The Colorado River passing Grand Junction, Colorado. Photo by Robert Marcos.
Click the link to read the article on the Summit Daily website (Ali Longwell). Here’s an excerpt:
April 13, 2026
Despite pressure from Colorado’s congressional delegation, around $140 million in federal funding previously granted to Western Slope water projects has lingered in limbo for nearly 16 months. The funds, awarded to 17 Western Slope projects in the final days of President Joe Biden’s administration, were part of the Inflation Reduction Act’s drought mitigation grant opportunity for the Upper Colorado River Basin. This included $40 million granted to the Colorado River District to aid in its purchase of the Shoshone water rights, the oldest and largest non-consumptive right on the Colorado River tied to the hydropower plant in Glenwood Canyon. Three days after the awards were announced, President Donald Trump took office, and his Day 1 order, “Unleashing American Energy,” called for all federal agencies to “immediately pause the disbursement of funds appropriated through the Inflation Reduction Act.” In June, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation released funds for two of the projects in the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District in Palisade, but the rest remain frozen.
“The funding has not yet been released, and that’s a real concern given current conditions across all of Colorado, but particularly western Colorado,” said Rep. Jeff Hurd, a Republican representing Colorado’s third district spanning the Western Slope, in an interview on Thursday, April 9. “I am continuing to press hard for clarity on timing and next steps because those projects were awarded for a reason and the need has not gone away.”
The Inflation Reduction Act set aside $4 billion toward drought mitigation, including funds for the Bureau of Reclamation’s Upper Colorado River Basin System Conservation and Efficiency program, also known as the Bucket 2E funding. In January, the Bureau under Biden’s administration allocated a total of $388.3 million to 42 projects on tribal land and in states in the Upper Basin.
Shoshone Falls hydroelectric generation station via USGenWeb
This included $152 million for 17 projects in Colorado, including those for wildlife habitat, watershed and stream restoration, water infrastructure improvements and more. Only $12 million of this funding for two Orchard Mesa Irrigation District projects — meant to improve water delivery to the 15-mile reach of the Colorado River, which extends from Grand Junction and the confluence of the Gunnison River and serves as critical habitat for several endangered fish species, as well as install new metering technology in the Grand Valley — has been released to the awardees. The largest Colorado award was the $40 million promised to the River District, which represents 15 Western Slope counties. This funding represented a large chunk of the $98.5 million that the River District needs to purchase the Shoshone water rights from Excel Energy. Outside of the frozen federal dollars, the River District has raised $57.2 million from the state Legislature, its board and the various Western Slope municipalities and utilities it serves. Matt Aboussie, Colorado River District’s communications director, said the district continues to work closely with the Bureau of Reclamation to secure this promised funding and remains committed to securing the rights.
“Funding will not be the obstacle that stops this effort,” Aboussie said. “If needed, River District leadership is prepared with alternative funding options and continues to rely on all our communities to get this project across the finish line.”
Colorado State University Extension experts are working with partners statewide to host drought planning workshops for farmers, ranchers and land managers seeking advice and support responding to the state’s abnormally dry conditions.
“Our goal at these workshops is to leverage what farmers and ranchers already know,” said Retta Bruegger, a CSU Extension range management specialist who co-founded Drought Advisors in 2020. “We offer support and a flexible framework to help producers create a formalized plan that they can use to make more strategic decisions when coping with drought.”
Responding to Drought Impacts in 2026: A Workshop for Livestock Producers Routt County 5:30-8:15 p.m. Monday, April 13 STARS Ranch, 35465 U.S. Highway 40, Steamboat Springs
When in Drought: Smart Irrigation and Soil Management Larimer County 8 a.m. to noon Tuesday, April 21 McKee Building at The Ranch, 5280 Arena Circle, Loveland (The program will continue with a drip irrigation demonstration from noon to 2 p.m. at Flores Del Sol Natural Area, 8101 S. Timberline Road, Fort Collins.)
Agriculture Drought Management Workshop Montezuma County 5:30-7:30 p.m. Thursday, April 23 Lewis Arriola Community Center, 21176 County Road S, Cortez
Old snow crunched underfoot in mid-January as a dozen people snowshoed near Molas Pass in Colorado’s San Juan Mountains. The interpretive hike, hosted by local environmental organizations, covered ecology, climate change and snow. It was the perfect classroom: below an azure sky, bare ground beneath trailside spruces and pines was a local example of what turned out to be a devastating lack of snow across the West.
Mountain snowpack is the West’s largest reservoir, providing water for 100 million people and diverse ecosystems. The amount of water stored in the snowpack historically peaks around April 1. But this year, the snowpack in many places was absent, or nearly so, by then — the lowest level in the 45 years since automated measurements began.
A stubborn high-pressure ridge contributed to the snow drought by shunting winter storms north to Canada in January. But the main culprit, according to the nonprofit Climate Central, was exceptional heat from climate change, which also caused a spring heat wave that decimated what snow there was at a time when other dry winters have seen “miracle March” snowstorms.
This map from the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Services shows snow-water equivalent (SWE) as of April 1 (near the typical peak of snowpack in the Western U.S.). The current SWE is shown as a percentage of the recent historical median SWE. United States Department of Agriculture
The lack of snow was unusually widespread across the Western U.S. But considering it as a whole makes it easier to miss the regional manifestations and implications of a winter that also brought record flooding and record dryness in addition to record heat. Here’s how the snow drought played out in a few regions that exemplify this winter’s variability:
Whiplash in Washington’s Cascades
Winter in Washington’s Cascade Range started and ended in “wet” snow drought — with precipitation falling as rain instead of snow. In December, over 2 feet of rain fell in two weeks in some places, melting much of the nascent snowpack and causing catastrophic flooding west of the Cascades. But it also replenished reservoirs in the Yakima Basin, on the drier eastern side of the range, which were only 8% full in October, a quarter of their normal volume.
