wilderness areas as long as they follow certain guidelines.

Wilderness study areas share many of the same qualities and protections as wilderness areas, but have not been designated as such by Congress. In 1976, Congress tasked the BLM with identifying potential wilderness areas within its domain and make recommendations regarding them. Those that were identified and fit certain criteria but not designated became wilderness study areas, or WSAs. There are currently 491 wilderness study areas covering over 11 million acres. Look at a map of areas that have large swaths of BLM land — particularly in Utah — and you’ll almost certainly find a few.

The Federal Land Policy Management Act directed the BLM to manage the WSAs “in a manner so as not to impair the suitability of such areas for preservation as wilderness”and prevent “unnecessary or undue degradation.” In other words, you couldn’t build a permanent road through a WSA because that would preclude it from being designated as a wilderness area later.

This leaves room for agency interpretation. The current BLM policy, carried out in accordance with a 2012 manual, is to “continue resource uses on land designated as WSAs in a manner that maintains the area’s suitability for preservation as wilderness.” Under that policy, the agency almost certainly would not permit a road through a WSA, because that would preclude it from being designated as a wilderness area later. And, according to the memo, it most likely would not allow motorized or mountain bike use in a WSA.

The current administration is unlikely to get away with allowing permanent roads in WSAs. However, given its language about removing barriers to access, one can expect it to apply a broader and more permissive interpretation of the non-impairment standard to its policies. This might mean allowing motorized vehicle or mountain bike use within WSAs on existing trails, for example, or even some logging or small-scale mining, so long as the agency officials could convince themselves that it would be cleaned up later.

Finally, the BLM also has a policy for managing lands with wilderness characteristics that are not WSAs or designated wilderness areas. The administration is reviewing this policy, as well.

Interior announced all of these policies in one press release, but you need to comment on them individually. Here’s how:

For the fixed anchors and other climbing management changes in wilderness areas, go to the Federal Register page and follow the instructions, or go directly to the regulations.gov page and click on “Comment.”

For changes to wilderness study area management, go to the Federal Register page, and read the instructions, or go directly to the regulations.gov page and click on “Comment.”

For changes to lands with wilderness characteristics management, go to the Federal Register page, and follow the instructions, or go directly to the regulations.gov page and click on “Comment.”

Colorado River “Beginnings”. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism

🐟 Colorado River Chronicles 💧

Guest Commentary: A Fair Allocation for the Colorado River

by Levi Tenen

This summer is the last chance for seven Western states to allocate the Colorado River voluntarily before the federal government steps in¹. Gridlock persists: Lower Basin states (California, Arizona, and Nevada) have offered to reduce their water usage the most, but they believe that Upper Basin States (Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming, and Utah) ought to reduce their usage as well if the region dries up too much.² The Upper Basin states reject this proposal, refusing to reduce the amount of water that was allotted to them under previous agreements.³ The federal government has proposed solutions of its own, all of which seem to favor the Upper Basin states.⁴

The debate raises fundamental questions: how should resources be allocated in times of scarcity, and do past agreements matter today? From my research in ethics, I think there is an answer, and one that has not been noticed by others. Justice demands that Upper Basin states give up some of their allotted, promised water, but Lower Basin states must greatly limit their water usage and—the new idea—Lower Basin states ought to pay for the extra water they receive.⁵

To see why, consider a thought experiment from philosopher Jeremy Waldron⁶: Imagine you and I own ranches in an arid region. We drill wells on our respective properties and enjoy plentiful water. Good times come to an end, however, when a drought sets in and my well runs dry. Unable to relocate, I am stuck in a dire circumstance. Due to the geography of the area, however, you continue to have a surplus of water. What, if anything, do you owe me? Without anyone else around to help me, are you obligated to share your water? The answer is yes, to an extent. It would be wrong, for instance, if you prevented me access to your well just to let the water go unused, leaving me to die. It would also be wrong if you kept me from your well so that you could build a nice new pool, or even so that you could increase your wealth by adding many more head of cattle, all while I perish nearby. Put simply, in times of scarcity and desperation, justice limits a person’s property rights. Justice will never require you to endanger yourself, but more modest sacrifices can become obligatory.

What most people miss, however, is that obligations often fall onto the recipients of aid. Return to the above case. First, even though water is scarce, other resources may not be. So, while you are obliged to give me water, if I have money, labor, or something else to give in return, I ought to do so. It would be unfair, after all, for me to hold onto large amounts of disposable wealth and take your water, leaving you altogether worse off and me only better off.

Secondly, even though I receive water from you, I cannot use it however I want. For, I do not have the right to an endless amount of your water. The water you owe me is only for the basic conditions of life, not for wasting away or for self-serving, economic growth. So, I mustn’t add more cattle to my ranch or build a pretty fountain in my courtyard. Indeed, if scarcity persists, I need to reduce my water consumption greatly, scaling back my ranch operations. To do otherwise would be to limit your future opportunity unjustly.

Carried over to the Colorado River, this much then seems clear: Upper Basin states ought to give some of their unused water to Lower Basin states, even though they all previously agreed to allocate that water to the Upper Basin. The scarce and desperate times limit the past agreements, particularly because the scarcity was unforeseen. And make no mistake: the Lower Basin states are facing dire times. Tens of millions of people in those states depend on the river for drinking water.⁷ Moreover, 70% of the water goes to food production, with the majority going towards crops in Lower Basin states.⁸ Running out of water is an existential threat to the cities and peoples in the Lower Basin, and it is a threat to food security the nation over.⁹

However, the Lower Basin states ought to purchase the water from Upper Basin states and they need to minimize their burden on those states, even if that means ceasing new housing developments and industrial projects. Perhaps if the Lower Basin states add these conditions to their offer, negotiations will move forward and the Upper Basin will accept their share of the burden: sending some of their allotted water downstream.

Levi Tenen is an Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Virginia Wesleyan University. He grew up in Arizona and conducts research at the intersection of Ethics, Political Philosophy, and Environmental Law.

¹ https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45546 (if printed as Pdf– p. 34-35)

² https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45546 PDF p.35

³ https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45546 PDF p. 35-36

⁴ https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45546 PDF p. 40 and 43.

⁵ Nowhere in this doc (https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45546) does it mention compensation from lower basin states. The only exception I can find is: https://cwseducation.ucdavis.edu/class/116/inefficient-over-appropriated-and-non-inclusive-can-water-trading-resolve-pitfalls

⁶ Waldron, Jeremy (1992) “Superseding Historic Injustice,” Ethics 103:1, pp. 4-28.

⁷ https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R45546 PDF p.5

⁸ https://mcmsc.asu.edu/sites/g/files/litvpz576/files/2024-08/Water%20Project%20compressed_1.pdf

⁹ https://mcmsc.asu.edu/sites/g/files/litvpz576/files/2024-08/Water%20Project%20compressed_1.pdf

The #ColoradoRiver Water Supply Crisis in a Few Graphs: Part 1 — Jack Schmidt, Anne Castle, Eric Kuhn, Kathryn Sorensen, Katherine Tara (Getches-Wilkinson Center) #COriver #acidification

Click the link to read the article on the Getches-Wilkinson Center website (Jack Schmidt,¹ Anne Castle,² Eric Kuhn, ³ Kathryn Sorensen,⁴ Katherine Tara⁵

June 18, 2026

In the next few weeks, we will share a few graphs and charts that we find informative in understanding today’s water supply crisis on the Colorado River. This short paper concerns the present status of reservoir storage.

IN BRIEF

In 2026 and for only the third time in the 21st century, there was no accumulation, and no recovery, of total Basin live storage6 during the snowmelt season. Nor was there any accumulation or recovery of total live storage in Lake Powell and Lake Mead during the 2026 snowmelt season. Total Basin live storage (hereafter, total Basin storage) is all the water available in the Colorado River Basin’s reservoir “savings account” and stored in reservoirs within the watershed.⁷ On June 1, total Basin storage was 22.94 million acre feet (maf), only 1.62 maf above the previous minimum of March 2023⁸ and less than 2 years supply at the current rate at which water is consumptively used or lost in the Basin. Total Basin storage will almost certainly drop to less than the previous record minimum by March 2027.

THE PRESENT CONDITION

On June 1, 2026, total Basin storage in 46 reservoirs in the Colorado River Basin was 22.94 maf, ⁹ 39% of the content of those same reservoirs in late August 1999, the last time those reservoirs were relatively full.¹⁰ On June 1, Lake Mead held 33% of the Basin’s active storage, 32% was in 42 reservoirs upstream from Lake Powell, 25% in Lake Powell, and 10% in Lake Mohave and Lake Havasu. The combined live storage in Lake Mead and Lake Powell was 28% of the total live storage of those two reservoirs in late summer 1999.¹¹

Why Total Basin Storage?

Most policy analysis of reservoir storage in the Colorado River Basin focuses on Lake Powell and Lake Mead or, alternatively, on all federally managed reservoirs in the Basin. These reservoirs are the focus of ongoing negotiations among the Basin states and will be impacted by impending management decisions by the federal government. On June 1, 89% of total Basin storage was held in 12 federally managed reservoirs.¹² Slightly more than 60% of live storage upstream from Lake Powell was held in 8 federally managed reservoirs.

Total Basin storage is the total amount of water stored in reservoirs in the Colorado River watershed. In addition to the 12 federally managed reservoirs, Basin storage includes federal project reservoirs managed by other entities and non-federal reservoirs managed by municipal water providers and water conservation and conservancy districts. Some of the non-federal reservoirs act as forebays that facilitate trans-basin diversions to the Colorado Front Range or Utah’s Wasatch Front. Water stored in these non-federally managed reservoirs is not subject to current or proposed federal operating guidelines. In the Upper Basin, however, water stored in the non-federally managed reservoirs is one determinant of total Upper Basin consumptive use. Therefore, the status of storage in all the Basin’s reservoirs is an indicator of the overall condition of the Colorado River reservoir system and its ability to buffer continued declining inflow. Transfer of water from one reservoir to another, such as the on-going transfer from Flaming Gorge Reservoir to Lake Powell, does not aﬀect total Basin storage. Although such management policy is critical to protecting dam infrastructure and maintaining realistically accessible storage in Lake Powell, ¹³ such policy merely shifts the location of the Basin’s deck chairs. What matters is whether the ship is sinking. [ed, emphasis mine]

Accumulation Period And Depletion Period

In terms of reservoir storage, we have previously distinguished two periods of the year – the period of reservoir rise (i.e., accumulation period) and the period of reservoir decline (i.e., depletion period).¹⁴ In terms of total Basin storage, the 2-3 month long accumulation period typically begins in mid-April, although it has begun as early as mid-March (Supplemental Table 1). The accumulation period typically ends in early July but has sometimes ended in early June and as late as early August. In rare cases, as discussed below, there has been no accumulation. The depletion period typically occurs from mid-summer until the following spring and lasts 9-10 months.

BASINWIDE STORAGE SHOWS CONTINUED DOWNWARD TREND DESPITE PERIODIC WET WINTERS

Basin Reservoirs in Spring 2023 Were at an Unprecedented Low.

Figure 1 shows total live storage in 46 reservoirs during the past 3.5 years. The minimum amount of water in those reservoirs was on March 14, 2023, immediately before snowmelt began from the winter 2022/2023 snowpack. At that time, the Basin’s reservoirs only held 21.32 maf. Total Basin storage had not been that low since May 1965 when the newly constructed Colorado River Storage Project reservoirs were beginning to fill.¹⁵

Figure 1. Graph showing total storage in 46 reservoirs in the Colorado River Basin since January 1, 2023. The minimum amount during this period occurred in mid-March 2023, when total storage was less than at any time since late May 1965. The amount of increase or decrease in total Basin storage during the accumulation and depletion periods of each year are shown. Updated to June 14, 2026.

Snowmelt in 2023 was unusually large for the 21st century, and reservoir storage significantly recovered. The 8.38 maf increase in reservoir storage during the 2023 accumulation period was the second largest single-year increase of the 21st century and resulted from the second largest unregulated inflow to Lake Powell of the 21st century.¹⁶ The Basin’s reservoirs were subsequently drawn down by only 2.15 maf between July 13, 2023, and April 17, 2024, the smallest depletion period since at least 2010. Unregulated inflow to Lake Powell in Water Year (WY) 2024, primarily due to the 2024 snowmelt season, was typical of the 21st century,¹⁷ and the Basin’s reservoirs recovered 2.45 maf. Because Basin reservoir recovery exceeded the drawdown during the preceding 2023-2024 depletion period, Basin storage reached its highest recent peak at the beginning of the 2024-2025 depletion period.¹⁸

The gains of 2023 and 2024 were subsequently lost between summer 2024 and today, because depletion exceeded accumulation. In spring 2027, total Basin storage is likely to be less than it was in March 2023.

In early July 2024, the multi-year downward turn of reservoir storage began. The Basin’s reservoirs were depleted by 3.60 maf during the 2024-2025 depletion period, more than 1 maf greater than the preceding accumulation. Unregulated inflow to Lake Powell in WY2025 was the fourth driest of the 21st century¹⁹, and the Basin’s reservoirs only accumulated 0.55 maf, a small amount. Despite hard-fought, politically contentious, and economically expensive system conservation and assigned water eﬀorts as well as a wet fall in the southern part of the Basin, the Basin’s reservoirs were depleted by 4.00 million af during the 2025-2026 depletion period.²⁰ The most probable unregulated inflow to Lake Powell in WY2026 is forecast to be 3.40 maf, the second lowest inflow of the 21st century.²¹ There will be no accumulation this year.²²

As of June 1, 2026, the Basin’s total storage was only 1.62 maf more than total storage at its record-breaking low in March 2023. It is likely that Basin storage in spring 2027, before the 2027 accumulation season begins, will be lower than at any time since 1965, because depletion during the 2016-2027 period will probably exceed 1.62 maf.²³

The depletion of reservoir storage that began in summer 2024 occurred despite a significant eﬀort to reduce Lower Basin water use. Water use in California and Arizona in Calendar Year (CY) 2025 was the lowest and third lowest, respectively, since CY2010, and use in those two states in CY2024 was the fourth lowest since CY2010. Water use in Arizona in CY2026 is forecast to be the lowest since CY2010. Upper Basin use in CY2024 was typical for the period CY2010-CY2024; Upper Basin use data for CY2025 are not yet available.

Despite each spring’s snowmelt inflow, each part of the Basin’s reservoir system that stores water – Lake Mead, Lake Powell, and the reservoirs upstream from Lake Powell – has declined since their recent maximums in summer 2024.

Lake Mead typically peaks between January and March and then declines until August (Fig. 2). This pattern contrasts from that of Lake Powell and of reservoirs further upstream. The winter peaks of Lake Mead in 2024, 2025, and 2026 have been progressively lower each year, and the summer minimums have also been lower each year. In 2026, Lake Mead peaked on February 28 and lost 1.23 maf between March 1 and June 1 and will probably continue to drop during the rest of summer. On June 1, 2026, Lake Mead stored only 0.34 maf more than its recent minimum of January 1, 2023.²⁴

Figure 2. Graph showing live storage in Lake Mead, Lake Powell, in 42 reservoirs upstream from Lake Powell, and in Lake Mohave and Lake Havasu since January 1, 2023. Updated to June 14, 2026.

In the last two years, Lake Powell has dropped more than other reservoirs. Lake Powell lost more than 4 maf of stored water since early July 2024. In 2026, Lake Powell steadily declined from the beginning of the year until May 7 and stabilized following the onset of snowmelt runoﬀ, increased releases from Flaming Gorge Reservoir, and reduction of releases at Glen Canyon Dam.²⁵ On June 1, decline in Lake Powell resumed. The total live storage in Lake Mead and Lake Powell on June 1 was 13.38 maf, significantly less than the capacity of either individual reservoir.

Total storage in 42 reservoirs upstream from Lake Powell also declined during the past 3.5 years. Those reservoirs rise every spring and typically recover until sometime in June or July. Presently, many reservoirs in the headwaters of the upper Colorado River are still rising, ²⁶ as are Fontenelle and Big Sandy in the upper Green River Basin. However, total reservoir storage in the Gunnison and Green River watersheds is already at its lowest of the year. Total reservoir storage in the San Juan River watershed has been declining since mid-April but is not yet at its lowest point for the year.

OVERALL TRENDS IN BASIN STORAGE DEMONSTRATE RATCHET EFFECT IN FULL FORCE

In the context of the entire 21st century, Basin storage significantly dropped during two multi-year dry periods, 2000-2004 and 2020-2022 (Fig. 3).²⁷ In other years, the bounty of snowmelt was temporarily stored but completely consumed in subsequent years. The resulting pattern for the 21st century is jagged, but the overall trend in storage has been relentlessly downward, because Basin average uses and losses have consistently exceeded average inflows. We call this pattern the Ratchet Eﬀect, because a rachet is a mechanical device that only allows movement in one direction, in this case towards ever declining Basin storage and deeper into crisis.²⁸ Despite laudable eﬀorts to maintain balance through system conservation and assigned water programs, the ship continues to sink.

Figure 3. Graph showing live storage in the Basin’s reservoirs since January 1, 1999. We call this pattern the Ratchet Eﬀect of declining Colorado River Basin storage in the 21st century. Updated to June 14, 2026.

SUPPLEMENTAL TABLE

Supplemental Table 1. Beginning and end dates of the reservoir storage accumulation period for the entire watershed and for Lake Powell plus Lake Mead. The volume in storage for each date is indicated. The value at the beginning of the accumulation period is the minimum storage at the end of the preceding 9-10 month depletion period. Numbers in bold brackets are the accumulation, in millions of acre feet. Tan shading indicates years that were among the five driest of the 21st century. Blue shading were years that were among the five wettest of the 21st century.

¹ Center for Colorado River Studies, Utah State University, former Chief, Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center.

² Getches-Wilkinson Center, Univ. of Colorado Law School, former US Commissioner, Upper Colorado River Commission, former Assistant Secretary for Water and Science, US Dept. of the Interior.

³ Retired General Manager, Colorado River Water Conservation District.

⁴ Kyl Center for Water Policy, Arizona State University, former Director, Phoenix Water Services.

⁵ Staﬀ Attorney, Utton Transboundary Resources Center, University of New Mexico.

⁶ Live storage is all water stored in reservoirs that can be vacated by gravity, no matter how diﬃcult or slow would be the process of withdrawing that water. Active storage is all water stored above minimum power pool, and inactive storage is water stored between dead pool and minimum power pool. These definitions diﬀer from those used in previous papers that we have written. In past papers, we used the term active storage to refer to what we now refer to as live storage. This change is made to be consistent with terminology of Bureau of Reclamation.

⁷ We do not consider reservoirs that store Colorado River water but are located beyond the watershed boundary, such as Horsetooth or Twin Lakes Reservoirs in Colorado.

⁸ As discussed below, the March 2023 minimum was the lowest total Basin storage since May 1965 when the reservoirs of the Colorado River Storage Project were beginning to fill.

⁹ the contents of these reservoirs are reported by the Bureau of Reclamation https://www.usbr.gov/uc/water/hydrodata/reservoir_data/site_map.html. These reservoirs include the largest in the Basin, as well as many small ones.

¹⁰ The total amount of water in the 46 reservoirs on August 24, 1999, was 59.52 maf. The only previous periods when total Basin storage exceeded that amount were for ~4.5 months between June 9 and October 24, 1983, and during parts of summer 1984, 1985, 1986, and 1998 The largest amount of live storage in these reservoirs was 63.61 maf on July 15, 1983.

¹¹ Total live storage in Lake Mead and Lake Powell peaked at 47.70 maf on September 19, 1999, and was 13.38 maf on June 1, 2026.

¹² The contents of these 12 reservoirs are reported in Reclamation’s 24-Month Study reports and include Taylor Park, Blue Mesa, Morrow Point, Crystal, Fontenelle, Flaming Gorge, Vallecito, and Navajo that are upstream from Lake Powell, as well as Lake Powell, Lake Mead, Lake Mohave, and Lake Havasu. The contents of the latter two reservoirs, as well as Morrow Point and Crystal, do not change much during the year.

¹³ A. Castle et al. 2026. UPDATE: Colorado River Basin storage continues slide toward system crash. https://qanr.usu.edu/coloradoriver/files/research/Wilburys-system-crash.pdf.

¹⁴ J. Schmidt and J. Fleck. 2025. Colorado River Basin reservoir storage; where do we stand? https://www.inkstain.net/2025/06/colorado-river-basin-reservoir-storage-where-do-we-stand/.

¹⁵ The 12 federal reservoirs had 18.93 maf of active storage on March 14, 2023, and were at their lowest since early May 1965.

¹⁶ The largest single-year accumulation of Basin storage was in 2011, when storage increased 8.78 million af. Unregulated inflow in WY2011 was 15.97 maf, and natural flow in WY2011 was the largest of the 21st century (WY2011 = 20.16 million af). Unregulated inflow to Lake Powell in WY2023 was 13.42 million af, and natural flow of the Colorado River in WY2023 was 17.41 million af, the third largest of the 21st century.

¹⁷ Unregulated inflow was 7.98 million af, 2% less than the average for the 21st century (2000-2026). Natural flow at Lees Ferry in WY2024 (11.88 million af) was 1.5% less than the 21st century average.

¹⁸ Total Basin storage was 29.99 million af on July 6, 2024, the largest peak since mid-January 2021.

¹⁹ WY2025 unregulated inflow was 4.69 million af. Natural flow at Lees Ferry was 8.50 million af, the fifth driest of the 21st century.

²⁰ J. C. Schmidt et al. 2026. Lake Powell and Lake Mead are moving in opposite direction – what gives? https://qanr.usu.edu/coloradoriver/news/blog-2026-2-9. Here, we are arbitrarily ending the 2025-2026 depletion period on June 1, 2026, when the 2026-2027 depletion period begins.

²¹ June 24-Month Study.

²² The only other years in the 21st century when there was no accumulation of total Basin storage were 2002 and 2012.

²³ The median drawdown of the Basin’s reservoirs since 2010 during each depletion period has been approximately 3.6 maf, and the smallest previous depletion was 2.15 maf. There have only been six years when Basin-wide reservoir depletion was less than 3.0 million af: 2023-2024 (2.15 million af), 2022-2023 (2.19 million af), 2014-2015 (2.61 million af), 2016-2017 (2.75 million af), 2019-2020 (2.82 million af), and 2011-2012 (2.93 million af).

²⁴ Active storage in Lake Mead on January 1, 2023, was 7.32 million af.

²⁵ Lake Powell only gained 0.12 million af between May 7 and May 31.

²⁶ These reservoirs include Granby, Dillon, Ruedi, Green Mountain, Taylor Park, and Ridgway.

²⁷ J. C. Schmidt et al. 2023. The Colorado River water crisis: its origin and the future. WIREs Water 10.1002/wat2.1672.

²⁸ A. Castle et al. 2026. UPDATE: Colorado River Basin storage continues slide toward system crash. https://qanr.usu.edu/coloradoriver/files/research/Wilburys-system-crash.pdf.

The latest seasonal outlooks, through September 30, 2026, are hot off the presses from the #Climate Prediction Center

#Drought news June 18, 2026: The impacts of a dry winter and below-normal #snowpack continue to affect #Colorado and other parts of the region, where increasing numbers of waterways are experiencing low-flow conditions

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

The heaviest precipitation this week occurred across the Midwest and southern Plains. Flooding rains developed from south Texas into the Gulf Coast region during and beyond the period considered in this week’s analysis. Portions of Illinois and Indiana recorded precipitation totals 4–5 inches above normal. Over the past several weeks, persistent rainfall across the Midwest and central to southern Plains has contributed to widespread drought improvement.

Temperatures were near to above normal across much of the country. The coolest conditions were observed from the central Plains into the northern Rocky Mountains, where portions of Montana and Wyoming averaged 4–6 degrees below normal. In contrast, the East Coast—particularly New England—as well as much of California and southern Nevada, experienced above-normal temperatures. Parts of New England recorded departures of 8–10 degrees above normal…

High Plains

Across the High Plains states, drought continues to persist across western Kansas and eastern Colorado. The most severe and exceptional drought areas extend from eastern Wyoming into western and northern Nebraska and far southern South Dakota. Continued lack of rainfall and warmer-than-normal temperatures led to worsening drought conditions in the plains of eastern Colorado and small portions of northwestern Kansas. Exceptional drought was expanded across three counties in the Nebraska panhandle, where pastures and dryland wheat conditions are the poorest seen in decades, as a result of the record warm, dry winter followed by meager spring rainfall. The agricultural impacts in western Nebraska were confirmed by drought indicators spanning the last 6-12 months.

Other areas of degradation occurred this past week over North Dakota, especially the western half of the state. Moderate drought expanded southward along the Montana border as dry conditions intensified in western North Dakota. Abnormal dryness was introduced from southwest to north-central North Dakota due to recent drier-than-normal conditions.

The only improvements in the High Plains region are in central and eastern Nebraska. A couple swaths of 2-4 inches of rain fell this past week along the Interstate 80 corridor and into the southeastern part of Nebraska, which is presently free of any drought or abnormal dryness…

West

There was not widespread precipitation across the region this week. However, portions of western Oregon and Washington, Arizona, northern Idaho, New Mexico, southern Montana, southern Utah, and northern Wyoming recorded above-normal precipitation.

Temperatures were mixed, with below-normal readings across northern portions of the region and above-normal temperatures farther south. The warmest conditions occurred in California, Nevada, and Arizona, where departures of 6–8 degrees above normal or greater were widespread.

Drought degradation occurred across eastern Oregon, where moderate drought expanded. Moderate, severe, and extreme drought also expanded across much of southern Idaho and into western Montana, while extreme drought increased in coverage across central Wyoming.

Several weeks of wetter-than-normal conditions in New Mexico allowed for improvements to extreme drought across northeastern and southern portions of the state, although slight expansion occurred in northern areas. Improved short-term moisture conditions in eastern Utah and western Colorado supported reductions in extreme drought, while degradation occurred across central and eastern Colorado.

Screenshot of the USGS Water Watch website June 18, 2026.

The impacts of a dry winter and below-normal snowpack continue to affect Colorado and other parts of the region, where increasing numbers of waterways are experiencing low-flow conditions…

South

Across the southern states, many areas experienced widespread and substantial rainfall of 2–6 inches over the past week, especially southern and eastern Texas, eastern Oklahoma, northern Arkansas, northern Mississippi, and western Tennessee. Most areas of the deep southern states experienced drought improvement from all this rainfall. The only exception is in northeastern Tennessee, where drought degradations were made to the northwest of Knoxville due to worsening drought indicators.

The northeastern portion of the Texas Panhandle saw 2–4 inches rainfall over an area of exceptional drought, helping to relieve drought conditions with a small downgrade to extreme drought there. However, for the most part, extreme to exceptional drought conditions persisted across the Texas and Oklahoma panhandles, and much of western Oklahoma. Despite weekly rainfall of 2 inches or more along the periphery of Arkansas, severe to exceptional drought continued to persist in much of the state due to the long-term rainfall deficits of the past several months.

The recent appreciable rainfall over eastern Oklahoma, combined with more heavy rains this past week, led to a large removal of abnormal dryness from Texas to southwestern Missouri. Widespread heavy rainfall of 2–6 inches or more led to more drought coverage and intensity reduction across southern and eastern Texas, central Louisiana, and parts of western Mississippi. Drought relief also extended into western and northwestern Tennessee, representing the eastern extent of this week’s large area of heavy rainfall in the South…

Looking Ahead

During the next 5–7 days, more heavy rainfall is expected in the Deep South, as a result of a Tropical Storm Arthur near the southeastern Texas coast as of this writing. Deep tropical moisture will stream northeastward from Arthur as it advances into the Southeastern states. This tropical rainfall will have the potential to produce more drought relief in southeastern Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee. Current rainfall forecasts by the Weather Prediction Center also show the potential for several inches of rain from Oklahoma, Missouri, and Arkansas, eastward into the Ohio River Valley, with more severe weather potential in the Midwest region. Other areas of appreciable rainfall are forecast for parts of the Northeast and the eastern portions of the High Plains.

The Climate Prediction Center’s 6–10 day outlook shows that above-normal temperatures should prevail across much of the western U.S. and along the immediate Gulf coast into Florida. Below-normal temperatures are possible from the eastern portions of the High Plains, the Midwest, and into the Northeast states. Meanwhile, precipitation is projected to be above normal across much of the Midwest and High Plains, possibly extending into the Northeast states. Near-normal rainfall is anticipated across the South and Southeast in the 6-10 day outlook, with below-normal precipitation expected in most of the West.

‘It’s devastating’: Drawdown at #FlamingGorge hits local recreation economy; Emergency drought-induced draw to save downstream #LakePowell wreaks havoc on #Wyoming-#Utah’s lucrative Flaming Gorge — Dustin Bleizeffer and Hannah Romero (WyoFile.org) #GreenRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Anglers flock to Flaming Gorge Reservoir on Memorial Day weekend. Kokanee salmon and trophy-sized lake trout draw tens of thousands of visitors to the reservoir each year, supporting a recreational economy in southwestern Wyoming and northeastern Utah. (Hannah Romero/Green River Star)

Click the link to read the article on the WyoFile website (Dustin Bleizeffer and Hannah Romero):

June 4, 2026

As campers with boats flocked to Buckboard Marina at the start of Memorial Day weekend, Tony Valdez was busy issuing refunds and repairing broken boat ramps. One older Green River man, who walked with two canes, left with his money refunded for the season after discovering he could not safely make it down to the boat slip. Due to dropping water levels at Flaming Gorge Reservoir, the ramp is now buckled, angling up and down like a pitched roof.

“It’s devastating, not just to me, it’s all the marina owners,” said Valdez, who owns Buckboard Marina, south of Green River. “It’s a big loss, and this is a big loss to the community.”

Along the cliffs and shoreline, darker and lighter lines of rock and sand trace the water’s elevations, showing where the water hits when the marina is full, where it hovered this spring and where it dropped after an initial “flush.” Valdez estimates the reservoir has dropped by 7 feet since April.

But that’s not the worst of it. Valdez anticipates that by the end of this summer, the reservoir will be as low as it’s ever been.

Why the drain?

For all its charm as a beloved recreation spot and its utility as a local economic driver, Flaming Gorge Reservoir owes its existence to a legal compact that essentially regards it as an insurance policy in times of drought.

Its primary purpose, according to federal officials and Colorado River Compact scholars, is to serve as a backup water bank to help maintain the Colorado River system. Specifically, Flaming Gorge and a handful of other reservoirs in the upper Colorado River Basin states of Wyoming, Colorado, Utah and New Mexico are key to ensuring a minimum flow of 7.5 million acre-feet of water, on a running 10-year average, at Lees Ferry just downstream of Lake Powell, a massive man-made reservoir straddling the Utah-Arizona border.

Today, after more than 20 years of drought intensified by human-caused climate change, the Colorado River is in crisis, putting at risk massive agricultural irrigation operations that consume about 80% of its water. This past winter saw historically low snowpack in the Upper Colorado River Basin — a primary source for the river’s flow.

This annotated 1963 photo of the Glen Canyon Dam shows the minimum level of Lake Powell, below which would render the dam’s power generation components inoperable. (Bureau of Reclamation)

Combined with record heat in March, Lake Powell is at risk of dropping below Glen Canyon Dam’s “minimum power pool,” the point at which it can no longer produce hydroelectric power, according to water officials. If it falls even lower, the dam, which holds back Lake Powell, could be at risk of structural damage or unable to allow water to flow downstream.

The situation triggered a drought response operations agreement that calls for restricting releases from Lake Powell and an order to draw extra water from Flaming Gorge upstream. In total, water managers will release about 1 million additional acre-feet of water from Flaming Gorge in April 2026 through April 2027.

“These actions are expected to lower [Flaming Gorge’s] elevation by roughly 35 feet over the next year to approximately 59% of capacity,” the bureau said in April.

“The elevations are real critical,” Valdez said. At Buckboard Marina, high water has hovered between 6,030 and 6,040 feet above sea level over the past 50 years, he said. Dropping 35 feet could expose 400 feet of shoreline in some places, including marinas with boat ramps, he said.

Dropping water levels in the Flaming Gorge Reservoir by 35 feet could expose over 400 feet of shoreline in some places, including marinas with boat ramps, according to Buckboard Marina owner Tony Valdez. (Hannah Romero/Green River Star)

If the water elevation continues to retreat, it could reach a point where boats can’t be brought in or out.

“By September, this thing is going to be down to 6,000 feet. That’s it,” Valdez said. “Next year, if it goes below that, there’s no more marina here.”

Setting a course

Water managers set a course in April to “stabilize” Flaming Gorge’s outflow to about 1,100 cubic feet per second, representing the rate needed to achieve the 1 million acre-feet of extra water release, according to the bureau. On top of that, there are two previously planned “flushes” from the Gorge. The first, in early May, temporarily increased the outflow to about 8,600 cubic feet per second to enhance the proliferation of razorback sucker larvae, and a second 72-hour flush beginning June 8 will temporarily increase the outflow to about 4,600 cubic feet per second to discourage the proliferation of smallmouth bass.

So far, Flaming Gorge has dropped from about 3 million acre-feet in April (or 82% capacity) to about 2.83 million acre-feet as of May 25. Meanwhile, water managers warn, “This release plan is subject to change depending on evolving river conditions and weather forecasts.”

Click to enlarge: This chart depicts water storage levels at Flaming Gorge Reservoir. (Bureau of Reclamation)

Those evolving conditions include forecasted versus actual flows from streams feeding the system. For example, those “unregulated” or natural flows are forecasted to be much lower than normal: 70,000 acre-feet of water into Flaming Gorge during May (28% of average), 175,000 acre-feet in June (45% of average) and 84,000 acre-feet (42%), according to the Bureau of Reclamation.

Water officials caution that water flowing from the Flaming Gorge Dam could change, and that those recreating on the Green River below should monitor release schedules at this website. The bureau also noted, “Water will be colder than usual and will run high and swift during periods of elevated releases.”

Water floats recreation economy

Buckboard Marina went through a similar drop in water a few years ago. The Bureau of Reclamation began pulling water from the Flaming Gorge in 2021, and by 2022, the marina’s water level was at an all-time low. While the reservoir recovered somewhat in 2023 thanks to a good year for moisture, Valdez said, the reservoir has continued to decline since then.

Buckboard Marina owner Tony Valdez stands next to a stake that indicates the extent of lowering water levels at Flaming Gorge Reservoir Sept. 26, 2022. (Dustin Bleizeffer/WyoFile)

Kokanee salmon and trophy-sized lake trout draw tens of thousands of visitors to Flaming Gorge each year, supporting a recreational economy in southwestern Wyoming and northeastern Utah. But as the lake is drawn down, water recedes from shallow shorelines and fish are forced into a smaller space, essentially shrinking the fishery toward the dam side of the reservoir.

One of Valdez’s primary concerns is that water levels could drop below the ideal elevation for kokanee to spawn in the reservoir.

“I think people don’t realize the economic value it brings,” he said. “It is a big deal when you lose your kokanees.”

Already, kokanee are struggling to thrive in the reservoir.

Drinking water dries up

Valdez has already lost money this year just from people being concerned about water levels. He estimated that the marina lost roughly $30,000 in cancellations when discussions about releasing water began as early as February.

Other problems also start to arise as the water drops. The marina will lose access to drinking water at 6,010 feet, below their floating pump that supplies potable water. It’s only 7 feet away from the current level.

“That’s scary to me,” Valdez said.

The marina can truck in water from Rock Springs, but it costs about $1,200 to bring in 8,000 gallons, which lasts about two weeks. For Valdez, it feels “asinine” to lose water at a marina.

“Why would we run out of water on a lake?”

Water levels also impact the location of the fuel dock and fuel lines extending to it. If the reservoir sinks too low, it could cost up to $100,000 to adapt, he said.

Drawing down water levels quickly — as happened in early May — can damage marina structures. After the 2021-22 drawdown, Valdez said he spent about $130,000 in repairs.

Buckboard Marina owner Tony Valdez shows a boat ramp that now angles up steeply before dropping down after the reservoir’s water levels dropped several feet. (Hannah Romero/Green River Star)

This time, he’d hoped to keep up. He and a group of 10 men worked to keep pace with the dropping water levels, repairing and modifying ramps. It wasn’t enough.

“The drop was dramatic enough to break all of our approaches, our bridges, our stuff, so it broke a lot of the welds, broke a lot of the structured steel, because it just vertically dropped too fast for the weight,” he said.

When structures go from water to land that quickly, the weight is too much for them to hold up, Valdez said.

“I’m re-rigging everything, and this is only a temporary fix ’til September, because that’s when the season ends.”

The marina should remain mostly functional until the summer season ends, he said. But with extra water releases set to continue through the winter, the lake could drop another 10 to 12 feet by the spring.

“We’re getting into numbers that I don’t even want to talk about,” Valdez said. “I mean, there’s no marina.”

What’s next?

“The guy with the boots on the ground that watches this every day,” as Valdez describes himself, can see what water managers can’t, and he questions whether official numbers and estimates match reality.

“It’s hard to watch this when it’s out of your hands.”

Valdez is critical of the 1922 compact, doubting the legal rationale of sending Wyoming water to places like Arizona. He also wonders about the role of local industries — refineries, coal-fired power plants and trona mines — that use large amounts of water, and the idea of adding more industrial facilities that require even more water, like data centers.

“We don’t have the water to give away,” Valdez said.

Aerial photo of the Glen Canyon Dam near Page, Arizona. Photo by Alexander Heilner/The Water Desk, with aerial support by LightHawk.