Dry snow drought hit in January, when little precipitation fell. While pockets of Washington’s Cascades saw near-normal precipitation in February, most of the mountains stayed dry, and the range’s snowpack remained well below average. Then, despite several feet of snow landing in March, rain followed and washed it away.
That’s a problem for the Yakima Basin, which lacks the reservoir capacity to store enough runoff to meet the region’s needs. The snowpack typically serves as an additional reservoir, storing water as snow into summer, said hydrogeologist and geochemist Carey Gazis of Central Washington University in Ellensburg.
Little snow covers the ground where two bald eagles perch atop a rock near Cooke Canyon about 10 miles northeast of Ellensberg, Washington, last December. Courtesy of Megan Walsh/Central Washington University
South of Ellensburg lies the Yakima Valley — the “fruit bowl of the nation” — where snowmelt is essential for irrigating crops, including cherries, apples, grapes, hops and mint. It also supports the Yakama Nation’s efforts to restore populations of culturally important migratory fish. As of March, the Bureau of Reclamation forecasted that many farmers in the Yakima Valley would receive just 44% of their usual water supply this growing season due to the snow drought.
One long-term solution is to create more water storage by augmenting aquifers. “There’s all this space under the surface that can hold more water,” said Gazis, who studies such processes. Projects pumping runoff or enhancing passive water infiltration into the ground are already happening in parts of the basin, including on the Yakama Nation reservation.
Northern Rocky Mountain high
As in Washington’s Cascades, winter in the Rocky Mountains of Idaho, Montana and western Wyoming was bookended by wet snow droughts, with a dry January in between. However, colder temperatures at higher elevations allowed for a near- to above-average snowpack in some areas that persisted into mid-March, leaving them in better shape than most of the West in early April.
That helped places dependent on winter tourism, such as Idaho’s Wood River Valley. “It’s as busy as ever, if not a little busier, because we have snow,” unlike many other winter destinations, such as those in Colorado, said the director of the valley’s Environmental Resource Center, Ashton Wilson, in February.
An intrepid group of hut renters heads up the final hill into the Pioneer Yurt, at almost 8200 feet in elevation in Montana’s Pioneer Mountains. Courtesy of Ashton Wilson/Environmental Resource Center
Environmental Resource Center (ERC) employees haul loads of gear and supplies into Bench Hut in late March in Idaho’s Sawtooth Mountains for their annual woodcut over a mix of dirt, rocks and snow. Courtesy of Ashton Wilson/Environmental Resource Center
Additionally, Russell Qualls, Idaho’s state climatologist, speculated that the Wood River Basin and others nearby may do “fairly well” this summer in terms of providing water for the towns and agriculture that depend on them.
But little to no snow at middle and lower elevations in Idaho, Wyoming and Montana — and ongoing unseasonable heat — might mean a long fire season unless sufficient rain arrives in spring and summer. Indeed, while fire season usually starts in May or June in Montana and Wyoming, both states experienced wildfires over 1,000 acres in March.
But high and dry in Colorado
Colorado also experienced such medium-sized wildfires, but they started much earlier — in December. Both December and January were abnormally dry, and one of the few storms that did arrive dropped rain at up to 11,000 feet — unusually high for winter, and unprecedented in much of Colorado.
This was evident at the January snowshoe hike near Molas Pass, led by the San Juan Mountains Association and Mountain Studies Institute. Outdoor educator Colin Courtney guided attendees wielding avalanche shovels in digging a snow pit to measure the snowpack’s depth and water content. With a dull thunk, shovel blades hit dirt just 2 feet down. As he melted snow samples over a camp stove, Courtney noted that the snowpack at the pass held 23% as much water as in an average year — the snow water equivalent, a more meaningful measurement than depth alone when planning for annual water needs and wildfire risk. “It’s a very real thing to be concerned this year,” said Courtney.
There are ecological threats, too. Research in New Hampshire and Finland has shown complicated effects on tree health when root systems lack an insulating layer of snow during winter. The impact on trees here — already stressed from the worst megadrought in 1,200 years —isn’t known.
“This is our worst snowpack on record,” wrote climatologist Allie Mazurek of the Colorado Climate Center in an early April email. She blamed the West’s record-breaking March heat wave for tipping the state beyond its prior historic low, in 1981.
Looking out towards the La Plata and San Juan mountains in Colorado’s Mesa Verde National Park in January. Courtesy of Allie Mazurek/Colorado Climate Center, Colorado State University
Denver has already initiated water restrictions. But the implications go beyond state lines: Colorado’s snowpack also provides water to 18 other states, dozens of tribal nations and parts of Mexico. The Colorado River Basin provides drinking water for one in 10 people in the U.S., irrigates over 5 million acres of cropland and generates substantial hydroelectric power. This year’s snow drought is exacerbating an already fraught fight among the seven states in the Colorado Basin over how to manage the dwindling river.
“One caveat to some of this is El Niño,” wrote Mazurek. The climate pattern may bring lots of rain to Colorado, and forecasters expect it to develop in early fall. “Still, rain tends to do much less for our water supply than snow,” she added.
And snow is a resource that will likely be in shorter and shorter supply in the years to come in the West, where researchers expect climate change to shrink snow-supplied water by about a quarter by mid-century. Mazurek summed up the region’s predicament succinctly: “We should probably be preparing for less water to be coming down from the mountain snowpack than usual.”
The San Luis Valley has an overabundance of potatoes in storage here in mid-April that, because of the warm winter, is leading to concerns about what happens as a new growing season begins.
An historically hot March that punctuated a warm winter overall is creating quality standard problems in the potato bins of the Valley. If a potato bin doesn’t meet the quality standard, it doesn’t ship. [ed. emphasis mine]
“When we start to lose a bin, a bin can be 5,000 sacks, 10,000 sacks, up to 100,000 sacks … then we look at a really gigantic pile of potatoes that has to be managed,” explains Jeff McCullough, who operates Spud Seller farms and potato packaging and distribution in Rio Grande County.
Fourth-generation farmer Jeff McCullough. Credit: The Citizen
McCullough does the math on the amount of potatoes estimated to be in storage that may not find a market or their way to processing facility and comes up with a mind-boggling figure on how big a problem this is.