Bryan Seppie, general manager for the Joint Powers Water Board for Sweetwater County, Rock Springs and Green River, agrees. “The poor hydrology this past winter has affected most all water users in some form or another,” he said.

His board monitors the Colorado River system closely. Just upstream from Flaming Gorge, the Bureau of Reclamation reduced releases from Fontenelle Reservoir due to poor inflow projections. Although the water will still be enough for river users, the low summer flows will have a negative impact.

“Low river flows typically result in higher water temperatures, which generally leads to higher levels of moss/algae and overall lower water quality,” Seppie said in an email.

What about recovery?

Valdez wonders: What’s the plan to allow the reservoir to bounce back?

Wyoming State Engineer Brandon Gebhart and his staff have warned for months that although Flaming Gorge can serve as a backup to Lake Powell this year, it drains the Gorge’s ability to play a similar role next year, or the year after. It takes time for Mother Nature to replenish the bank.

“The big thing that nobody is talking about is the recovery,” Valdez said. “Where is the recovery of our water?”

This year’s drain on Flaming Gorge began at a low point. The reservoir hadn’t fully recovered after the last major pull. Rather than starting at a high point of 6,040 feet, the marina was at about 6,024 feet, he said.

“There’s no recovery plan,” he said. “We can’t just let them keep taking. I mean, where’s this end?”

Rings line the shore of Flaming Gorge Reservoir, showing the drop in the water level at the popular recreation spot that spans the Wyoming-Utah border. (Hannah Romero/Green River Star)

If there is no grace period for the reservoir to replenish and officials want to take even more in the near future, starting from such a low elevation point, it will be “devastating,” Valdez said.

“The water going down is not the end of the world, it’s the recovery in a timely manner that really matters,” he said. “I can’t preach recovery enough.”

Watching people come to the marina and seeing how happy they are still motivates Valdez to keep going. Despite the drawdown, there’s nowhere else he’d rather be.

“We’re not going to run away. We’re not going to give up,” he said. “We’re going to fight.”

ten tribes — Graphic via Holly McClelland/High Country News.

Happy wedding anniversary Mrs. Gulch: Old Friends shine like diamonds

Kayakers enjoy the Clark Fork River next to downtown Missoula, Montana. Photo credit: Micah Sheldon/Flickr

NOTE: Our wedding anniversary was on June 16th.

Mrs. Gulch lived long enough to celebrate our 50th wedding anniversary. I don’t think you stay together that long unless you become close friends.

We were a work romance. She was introduced to me early on a Sunday morning where I worked at the Safeway at 44th & Lowell in Denver. She was the first girl hired there to bag groceries and other duties. As the Assistant Manager and Mrs. Gulch walked away I noticed that she was holding her very long brown hair back with a hair clip made out of rawhide in the shape of a peace sign. Since this was during the Viet Nam war the peace sign was very symbolic.

We became good friends, then romantically involved, which despite some pressure to split up from her parents, we stuck it out and got married in 1973.

Read: Happy Birth Anniversary Mrs. Gulch

I think we cemented our friendship when we moved to Missoula. We really needed to depend on each other since our support folks were back in Denver. We set out in our VW bus driving to college towns, looking for a graduate school. We wandered through college towns, Laramie, Grand Junction, Pocatello, Idaho Falls, Bozeman, Butte, and then drove down the Clark Fork River, through the Hellgate, into Missoula and decided try out the University of Montana. Those western sunsets in the Rocky Mountains will get you every time.

Mrs. Gulch’s landscape June 17, 2026

18 Months Without Water: The Grim Reality of a Major Earthquake on the San Andreas Fault

Aerial view of rugged brown mountains and valleys under a clear sky, showcasing a desert landscape. — ^{The San Andreas Fault runs down the middle of the Mecca Hills, (shown). The Coachella Canal passes nearby. Photo by Robert Marcos.}

by Robert Marcos, photojournalist

Last week the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa released a study that reported that tectonic stress along the San Andreas and San Jacinto faults had reached its highest levels in 1,000 years.¹

Key Findings of the Report

Critical State: The research, published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, reveals that stress levels have accumulated to unprecedented heights because more than 160 years have passed since the region’s last major fault rupture. ²

The “Earthquake Gate”: Scientists identified the Cajon Pass—where the two fault lines intersect—as a critical junction. This area could either halt a rupture or facilitate a massive joint rupture across both systems simultaneously, creating a significantly more destructive earthquake than a single-fault event. ³

Impact Areas: A dual-fault rupture would severely threaten densely populated Southern California regions, including Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, and the Coachella Valley. 4

Expected Physical Damage

The San Andreas Fault bisects the city of Coachella. The section of the fault that extends through Coachella has a high probability of rupturing in the next 30 years. The resulting earthquake will be accompanied by extreme seismic shaking and lateral rupture of the ground that locally may exceed 20 feet. Other earthquake-induced hazards expected in the area include ground deformation due to liquefaction and slope failure. Earthquake scenarios indicate the infrastructure in the region will be damaged extensively by an earthquake on the San Andreas Fault. The water-distribution system especially will be hard-hit but other services, including the transportation network, will also be affected. The Coachella Canal is expected to be damaged by surface fault rupture and ground deformation, with the potential for significant flooding in the Coachella area.⁵

Hazards for Water Conveyance Systems

The All-American Canal and its 123-mile branch, the Coachella Canal, form a critical water delivery system for southern California’s desert agriculture. However, this infrastructure faces several severe structural, environmental, and public safety threats. ⁶

San Andreas Fault Proximity: The Coachella Canal directly crosses seismically active zones. Regional hazard models indicate that a major earthquake on the San Andreas Fault is expected to cause severe surface fault ruptures and ground deformation. ⁷

Catastrophic Flooding: Damage to the canal walls from an earthquake could instantly breach the concrete system, causing rapid, severe flash flooding in surrounding residential and agricultural areas of the Coachella Valley. ⁸

Immediate Drowning and Public Safety Hazards

The Deadly Trap: The canals pose a massive public safety threat, with well over 140 recorded drownings in the Coachella Canal alone. While the water surface often looks calm, the internal currents are incredibly swift (moving at several feet per second) with powerful undertows. ⁹

Impassable Features: The canals feature steep, slick concrete walls that make it nearly impossible for a person or animal to climb out once they fall in. They also contain hidden underwater tunnels called “siphons” and automated water-delivery equipment that can trap and drown victims instantly. ¹⁰

Smuggler Exploitation: Because the All-American Canal runs parallel to the US – Mexico border, criminal cartels and human smugglers frequently force migrants into the dangerous currents to evade law enforcement, routinely resulting in fatalities. ¹¹

The razorback sucker needed saving. The feds, high schoolers and a baseball team stepped in — #Colorado Public Radio

Endangered Razorback sucker. Photo credit: Reclamation

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

June 12, 2026

On a recent warm night, a batter cracked a hit deep into the lush outfield at Grand Junction’s downtown baseball field, and fans of the city’s new team erupted in joy. Their screams welcomed two players sprinting across home plate. Emblazoned on the young men’s crisp navy caps was the image of an imposing fish with a distinctive hump.

“Go, Suckers!” yelled a guy in the stands, lifting up his beer.

The Razorback Suckers isn’t just a quirky team name. It’s a statement about what matters to this community. The Grand Valley, on the high-desert edge of Colorado’s Western Slope, is deep in a fight to keep this endangered fish alive. Razorbacks roamed the Colorado River for an estimated five million years before humans almost fished them out of existence and destroyed much of their habitat. Now it’s up to today’s humans to save them. And on a recent morning, hundreds of people gathered on the rocky banks of the Colorado River in Palisade for a joyous razorback release…

[Patrick] Steele’s students, who raised these razorbacks all school year, helped direct locals into two long lines leading to the olive-green water. They were here for a local tradition: to kiss each fish before it’s released. Standing in the river, Steele held up a glistening, green and yellow razorback — its suctioning mouth opened and closed between wide eyes on a blobby head. Little kids squealed, and adults closed their eyes with a grimace as they planted a smooch on the razorbacks.

“Well, it was very slimy,” said Phoenix Hadley, a local mom, before starting to laugh. “I think I might have kissed its eyeball. I’m not sure!”

Join Blue River Watershed Group and local water leaders as we discuss how #drought conditions will affect our water, rivers, and community here in the Blue River watershed, Tuesday, June 23, 2026

Map of the Blue River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69327693

Here’s the release from the Blue River Watershed Group (Reyna Schedler):

As drought conditions continue to shape water management decisions across Colorado, Blue River Watershed Group is hosting a free public forum to help community members better understand how current operations and water management strategies are affecting the Blue River Watershed and the local community.

The Summit County Drought Response Event will bring together representatives from state and federal agencies, local water providers, water utilities, and local governments to discuss current drought conditions, reservoir operations, water supply management, and the challenges facing communities throughout the region.

The event will take place on Tuesday, June 23, 2026, from 5:30–7:30 p.m. at the North Branch Library in Silverthorne. Attendees will hear directly from water experts working across Summit County’s water systems and will have opportunities to ask questions throughout the evening.

The program will begin with an overview of current drought conditions and watershed impacts, followed by presentations from agency and water provider representatives. The evening will conclude with an open community question-and-answer session featuring participating speakers and local water providers.

Event Focus

Presentations will address:

Current drought conditions and outlook for the Blue River Watershed

Status of water operations and reservoir management

Impacts on local rivers, water supplies, and watershed health

Regional coordination among water providers and agencies

Opportunities for community engagement and education

Featured Speakers

Troy Wineland – Event moderator, introductions, and current drought overview

Christina Pearson, Colorado Division of Water Resources

Nathan Elder, Denver Water

Kyle Whitaker, Northern Water

Marc Baldo, Bureau of Reclamation

Nick Harris or Maria Pastore, Colorado Springs Utilities

Will Stambaugh, City of Golden

Local water providers will also participate in the community Q&A session.

Event Details

What: Summit County Drought Response Event

When: Tuesday, June 23, 2026, 5:30–7:30 p.m.

Where: North Branch Library, Silverthorne, Colorado

Who Should Attend: Community members, water users, elected officials, business owners, educators, recreation stakeholders, and anyone interested in learning more about drought conditions and water management in the Blue River Watershed

Please register here.

About the Blue River Watershed Group

The Blue River Watershed Group is a community-led nonprofit working to promote, protect, and restore a healthy Blue River watershed through cooperative community education, stewardship, and resource management. We focus on the entire watershed, which drains an area of about 680 square miles covering all of Summit County and portions of Grand and Lake Counties.

To Lees or not to Lee’s; Mike Lee goes after roadless rule; Trump steps up oil and gas leasing; Plus a dash of historical mass murder and its connection to today’s copyediting and political battles — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org)

Looking down at Lees Ferry and Lee Ferry, but probably not Lee’s Ferry or Lees’ Ferry. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

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

June 12, 2026

🐟 Colorado River Chronicles 💧

Recently, my colleagues at High Country News and I had a bit of a kerfuffle over whether the place on the Colorado River that divides the Upper Basin from the Lower Basin was called Lee Ferry, Lee’s Ferry, or Lees Ferry. Our esteemed copyeditor, Diane Sylvain, was beating herself up for letting a “Lee Ferry” sneak into an article I wrote, when the HCN style guide says it should be “Lees Ferry.”

I pointed out that it was fine, since “Lee Ferry” is an accepted spelling, as is “Lee’s Ferry.” This prompted a sharp rebuke: “Its name is Lees. … Dissenters can use apostrophes on their own time.”

Great. Now I’ve been labelled as a copyedit dissenter. That hurts. But it also sent me down a wormhole on this whole Lee Lees Lee’s Ferry thing, not in an effort to catch any copyeditors out, not as an act of dissent, but just because I’m curious about how we got to where “Lees Ferry” is the accepted spelling, in defiance of apostrophes and, perhaps, history. In the process I learned a lot about one of the coolest spots I know.

Photo credit: Jonathan P. Thompson/The Land Desk

Honestly, I wish we could use a different name altogether for this place of convergence in the far reaches of northern Arizona, something grander and more suited to the landscape, to the condors that ply the skies over the Marble Canyon, to the towering Vermillion Cliffs, and the way the light plays off the stone and dances across the ripply waters of the Colorado River, a dim echo of the geological turmoil that occurred here. Lees Ferry is where the Wingate sandstone of Glen Canyon gives way to the Kaibab limestone of Marble Canyon, where the deep gorge of the Paria River meets up with the Colorado, and — more arbitrarily — where the Upper Basin of the Colorado River meets the Lower Basin.

The geologic transition influenced the topography, making this one of the few places in the region that people and their horses and wagons can reach the Colorado River safely without winches and ropes or parachutes.

Hopi people probably forged the first footpaths to the river from the east, making their way down the giant limestone ramp. Much later, the Escalante-Dominguez expedition of 1776, searching for a return route to Santa Fe, stumbled upon this place, naming it San Benito de Salsipuedes ¹. “The entire terrain from San Fructo up to here is very troublesome,” the friars wrote, “and altogether impassible when it contains a little moisture from snow and rain.” They also said the land was “pleasingly jumbled,” which seems a perfect descriptor. Some of the Spaniard colonists tried to cross the river, but found that the water was too deep and the current too swift — although they managed to survive. They had to exit the canyon and continue upstream for miles before finding a way across.

A section of Don Bernardo Miera y Pacheco’s map from the Escalante-Dominguez expedition showing what is now known as Lees Ferry.

Paiute guide Naraguts led explorer Jacob Hamblin to the crossing in the 1860s, putting it, figuratively, on the Euro-American maps. And in 1871, a man named John Doyle Lee and his wife Emma settled near the mouth of the Paria and, with a boat abandoned by John Wesley Powell, established a ferry river crossing just upstream from the confluence of the Paria River, naming the place Lonely Dell.

Lee was the adopted son of Brigham Young and had been a Church of Latter Day Saints leader. However, the church excommunicated him after he helped lead the Mountain Meadows Massacre in southwestern Utah, which resulted in the killing of more than 100 non-Mormon white settlers. Whether he chose to go to the remote Lonely Dell to escape prosecution for mass-murder or was exiled there isn’t really clear. Either way, it didn’t work out: Federal marshals arrested him in 1874. In a jail-house interview with the Philadelphia Times the following year, Lee said he had 18 wives, 63 children, 100 grandchildren, and one great grandchild. He also refused to implicate Brigham Young for his role in the massacre. Lee was tried, convicted of first-degree murder, and executed by firing squad in 1877.

Emma Lee continued operations at the ferry until 1879 (meaning she ran it for longer than her husband). Then Warren Johnson and sons ran the enterprise on behalf of the LDS Church, followed by James Emmet and the Grand Canyon Cattle Co., followed again by Johnson and sons for Coconino County. The ferry was finally shut down in 1928 after an accident killed three people. The Navajo Bridge downstream was under construction at the time and would have displaced the ferry, so it would have been abandoned anyway.

John Lee’s notoriety and his conviction didn’t dissuade folks from using his name to refer to the ferry and the place — although it could be argued that it’s named after Emma, not John.

George F. Cram maps from 1879 and 1900 show “Lee’s Ferry” at the confluence of the Paria and the Colorado rivers, but an 1881 version of Cram’s map calls it “Lees Ferry.” Newspaper articles in 1899, 1905, and 1935 refer to the place as “Lee’s Ferry,” as does an 1884 Rand McNally map. It goes like this up until the 1930s, with mapmakers and others generally using both Lee’s and Lees, depending, perhaps, on the typesetter’s fondness for apostrophes. Another theory (albeit likely false): “Lees” is actually the plural form, not the possessive without the apostrophe, so as to give both Emma and John credit for starting and running the ferry. Whatever the case, by the 1940s “Lees Ferry” had edged out “Lee’s Ferry” as most cartographers’ preferred form.

It seems, then, that we have come to the end of this journey, and that “Lees Ferry” is the most acceptable spelling, whether or not it’s grammatically correct. But then along comes “Lee Ferry” to throw it all out of whack.

In 1916, Eric C. LaRue wrote a paper on “The Colorado River and its Utilization” for the U.S. Geological Survey, which is the arbiter of place names. In it, he refers to the place where the Paria River meets the Colorado River as “Lee Ferry.” Except then, five years later, the USGS installed a Colorado River streamflow gage just upstream of the Paria River confluence and called it “Lees Ferry.”

Does this settle it? Nope. Because in 1922, the Colorado River Compact was hammered out. This is the foundational document of the “Law of the River,” and it partitioned the Colorado River watershed into the Upper Basin and Lower Basin states and parceled out its waters to each. The dividing line between the two? Lee Ferry. No, the authors did not accidentally omit the “s” in “Lees.” In its definition-of-terms section, the Compact says: “The term ‘Lee Ferry’ means a point in the main stream of the Colorado River one mile below the mouth of the Paria River.” Yet, the ferry established by John and Emma Lee — along with the USGS streamflow gage — are located above the mouth of the Paria River (because sediment from the Paria can mess up measurements and, possibly, ferries).

A passage from he U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s 1946 report, “The Colorado River: A Natural Menace Becomes a Natural Resource,” in which they use both “Lees Ferry” and “Lee Ferry” and explain the difference between the two. Source: USBR.

While these two points on the map are close enough together to be considered the same place, there is a significant distinction when it comes to accounting for the water in the Colorado River: By putting the dividing point (Lee Ferry) below the mouth of the Paria, it includes the Paria River in the Upper Basin, and includes those flows in the 75 million acre-feet every ten years the Upper Basin is obligated to allow to flow past Lee Ferry. To determine the flow at Lee Ferry, the USGS adds the measurement from the Lees Ferry streamflow gage to the one from the Paria River gage.

It’s about as clear as a sediment-choked Colorado River now, isn’t it? Here it is in a slightly more concise version:

Lees Ferry = Lee’s Ferry ≠ Lee Ferry

Lees Ferry is the most widely accepted term for the geographical location at and around the confluence of the Colorado River and Paria River in northern Arizona. It’s probably derived from “Lee’s Ferry,” as the USGS typically drops apostrophes from possessive place names for reasons unknown. Lees Ferry also refers to the USGS Colorado River streamflow gage located just upstream from the mouth of the Paria River.

Zipline at the USGS Lees Ferry streamflow gage, not to be confused with Lee Ferry, which is the point that divides the Colorado River’s Upper Basin from the Lower Basin. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

Lee Ferry is the correct term for the point one mile downstream from the mouth² of the Paria River that divides the Colorado River’s Upper Basin from the Lower Basin. The Colorado River Compact mandates that the Upper Basin “will not cause the flow of the river at Lee Ferry to be depleted below an aggregate of 75,000,000 acre-feet for any period of ten consecutive years.”

The streamflow at Lee Ferry is determined by adding the measured flow at the Lees Ferry streamflow gage to that at the Paria River gage just upstream from the Paria River’s mouth.

So, if one is writing about the Upper Basin’s non-depletion obligation, they should use “Lee Ferry.” If they are writing about the historical settlement, the general place, or the streamflow gage, they should write “Lees Ferry.”

🌵 Public Lands 🌲

THE NEWS: MAGA Sen. Mike Lee, of Utah, is back on his anti-public-lands crusade, this time with an underhanded attempt to repeal the wildly popular 2001 Roadless Area Conservation Rule, which protects some 45 million acres of U.S. Forest Service land from roadbuilding and logging³. And yes, Mike Lee is related to the aforementioned convicted mass murderer John D. Lee, though I’m sure that has nothing to do with this.

THE CONTEXT: Lee had a busy week. First, he went ballistic on social media after the Trump Defense Department removed the Church of Latter Day Saints from its list of Christian religious denominations (it’s still a recognized faith, but lost the “Christian” label). Apparently he was worried Mormons would be left out of Pete Hegseth’s white Christian Nationalist holy wars.

Then, ol’ Jell-O-Social Lee snuck a last-minute amendment into the bipartisan Wildfire Prevention Act that would not only kill the Roadless Rule, but also prevent a similar rule from being implemented later. The Senate’s energy and natural resources committee voted to advance the amended legislation along party lines. Next it will be subject to a full Senate vote.

Lee’s amendment “just blows up” the bipartisan support for the larger Wildfire Prevention Act, said a clearly dismayed Sen. Martin Heinrich, a New Mexico Democrat. The larger legislation, introduced by Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., aims to increase forest thinning and other vegetation treatments as well as prescribed burns on Forest Service and BLM land. It would also guide the agencies to develop strategies for using “livestock grazing as a wildlife risk reduction tool.”

The jury is certainly still out on the efficacy of forest thinning as a wildfire hazard mitigation method. As for livestock grazing? Yeah, probably not, unless all vegetation is eaten down to bare dirt. And once all of the native grasses are gone, it opens the door to cheatgrass, which is especially flammable. Then there’s the question of whether wildfires are really a bad thing — but we’ll leave that debate for later.

Lee claims his motives are pure, and that the Roadless Rule is hampering access for fire prevention and fighting efforts. That’s not true. While the rule generally prohibits roadbuilding and timber harvesting in inventoried roadless areas, it makes exceptions for both if they are deemed necessary for wildfire hazard mitigation or to fight fires. In a public hearing, Sen. Alex Padilla, D-California, pointed out that 240,000 acres of inventoried roadless areas in his state alone had been treated for wildfire hazard mitigation treatment, proving Lee wrong. And the Trump administration, for better or worse, has lagged on forest thinning: A Center for Western Priorities analysis found the Forest Service treated 35% less acreage in 2025 than it did under Biden in 2024.

In fact, building more roads increases access to remote areas. Since most fires are started by humans, it follows that putting more humans into a forest makes it more likely that forest is going to be ignited by an errant spark, cigarette, campfire, or a hot catalytic converter in some tinder-dry grass. So if you really want to prevent wildfires, consider closing some of the thousands of miles of existing roads across public lands.

It’s not clear what Lee hopes to accomplish with these inane, and often futile moves, but what he has done is given strength and energy to the environmental movement. His bid last year to sell off public lands to real estate developers not only flopped, but enlarged the constituency opposing land transfers of any kind. His latest assault on public lands has riled up the hook and bullet crowd, who don’t want roads and timber operations sullying game habitat and streams. And his amendment may very well kill the wildfire bill’s chances at passing, disrupting the efforts of his right-wing colleagues.

Maybe Lee’s inherent extremism forces him to lash out at bipartisanship and pragmatism, in general. After all, he got into the Senate by unseating the late Sen. Bob Bennett, a conservative Republican who lost favor with the more extreme wing of his state’s party by attempting to broker a compromise on public lands in Utah.

It’s tempting to blame Lee’s zealotry on genetics, given that he is the great-great-grandson of John D. Lee, who was convicted and executed for his role in the Mountain Meadows Massacre of 1857, when a group of Mormon militia members killed about 120 gentile emigrants as their wagon train made its way from Arkansas to California. The attack came during a time of heightened tension and conflict between the LDS church and the federal government.

Water and climate scientist Brad Udall speaks at the annual Colorado Law Conference on Natural Resources at the University of Colorado Boulder June, 2014. Udall has been one of the loudest voices calling for audacious leadership on issues of climate and the Colorado River. Photo credit: Heather Sackett/Aspen Journalism

The problem with that theory is that John D. Lee’s direct descendants — who likely number in the thousands by now — also include Stewart and Morris Udall, influential Western Democratic politicians and public lands champions. Stewart served as Interior Secretary under John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, and Morris was an Arizona congressman for three decades. Stewart’s son Tom represented New Mexico in the House and Senate, and Mo’s son Mark, a Colorado Democrat, served in the Senate and House as well.

Those Udalls were (and are) Democrats and environmentalists and, according to some takes, “staunch liberals.” But they were also old-school Western politicians who valued pragmatism over ideology and values over party, everything Mike Lee is not. Lee could learn a lot from his kin.

🛢️ Hydrocarbon Hoedown 📈

I’ve written here often about how the Trump administration is handing out drilling permits to petroleum companies like Shriners throwing candy at a parade. Over the last six months, for example, the BLM has issued drilling permits at a rate of 500 per month; you’d have to go back to the George W. Bush administration to see the agency acting at a more rapid pace. But the administration is supplicating itself even more to the fossil fuel industries in a different realm: leasing as much public land to oil and gas companies as they possibly can.

Earlier this month, for example, the Bureau of Land Management auctioned 114,439 acres of public land in Wyoming to the oil and gas industry. Next week, the BLM will put a whopping 160,268 acres in Colorado on the auction block, which could open 174 parcels in Arapahoe, Garfield, Jackson, Mesa, Moffat, Rio Blanco, Routt, and Weld counties — including prime elk habitat — to drilling. And in December, the agency is looking to auction nearly 79,000 acres on the Arizona Strip, despite the fact that there are no known petroleum reserves there.

The public comment period is long gone for those lands, but another planned December sale in Colorado is still subject to your input. This time the BLM is looking to sell 114 parcels on nearly 127,000 acres. The parcels are scattered around the state, with the biggest chunk east of Trinidad, including a block along the Purgatoire River. More than 2,000 acres in and around the HD Mountains in southwestern Colorado — including one big swath south of Chimney Rock — are also going on the block.

Parcels in Archuleta County, Colorado, the BLM plans to put on the oil and gas lease auction block in December (outlined in black). To comment on the proposal, click on this link.

¹I’ve seen different translations for “Salsipuede,” including: “you can get out” and “get out if you can.” It seems that the latter is most accurate, given that a “San Benito” is a cassock worn by errant friars. They also called the place “distressful.”

²This is not at a fixed point, as the mouth of the Paria River has migrated from north to south over the years, thanks to sedimentation and so forth.

³The original rule covered nearly 60 million acres, however, as the rule was battered around the courts and political playing field in the years after its implementation, Colorado and Idaho petitioned to create state-specific rules for inventoried roadless areas in their states. That means that any rescission of the rule, whether it’s administratively by the Trump administration or via Lee’s amendment, would not affect Colorado or Idaho roadless areas.

Who depends more on Colorado River water: 40 million people or 1.8 million cattle?

A cartoon cow enjoying a shower, wearing a colorful shower cap and surrounded by bubbles in a bathroom. The showerhead is spraying water, and there are soap and shampoo products visible. — ^{Dairy cow bathing with a shower cap on. Created by Google’s Nana Banana 2.}

by Robert Marcos, photojournalist

In terms of actual volume consumed, cattle depend significantly more on Colorado River water than people do. All total, the Colorado River water that’s consumed by the 40 million people who have access to it represents about 18% of the river’s total allocate use. Meanwhile cattle and their forage – specifically alfalfa and hay, use 46% of the river’s allocated use, making livestock the single largest consumer of the Colorado River.¹

The Data Breakdown

According to a landmark Nature Communications Earth & Environment study tracking the river’s allocation, the water consumption heavily favors cattle and the production of forage over use by cities. 2

Cattle Feed vs. Cities: Crops like alfalfa and grass hay consume roughly twice as much water as the combined municipal and industrial use of every single city that relies on the river – including massive hubs like Los Angeles, Phoenix, Denver, and Las Vegas. ³

The Agricultural Monopoly: Irrigated agriculture accounts for 52% of the river’s overall water consumption (which includes natural evaporation). Of that massive agricultural share, 62% goes strictly to feeding livestock. ⁴

Upper Basin Extreme: In the Upper Colorado River Basin (Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming), cattle-feed crops consume 90% of all agricultural irrigation water. This is three times more water than all municipal, commercial, and industrial uses combined in that region. 5

Critical Nuance

Water policy experts note that most of the 40 million people who are said to “depend” upon Colorado River water actually utilize water from a variety of sources: including surface water, recycled water, groundwater, captured rain water, water from state water projects, and in some cases desalinated water. Only five American cities rely solely on Colorado River water: Yuma, Lake Havasu, Bullhead City, Needles, and Green River Wyoming. ⁶

Las Vegas draws approximately 90% of its water from Lake Mead, making it perhaps the most vulnerable major city to reservoir decline. Phoenix and the broader Phoenix metropolitan area relies on the river for about 40% of its water through the Central Arizona Project canal. Tucson receives most of its water from the Colorado River via the same 336-mile Central Arizona Project. Denver and Colorado’s Front Range cities draw water from the river’s headwaters through transmountain diversions like the Colorado-Big Thompson Project. The Imperial Valley and Coachella Valley in California—among the nation’s most productive agricultural regions—use more Colorado River water than any other area. ⁷

Gross Dam’s $600 million expansion is largely done. Will Denver Water ever get to fill its expanded reservoir? Facing environmental challenge, state’s largest water utility is still under order not to use extra capacity — The #Denver Post

The new conveyor system moved concrete across the gap where the spillway channel will be to the far side of the dam. Photo credit: Denver Water.

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

June 14, 2026

…it remains unclear whether Denver Water will ever be able to fill the reservoir to its new full capacity as a yearslong court battle lumbers on between the utility and environmentalists. Months of mediation between the parties have failed. Denver Water is now asking a federal appeals court to reverse a lower court judge’s 2025 order barring the utility from filling the expanded reservoir and ordering the yearslong federal permitting process to be redone. A panel of three judges for the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is scheduled to hear arguments in the case on July 31 in Santa Fe…

U.S. District Court Judge Christine Arguello in 2024 found that federal regulators violated environmental protection laws when they failed to properly analyze the environmental impact of the project or consider reasonable alternatives to the dam expansion that would be less harmful. She later issued the order against filling the reservoir. Environmental groups argued in court, and in their filings, that regulators failed to evaluate how siphoning more water from the drought-stricken Colorado River would impact the basin as a whole. And the groups charged that they failed to weigh other project options that wouldn’t require the clear-cutting of a half-million trees or risk damage to wetlands. The case has drawn the attention of other Front Range water providers, lawyers from across the county and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — all of which have filed briefs in the appeals case…

While the dam structure itself is complete, at least a year of work remains to fully finish the project, Martin said. Construction crews must finish the spillway and place the final topper foot of concrete on the completed dam structure. Divers will place a gate between the reservoir’s water and the dam’s intake tubes. But the crews on site will diminish in the coming months, from up to 500 workers a day to closer to 100. On the morning of June 3, crane operators already worked to remove from the dam crest the heavy machinery that was necessary to build the main structure.

Roller-compacted concrete will be placed on top of the existing dam to raise it to a new height of 471 feet. A total of 118 new steps will make up the new dam. Image credit: Denver Water.

‘Not great’ but ‘OK’: How a dry winter is impacting hay season in the Yampa Valley — Steamboat Pilot & Today #YampaRiver

Yampa River inflow to Stagecoach Reservoir April 22, 2026. Photo credit: Scott Hummer

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

June 12, 2026

Ranchers are constantly adjusting to changing weather conditions and seasonal variations by nature. Jay Fetcher, of Fetcher Ranch in North Routt County, has documented snow melt dates for his hay meadows for each of the 75 years the ranch has been in the family, and said the variation is “incredible.” A year with low snowpack and a warm spring is just another condition to adjust to in the ranching world. This year, dryland hay broke dormancy early in Routt County, meaning cutting has already started, about two or three weeks earlier than usual. The low snowpack is not only generating concerns for ranchers with irrigated hay but water concerns for those with livestock. Despite these problems, the general consensus was that this year is expected to be below average, but not detrimental.

“People with dry land probably can expect some reduced yields, but I will say that the rains we’ve gotten over the last couple weeks have brought on grasses in dry land and pasture situation areas better than I would have anticipated,” said Todd Hagenbuch, the county director and agriculture agent for the Colorado State University Routt County Extension…

The second big concern from the lack of snowpack was water for cattle and other livestock. According to Hagenbuch, the snow runoff fills ponds and streams that the animals drink out of, but this year there’s simply no water in a lot of them. For ranchers whose ponds and streams are not filled, they have to haul water in for the livestock.

“That’s the big issue is adequate water for livestock, and it will be all summer,” said Mucklow. Mucklow is currently not needing to haul water on his ranch, but he personally knows several ranchers who are in that position.

Mucklow also said that there is a federal drought program conducted by the U.S Department of Agriculture that compensates ranchers who have to haul water.

Having drinking water for his cattle was also a primary concern for Fetcher earlier in the season. “It was on my mind as we had no snowpack, and the snow was gone,” said Fetcher. On his ranch, they rely on the streams and springs for the cows in the pastures. Fetcher said the recent rains gave him a significant amount of moisture that eased his worries considerably.

South Platte River Basin #climate summary for the week ending June 15, 2026

The South Platte river basin is pretty much melted out. Below is the June 15, 2026 Snow Water Equivalent in South Platte graph from the NRCS.

Below is the Precipitation Accumulation in South Platte graph from the NRCS for June 15, 2026. Precipitation is at 74% of the median and 58% of the water year median this morning. There are 107 days left in the water year.

It looks sunny and warm all week in the central and northern mountains. It also looks sunny and warm all week down here in Denver where Edward M. McCook served as the 5th and 7th Governor of Colorado Territory. From Wikipedia; “On June 14, 1869, President Ulysses S. Grant appointed Edward M. McCook as the fifth governor of the Colorado Territory. McCook served during a critical period leading up to Colorado’s statehood in 1876…McCook’s administration coincided with the early years of irrigation development along the Front Range. During this period, communities began constructing many of the ditches and diversion systems that later became the foundation of Colorado’s prior-appropriation water rights system. The rapid agricultural growth of the 1870s was already underway by the time he took office…McCook was born in Steubenville, Ohio, on June 15, 1833. As a young man, he moved to the Kansas Territory and became a lawyer. He joined the Pike’s Peak Gold Rush in 1859 and represented the Pikes Peak region in the Kansas Territorial House of Representatives…In 1869, President Ulysses S. Grant appointed McCook Governor of the Territory of Colorado, a selection bitterly opposed by Jerome B. Chaffee, the Colorado Territorial Delegate to the United States House of Representatives. During his tenure, Governor McCook signed the legislation that created Colorado Agricultural College (now Colorado State University) and was among the first territorial governors to endorse women’s suffrage.”

General Edward M. McCook, U.S.A. By Mathew Benjamin Brady – Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division. Brady-Handy Photograph Collection CALL NUMBER: LC-BH831- 935[P&P], Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1355339

Here’s a look at the 7-Day Colorado precipitation map through June 14, 2026 from the High Plains Regional Climate Center. Precipitation in the South Platte Basin along the Continental Divide of the Americas ranged from 0.00” to 0.30”.

Here’s the 7-Day percent of normal precipitation map through June 14, 2026 from the High Plains Regional Climate Center. Precipitation in the South Platte River Basin along the Continental Divide of the Americas ranged from 0% to 50% of normal.

Here’s the 7-Day Quantitative Precipitation Forecast issued June 15, 2026 by NOAA. Precipitation is anticipated for the mountains of the South Platte River Basin and may total 0.50”.

Below are the 8-14 day outlooks from the Climate Prediction Center, issued June 15, 2026, for temperature and precipitation, for the week starting June 22, 2026. The CPC expects above normal temperatures and above normal precipitation for the mountains of the South Platte River Basin.

Below is the Colorado Drought Monitor map from June 9, 2026. There were one class degradations in Weld and Morgan counties, in the South Platte River Basin. Drought and abnormal dryness covers 99.45% of Colorado. The South Platte Basin is experiencing Abnormally Dry, Moderate, Severe, Extreme, and Exceptional drought conditions.

Colorado Drought Monitor map June 9, 2026.

Below is the Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending June 9, 2026.

Here’s the US Drought Monitor Map from last week along with the one week U.S. change map.

US Drought Monitor one week change map ending June 9, 2026.

The Climate Prediction Center published their latest El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) diagnostic discussion last week. They write: “June 8, 2026, ENSO Alert System Status: El Niño Advisory. Synopsis: El Niño conditions are present and expected to strengthen into the Northern Hemisphere winter 2026-27.“

Official ENSO probabilities for the Niño 3.4 relative sea surface temperature index (5°N-5°S, 170°W -120°W) minus tropical mean (20°N-20°S). The relative index is re-scaled to match the variance of the traditional index. Figure updated 11 June 2026. Higher resolution image/table: https://cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/enso/roni/probabilities/

The #PagosaSprings Town Council hears about grant opportunity for wildfire ready action plan for the Upper #SanJuanRiver watershed — The Pagosa Springs Sun

West Fork Fire June 20, 2013 photo the Pike Hot Shots Wildfire Today

Click the link to read the article on the Pagosa Springs Sun website (Derek Kutzer). Here’s an excerpt:

On June 2, the Pagosa Springs Town Council heard a presentation from Al Pfister, board president of the Upper San Juan Watershed Enhancement Partnership (WEP), about an application for the state-run Wildfire Ready Action Plan (WRAP) grant. The WRAP grant is a state of Colorado program, with its website describing the program as “locally-developed wildfire ready action plans (WRAP), refining the statewide susceptibility evaluations to reflect local values and community-scale data.” Pfister explained that the total project cost for WEP to do a watershed fire action plan for the Upper San Juan watershed would be about $400,000, and the grant would require a match of about $100,000. He noted the benefits of a WRAP would include identifying critical infrastructure that may be susceptible to risk and developing plans for roads and trails that may be impacted by post-wildfire effects. The fostering of collaboration between planners and emergency management agencies would also be a benefit to the community, he stated.

He explained what a WRAP actually does, saying it fosters stakeholder engagement, collects data and resources for the watershed, and organizes that data into a central database for use down the road. He added that the models could help predict how a watershed will behave in a post-wildfire situation and that the action plan would include both pre-and post-wildfire projects to mitigate damage to the watershed. He added that he was not at the meeting asking for funding at this time, but wanted to give the council a “heads up” that this was coming up.

There are solutions to some of our problems but you won’t like how they sound

by Robert Marcos, photojournalist

Yesterday on the way to the airport, I told my friend Brad that a solution another friend provided – to help save the Great Salt Lake, had already been considered and was shot down because of its expense.