Based on conversations with other operators in the Valley, he is estimating a million hundredweight worth of potatoes, or about a hundred million pounds of potatoes that may not be sold or processed this year and would have to be dumped.
Others say the figure may be an underestimate. And they say the problem isn’t just in the San Luis Valley but everywhere potatoes are grown as an oversupply and weak market keep potatoes in storage.
How a warm winter hurts the quality of potatoes in storage: “A potato is a living organism. It generates its own heat. And so throughout the wintertime, we still have to push cold air and cool those potatoes down. Otherwise, those potatoes will generate heat and once they generate enough heat, they’ll sprout, then they won’t meet a quality standard at all … There’s a lot of instances where you lose an entire bin because the bin generates too much heat before you can get it sold.” — Jeff McCullough, Spud Seller
It’s the responsibility of each grower to figure out how to dispose of what’s left over from their fields, but with such a large amount, McCullough and others see it as a communitywide problem that is going to require input at the public level on what to do.
To that end, McCullough has been meeting with county officials and has a joint meeting set up to address the situation with county commissioners representing Alamosa and Rio Grande counties.
“We’re going to need to find a good way to dispose of these potatoes,” McCullough says.
Adding to the problem is the loss of the Colorado Gourmet processing plant in Center that burned down two years ago and isn’t coming back, leaving the Valley with only one processing facility. It handled about 40 percent of the potatoes that got processed each year.
Potato production in the Valley remained steady in 2025. Total potato acreage went to 51,474 acres from 50,188 acres in 2024, according to the 2025 USDA acreage report. A tight potato market, though, is keeping potatoes in storage as local growers work with distributors over the next three months to move potatoes and clear storage for the 2026 crop.
Credit: The Citizen
“The next harvest will start roughly, the first of September, and so the ideal situation is we are out of this crop the day that we start harvesting the new crop,” says McCullough.
The Spud Seller needs to move about 550,000 sacks of potatoes – each sack 100 pounds – by around July to keep pace and to keep the backlog of potatoes from growing at his operation, McCullough figures.
Others are in similar boats.
“There’s still a shit-ton of potatoes out there,” said Mark Lounsbury, general manager of Grower Shipper Potato Company.
Lounsbury and McCullough’s packaging and shipping operations are two of the biggest in the Valley.
2025 top six certified varieties of SLV spuds were:
The variety of potato in storage matters, too. Some varieties have a longer dormancy period and will store longer, while a less dormant variety like a Russet Norkotah that wants to sprout has to be gone by a calendar date, McCullough said.
Newer varieties of potatoes are creating efficiencies on the growing side, using less water and creating more yield even as less acreage is planted.
Potato growers have to follow rules for cull piles outlined in the Colorado Seed Potato Act, which will make the dumping of the amount of potatoes McCullough and others are talking about all the more challenging to figure out.
Hence the outreach to county officials.
Credit: The Citizen
The process involves smashing or crushing each individual potato, spreading them out in a very thin layer and then running them over with something. “For example, we have a manure spreader that we run our potatoes through and it chops them up and it kind of disintegrates them. And then it spreads them out into a thin layer, and then once you break the skin of that potato, it dries out really well,” McCullough says.
“We’ve been in situations in years past where we’ve had to dump a lot of potatoes, and it’s because of those years that we’ve come up with these new laws.”
But Valley potato growers rarely see a year where a hundred million pounds of potatoes may have to be dumped. Then again, the Valley has never seen a March where the temperatures reached into the 80s and caused potatoes in storage to want to sprout.
An oversupply of potatoes, coupled with a burned-down processing plant and a much too warm winter, is creating the conditions for a biggest cull pile of potatoes the Valley has ever seen. Proper disposal is essential.
“It is not one person that can swoop in and solve this,” said Tara Artho, executive director of the Colorado Potato Administrative Committee in Monte Vista. “It’s going to take the community.”
Aerial view of the San Luis Valley’s irrigated agriculture. Photo by Rio de la Vista.
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
A historically dry winter is setting up what water officials describe as one of the most challenging runoff seasons in recent memory, with operations and allocations at Elkhead Reservoir expected to play a critical role in stretching limited supplies across Northwest Colorado….That challenging outlook [ed. snowpack and streamflow in 2025] and lessons learned from past years with low snowfall are key focal points in early planning and coordination among water managers, particularly for reservoirs like Elkhead, which serves irrigators, municipalities and environmental needs in the Yampa River Basin…Calahan said warm, dry conditions have dramatically accelerated snowmelt, raising the likelihood of a runoff season that arrives early, fades quickly and leaves water managers facing difficult decisions for a wide range of stakeholders…In a more typical year, gradual warming allows the snowpack to melt slowly, sustaining river flows well into summer. This year, however, that prolonged runoff is not materializing, which is already increasing pressure on stored water supplies. While late spring storms or summer monsoons could provide some relief, officials do not expect conditions to return anywhere near an average water year. That uncertainty leaves reservoir managers balancing how much water to store versus how much to release to meet downstream demand.
Much of the country continued to experience above-normal temperatures in April. During the last week, the warmest temperatures were over the southern Midwest and into the central Plains, where departures were 9°F or greater. California and portions of the Southeast into the Mid-Atlantic were near normal to slightly below normal. Dryness has continued in the Southeast, portions of the South, the Northeast, and much of the High Plains. The greatest precipitation occurred in the Great Basin, northern California, central and west Texas, northeast Kansas, and across much of Michigan and Wisconsin, where spring thunderstorms developed within an active weather pattern, mainly over the Midwest…
Temperatures were mostly above normal, with only eastern North Dakota and northeast South Dakota near or below normal. The greatest departures occurred in central Kansas, where temperatures were 12–15 degrees above normal. Above-normal precipitation was observed in southwest and northern North Dakota.