You see there’s solutions out there but many of them are unpalatable. Take dairy cows for instance – they’re cute, right? I like to imagine that my beloved Kerrygold butter comes from white cows with big brass bells around their necks, sniffing daisies and running free over miles of rich green fields in Switzerland. If you’re like me and you don’t want to know the facts, just walk away now and turn on the TV because Bob Ross is about to start painting.

The unfortunate fact is that dairy cows emit literally tons of pollution into the air, the groundwater, and soil. Worse – the forage they consume is using up the vast majority of our fresh water supply.

Precision Fermentation to the rescue

Just as vertical agriculture will be used in order to continue to produce some of our crops once the Colorado River’s gone, Precision Fermentation is gearing up to replace dairy cows. It uses genetically engineered microbes (like yeast or fungi) in bioreactors to produce exact, molecular duplicates of dairy proteins (e.g., whey and casein). This process provides revolutionary environmental advantages over traditional dairy farming – dramatically cutting emissions, water consumption, and land use while eliminating agricultural pollution.¹

Key Environmental Advantages

Land & Habitat Conservation: Cows require vast tracts of arable land for grazing and growing feed crops, which is a primary driver of deforestation. Fermentation takes place in vertical stainless-steel bioreactors, bypassing the need for pastures. This uses far less land and provides the opportunity to return millions of acres to natural ecosystems that could absorb massive amounts of carbon.

Drastic reductions in greenhouse gasses: Traditional dairy farming is a massive emitter of methane and nitrous oxide. Precision fermentation eliminates enteric fermentation (cow burps) and manure emissions, generating far fewer greenhouse gases than conventional dairy systems.²

The elimination of nitrate leaching: The urine from dairy cows pollutes groundwater with nitrates because it contains highly concentrated loads of urea, a nitrogen-rich compound. When cows urinate on pastures soil microbes rapidly convert this urea into ammonium and then into nitrate through a biological process called nitrification. Because pastures feature localized “urine patches,” the amount of nitrogen deposited drastically exceeds what the surrounding plants can absorb. The excess, highly soluble nitrate does not bind well to soil particles, causing it to leach downward through the soil layers during rainfall or irrigation and accumulate in the underlying water table.

I’m rambling on!

Along Clear Creek during my last bicycle commute to work in Thornton June 11, 2026.

Today is my first day without a job in 63 years! I’ve retired from the City of Thornton.

Ecological Drought in the #ColoradoRiver Basin: Seeing the Full Picture; It’s not just about precipitation, it’s about how #drought moves through a system — Abby Burk (Audubon.org) #COriver #aridification

A rainstorm over southern Colorado. Photo: Abby Burk

Click the link to read the article on the Audubon website (Abby Burk):

May 7, 2026

Drought in Colorado isn’t abstract—it’s shaping decisions right now, from headwater streams to major reservoirs. And this year, the signals are hard to ignore. At the same time, conversations about water are tightening. There’s more concern and more sensitivity—especially around anything tied to water availability.

That’s exactly why it matters how we talk about ecological drought.

This isn’t a new issue. It’s a clearer, science-based way to describe what’s already happening—across rivers, landscapes, and communities.

A System Under Stress

The Colorado River Basin is entering this water year under extreme hydrologic pressure.

Snowpack across the Upper Basin has dropped to record or near-record lows. By early April, snow water equivalent in many areas fell to a fraction of normal, and snow cover reached the lowest levels observed in the satellite record. At the same time, this winter ranked among the warmest on record—reducing snow accumulation, accelerating melt, and increasing evaporative losses. These patterns are consistent with the impacts of climate change across the Colorado River Basin, where rising temperatures are diminishing snowpack reliability and reducing overall runoff efficiency.

June 1, 2026 seasonal water supply forecast summary.

Those conditions are now reflected in forecasts. Runoff across the Upper Basin watersheds is expected to be among the lowest on record, with sharply reduced inflows into Lake Powell. Meanwhile, Lake Powell and Lake Meadcontinue to sit near historic lows—leaving very little buffer in the system.

Even where spring storms have brought some relief, the underlying deficitremains. Dry soils, warm temperatures, and reduced snowpack mean less water ultimately reaches rivers.

This is not just a dry year. It’s a system under compounding stress.

Why This Matters: Ecological Drought

Ecological drought helps explain what those conditions mean on the ground.

Scientifically, it’s defined as an episodic deficit in water availability that pushes ecosystems beyond their thresholds—impacting ecosystem services and triggering feedbacks in both natural and human systems.

That definition matters because it expands how we think about drought.

It’s not just about precipitation. It’s about how drought moves through a system:

From snowpack to soil moisture

From soil moisture to vegetation and habitat

From ecosystems to the services people depend on

Modern droughts are also changing. They are becoming hotter, longer, and more widespread, with impacts amplified by both climate conditions and human water use.

And those impacts don’t stay contained.

Ecological drought is fundamentally about connected systems. When ecosystems cross critical thresholds—losing wetland function, shifting vegetation, or degrading habitat—those changes feed back into water supply, with wide-ranging implications to agriculture, wildfire risk, and community stability.

What it Looks Like Right Now

In Colorado, ecological drought is showing up as a shift in timing, duration, and connectivity.

Even with recent moisture:

Peak river flows are shorter and less effective

River baseflows drop earlier

Floodplains connect less often

Wetlands and side channels dry sooner

These aren’t always dramatic changes—but they compound, especially when they occur in back-to-back years, reducing recovery time.

That’s a critical shift. Drought is no longer just episodic. It’s increasingly persistent, with ecosystems spending less time in recovery and more time under stress.

Birds Are Early Indicators

For birds, these shifts are immediate.

Migratory species depend on wetlands that function like stepping stones across the landscape. When those wetlands shrink or disappear earlier, habitat becomes compressed.

Riparian birds like the Northern Yellow Warbler and Song Sparrow rely on dense, water-supported vegetation during breeding season. Earlier drying reduces both cover and food availability.

Wetland-dependent species such as the American Avocet, White-faced Ibis, and Sandhill Crane are especially sensitive to shrinking shallow-water habitat.

And beneath all of this, food webs shift. Aquatic insects emerge differently under drier conditions, creating mismatches with nesting cycles.

Birds are often the first to show us what’s changing—but they’re not the only ones affected.

People Are In This System, Too

Ecological drought makes one thing clear: this is a single, connected system responding together. The same processes that shape habitat also shape outcomes for people. Soil moisture influences forage conditions for agriculture. Water timing and availability affect the reliability of community supplies. River flows support recreation and local economies, while connected floodplains help reduce risk and support recovery after disturbance.

This is what we mean by ecosystem services—the benefits people receive from functioning natural systems. When those systems are strained or begin to break down, those benefits decline as well.

What This Means for the Basin

The science is pointing to something bigger than a single dry year.

The Colorado River Basin is increasingly operating in a warmer, drier regime, where snowpack is less reliable and variability is higher. Recent conditions mirror some of the most consequential low-flow years in recent history—and they are becoming more frequent.

At the same time, current operating guidelines are set to expire, and the decisions made now will shape how the system responds to these conditions going forward.

What’s needed is a shift—from reactive, year-to-year crisis management to more durable and flexible operations; from short-term fixes to sustained investment in long-term resilience; and from fragmented efforts to stronger alignment across states, Tribes, and water users.

There is growing recognition that solutions must include conservation, efficiency, infrastructure, and watershed health—including restoration that improves how water is stored and functions across the landscape. Without that kind of alignment, risks will continue to compound—ecologically, economically, and socially.

A Clearer Lens for What’s Ahead

Ecological drought is not a new agenda. It’s a way to understand how drought actually works in today’s world—how water shortages move through ecosystems, how impacts cascade, and how those impacts ultimately reach people.

It connects snowpack to rivers, rivers to habitat, and habitat to communities. And it underscores something essential: when ecosystems are pushed beyond their limits, the consequences don’t stay ecological—they become systemic.

That’s why this matters now. Because the question in front of us isn’t just how we respond to this year’s drought. It’s whether we’re building a system that can function—ecologically and socially—under the conditions we know are coming (or are here).

That’s the conversation worth getting right.

Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=65868008

Thank you Councilmember Sandoval (and Mayor Johnston), bicycle safety is much improved on Tennyson St.

Public bicycle parking near W. 39th & Tennyson June 12, 2026.

Councilmember Sandoval’s staff reached out to the Denver Department of Transportation and Infrastructure. I received a response from DOTI which basically said that Veo can use the public bicycle parking but is encouraged to not fill it up so that it is also available for other bicycle riders.

Public bicycle parking near W. 41st & Tennyson June 12, 2026.

Public bicycle parking near W. 43rd & Tennyson June 12, 2026.

Public bicycle parking near W. 44th and Tennyson June 12, 2026.

As the Veo vehicles get distributed around the city they are ending up in the neighborhoods.

Veo vehicle on the street in front of my house June 12, 2026. I’m okay with this as it helps Denver’s carbon goals. I don’t need the parking space.

The Consequences of Building a Metropolis alongside a Terminal Lake

A serene sunset over a calm sea, with the sun reflecting on the water and rocky shoreline. The sky is filled with light clouds, and distant mountains are visible on the horizon. — ^{An archipelago of ancient bioherms living on the Great Salt Lake’s southeastern side. Photo by Robert Marcos.}

“This day we arrived in the valley of the great Salt Lake. My feelings were such as I cannot describe. Everything looked bloomy and I felt heart sick.” Lorenzo Young, Brigham Young’s younger brother

by Robert Marcos

Utah’s Great Salt Lake sits at dangerously low levels

The Great Salt Lake is currently locked in a critical structural decline, hovering in a “serious adverse effects” range at nearly seven feet below its minimum healthy level. Decades of excessive human water diversions for agriculture and rapid urban growth, coupled with a warming climate, have stripped the lake of over half its historic water volume. This trajectory directly parallels the Aral Sea disaster in Central Asia, where Soviet-era river diversions for cotton farming completely decimated a massive inland sea, turning it into a barren desert of toxic salt flats. If Utah fails to drastically alter its current water policies and consumption, the Great Salt Lake faces the exact same fate of complete ecological collapse.¹

The Source of Half of the Wasatch Front’s Precipitation

The potential disappearance of the lake would critically disrupt the regional water cycle because half of the convective precipitation along Utah’s heavily populated Wasatch Front relies on the lake’s evaporation. As a terminal lake, its vast surface area fuels a vital localized hydrological sub-cycle, generating the famous “lake-effect” storms that dump immense snowpacks into nearby mountains. Recent research from Utah State University confirms that if the lake dries up completely, regional precipitation will face an approximate 50% reduction. This would trigger a devastating, self-perpetuating drought loop: less lake surface area means fewer storms, which shrinks mountain snowpacks and further dries the rivers needed to refill the basin.²

Potential for a Widespread Respiratory and Cardiovascular Crisis

The long-term consequences of a completely dried lakebed would be catastrophic for Utah’s public health, economy, and environment. With nearly 1,000 square miles of exposed lakebed, heavy winds would unleash massive, toxic dust storms laced with naturally occurring arsenic, mercury, and other hazardous minerals directly into the Salt Lake City metropolitan area. This airborne pollution would trigger widespread respiratory and cardiovascular crises, rendering the region largely uninhabitable. Furthermore, the collapse would wipe out the lake’s multi-billion-dollar mineral extraction and brine shrimp industries, decimate the habitat of 10 million migratory birds, and permanently cripple Utah’s iconic multi-million-dollar ski industry due to the permanent loss of winter snowpack.³

Broke and On Their Own: Small Water Systems Lose Ground as Federal Support Wavers; For systems serving rural and low-income communities, the finances were already precarious — Brett Walton (circleofblue.org)

Kevin Sonnichsen, water commissioner, right, and Alan Novacek, backup operator and sewer commissioner, left, gaze into the Creighton water treatment facility in this file photo from 2021. Built in 1993, the facility uses reverse osmosis to remove nitrate. Creighton was the first community in Nebraska to use reverse osmosis to remove nitrate in drinking water. Photo © J. Carl Ganter/Circle of Blue

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

June 11, 2026

The country’s most severe drinking water problems, from high levels of contaminants and foul-smelling water to pipe breaks, low water pressure, and expensive rates, are generally found in the thousands of small systems that serve dozens of people up to a few thousand.

These systems are public health crises waiting to emerge, said Denise Schmidt, director of water at the Environmental Policy Innovation Center, a group that works with water utilities on infrastructure funding.

Though some are perpetually struggling, small water systems, especially those serving low-income communities, are encountering a fresh set of economic and political hurdles in their quest for safe drinking water.

In recent industry surveys, small utilities report that accessing financing to repair and upgrade their systems is becoming increasingly difficult. Their credit ratings are deteriorating, making borrowing more expensive. The rates they charge customers are not covering the cost of providing water service, thus digging a long-term financial hole. Extreme weather is burdening them with unexpected and daunting repairs to their reservoirs, treatment plants, and pipe networks. Federal water quality mandates for PFAS and lead pipe replacements, though both providing public health benefits, are an added cost.

Small systems, in effect, are walking a precarious path. They are trying to survive today while also staring at a gathering wave of necessary replacements to aging pipes and treatment plants.

The Trump administration and Republican allies in Congress, meanwhile, are casting more obstacles. The White House’s tariffs have increased the price of equipment and materials. And the House’s fiscal year 2027 budget would cut the main federal water infrastructure program by about a quarter.

“I don’t think people realize how big this wave is and how much it’s going to cost,” said Blake Anderson, president and founder of Mogollon Water Management, a company that operates and maintains 11 small water systems in northeast Arizona. “The utilities that were built in 1970 now are 56 years old. There was a lot of development that happened back then. And all of these waves are going to start crashing.”

Negative Outlook

Crashing sounds are gaining strength.

Last year, for the first time, S&P Global, a credit rating agency, lowered the financial outlook for small water and wastewater utilities from stable to negative. Large and medium utilities remained stable.

The increased pessimism for small water utilities is due to stiffening financial headwinds, said Malcolm D’Silva, an associate director at S&P, which rates roughly 1,700 water and wastewater utilities. Ninety-one percent of the agency’s credit downgrades last year were for small systems, he said. Credit downgrades increase the cost of borrowing.

D’Silva narrated a story in two parts. One is the “expense squeeze.” Costs are rising across the board. First from the post-Covid inflation and supply chain shortages, and now from the Trump administration’s tariffs. Half of the utilities that responded to the American Water Works Association’s annual survey said that tariffs had “moderate or considerable” pressure on equipment and materials costs. At the same time, revenue is not keeping up. In the same survey, only 43 percent of utilities said they charged customers enough to fully cover service costs.

The second part is managerial. Small systems typically do not have the technical expertise, staff, or budget to analyze their infrastructure and apply for funding in the way that larger utilities do. Some might keep only paper records of their pipe networks. The smallest systems have volunteer board members or staff that might also oversee the fire department and run a business.

The positive news is that last year might have been the bottom for small systems, D’Silva said. S&P is seeing some improvement in the first half of 2026, with the rate of downgrades slowing. More utilities have instituted rate increases to fill budget holes, D’Silva said.

Federal Question Mark

Just as one hole is closing, however, another might be opening.

Every year the White House lobs a spending plan toward Capitol Hill and members of Congress decide whether those numbers are a good idea. For fiscal year 2027, the Trump administration proposed a roughly 90 percent cut to the two state revolving funds, the main federal sources of water infrastructure funding.

Congress usually sustains the state revolving funds, which have broad support. But this budget cycle could be different.

A House spending bill cuts the revolving funds by about 24 percent combined. The House Appropriations Committee approved the bill on June 3.

The bill provides $1.2 billion for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (27 percent cut) and $911 million for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (19 percent cut). The Senate has not yet introduced its version.

Jeff Dietlin, director of utilities for Cadillac, Michigan, stands inside a new pump house built as part of the city’s East 44 Road well field project. The city received a $9.8 million low-interest loan from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund to finance the project. Photo © J. Carl Ganter / Circle of Blue

The Environmental Policy Innovation Center, or EPIC, tracks state revolving fund expenditures and project proposals in 15 states. At Circle of Blue’s request, EPIC analyzed small system and very small system requests for drinking water funding. By EPA’s definition, small systems serve fewer than 10,000 people and very small systems fewer than 3,300.

The data indicate high demand from these systems. Some 61 percent of projects seeking drinking water funding were small or very small. However, only about a third of these proposed projects advanced to the next step in the funding process. This “highlights significant unmet infrastructure needs,” EPIC analysts wrote.

Water infrastructure funding needs and the status of the revolving funds were a point of discussion during a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing on May 20.

Jessica Kramer, the head of the EPA Office of Water, defended the administration’s proposed cuts. Her justification: the states have $14.8 billion in uncommitted state revolving funds, those sitting in coffers for more than a year without being allocated. That money should be distributed first, she argued.

“It doesn’t do any good to get the money to the states if the states aren’t actually getting it out to the communities that need it,” Kramer said.

Schmidt, the EPIC water director, had a different view. Two issues are being wrapped into one, she said. If state administrative capacity to review and approve applications is the problem, then focus on that. But don’t use it to rationalize disinvestment in an otherwise successful decades-long infrastructure program.

“Uncommitted does not mean unneeded,” Schmidt said. “Cutting moves us farther from the solution.”

The View from Arizona

The financial pressures that populate D’Silva’s and Schmidt’s spreadsheets are the on-the-ground reality for Blake Anderson.

Anderson is the president and founder of Mogollon Water Management, a company that operates and maintains 11 small water systems in the White Mountains of northeastern Arizona. Mogollon oversees the smallest of the small – systems ranging in size from 29 service connections to roughly 1,100.

These are not the sophisticated, professionally managed systems that you would see in Phoenix or Flagstaff.

“They’re volunteer board members and they’re aware that there’s some sort of money for water out there but they don’t know where it is, or if they do know, they aren’t sure how to go about applying and accessing it,” Anderson said, describing the challenges for small systems in securing grants and loans.

“Most of them have never done a capital improvement project over $50,000,” he added. “And so there is not institutional knowledge in how do you manage a federally funded program or a state funded program? How do you go about securing engineers or contractors? What are the proper procurement practices?”

One school of thought for solving the small systems problem is that there should be fewer of them. By connecting with larger systems or forming regional partnerships, small utilities could grow into medium-sized utilities with favorable economics: more customers to cover expensive infrastructure costs, better credit ratings, money to hire knowledgeable staff.

Research from Manny Teodoro at the University of Wisconsin indicates that the target size for utility consolidations should be about 20,000 service connections, or about 60,000 people. At that point the most serious water quality violations become far less common and operating costs become more reasonable.

Where might funding for consolidations come from? States like California have dedicated programs, though even those are facing funding shortfalls. Another source is federal: the state revolving funds that House Republicans want to cut.

Stillwater Reservoir project expected to begin in July to remove storage restrictions — Steamboat Pilot & Today

Stillwater Reservoir in the Flat Tops Wilderness area. Jeff Hall/Courtesy photo

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

June 9, 2026

At the Yampa Town Board meeting last week, Andi Schaffner with the Bear River Reservoir Company presented plans and cost estimates for a Stillwater Reservoir project that would lead to removal of its storage restriction. The plan consists of two phases involving installation of a strain and a sand filter to alleviate seepage into the dam’s embankment, the primary concern that led to the storage restriction designation…Currently, the town of Yampa owns 112 shares in Stillwater Reservoir, or about 2% of the reservoir. Phase 1 of the project consists of a blanket drain and filter collar and is estimated to cost $730,717. Phase Two of the project will be stabilizing the channel and the removal of the culvert and the flume, at a total estimated cost $209,874. Schaffner said that the team at Bear River Reservoir Company has spent hours on engineering and studies at the reservoir in order to determine the best solution for the dam. “We finally opted for the least expensive fix, which is what we’re working on right now,” said Schaffner…The project has received a significant amount of grant funding despite higher than anticipated bids, including a $202,000 loan from the Colorado Water Conservation Board. This loan was the primary expected cost for the town of Yampa, and is expected to be approved with an increase to $404,000 ahead of the project’s notice to proceed with the contractor on July 13. The project is expected to be completed by the end of October. The Colorado Water Conservation Board loan is 30 years with 1.85% interest, or $3.40 per share per year. For the town of Yampa’s 100 or so shares, this amounts to $381 a year. Schaffner did not expect any more expenses besides an assessment of the shares which amounts to about $5.

The latest #ElNiño/Southern Oscillation (#ENSO) diagnostic discussion is hot off the presses from the Climate Prediction Center

Click the link to read the discussion on the Climate Prediction Center website:

June 8, 2026

ENSO Alert System Status: El Niño Advisory

Synopsis: El Niño conditions are present and expected to strengthen into the Northern Hemisphere winter 2026-27.

El Niño conditions developed over the past month, as shown by above-average sea surface temperatures (SSTs) across the central to eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean. The latest weekly Niño-3.4 index value was +0.7ºC, with the westernmost (Niño-4) and easternmost (Niño-1+2) indices at +0.7ºC and +2.1ºC, respectively. The equatorial subsurface temperature index (average from 180º-100ºW) decreased in the past month, but significantly above-average subsurface temperatures remained in the central and eastern equatorial Pacific. Low-level westerly wind anomalies and upper-level easterly wind anomalies were evident over the central equatorial Pacific. Convection was slightly above average over the central and east-central equatorial Pacific and was near or below average over Indonesia. The traditional and equatorial Southern Oscillation indices were negative. Collectively, the coupled ocean-atmosphere system reflected the onset of El Niño conditions.

The North American Multi-Model Ensemble (NMME) average, including the NCEP CFSv2 , forecasts El Niño to intensify into the Northern Hemisphere winter 2026-27. High confidence in El Niño is also linked to anomalously high oceanic heat content and expanding westerly wind anomalies across the equatorial Pacific Ocean. There is a 63% chance of a very strong El Niño during November-January that would rank among the largest El Niño events in the historical record going back to 1950. Even very strong El Niño events do not lead to the expected impact everywhere, but stronger events can more significantly tilt the odds in favor of expected outcomes (see CPC outlooks for probabilities of seasonal anomalies). In summary, El Niño conditions are present and expected to strengthen into the Northern Hemisphere winter 2026-27.

#ColoradoRiver District Offers Drought Relief for Yampa Valley Agriculture — Lindsay DeFrates #YampaRiver

Elkhead Reservoir is taking center stage following a winter of historically low snowfall, leaving water managers with hard decisions and water users with a high degree of uncertainty. Courtesy Photo/Colorado Parks & Wildlife

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

June 8, 2026

In response to extreme drought conditions throughout northwestern Colorado, the Colorado River District, in partnership with the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB), is offering up to 420 acre-feet of supplemental agricultural water from Elkhead Reservoir for irrigators in the Yampa River Valley. Modeled on the successful joint CWCB-River District program implemented in 2021, this effort will provide additional supplies during critical times of agricultural production.

“The drought conditions this year have been exceptional and unpredictable,” said Colorado River District’s Director of Asset Management, Hunter Causey. “And it’s that kind of unpredictability that hits small family farms and ranches the hardest. The Yampa Valley, the western slope, and our entire region depend on local agriculture to drive economies, produce local food, and preserve landscapes. While a program like this cannot solve the drought problem at large, we can be strategic in how we use our available supplies and support our constituents wherever possible.”

“The challenges posed by this year’s drought call for creative solutions and strong partnerships,” said Lauren Ris, CWCB Director. “This project reflects what can happen when local water users and water management agencies work together to respond to emerging needs. We’re pleased to support this collaborative effort in the Yampa Valley and remain committed to working with communities across Colorado to explore creative, locally driven solutions that help address drought impacts and strengthen drought resilience.”

Program Structure:

Water will be allocated using a lottery with an initial round of allocations of up to 50 AF per applicant, totaling 420 AF.

Any water remaining after the lottery will be awarded equally to initial round applicants that expressed a need beyond 50 AF. If there is any remaining water, it will be available on a first-come, first-served basis and will need to be contracted at no cost with the District.

Successful participants in the lottery will need to enter into a no-cost contract with the River District for direct delivery and/or use of the District’s Elkhead water through administrative exchange.

In the event there is a mainstem Yampa River call and to the extent that lessees are out-of-priority, water will be released at the diversion rate plus transit losses.

Water will be available for delivery or exchange beginning on July 10, 2026.

At current agricultural water marketing rates, the total project will cost $18,375. On June 4, the Colorado River District Board of Directors agreed to make $4,594 available from the Board’s previously authorized CFP expenditures for the District’s 2026 Drought relief effort. The CWCB has committed to providing the remainder of the funds – approximately $13,781.

Applications are due by June 26^th, and a lottery will be conducted for the initial round of contracts on July 1^st. Available augmentation water is limited. Those interested in applying should contact the Colorado River District’s Director of Asset Management, Hunter Causey, at hcausey@crwcd.org or visit HERE for more information.

If the IID wants their farmers to use less water, why don’t they just charge more for it?

A classroom setting with four individuals seated at a large table, attentively listening to a presentation about the Grand Canyon, displayed on a screen. The presenter, wearing a patterned shirt, stands at the front of the room beside a map of the Grand Canyon's historical geography. — ^{The IID’s former Watermaster, Merlon Kidwell, makes a presentation to a group studying the Colorado River crisis. Photo by Robert Marcos.}

by Robert Marcos & Brad Barham, PhD

In 2022 – while conducting a study of the Colorado River crisis, Dr. Brad Barham – a Professor of Agricultural Economics at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, two of his undergrads and I watched a Powerpoint presentation given by the Imperial Irrigation District’s Watermaster, Merlon Kidwell. Kidwell retired last year after fifty years with the IID. Besides the IID’s hospitality that day, there were two fundamentally-important things we’ve never forgotten –

1. The IID maintains 3,000 miles of delivery canals and agricultural drains that convey 3.1 million acre feet of Colorado River water every year. This amount represents about a quarter of the Colorado River’s average annual 12.5MAF output since 2000.¹ Under its historic contracts with the federal government, the IID is exempt from paying for the water it receives, it does however pay for the operation, maintenance, and repair of the 80-mile long All-American Canal, its own internal water delivery systems, and a portion of the cost of maintaining the Imperial Dam.²

2. Similarly, the IID does not charge farmers for the water itself. It charges farmers (who are connected to the IID’s water delivery system) an annual fee for that connection, plus a flat $20 per acre foot for the costs associated with the delivery of their water. ³

Group of five people discussing near a water measurement structure in an agricultural area on a sunny day. — ^{IID employees demonstrate an automated canal gate to a group studying the Colorado River crisis. Photo by Robert Marcos.}

Meanwhile, the San Diego County Water Authority pays a wholesale price that’s between $700 and $1,200 per acre-foot for that same (untreated) Colorado River water.⁴ With such a disparity in water prices it seems reasonable to ask if the IID could both conserve water and lower the price paid by municipal users by raising the price paid by farmers.⁵

It doesn’t take an economist to understand the “law of demand” which says: “As the price of goods or services go up, people will generally use less of it”. Today with Lake Powell hovering just above the dead pool level it’ has become crucial’s more urgent than ever to understand why the price of water that’s provided to Imperial Valley farmers hasn’t gone up considering the increased scarcity of Colorado River water.

For decades now the Imperial Irrigation District has demonstrated that they prefer the carrot to the stick – in other words the IID has provided farmers with financial incentives and the technology that’s required in order to conserve water. The IID also cannot raise water prices because of laws established by California Proposition 218.

California’s Proposition 218 was passed by voters in 1996 in order to protect taxpayers by requiring voter approval for local tax increases and restricting property-related fees to the actual, proportional cost of service delivery ⁶. Since the IID receives Colorado River water for free, they can only charge farmers $20 per acre-foot to recover the costs associated with the water’s conveyance – but not for the water itself. Consequently, to legally increase agricultural water rates, the IID must prove higher service expenses through a formal cost-of-service study, issue a 45-day advance notice to landowners, and then begin the “majority protest” process. Because water, sewer, and refuse collection fees are legally classified as “property-related fees,” the Imperial Irrigation District board could pass the rate increase automatically unless a majority of affected stakeholders vote “no” by submitting written protests.⁷ In this context the “affected stakeholders” are the legal landowners of the agricultural parcels that are subject to the water fee, and the ratepayers, tenants, or farmers who are directly responsible for paying the water bill under their lease terms. ⁸

However the cost of these (very successful) conservation measures – especially the cost of paying farmers to fallow some of their fields, are very high: about $250 million per year (or $300-450 per acre foot depending on conservation practices used). Given how Western water laws work, and the addition of Proposition 218, that is currently the most feasible and the most immediate path to water conservation in the Colorado River system.

A lower cost, more sustainable solution would require changing the rules that guarantee specific volumes of water at only the cost of conveyance to farmers across the basin. That will be a challenging transition, and will probably require federal legislation to be achieved.

#Drought news June 11, 2026: Areas along the foothills of the Rocky Mountains from #Montana through #Colorado remained largely dry. Temperatures were above normal across much of the west, with departures of 6–9 degrees above normal across #Nevada, #Utah and western Colorado

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

Summer thunderstorms, with their hit-or-miss nature, dominated precipitation patterns across the U.S. this week. The greatest departures from normal precipitation occurred across portions of the central and southern Plains, West Texas, New Mexico, and the Midwest. Areas of southern Louisiana, northern Alabama, and western Kentucky also recorded well-above-normal precipitation. The East Coast remained dry, with the exception of Florida’s Atlantic coast. Much of the West also remained dry, with only portions of the Pacific Northwest and southern California recording near- to above-normal precipitation.

Temperatures for the week were below normal across the Southeast, with parts of Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina averaging 3–6 degrees below normal. Portions of West Texas, southeast New Mexico, and the Pacific Northwest were also below normal. The greatest temperature departures occurred in the central and northern Plains, where portions of Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, and Minnesota experienced temperatures 9–12 degrees above normal.

Drought signals across much of the southern U.S. remain mixed, with wetter short-term conditions developing while long-term deficits persist despite the recent pattern change. In the Plains, impacts have primarily affected winter wheat and forage production, and areas that have remained dry continue to experience elevated fire danger. In the Southeast, water supply concerns and fire danger remain significant, particularly in Florida…

High Plains

Temperatures were generally warmer than normal across the region, with portions of the Dakotas and western Nebraska averaging 9–12 degrees above normal. Above-normal precipitation occurred in southern Nebraska, northern Kansas, northern Nebraska into southern and central South Dakota, and across much of northern North Dakota. Areas along the foothills of the Rocky Mountains from Montana through Colorado remained largely dry.

Drought intensity eased where the heaviest rains fell in Nebraska, Kansas and South Dakota, and drought was eliminated in portions of northern Kansas and southeast Nebraska. Southeast South Dakota continued to miss significant rainfall, and the combination of short- and long-term dryness allowed moderate and severe drought to expand. Degradation also occurred in eastern Colorado, where extreme drought expanded in the north and moderate drought expanded across east-central portions of the state. Extreme drought was reduced slightly in southern Colorado following recent rainfall…

West

Above-normal precipitation was limited to a few locations, primarily along the Pacific Northwest coast and across southern and eastern New Mexico. Temperatures were above normal across much of the region, with departures of 6–9 degrees above normal across Nevada, Utah and western Colorado. Cooler-than-normal temperatures occurred in the Pacific Northwest and eastern New Mexico, where departures averaged 3–4 degrees below normal.

Although some areas have recently received additional precipitation, a winter characterized by above-normal temperatures and below-normal snowpack continues to affect the region and will likely influence conditions through the summer. Conditions deteriorated in Oregon, where moderate, severe and extreme drought expanded across much of the eastern portion of the state, although southern Oregon experienced localized improvements to moderate drought.

Elsewhere, western Montana benefited from recent rainfall, allowing severe and extreme drought to improve. Extreme drought also improved across much of eastern Utah, while southern and eastern New Mexico saw additional improvements following precipitation totals exceeding 200% of normal…

South

Temperatures were mixed, with Oklahoma and Arkansas averaging 2–4 degrees above normal. Meanwhile, much of West, south and east Texas, along with eastern Mississippi and Tennessee, averaged 2–4 degrees below normal.

Most of the region received some precipitation, although eastern Arkansas, northern Mississippi, southern Texas, and southwest Oklahoma were the driest locations. The continuing wetter pattern resulted in additional improvements, with drought eliminated across more of central Texas and eastern Oklahoma. Drought also eased across much of the Texas and Oklahoma panhandles, although widespread severe and extreme drought persisted.

Long-term dryness in far south Texas continues to improve, and improving local conditions combined with short-term data supported the removal of remaining abnormally dry designations. Improvements also occurred in Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Tennessee, where recent wet conditions are beginning to offset longer-term drought indicators…

Looking Ahead

During the next 5–7 days, the West is expected to remain quite dry, [ed. emphasis mine] while the southern U.S. and portions of the Midwest have the greatest potential for above-normal precipitation. The northern Plains and Southwest are forecast to receive less than 1 inch of precipitation.

Temperatures are expected to remain warmer than normal across the West, with departures exceeding 10 degrees above normal in Nevada and portions of the Pacific Northwest. Most of the remainder of the country is expected to experience near- to slightly below-normal temperatures.

The 6–10 day outlook shows the best chances for above-normal temperatures will be across the West and Southeast, especially in areas centered on Nevada and much of South Florida. Above-normal chances for below-normal temperatures will be centered on the Great Lakes and Midwest, with the highest probabilities over Michigan.

Above-normal chances for below-normal precipitation will be over much of the northern Plains and Upper Midwest, as well as northern areas of California, Nevada, and into Oregon. Above-normal chances for above-normal precipitation will be mainly in the southern and eastern U.S., with the highest probabilities in South Texas and into the lower Mississippi River Valley.

Second-warmest spring in U.S. history: Record-low #snowpack and historic late-March heat were among the standout events — Bob Henson (YaleClimateConnections.org) #runoff

California superbloom. Photo credit: Travellers Autobarn

Click the link to read the article on the Yale Climate Connections website (Bob Henson):

June 8, 2026

The period of March through May 2026 ranked as the second warmest spring in records going back to 1895 for the contiguous U.S., according to NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI). Across the past 131 years, only 2012 had a warmer spring, said NCEI in its monthly analysis released on June 8.

The nationwide average temperatures for both spring 2012 (56.17 degrees Fahrenheit) and 2026 (55.79°F) are both more than 1.5°F above any rivals in the 131-year database. Spring 2026 was the hottest on record for Arizona, Colorado, Texas, and New Mexico, and 38 of the 48 contiguous states had a top-five hottest spring (see Fig. 2).

Figure 1. Average temperature for the contiguous United States for each spring (March-May) from 1895 through 2026. (Image credit: NOAA/NCEI)

Figure 2. Temperature rankings by state for the contiguous United States for each spring (March-May) from 1895 through 2026. (Image credit: NOAA/NCEI)

Exceptional warmth this year in both March (warmest on record) and April (3^rdwarmest on record) – including a phenomenal heat wave that brought summerlike temperatures in late March to much of the central and western U.S. – was only partially tempered by a less extreme but still unusually mild May (28th warmest on record). Over the longer-term, the contiguous U.S. remains locked in a long-term warming pattern fully in line with human-caused climate change.

The 12-month running average temperature for the Contiguous U.S. continues to be at a record high.
— Climatologist49 (@climatologist49.bsky.social) 2026-06-06T01:36:52.835Z

For the nation as a whole, spring 2026 ranked as the 37^th driest on record, with a contiguous-U.S. average of 7.43 inches. After a parched March (8^th driest), precipitation came in closer to average nationwide in April (46^th wettest) and May (55^th driest). However, that moisture was largely focused in the Midwest and Northeast. Michigan experienced its wettest spring on record, and it was a top-ten wettest spring for Wisconsin, Ohio, and Indiana. In contrast, it was a top-ten driest spring for Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia (see Fig. 3).

Figure 3. Precipitaton rankings by state for the contiguous United States for each spring (March-May) from 1895 through 2026. (Image credit: NOAA/NCEI)

For the contiguous U.S. as a whole, May 2026 had the second-worst May drought conditions in contiguous U.S. history, with a Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) of -6.93. The only worse May occurred in the Dust Bowl year of 1934 (a PDSI of -7.03). The year 2026 has now had three of the top-10 months for worst contiguous U.S drought conditions since records began in 1895:

Aug 1934: -8.42
Jul 1934: -8.09
Mar 2026: -7.82
Apr 2026: -7.49
Sep 1934: -7.21
Jun 1934: -7.18
Oct 1934: -7.16
May 1934: -7.03
Jan 1940: -6.97
May 2026: -6.93

Figure 4. Departure of snow liquid water equivalent for the winter of 2025-2026, ending in April 2026. Units are in mm; 25.4 mm = 1.0 inch. The vast majority of the Western U.S. saw below-average snowfall, while much of western Canada had much above average snowfall. (Image credit, used by permission: Jihan Bhuiyan, Cornell)

For much of the mountain West, more “no” than snow

The March heat wave dissolved any hope of a respectable snow season for large parts of the western United States. From April into early May, large swaths of the Rockies had record-low snow levels for the season, as much of what was already a skimpy snowpack melted weeks ahead of average.

12-month running average snowfall for the Contiguous U.S. It's as if warming temperatures mean less snowfall. Who knew?
— Climatologist49 (@climatologist49.bsky.social) 2026-06-06T17:17:32.849Z

Taking the edge off slightly was a notably moist period over parts of the Southwest in mid-May. That system brought some of the heaviest snowfall of the entire winter to areas that included the Front Range of Colorado (Fig. 5).