Kansas experienced the most active weather, with southwest and eastern areas of the state and southeast Nebraska recording above-normal precipitation. Some areas of northeast Kansas received more than 400% of normal precipitation. These rains led to improvements in abnormally dry and moderate drought conditions across southeast Nebraska and northeast Kansas. Some areas of eastern Nebraska and south-central Kansas also saw improvements.
Extreme drought expanded across southwest Nebraska and northwest Kansas, while severe drought expanded across southwest Kansas. The plains of eastern Colorado experienced nearly a full-category degradation, with expansion of moderate, severe, and extreme drought…
Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending April 14, 2026.
Warmer-than-normal temperatures dominated the region this past week. Departures were 6–8 degrees above normal across most of Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming. Only the Sierra Nevada area and northern California were near to slightly below normal.
Precipitation was mixed, with parts of northern California, northern Nevada, eastern Oregon, southern Utah, eastern and western New Mexico, southwest Idaho, and eastern Washington receiving above-normal precipitation.
The lack of snowpack will continue to impact the region in the coming months. Earlier-than-normal snowmelt, below-normal seasonal totals, and increased liquid precipitation are contributing to hydrological impacts.
Changes this week included improvements in moderate drought in northeastern California and expansion of moderate and severe drought in southern Arizona. Southern Idaho into northern Nevada saw expansion of severe, extreme, and exceptional drought, while severe drought expanded across eastern and northern New Mexico…
Precipitation was mixed across the region. Oklahoma and much of central and western Texas received more than 150% of normal precipitation. Farther east, eastern Arkansas and Louisiana saw light precipitation, while areas farther west and into Tennessee remained mostly dry.
Temperatures were above normal across much of the region, with only southern Texas, southern Louisiana, and eastern Mississippi near or below normal. The greatest departures occurred in western Oklahoma and the Texas Panhandle, where temperatures were 12–15 degrees above normal.
Drought expanded and intensified across much of Tennessee, with moderate and severe drought expanding statewide and a new area of extreme drought developing in the northwest. In Mississippi, moderate and severe drought expanded across eastern and southern areas, with extreme drought expanding in the northwest. Arkansas remained dry, with extreme and exceptional drought expanding in both northern and southern areas.
Louisiana saw expansion of extreme drought across much of the south, as well as central and northern areas. Moderate and severe drought also expanded across southern portions of the state. Oklahoma remained largely unchanged, with only minor expansion of severe drought in the panhandle.
The most significant improvements occurred in Texas, where much of central, southern, and southeastern portions of the state saw a full-category improvement in drought conditions. However, severe drought expanded in parts of the panhandle…
Looking Ahead
Over the next 5–7 days, precipitation is expected to be most prominent across the southern Plains, Midwest, and Northeast. The heaviest precipitation is likely from eastern Kansas into Missouri and northward into eastern Iowa, northern Illinois, and the Great Lakes.
Additional precipitation is expected from the Pacific Northwest into the northern Rockies and High Plains. Dryness is likely to persist across much of the Southwest and Southeast.
Temperatures are expected to be above normal from the northern Rockies into the High Plains, with the greatest departures in western Nebraska, eastern Colorado, and central Montana (10–13 degrees above normal). Cooler-than-normal temperatures are anticipated across much of central Texas (5–9 degrees below normal), while warmer-than-normal conditions are expected across the Mid-Atlantic (5–7 degrees above normal).
The 6-10 day outlooks show that the locations with the best chances of experiencing below- normal temperatures are in the Southwest, especially those locations in Arizona and southern Nevada and California as well as in New England with the best chances in both Arizona and Maine. There is a high likelihood of above-normal temperatures over much of the Midwest, Plains, and into the South and Southeast with the best chances over Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma into southern Nebraska and Iowa. Precipitation chances are expected to be near-normal over southern Florida and southern areas of New Mexico and Arizona. Near-normal precipitation is also expected over the Pacific Northwest, upper Midwest and into the Northern Plains. In the Northeast, there will be a mix of near-normal to below-normal precipitation chances. Most of the rest of the country has above-normal chances of recording above-normal precipitation with the greatest chances over an area from northern Louisiana to Indiana.
US Drought Monitor one week change map ending April 14, 2026.
The Central Arizona Project canal, which carries Colorado River water to Phoenix and Tucson, as it runs past fields in the desert (that are irrigated with groundwater, not CAP water). The CAP is not likely to see new cuts this year beyond the levels already imposed. Source: Google Earth.
With each passing April day without major snowfall, we gain more clarity on the Colorado River situation and what things might look like this summer, which is, in a word, grim. Or, as Arizona’s top water officials put it: “The winter and spring snowpack and runoff projections in the upper basin are abysmal.”
The Colorado River Basin Forecast Center is putting a number to that term by predicting that the Colorado River system will deliver about 1.4 million acre-feet1 of water to Lake Powell from April 1 through July 31. That’s about 23% of the median for the spring runoff season, which is when flows are most abundant, and just over half of last year’s not so great figure of 2.6 MAF.
This year’s Upper Colorado Basin spring runoff is forecast to be about 1.4 million acre-feet. That isn’t as low as 2002, which was just below 1 million acre-feet, but if conditions don’t improve it could fall even lower than that. Source: Colorado River Basin Forecast Center.
Believe it or not, that figure — the official 50% forecast, made by an actual person — may be optimistic. Over the last two weeks, the Ensemble Streamflow Prediction model (which is a constantly updating automated forecast) has come up with an even more dire outlook, downgrading the forecast to 1.16 MAF during that same time period.
Abysmal, indeed.
We’re also getting a little more information as to how the feds plan to address the crisis, at least in the near-term. Most significantly, they tentatively plan to “defend” minimum power pool at Glen Canyon Dam, which is to say they will do what it takes to keep the surface level of Lake Powell at or above 3,500 feet in elevation to avoid relying on the lower river outlets, which are not engineered for sustained use. The weapons they will use for this defense include:
Reducing Lake Powell releases from the planned 7.48 million acre-feet to 6 million acre-feet.
Releasing up to 1 MAF from the “Upper Initial Units,” which includes Flaming Gorge, Blue Mesa, and Navajo Reservoirs. Hydrology may make this impossible, however, meaning that these releases could be as low as 650 MAF .65 MAF (or 650,000 acre-feet).
For now, Interior is not asking for larger cuts from the Lower Basin (beyond the 1.5 MAF cuts they’ve already taken), which presumably means the feds will not reduce Lake Mead releases through Hoover Dam.
But will it be enough to avoid dipping below what I call de facto deadpool at Lake Powell? We won’t really know until later this summer, but a fairly simple calculation can help predict that future. Keep in mind that I’m no hydrologist, I’m just working with the numbers that are available to see whether potential inputs (Lake Powell inflows) are at least equal to planned outputs (Glen Canyon Dam releases).
I put together this little diagram to help visualize things. I know the text is tough to read in the email version, and especially if you’re reading this on your phone. So I’d suggest clicking on the image (or the headline of this post) and viewing it in the web version.
Simplified diagram of Glen Canyon Dam with inputs (on the right) and outputs (on the left). *Fish pool is the surface level scientists have deemed necessary for minimizing the potential of non-native bass escaping through the dam and propagating downstream, where they can compete with endangered native fish. Infographic by Land Desk using data from Bureau of Reclamation and the Colorado River Basin Forecast Center.
Here are the figures for the equation.
Inflows:
1.5 MAF: Lake Powell Storage available above 3,500 feet.
1.1 MAF to 1.4 MAF: Forecast Lake Powell inflows April-July
.65 MAF to 1 MAF: Planned releases from upper basin reservoirs.
TOTAL INFLOWS: 3.25 to 3.9 MAF
Outflows:
2.9 MAF: April 1 – Oct. 1 releases to reach 6 MAF for the water year (3.13 MAF has already been released)
.3 MAF: Rough estimate of evaporation from Lake Powell for the remainder of the water year.
TOTAL OUTFLOWS: 3.2 MAF
That gives us a whopping .05 to .7 million acre-feet to spare. That is cutting it close, folks; a hot, dry summer could drive evaporation levels up, and/or bring inflows down, shaving off the sliver of breathing room this affords. But unless the outlook dims considerably, the BoR should be able to avoid a run-of-the-river situation this year, which is good news. And, since Arizona likely will not be required to take more cuts this year, the state will probably hold off on doing a compact call and dragging the Upper Basin to court.
These measures, however, will have a variety of consequences, including:
The Upper Basin reservoirs (Flaming Gorge, Navajo, Blue Mesa) are also likely to see record low inflows this year. That, combined with up to 1 million acre-feet of additional releases to benefit Lake Powell, will draw them down considerably, affecting hydropower production, irrigation, and, especially, recreation.
Non-native smallmouth bass are abundant in Lake Powell, but since they are warmer-water fish, they tend to stay near the surface of the reservoir, meaning under normal conditions they stay well above the penstocks, or the outlets in the dam that lead to the hydropower turbines. However, as the surface drops closer to the penstock openings, so do the fish, allowing them to get flushed through the dam into the Colorado River. And because the water released from the dam is warmer (since it’s nearer to the surface), that warms the river downstream, allowing the bass to thrive and compete with the endangered native fish downstream. This is likely to be exacerbated as the surface level nears 3,500 feet.
This year’s 6 MAF release from Glen Canyon Dam will bring the ten-year aggregate flows at Lees Ferry down to about 79 million acre-feet. This potentially puts the Upper Basin in violation of Article III of the Colorado River Compact, which mandates that the Upper Basin “not cause the flow of the river at Lee Ferry to be depleted below an aggregate of 75 million acre-feet” for any 10-year period. A 1944 treaty added another 7.5 million acre-feet to this figure to cover half of Mexico’s allotment, making for a total of 82.5 MAF over ten years. Note: The interpretation of this provision is in dispute.
The diminished reservoir levels, combined with the reduced releases, will lead to lower hydropower output from the dam. That will force tribes, communities, and utilities that buy the relatively cheap power to purchase it on the open market. And it will also cut into power-sale revenues, which help fund endangered fish recovery programs.
Reduced dam releases will mean lower flows, on average, through the Grand Canyon, affecting riparian ecosystems and boating.
Reduced dam releases equate to lower flows into Lake Mead. Since the BoR apparently does not plan to cut releases from Hoover Dam, that reservoir will likely see its levels drop considerably, diminishing hydropower output and affecting recreation. My rough calculation suggests Lake Mead’s surface level will drop from the current 1,060 feet to about 1,030 feet, which would be lower eventhan in 2022. The BoR has suggested it will “defend” a level of 1,000 feet. That would almost certainly lead to Lower Basin shortages.
It’s still a long ways out, but for now the NOAA is calling for above average precipitation in the Southwest later this summer.
A super El Niño appears to be forming, but the effects in the Upper Colorado River Basin are especially hard to predict because it sits right in between the “warmer, drier” and the “wetter, colder” zones, meaning it could go either way. Source: NOAA.
There is potentially good news on the horizon. Conditions are ripening up for a “super” El Niño to begin forming this summer. It’s difficult to predict how that will affect the Upper Colorado River Basin, but for now, forecasts are calling for a strong monsoon in the Southwest, beginning in July. That probably would not do much to bring up Lake Powell’s levels, but it would provide relief to the many farmers who are almost certain to lose irrigation relatively early this summer and may help keep late-summer megafires at bay. And, you never know, El Niño might just bring a monster winter just when we need it most.
1 *The forecasts are for the “unregulated flow,” which means that it is an estimate of what the flow would be without upstream dams holding water back. This is not the same as “natural flow” which is a calculation of what the flow would be without upstream human consumptive use, dams, or diversions. In this case, actual inflow and unregulated inflow are almost the same.