Figure 5. The heaviest snowfall of winter 2025-26 fell over leafed-out trees on May 6 in Boulder, Colorado. The May 5-6 storm total was 11.3 inches, capping the least-snowy winter in the 36-year history of Boulder’s current official observing station. (Image credit: Bob Henson)

In California, substantial rain and mountain snow in midwinter helped to keep put of the state’s reservoirs in better shape than one might assume from the early melt-off from unusual warmth.

Most of northern and central California remain within about 10% of normal, while much of the south state is well above normal, mostly on the basis of heavy rains in Nov and Dec.
— Jan Null, CCM (@ggweather.bsky.social) 2026-06-01T02:54:08.045Z

The situation is considerably more dire across the Desert Southwest. Lake Powell and Lake Mead, which together serve thousands of farmers and millions of residents in six states, were both at less than 30 percent of capacity by early June.

Figure 6. Active storage in 46 Colorado River Basin reservoirs between January 1, 1999, and late May 2026. The progressive decline in storage shown above, despite occasional replenishment during wet years, is referred to as the “ratchet effect.” Data for these reservoirs is available at https://www.usbr.gov/uc/water/hydrodata/reservoir_data/site_map.html. (Image credit: University of Colorado)

https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:e2wp425fr24kyup6dci5nim2?ref_src=embed&ref_url=https%253A%252F%252Fyaleclimateconnections.org%252F2026%252F06%252Fsecond-warmest-spring-in-u-s-history%252F

The lack of remaining Southwest snowpack means runoff will be limited this summer, only worsening the situation. There’s at least some chance that the fast-evolving El Niño event – which has a greater-than-60-percent of reaching “strong” or “very strong” levels, according to NOAA’s intensity outlook issued in May – will bring generous moisture to the Southwest later this year into early 2027.

However, scientists at the University of Colorado cautioned in a June 1 press release that even a very wet year such as 2023 would likely forestall major long-term trouble by only about two years, while another dry year could lead to “run-of-the-river” conditions that would hasten depletion and lead to devastating consequences.

“Both scenarios demonstrate the need to adopt significant additional measures topermanently decrease consumptive uses across the entire basin,” the researchers warned.

Jeff Masters contributed to this post.

BOB HENSON

Bob Henson is a meteorologist and journalist based in Boulder, Colorado. He has written on weather and climate for the National Center for Atmospheric Research, Weather Underground, and many freelance… More by Bob Henson

Data centers = heat factories: #DoloresRiver rambling; Forecasters call for sultry summer — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org)

Sunset and the Dolores River before it crosses the Utah state line. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

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

June 5, 2026

Heat-emitting Phoenix-area data centers next to already hot neighborhoods. Good thing a lot of those houses have swimming pools. They’ll need them. Source: Data Center Waste Heat as an Emerging Urban Thermal Hazard: First Field Measurements of Neighborhood-Scale Air Temperature Impacts, by David J. Sailor, Soroush Samareh Abolhassani, Eli P. Martin.

🤖 Data Center Watch 👾

Phoenix is hot, thanks to its location and elevation; it’s getting hotter, due to climate change, all that concrete and steel and glass and the urban heat island effect, and heat output from thousands of overworked air conditioning units; and it’s bound to get even hotter thanks to … data centers.

A team of Arizona State University researchers recently published a report on data center waste heat as an “emerging thermal hazard.” What they found will make folks who live near the facilities sweat, literally.

Data centers do a lot of work crunching information to stream movies, power AI queries, make those Tik Tok videos, and keep you doomscrolling, and work creates heat, meaning that data centers need constant cooling. As the paper’s authors put it, “virtually all electrical energy consumed by information technology equipment is ultimately converted to sensible heat,” and data centers consume huge amounts of electricity. More and more data centers, especially in arid areas, are using air cooling technology, which means taking that heat away from the equipment and putting it elsewhere — i.e. outside the facility, creating thermal plumes.

The researchers determined that these thermal plumes are migrating into adjacent neighborhoods and heating them up, with downwind air temperatures measuring up to .9° C warmer than upwind temperatures. The data centers’ excess heat was detected up to 500 meters, or about 1,600 feet, away from the facility. This is troubling given that many data centers are being constructed in or next to residential neighborhoods. The massive Cyrus One server farm complex in Chandler, Arizona, for example, is about 600 feet from single-family residences.

The authors write:

Keep in mind that this study only looked at the warming effect of on-grid facilities. Many of the new hyperscale data centers in the pipeline are planning to install power generation infrastructure, usually natural gas-fired, on-site, most likely radiating even more heat than the data centers alone. Putting your data center in Wyoming or Alaska rather than Phoenix or Las Vegas is making more and more sense.

⛈️ Wacky Weather Watch⚡️

Will it be the Sultry Summer of 2026 for the Four Corners region? The long-range forecasts sure do look that way. The good news is that it’s looking more and more likely that the monsoon will be potent in the Southwest, with the National Weather Service predicting above average precipitation over the next three months. The bad news is they are also calling for higher-than-normal temperatures for the entire West during that time period, which could offset some of the benefits of the rain.

But whether it’s normally hot or abnormally so, the extra moisture will be especially welcome this year. Many an irrigation ditch is likely to go dry in the next month or so, thanks to extra-low streamflows, and regular afternoon downpours could help farmers get their crops to harvest, so long as the storms aren’t too severe and don’t produce softball-sized hail stones or whatever.

Once the monsoon arrives, it should help dampen wildfire hazard a bit (although the lightning that always comes with it will certainly spark many a blaze). In the meantime, however, big swaths of the West are expected to have above normal wildland fire potential for the next month or so.

And blazes are flaring up here and there, including a small conflagration atop Hermosa Mountain north of Durango that is eerily reminiscent of the 416 Fire in 2018: This winter’s snowpack resembled 2018’s, the 416 broke out on June 1, and the starting points are in the same general area.

The current fire is burning in a hard-to-reach area at higher elevation and was definitely not started by sparks from the railroad. It’s also growing relatively slowly, having reached just 18 acres as of the evening of June 4.

***

Emery Peak near Silverton, Colorado, on June 2, 2026. Andy Gleason photo.

I don’t know about y’all, but the crazy winter and spring has screwed up my perception of the water situation. When skiing-obsessed snow-nerd Andy Gleason sent me this photo, I was somewhat surprised to see that there was any snow at all left in the high country, especially enough to carve a few turns on. When I see that the Animas River is running above 800 cfs right now, I think: That’s not so bad! And when I see Lake Powell’s surface level inching upwards rather than downwards a temporary feeling of relief washes over me.

Then I remember: It’s the beginning of June. The north facing high mountains should be coated with several feet of snow, not a few inches. The Animas should be running at 3,000 cfs, at least, and in a good year still would be approaching its peak. And Lake Powell’s inflows should far exceed releases at this time of year, bringing the surface level up by several feet or more, without requiring Flaming Gorge to be drawn down to “devastating” levels.

That bout of summer-like weather at the end of March set my internal season clock a couple of months ahead, so that I expect the conditions to be like they typically would be in late July. So once that split second of disorientation, and accompanying optimism, passes, there’s a sort of letdown.

Because, yes, the conditions are grim. And it was one of the worst winters, in terms of snowpack, on record. But there are reasons not to despair. While the snow was dismal, precipitation accumulation for the water year so far has been far less so, keeping extreme drought at bay. Temperatures cooled after the March heat spell, a series of storms kept the forests from becoming kindling, and desert rains summoned the wildflowers. Patches of globe mallow, sego lily, primrose, and prince’s plume brightened up the burnished sands of Utah, and my friend and I rode our bikes through a purple-hued super bloom near Farmington.

The land may be dry, but it still offers beauty, solace, and refuge from these trying times. [ed. emphasis mine]

Redrock reflection on the Dolores River near Gateway, downstream from the confluence with the San Miguel. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

Last month I wrote about the despair I felt as I witnessed the virtually dry Dolores River bed a mile or so above its confluence with the San Miguel River. Neither the dryness nor the despair are new, though they both came early this year.

For decades, the wild Dolores would swell up into a raging torrent during the spring runoff. Then, during the summer, Montezuma Valley irrigators would divert nearly all of the stream’s flow, reducing these lower reaches to little more than a trickle come late July and August.

McPhee Dam started holding back those spring flows in the early 1980s. Like any dam, this one robbed so much life from the river. Yet this one also promised to give some life back to the beleaguered river by mitigating the impacts of all of that irrigation. The idea was to capture enough of the runoff to fill up the reservoir in the spring. During summer, the storage could be drawn down to serve irrigators, while most or all of the river’s natural flow could be sent through the dam to the Lower Dolores. It was like putting the river’s manic-depressive flows on lithium.

It worked, for a while: The massive spring runoffs, known to hit upwards of 11,000 cfs, were tempered, but enough water still flowed downstream to scour beaches and preserve Snaggletooth’s whitewater snarl. And for the first time in a century the lower Dolores didn’t run dry in July. In fact, the year-round flows were enough to build and sustain a cold-water fishery for trout in the first dozen or so miles below the dam and a habitat for native fish below that. Meanwhile, the Dolores River water was able to reach far more irrigators, including the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe and former dryland farmers out Dove Creek way.

It appeared to be a win-win situation. Then, beginning in 2000, things went awry as a long-term drought gripped the region. More often than not, the dam’s operators held back almost all of the water running into the reservoir to allow them to continue delivering something to the irrigators. And even then the reservoir still isn’t full enough to deliver all of the water that’s allocated: This year the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe and irrigators outside of the Montezuma Valley Irrigation Company will receive just 13% of their allotted amount. The river below the dam, of course, is the biggest loser, receiving virtually nothing.

And yet, not all is lost. The Dolores River Boating Advocates recently put out a postdetailing the grim forecast for this year, but also reporting on a new Colorado Parks and Wildlife effort to help fish in the Lower Dolores: pulse flows. They tested the concept last year by holding water back behind the dam for a few days by reducing release flows to 24 cfs, then bumping up releases to 75 cfs create a slight surge of water to reconnect downstream pools, to induce enough current to keep the water cooler, and allow fish to move around again.

Graph showing the pulse flows last summer as they reached Bedrock. So far this spring flows there have been below a dismal 10 cfs. Source: USGS.

The Boating Advocates write:

Of course streams also need water, and it’s so scarce this year that the base flows will be just 5 cfs, or one-fifth of last year’s base flows. And so the sorrows continue for the poor Dolores River.

Our River of Sorrow — Jonathan P. Thompson

And here’s the thing: closed loop water systems are 100% possible. They just require a bit more investment — Katherine Hayhoe

And here’s the thing: closed loop water systems are 100% possible. They just require a bit more investment.Similarly, powering data centers off clean energy is also 100% possible. In some cases, it’s even cheaper!This disastrous overconsumption is not a technological failure: it’s a policy one.
— Katharine Hayhoe (@katharinehayhoe.com) 2026-06-09T17:58:40.724Z

The Vegetation Drought Response Index (VegDRI) shows intense vegetation stress due to drought in the Southeast, parts of the High Plains, and to a lesser extent in other parts of the US — Denise Gutzmer

https://bsky.app/profile/denisegutzmer.bsky.social/post/3mnumrxyp4c2k

Reclamation says new #ColoradoRiver plan will be short-term: Operating plan may be based on latest Lower Basin proposal — Heather Sackett (AspenJournalism.org) #COriver #aridification

Glen Canyon Dam forms Lake Powell on the Colorado River near Page, Ariz. Officials from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation are holding back water and releasing water from an upstream reservoir to prop up levels in Lake Powell. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Click the link to read the article on the Aspen Journalism website (Heather Sackett):

June 5, 2026

Federal officials announced on Thursday that they plan on using a shorter-term framework for future Colorado River management so they can be more responsive to changing conditions and reservoir levels.

Acting Commissioner of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Scott Cameron said at an annual conference on water policy that the agency will be using a 10-year framework, issuing new operational guidelines every two years. In the absence of a seven-state deal for sharing shortages and managing reservoirs, river management now falls to the federal government — an outcome nearly everyone had hoped to avoid.

“We would love to have a 20-year deal or a 30-year deal but, frankly, we haven’t even been able to get the seven states to agree on what a two-year deal would look like,” Cameron said. “Given the highly unusual hydrological situation in the basin … we think it makes sense to take a second look at decision making every couple of years.”

As part of the required process under the National Environmental Policy Act, Cameron said Reclamation will release a final Environmental Impact Statement with its “preferred alternative,” in mid-to-late summer. It will lay out a more detailed 10-year operations plan for the nation’s two largest reservoirs, Lake Powell and Lake Mead, and will include short-term operational guidelines for 2027 and 2028. He said the plan provides a stable, transparent and adaptable framework for river management.

Scott Cameron is the acting commissioner of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. He announced Thursday the federal agency is planning to release a river management plan in mid-to-late summer that includes a 10-year framework, with new operational guidelines every two years. CREDIT: U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

“We want to pay more attention to what’s actually happening in the river and what’s happening in terms of the elevation of the reservoirs,” Cameron said. “We want to manage conservatively during low inflow periods and hopefully be able to transition to recovery as conditions improve across the basin to keep the system stable and resilient.”

Cameron left the door open for a return to future management by the states and added that if they eventually come to an agreement, it could supplant the federal plan.

Cameron’s update came at the Colorado Law Conference on Natural Resources at the University of Colorado Boulder, hosted by the Getches-Wilkinson Center and the Water & Tribes Initiative. Water managers from around the basin gathered at the Wolf Law School in the midst of one of the worst droughts on record that threatens the water supply for about 40 million people in the American Southwest. Record hot temperatures and one of the worst snowpacks since measuring began resulted in streamflows that peaked much lower than normal and, in some reaches, a month early. Reclamation’s most recent projections put spring runoff into Lake Powell at just 800,000 acre-feet, which would be 13% percent of normal and the lowest on record.

On top of the abysmal hydrologic conditions, the basin is also in the midst of a management crisis. The Upper Basin states (Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming) and Lower Basin states (California, Arizona and Nevada) after two years of negotiating have failed to reach a consensus on how they will share future cuts and have blown past deadlines to come up with a plan. The current guidelines, which have determined shortages and releases since 2007, expire at the end of the year. But for all intents and purposes, water managers need a new plan in place by the start of the new water year on Oct. 1.

Some of the problem still centers around the 1922 Colorado River Compact, which allocated half of the river’s flows (7.5 million acre-feet a year) to each basin. But this framework no longer applies under 21st century conditions, which has seen flows decline by 20% due to climate change. Despite indications a year ago that the states were moving to a supply-driven model based on each year’s snowpack and available water — rather than a fixed allocation of water — a new management framework the states can agree on has remained out of reach.

Colorado representative Becky Mitchell and Nevada representative John Entsminger speak at a conference on Colorado River policy in Boulder on Friday, June 5, 2026. The federal government is set to release a plan for future river management in mid-to-late summer. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Beyond the band-aid

The feds’ operating plan for the first two years may be based on a proposal submitted by the Lower Basin states in early May, in which they propose to cut another 700,000 acre-feet of water per year through 2028, on top of the 1.5 million acre-feet they had already promised. California and Arizona will each take another 300,000 acre-feet of cuts and Nevada will take a cut of 100,000 acre-feet. The proposal does not include any mandatory conservation from the Upper Basin.

Federal officials responded in a May 28 letter with adjustments to make the proposal feasible, including the requirement that the Lower Basin states help pay for the 700,000 acre-feet of conservation. In the past, conservation programs have depended heavily on federal funding.

Becky Mitchell, who represents Colorado in the negotiations among the states, said during a Friday panel that the feds’ plan was a starting point but raises some concerns. Constantly renegotiating an operating plan every two years would be hard to fathom, she said.

“How do we fund and finance if we’re constantly renegotiating?” Mitchell said. “And how do we create the certainty that the 40 million people deserve?”

The feds have already stepped in this spring to prevent the worst consequences of the exceptionally dry winter and keep water levels at Lake Powell from falling below the threshold for making hydropower at Glen Canyon Dam. They are releasing up to 1 million acre-feet from Flaming Gorge Reservoir to prop up Powell and holding back Powell releases by about 1.5 million acre-feet. Cameron conceded, however, that these are temporary, stop-gap measures meant to address a critical situation.

“I think we succeeded in making everybody unhappy and everybody mad, which maybe means we’re doing the right thing in terms of Lake Powell,” Cameron said.

The Upper Basin states, including Colorado, are exploring ways to contribute water to a pool in Lake Powell as a means of maintaining higher water levels and an insurance policy against drastic cuts. But officials have not budged from their position that the Upper Basin is limited in what it can do and that cutting Lower Basin overuse is the primary solution to the Colorado River crisis.

Brad Udall, a water and climate scientist at Colorado State University whose presentation kicked off the conference, asked water managers not to waste this unique opportunity to redo 100 years of law and policy around how to manage a critical resource. And he directed a plea at the Upper Basin, saying that they, too, are part of the problem.

“We need everybody with a shoulder to this wheel,” Udall said. “We understand that the Upper Basin is different. We understand that they don’t have (large upstream) reservoirs and that every year people suffer. But we need you to help. Please help us.”

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

#ColoradoRiver Basin – new report from my colleagues on the implications of running on empty — John Fleck (InkStain.net) #COriver #aridification

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

June 1, 2026

I’ve been on a “Colorado River sabbatical” of late, but I took a peek last week at Reclamation’s latest 24-month study. Holy moly things have gotten bad since the last time I looked!

Those not on sabbatical already know all of this, but to keep Lake Powell above a surface elevation of 3,500 feet, Reclamation is:

increasing releases out of Flaming Gorge on the Wyoming-Utah border

dropping releases out of Lake Powell to 6 million acre feet this year

Even with those two “hail Mary” moves, Lake Mead is projected in the “most probable” scenario to drop to elevation 1,020 by summer 2027. Under the “minimum probable” forecast, Mead drops all the way to elevation 1,008 in 2027.

We are on the brink, as a group of my colleagues explains in a new analysis out this morning (Monday June 1, 2026), of a system crash:

That’s from the latest report from the team of Castle-Schmidt-Kuhn-Sorensen-Tara, the Traveling Wilburys of the Colorado River. I’ve been on “sabbatical”, so I didn’t work on this one with my friends. (The joke is that I’m busy catching up on old movies, which is at least partly true, did you know Billy Wilder made, like, 50 movies?)

Even a wet year, my friends conclude, would only provide a short reprieve from the need to significantly reduce consumptive use.

Building on a similar analysis done last September (I was a co-author on that one), the authors attempt to overcome one of the shortcomings of the traditional Colorado River accounting systems, which is to treat any water above “dead pool” as usable storage. This is not the case, with clear do-not-cross lines in the reservoirs that are maintained for technical reasons well above the bottom, defined by my colleagues as…

One of the reasons for my “sabbatical” is, frankly, an agonized frustration with the abject failure of Colorado River governance at the basin scale, and a desire to turn my attention to the local level, which is where the problem solving responsibility seems to rest right now. Each community needs to be having a serious conversation right now about the specifics of its Colorado River water supply, and how it intends to go about using less. Blaming other people for using too much isn’t particularly useful at this point, we seem to have chosen to hand that set of questions (the rule-based part of “who is entitled to how much”) over to the courts, and who knows what that process holds. We know the answer for everyone is “use less water”, and each community needs to be getting on with that conversation.