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
San Diego’s Embarcadero Park. Photo provided by Storyblocks.
by Robert Marcos
There’s a 33-to-1 disparity in the cost of Colorado River water that’s being utilized by the residents of San Diego, versus the residents of Brawley – both of which are in Southern California and are just 97 miles away from each other. The disparity stems from differences in two primary areas: water rights and conveyance. San Diego’s municipal water rates – which are the fourth highest for a major city in the United States, are also inflated by the city’s massive investment in recycling and desalination.
Brawley’s Senior Water Rights
Residents of Brawley are served by the Imperial Irrigation District, which holds some of the most senior water rights on the Colorado River, in particular among major users. The IIDs rights predate the 1922 Colorado River Compact and fall under “present perfected rights” which make them an exceptionally high-priority. The IID holds rights to approximately 3.1 million acre-feet of Colorado River water annually, making them the largest single user of Colorado River water.1
It’s also worth noting that the IID pays nothing for the 3.1 million acre feet of water they’re entitled to. They do however pay multiple-millions of dollars for the operation and maintenance of California’s Imperial Dam, and the All-American Canal. Farmers and residents of the Imperial Valley pay only $20 per acre-foot for the water itself, since they only need to cover local delivery costs.2 Meanwhile San Diego, which does not have senior rights must buy water at market rates. Beginning in 2026 San Diego pays the Metropolitan Water District $671 per acre-foot of water—33 times what Brawley pays for the same water.
Infrastructure and Transportation
The city of Brawley is adjacent to the All-American Canal, so it requires a minimal amount of infrastructure to move the water into town. Whereas San Diego’s imported water utilizes two large canal systems: The Edmund G. Brown California Aqueduct from the State Water Project, and the Colorado Aqueduct that travels 242 miles from Lake Havasu in the east. San Diego – in the face of chronic drought and the increased stress of climate change on imported water sources, has made long-term commitments to making water conservation a permanent way of life. Historically dependent on importing up to 90% of its water from the Colorado River and Northern California, the region is now aggressively diversifying its water portfolio to ensure sustainability: aiming to reduce demand through mandated restrictions, turf replacement programs, and widespread public education.
San Diego is preparing for a drier future
San Diego has launched massive and innovative infrastructure projects, most notably the “Pure Water San Diego” program which aims to produce nearly half of the city’s water locally by 2035, with the use of advanced water purification technology that will convert recycled wastewater into high-quality drinking water.
In 2015 the region pioneered the use of desalination with the Claude “Bud” Lewis Carlsbad Desalination Plant, which is the largest desalination plant in the United States. The plant produces up to 54 million gallons of high-quality drinking water per day, which is about 10% of the water San Diego needs, at a cost of about $3,800 per acre foot.
But the stability that these projects promise comes at a high price. Residents who were already frustrated with high energy bills now face skyrocketing water bills too. Water rates in San Diego have seen steep increases, with projections showing a 14.7% hike in 2026, followed by another 14.5% in 2027. These are largely to pay for the Pure Water program in addition to higher costs for imported water. Residents and critics have expressed frustration that water rates could rise by 44% over four years, causing many to question the rising cost of living in the region.
Crystal Dam, part of the Colorado River Storage Project, Aspinall Unit. Credit Reclamation.
From email from Reclamation (Andrew P. Limbach):
April 14, 2026
Meeting date changed to Monday, April 20th, 2026 at 1:00 pm.
In an effort to better coordinate with the upper initial unit work groups and ongoing DROA discussions, the upcoming Aspinall Unit Coordination Meeting for the Aspinall Unit & Gunnison River has been changed to Monday, April 20th, 2026 at 1:00 pm. Sorry for the short notice and any inconvenience this may cause.
This meeting will still be held virtually via Microsoft Teams. There will not be an in-person meeting location for this meeting. The link to the Teams meeting is below.
Contact Andrew Limbach (alimbach@usbr.gov or 970-248-0644) for more information regarding Aspinall operations or the Operation Group meeting.
Denver Water’s collection and service areas continue to face severe drought conditions, with historically low snowpack and concerns about the diminished spring runoff that will be available to meet customer’s water needs in the future.
As a result, at its meeting today, the Denver Board of Water Commissioners adopted a resolution approving the implementation of temporary drought pricing on outdoor water use. The drought pricing will apply starting with May water use (reflected in June bills) and will be in effect through April 30, 2027, or until further action by the board.
Under the temporary drought pricing, residential customers will see a drought charge on Tier 2 water use of $1.10 per 1,000 gallons. Tier 3 will have a drought charge of $2.20 per 1,000 gallons. The temporary drought charges will be added on top of the customer’s existing 2026 water rates.
Tier 1, which covers essential indoor water use, is exempt from drought pricing.
“Implementing temporary drought pricing is not a step we take lightly. It is one of many tools Denver Water has available — when needed — to respond to drought conditions, encourage customers to conserve our water supply, and ensure our ongoing ability to operate and maintain the system that delivers clean, safe water to 1.5 million people,” said Alan Salazar, Denver Water’s CEO/Manager.
“Drought charges signal to our customers the premium value of water in a drought, while exempting essential indoor water use. We haven’t needed to use this tool in more than 20 years — since the historic drought of 2002-04 — and conditions surrounding this year’s snowpack and potential runoff are shaping up to rival, and possibly be worse than, those years,” Salazar said.
Please keep sprinklers OFF until mid-to-late May, or later if it rains, to help stretch the water supplies we have. Hand water trees and shrubs if needed. It’s a drought. Use Only What You Need. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Under the temporary drought pricing approved by the board, for Denver Water residential customers in Denver and the suburbs:
e first tier will be exempt from the temporary drought charge. This tier is charged at the lowest rate and covers essential indoor water use for bathing, cooking and flushing toilets. Each customer has their individual first tier determined by the average of their monthly water use as listed on bills that arrive in January, February and March — when there is very little or no outdoor watering.
The second tier will have a temporary drought charge of $1.10 per 1,000 gallons added on top of their 2026 water rates. This tier is for water consumption, typically used for outdoor watering, that is above the customer’s first tier and up to 15,000 gallons of water per month. Water use in this tier is considered to be an efficient use of water outdoors.
The third tier will have a temporary drought charge of $2.20 per 1,000 gallons of water added on top of their 2026 water rates. Tier 3 is for water use above the second tier each month. It is priced at the highest level to signal potentially excessive water use and encourage conservation efforts by larger-lot customers.
The board’s decision to impose temporary drought charges on outdoor water use follows its March 25 declaration of Stage 1 drought. The declaration seeks a 20% reduction in water use effective immediately, with the goal of preserving water supplies and to help avoid the need for Denver Water to take further actions later this summer if conditions don’t improve. Read the March 25, 2026, drought declaration.
The snowpack, which supplies the water Denver Water captures, stores, treats and delivers to customers, is at historically low levels despite recent storms that brought some much-needed precipitation to the mountains and city last week.
It’s a drought. Image credit: Denver Water.
“We welcome the storms that do come, while knowing that this year’s snowpack is at historically low levels and hopes for a Miracle May snowstorm are dimming. And Denver Water has made a number of tools available to help customers reduce their water use — whether it’s a normal year or a drought year. We encourage our customers to take steps to conserve water for this drought and be better prepared to manage through future dry times,” Greg Fisher, Denver Water’s manager of demand planning and efficiency.
Denver Water’s temporary drought pricing charges a premium for outdoor water use and covers several classes of customers, including residential, large irrigation, wholesale and raw water customers. (See the chart at the bottom of this story for additional information on nonresidential customers.)
An individual residential customer’s monthly water bill will vary depending on where they live in Denver Water’s service area (in Denver or in one of the utility’s suburban distributor districts) and how much water they use. Drought charges are expected to incentivize customers to reduce outdoor water use.
The following two charts illustrate the potential impact of the temporary drought charges on an annual water bill for residential customers living inside the city of Denver and, below that, in a Total Service suburban distributor district.
Examples of the impact of temporary drought charges on an annual water bill for Denver Water customers living inside Denver. In this example, “super conservers” will see their bills increase by roughly $7 annually. High users who do not conserve will see their bills increase by roughly $76 in one year. Individual bills will vary. Image credit: Denver Water.
In these charts, the categories are:
“Super conserver”: A customer who has very little outdoor water use, maybe only watering trees and shrubs throughout the year.
“Good conserver”: An average customer who reduces their annual water use by 20%, from 104,000 gallons (the average use by residential customers in an average year) to 82,000 gallons.
“Non-conserver”: An average Denver Water residential customer who uses 104,000 gallons of water over the course of the year (the average use by residential customers in an average year) and doesn’t respond to Denver Water’s call to reduce water use by 20%.
“High user”: A customer in the top 25% of residential water users.
The following chart illustrates temporary drought charges impacts for residential customers who live in one of Denver Water’s Total Service distributor districts in the suburbs. (Learn more about Denver Water’s suburban customers.)
Examples of the impact of the temporary drought charges on an annual water bill for Denver Water customers living in one of Denver Water’s Total Service suburban distributor districts. “Super conservers” will see their bills increase by roughly $8 annually. High users who do not conserve will see their bills increase by roughly $76 in one year. Individual bills will vary. Image credit: Denver Water.
“This is not Denver Water’s first drought. We know our customers strive to be efficient in their water use, and we know we are asking them to use less to stretch the water supplies we have in this drought. We also know that success in reducing water use will result in reduced revenue for our organization. We have tools to address reduced revenue and ensure the organization maintains its financial foundation for when this drought is over,” said Angela Bricmont, Denver Water’s chief financial officer.
If customers comply with Denver Water’s request to reduce water use by 20%, the utility estimates 2026 revenue to fall by a commensurate amount. While drought pricing can offset a portion of that reduction, the utility will rely on cash reserves and budget reductions to cover the majority of the gap.
Denver Water has proactively reduced its spending, taking steps that include enacting a hiring freeze and reviewing maintenance and other projects to see which ones could be deferred.
Now is the time to replace non-native plants with with drought-tolerant plants. Photo credit: Denver Water
To help customers Use Only What They Need indoors and outdoors, Denver Water offers a range of tools, including:
Aerial image of entrenched meanders of the San Juan River within Goosenecks State Park. Located in San Juan County, southeastern Utah (U.S.). Credits Constructed from county topographic map DRG mosaic for San Juan County from USDA/NRCS – National Cartography & Geospatial Center using Global Mapper 12.0 and Adobe Illustrator. Latitude 33° 31′ 49.52″ N., Longitude 111° 37′ 48.02″ W. USDA/FSA, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
From email from Reclamation :
April 14, 2026
Reminder Navajo Reservoir Spring Operations MTG Tuesday April 21st from 1-3pm. The meeting will be entirely virtual; members of this list should have received a Teams invite. If you did not and would like to attend email cfelletter@usbr.gov for a meeting invite.
Reclamation conducts Public Operations Meetings three times per year to gather input for determining upcoming operations for Navajo Reservoir. Input from individuals, organizations, and agencies along with other factors such as weather, water rights, endangered species requirements, flood control, hydro power, recreation, fish and wildlife management, and reservoir levels, will be considered in the development of these reservoir operation plans. In addition, the meetings are used to coordinate activities and exchange information among agencies, water users, and other interested parties concerning the San Juan River and Navajo Reservoir.
Phoenix had native water, but expansive growth, among the fastest in the nation, has been enabled by imported Colorado River water since the 1990s. Photo/Allen Best
Click the link to read the article on the KJZZ website (Alex Hager). Here’s an excerpt:
April 13, 2025
A new article by an Arizona State University water expert argues that existing conservation measures are a step in the right direction, but may not be effective enough in the face of climate change. Dave White, director of ASU’s Global Institute of Sustainability and Innovation, says city leaders around the Colorado River basin need to think bigger to plan for a future in which the river has less water to go around.
“We have to think about a reset, a recalibration,” White told KJZZ, “to have an economy and a lifestyle in the southwest that lives within the means of the new normal of water availability in the Colorado River.”
White, alongside The Pennsylvania State University’s Renee Obringer, wrote that cities such as Phoenix, Denver and Las Vegas have made major strides in saving water among homes and businesses. In Phoenix, conservation programs led to a 20% reduction in water use over 20 years, while the population grew by about 40%…Even under aggressive conservation measures, though, the new report explains that demand management practices “won’t be able to keep up” with the kind of hot, dry conditions that fueled the current 26-year megadrought and will likely continue for years in the future…New technologies will likely be a big part of cities’ drought response going forward. White pointed to the need for water reuse programs, desalination facilities and reductions to the amount of water consumed for electricity generation. While Central Arizona cities are already looking to some of those technologies, White said changes may be needed sooner than they can be deployed.
Udall/Overpeck 4-panel Figure Colorado River temperature/precipitation/natural flows with trend. Lake Mead and Lake Powell storage. Updated through Water Year 2025. Note the tiny points on the annual data so that you can flyspeck the individual years. Credit: Brad Udall
The Atlas Uranium Mill near Moab as it appeared in May of 1972. Source: DOCUMERICA: The Environmental Protection Agency’s Program to Photographically Document Subjects of Environmental Concern.
The Trump administration has formally cancelled the proposed withdrawal of more than 160,000 acres in the Upper Pecos River Watershed from new mining claims and mineral leasing.
Prompted by local advocacy and New Mexico’s congressional delegation, the Biden administration began the process of protecting the watershed and surrounding mountains east of Santa Fe in 2024. But the Trump administration nipped the process in the bud shortly after taking office by cancelling scheduled public meetings. Now it has officially ended the withdrawal.
For the past several years, Comexico LLC, a subsidiary of Australia-based New World Resources, has been working its way through the permitting process to do exploratory drilling at what it calls its Tererro mining project on more than 200 active mining claims in the watershed. It has met with stiff resistance from locals and regional advocacy groups, partly because mining has a dark history in the Pecos River watershed. In 1991, a big spring runoff washed contaminated mine and mill waste from a long-defunct mine into the upper Pecos River, killing as many as 100,000 trout. That prompted a multi-year cleanup of various mining sites.
The withdrawal wouldn’t have stopped the project outright, because it doesn’t affect existing, active, valid claims. Yet it would have stopped the company from staking more claims and would make it more difficult to develop the existing ones (especially if they haven’t established validity).
I have a saying I coined while writing River of Lost Souls that goes like this: Mining is hard. Putting the earth back together again afterwards is a hell of a lot harder.That’s probably especially true when it comes to mining and milling uranium, given that along with all the other nasty byproducts of mining, it also leaves behind radioactive material. The point was recently driven home by two events:
Meanwhile, over at the cleaned up Durango uranium mill site (now a dog park), the Department of Energy’s most recent verification monitoring report finds that natural uranium flushing in the groundwater beneath the site is happening slower than expected. There’s no reason for concern at this point: Researchers are still confident that uranium concentrations will drop below the compliance goal within the allotted 100-year time period.
I mention it here because of the time-scale involved: The Atlas mill in Moab stopped operating more than 40 years ago, and the cleanup has dragged on for close to two decades. The Durango mill shut down for good in 1963; the massive, years-long, multi-million-dollar cleanup was completed in 1991. And researchers expect it to take another 65 years for the groundwater contamination to finally get back to acceptable levels.
It’s just something to keep in mind when considering new uranium mines and mills.
The back of Glen Canyon Dam circa 1964, not long after the reservoir had begun filling up. Here the water level is above dead pool, meaning water can be released via the river outlets, but it is below minimum power pool, so water cannot yet enter the penstocks to generate electricity. Bureau of Reclamation photo. Annotations: Jonathan P. Thompson
🐟 Colorado River Chronicles 💧
One of the more frustrating things about the Colorado River crisis is that the federal government, which controls the big dams and most of the extensive plumbing system on the river, has hardly given even a clue as to what it might do when Glen Canyon Dam reaches the critical minimum power pool mark as early as this summer.
Will they shut down the hydropower turbines and route all releases through the river outlets, possibly compromising the outlet tubes’ — and the dam’s — structural integrity? Will they “defend” minimum power pool by cutting back releases, thereby putting the Upper Basin in violation of the Colorado River Compact? Or will they drain Upper Basin reservoirs in an effort to maintain minimum power pool while also keeping releases at a level that will keep Lake Mead from dropping too precipitously? Maybe they’ll use the bunker-busting bombs intended for Iran to very quickly blast bypass tunnels through the canyon walls to render the dam obsolete?
The answer is still a mystery, but Interior Secretary Doug Burgum finally hinted coyly about the government’s potential approach (Interior oversees the Bureau of Reclamation, which runs most dams). The Arizona Star’s venerable environmental reporter Tony Davis reports that Burgum told a Tucson roundtable this week:
Okay, I don’t know what that means, exactly, but at least they’re planning to do something. The last statement hints at their intent to defend the minimum power pool on Glen Canyon Dam (lest they’ll lose power generation altogether). We’ll probably learn more during the Glen Canyon Monthly Operations Call in the coming week or two. So stay tuned.
As long as we’re on the subject of the federal government doing something about the Colorado River, when’s Trump going to order his people to open the giant faucet up in Canada and send water gushing down to the Southwest?
This won’t come as a surprise to many people, but it’s now official: March 2026 was the hottest March on record by a lot in the Southwest and beyond. The Upper Colorado River Basin’s average temperature for the month was 46.5° F, or more than 13° higher than the 1895-2026 median. The graph below makes it very clear that the place has been getting hotter over the past fifty years, with the only real break coming in March 2023, when snow was piling up in the mountains.
March 2026 was the hottest March since 1895 by far in the Upper Colorado River Basin. Source: NOAA.
The March scorcher followed the warmest winter and first half of the water year (Oct-March) for most of the West.
The result is clear: Even though precipitation accumulation wasn’t terribly far below normal, the snowpack was. The April 1 snowpack across Colorado was at a record low level, according to this year’s snow course, which is done by