The full report is here.

Desert Deluge: The threat of a Super El Niño

A desert landscape featuring tall cacti under a cloudy sky, with mountains in the background. — ^{Saguaro cactus in Southern Arizona. Image provided by Storyblocks.}

The forecasted “Super El Niño” is expected to delay the start of Southern Arizona’s monsoonal season but by August it could trigger heavier, more intense rainfall, severe flash flooding, and unusually high humidity during its peak. While El Niño historically weakens global monsoons, its impact on the Desert Southwest creates unique atmospheric shifts for the June 15 to September 30 season.¹ Climate experts from the National Weather Service and the University of Arizona predict the season will unfold across three distinct phases: ²

A DELAYED AND DRIER ONSET

Early in the summer, El Niño’s atmospheric patterns alter the subtropical jet stream, creating persistent westerly winds across the Southwest.

Moisture Suppression: These westerlies act as a wall, driving out early moisture from the south and delaying the typical shift to monsoonal wind patterns.

Increased Fire Risk: A slower, drier start to the monsoon prolongs the summer dry spell, elevating the risk of wildfire ignition from dry lightning storms.

HIGH-INTENSITY PEAK (August into September)

Tropical Cyclone Activity: The incredibly warm ocean temperatures of a Super El Niño fuel severe hurricane activity off the Pacific coast of Mexico.

Tropical Moisture Pumps: While the hurricanes themselves rarely hit Southern Arizona directly, they act as massive atmospheric pumps, steering heavy tropical moisture straight into the Desert Southwest.

Rain Bombs and Flooding: As this extra moisture collides with the desert heat, it increases the likelihood of high-intensity storms, widespread flash flooding, severe dust storms, and heavy rainfall that could reach up to 150% of normal averages in some areas.

A SHIFT TO MOIST HEAT (after September)

High Humidity: Southern Arizona is famous for its dry heat, but the influx of Pacific moisture will cause humidity levels to skyrocket.

Stubbornly High Temperatures: Even with localized cloud cover and rain mitigating the most extreme temperature spikes, daily highs will remain brutally hot—frequently ranging between 100°F and 115°F. The added moisture will result in a heavy, oppressive “moist heat” rather than a dry one.

President Trump’s border wall is ‘blowing up’ sacred sites in 4 US states — AZCentral.com

Video and photos of fish-shaped intaglio (geoglyph) damaged by border wall construction contractors at Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge. Footage taken from Mexico. Credit Russ McSpadden / Center for Biological Diversity

Click the link to read the article on the AZCentral website (Debra Utacia Krol). Here’s an excerpt:

June 7, 2026

Key Points

Border wall construction is damaging or threatening sacred Indigenous, cultural, and environmentally sensitive sites in four states along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Department of Homeland Security has waived environmental and historic protection laws to expedite construction of a two-layered structure.

Sites affected include a 1,000-year-old O’odham geoglyph in Arizona and Kuuchamaa, a sacred mountain to Kumeyaay tribes in California.

The recent destruction of a 1,000-year-old sacred O’odham geoglyph in the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge is only the latest example of damage and desecration to religious, cultural and environmentally sensitive sites caused by construction of the border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. At least one Catholic shrine, two mountains held sacred by Kumeyaay bands in California and Catholics on the New Mexico-Texas state line, and wetlands prized as life-giving water sources for wildlife and humans have all suffered damage or are in the work zone. The Las Playas Intaglio holds great cultural and historical importance to O’odham and other Indigenous peoples in the Southwest. The intaglio, or geoglyph, was created by scraping the top darker layer of earth from the desert floor, resulting in a 200-foot-long rendition of a fish with its nose pointing south. Some tribes say it served as a directional marker along a trail that led to the Gulf of California and its marine resources, including salt deposits…

The Department of Homeland Security is filling in the gaps in the border wall not completed during President Donald Trump’s first term. The agency is also building a second wall parallel to the first in areas deemed to be at higher risk of smuggling and human trafficking. The Trump administration has moved to waive environmental and historic protection laws and regulations in its rush to build the walls. In April 2025, the Department of Homeland Security issued waivers to expedite construction in Arizona and New Mexico, based on a 2005 law that gave the agency the authority to waive laws to expedite barriers and roads at the U.S. border…The agency has also ignored directives such as sites being included in the National Register of Historic Places, the United States’ official list of historic and archaeological resources deemed worthy of protection…

Tecate Peak as seen from Potrero, CA. By UncleMunkle – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=51110281

Members of the 16 Kumeyaay tribal communities in Southern California and Baja California sounded alarms when the government began blasting chunks off Kuuchamaa, also known as Mount Cuchuma or Tecate Peak. The 3,885-foot-high mountain straddles the U.S.-Mexico border and is about 4 miles west of Tecate, Baja California. Kumeyaay people consider Kuuchamaa their most sacred mountain. According to the Kumeyaay Diegueño Land Conservancy, a nonprofit founded in 2005 to protect areas important to the Kumeyaay peoples, the peak is the namesake of a powerful Kuseyaay, or religious leader…Like other cultural and sacred places, the government has waived environmental laws and disregarded Kuuchamaa’s listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The 1992 listing, which Bergueno said was led by her elders, was the first-ever Native religious site to be listed…

Quitobaquito Springs was heavily damaged as the first border wall was built in 2020. At least two endangered species, the Sonoyta pupfish and Sonoyta mud turtles, are endemic to the springs and found nowhere else on the planet. Their survival was on the line as construction crews pumped water and damaged wetlands. The spring is also a lifeline for other wildlife in one of the hottest, driest parts of the Sonoran Desert. Biologists and environmentalists are already mapping strategies to rescue Sonoyta mud turtles from the pond should CBP damage it again. A small population of the Sonoyta pupfish was brought to a new desert stream habitat at Biosphere 2 in October 2025 to provide a backup to the critically endangered species.

Quitobaquito Pond. By NPS – National Park Service, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=91942483

Once underwater, #ColoradoRiver canyon country reemerges as drought-stricken #LakePowell’s levels drop — The #Denver Post #COriver #aridification

Underwater until recently, a biodiverse ecosystem has quickly re-established in this particular side-canyon of Glen Canyon. Along with a whole host of plant life, I’ve documented crayfish, otters, beavers, deer, coyotes and tracks of mountain lions and bobcats throughout Glen Canyon’s wet tributaries. Photo credit: Elliot Ross/Glen Canyon Institute (GlenCanyon.org)

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

June 7, 2026

The tops of trees, dead since Lake Powell’s levels rose decades ago, poked through mud and ooze at the silent mouth of Davis Gulch, where the side canyon met the reservoir’s still waters. But just around a few bends in the sandstone walls, life began to appear. First, a fuzz of inch-tall greenery. Then, knee-high cattails and primrose, followed shortly by small cottonwoods and willows, then by towering gambel oaks. The silence of the canyon mouth was replaced by the soft rush of a creek, bird songs, and the constant cacophony of dragonflies and gnats. Scattered throughout the canyon, an ecologist, bug scientists, birders and advocates for Glen Canyon were working to document the ecosystems emerging as Lake Powell’s water levels have dropped after decades of drought and water overuse.

“Hiking the side canyons is like going through ecological time travel,” said Eric Balken, the executive director of the Glen Canyon Institute, a nonprofit dedicated to restoring the canyons inundated by Lake Powell, as he hiked up Davis Gulch…

The falling water levels have also steadily revealed long-submerged canyonlands: red slot canyons, sandstone amphitheaters, waterfalls that tumble over slickrock cliffs. The reemerging landscapes provide a new opportunity to study life in Glen Canyon, which sits just upstream of the iconic Grand Canyon. Little scientific work was completed in Glen Canyon before the federal government flooded it — an event seen by environmentalists then, and now, as an unmitigated ecological disaster, a paradise lost…But for a new generation of advocates, regaining paradise seems possible as the reservoir’s shorelines recede, bringing more than 100,000 acres of rugged terrain out of the water. The Glen Canyon Institute and canyon activists for years have argued that Lake Powell should be drained and the Colorado River allowed to again flow freely through Glen Canyon. Now, their argument is also bolstered by the fact that Lake Powell is emptying — whether Colorado River managers like it or not. For those advocates, recent years have provided a rare chance to study life in the emerging canyonlands and to make their case to basin leaders who are contemplating the long-term future of Colorado River management…

A map of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area produced by the U.S. National Park Service. The map shows the shoreline of Lake Powell as it was when it was full — the water level is now more than 170 feet lower. Click image to enlarge map. (National Park Service via Wikimedia Commons)

Lower basin states prepare for the loss of Colorado River water

Aerial view of a river meandering through rocky terrain and hills, surrounded by sparse vegetation and mountains in the distance. — ^{April 2023 photograph showing the Colorado River as it enters Lake Mead. Photograph by Robert Marcos.}

By Robert Marcos, photojournalist

Arizona, California, and Nevada are actively preparing for a future that may provide little or no Colorado River water through a combination of aggressive local conservation, infrastructure changes, and unprecedented collective agreements. On May 1st – driven by the imminent expiration of current river guidelines, the states finalized a joint Water Stabilization Plan to collectively slash usage by up to 3.2 million acre feet. J.B. Hamby, the Chairman of the Colorado River Board of California, said, “We’re putting forward additional measurable water contributions for the system. Without that, the system will continue to decline.” ¹

ARIZONA: Agricultural sacrifices and groundwater banking

Arizona holds the lowest-priority water rights among the major Lower Basin states, which means that it takes the earliest and deepest cuts during shortages.² Under multi-state and federal plans, Arizona has offered up to 760,000 acre-feet in voluntary reductions, nearly half of what typically flows through the Central Arizona Project canal.³ Central Arizona agriculture has borne the brunt of these reductions. In counties like Pinal, farmers have already been forced to operate at half their normal capacity, switching to high-tech drip irrigation or leaving fields fallow. ⁴

The state is shifting heavily toward managing its underground aquifers, heavily regulating new real estate developments that cannot prove a 100-year assured water supply independent of dwindling surface flows.

An article in the Manataba Messenger said, “In Phoenix, city leaders are getting ready for the possibility of Colorado River cuts by checking out alternative water sources and long-term reserves. Phoenix relies on several water sources, including the Colorado River through the Central Arizona Project. As future reductions become more likely, the city’s planning mirrors a broader trend across the Southwest: big cities are no longer seeing Colorado River shortages as just a distant threat. They’re preparing for a future where less river water might be available, and backup supplies might be needed to keep up with demand.” ⁵

CALIFORNIA: Agricultural efficiency and urban recycling

As the largest consumer of the river’s water, California has historically avoided the earliest shortage cuts, but now it has begun to force its massive agricultural districts to adapt to having less water.⁶ The Imperial Irrigation District which rceives 3.1 million acre feet of Colorado River water every year, is expanding its efficiency programs. On January 20th the IID Board of Directors approved the continuation of the District’s Deficit Irrigation Program for 2026. This program motives local growers to voluntarily pause irrigation on select perennial forage crops (such as alfalfa, Bermuda grass, and Klein grass) during peak summer water use windows. Growers are then financially compensated for their reduced crop yields.⁷

On May 15th the IID Board of Directors announced an amendment that would leave an additional 100,000 acre feet of Colorado River water in Lake Mead. The amendment increased the IID’s existing three-year conservation agreement capacity from 700,000 acre-feet to 800,000 acre-feet, in addition to the 106,111 AF conserved for Lake Mead in 2023. Cumulatively these programs are slated to add about 12 feet of elevation to Lake Mead by the end of the year.⁸

The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, is investing billions of dollars into advanced local wastewater purification systems to reduce coastal cities’ reliance on imported river water –

Pure Water Southern California: MWD has partnered with the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts to develop Pure Water Southern California, aiming to produce up to 150 million gallons of recycled water daily for 15 million people. MWD has allocated $150 million within its capital investment plan for the planning and final design of the project’s first stage, and has financed and operates a 500,000-gallon-per-day demonstration facility (the Grace F. Napolitano Innovation Center) to test advanced purification techniques before full scale construction.⁹

The Local Resources Program: MWD has provided financial subsidies to its 26 member public and private water agencies based on the volume of recycled water they successfully produced, and it has invested over $1.5 billion since 1990 to support more than 100 localized recycling and groundwater recovery projects across Southern California. Additionally, the MWD funds localized conversions, such as transforming unused sewer lift stations into active recycling plants for urban irrigation.¹⁰

Commercial and Research Grants: MWD has awarded grants to public and private entities to evaluate next-generation water-saving devices and urban reuse technologies. It has funded studies on innovative Membrane Bioreactors that are paired with reverse osmosis to reduce the energy and financial costs of recycling wastewater.¹¹

NEVADA: Focused on a new lower-lake pipeline and a war on turf

Nevada has the smallest allocation of the river but is widely considered to have established a blueprint for urban climate adaptation, having spent decades in preparation for the kind of low-water scenario the Southwestern US is now facing. ¹²

Low Lake Level Infrastructure: Nevada’s water manager, the Southern Nevada Water Authority has completed a “third” intake and a specialized low-level pumping station at Lake Mead. This will allow Las Vegas to continue drawing water even if Lake Mead drops below the deadpool level where water can no longer flow downstream to California and Arizona.¹³

A War on Turf: Nevada has passed strict laws mandating the removal of “non-functional turf” (decorative grass) at commercial, multi-family, and government properties. It also bans outdoor water features and prohibits new grass in future developments. ¹⁴

Indoor Water Recycling: Las Vegas treats and returns nearly 100% of its indoor wastewater back to Lake Mead. This cycle earns the state “return-flow credits,” stretching its small allocation significantly further than other states. ¹⁵

The Local Resources Program

It’s not all doom and gloom, and 4 other things we learned at CU Boulder, Getches-Wilkinson Center’s, #ColoradoRiver gathering — Scott Franz (KUNC.org) #COriver #aridification

A large crowd listens to a presentation at the University of Colorado Boulder law school about securing powerful new water rights on Colorado’s West Slope to benefit the health of the Colorado River. Scott Franz/KUNC

June 5, 2026

This story is part of ongoing coverage of the Colorado River, produced by KUNC in Colorado and supported by the Walton Family Foundation. KUNC is solely responsible for its editorial coverage.

Water negotiators, river enthusiasts, Native tribes and lots of lawyers convened at the University of Colorado Law School on Thursday to take stock of the future of the dwindling Colorado River.

Here are five things KUNC’s water and environment reporter learned on the first day of the gathering.

There’s a thirst for treating the river as more than something to be consumed, and monetized and stretched out

Dale Sinquah, a tribal council member for Arizona’s Hopi tribe, is among a growing number of people who view the Colorado as a living being that should have the same rights as a person.

“If you look at it at that level and you allow it to, then it starts changing the ways in which you think about it, and maybe your actions,” he said.

Late last year, the Colorado River Indian Tribes of Arizona and California voted to give their namesake waterway the same legal rights as a person, saying the ‘living being’ deserves more protection while it’s being threatened by overuse and drought.

Sinquah said he had mixed reviews of the discussions at the water conference halfway through the first day.

“I’m kind of wondering if we’re stuck in that mode where you know personal interest (is winning) instead of how do we fix this as a whole, as a group,” he said. “It works better when you work together as a group.”

There’s still no finalized federal plan for the river yet, and the White House could have the final say…

Scott Cameron, the acting commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation overseeing the operations of Lake Powell and Lake Mead, said the Interior Department is expecting to publish a short term operating plan for the reservoirs by “mid-summer.”

He said the plan would have to be renegotiated every two years and could be replaced at any time with one that the seven states can agree on.

“The good news is that the White House is very interested in what’s going on with the Colorado, so we’ll probably have to brief the White House on the (Secretary of the Interior’s) decision before it’s final,” Cameron said.

U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, center, speaks during a gathering with governors from six states in the Colorado River basin on Friday, Jan. 30, 2026. Photo credit: Lowell Whitman/Department Of Interior

River negotiations are ongoing, but details are scarce…

First governors from all seven states in the river basin were summoned to Washington, DC, ahead of the Feb. 14 deal deadline they missed.

Then, after that didn’t work, came the Microsoft Teams meeting.

Scott Cameron, the acting commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, said Interior Secretary Doug Burgum recently talked with the seven governors again on the virtual meeting platform.

“The fact that he is trying to wrangle his gubernatorial colleagues twice, I think, indicates how seriously Secretary Burgum takes what’s happening in the Colorado River,” Cameron said.

However, no deal has yet to materialize as the states remain at an impasse, and some in the upper basin have called for a different mediator to intervene.

One thing is clear.

Forecasts for the river have gotten worse in recent months. And there was an acknowledgement that the status quo is not sustainable.

Could the feds get more involved in the management of upper basin reservoirs like Flaming Gorge? The answer is murky…

The audience asked Cameron, the Bureau of Reclamation official, about his thinking on how Interior should manage four large reservoirs in the upper basin that are collectively known as the upper initial units (they include Flaming Gorge on the Wyoming-Utah border).

Flaming Gorge is currently being partially drained so water can be sent down to Lake Powell so it doesn’t get so low that it stops producing hydropower.

Cameron said the Interior Secretary could exert more control over the reservoirs in the future in the event of an “emergency.”

“And what an emergency is, I think, is probably in the eyes of the beholder,” he said. “Now, you put four or five lawyers in a room. You’ll probably get nine answers on how much discretion the secretary has or doesn’t have in the upper initial units.”

It’s not all doom and gloom…

Author Zak Podmore, known for his recent book Life After Deadpool: Lake Powell’s Last Days and the Rebirth of the Colorado River, wowed the audience with a photo slideshow of what’s happening in Glen Canyon as drought takes water levels lower and lower in Lake Powell.

Parts of the lake that have only recently been uncovered are full of old beer cans and other relics of boating escapades, including sunken boats.

But deeper down, Podmore shared photos of Native artifacts that have survived decades of being submerged.

New ecosystems are also taking shape.

⛈️ Wacky Weather Watch⚡️

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Desalination

Taming tech and power

Squeezing rain from the clouds

Mining a hoard of desert groundwater

Share this:

Like this:

How this water year’s drought has unfolded

Where are we headed?

State drought tour: support Colorado businesses!

Share this:

Like this:

June 8, 2025 – CO, UT, WY

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:

🌞 Good News! 😎

🐟 Colorado River Chronicles 💧

Guest Commentary: A Fair Allocation for the Colorado River

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

This Week’s Drought Summary

Looking Ahead

Share this:

Like this:

Why the drain?

Setting a course

Water floats recreation economy

Drinking water dries up

What’s next?

What about recovery?

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Key Findings of the Report

Expected Physical Damage

Hazards for Water Conveyance Systems

Immediate Drowning and Public Safety Hazards

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

🌵 Public Lands 🌲

Share this:

Like this:

The Data Breakdown

Critical Nuance

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this: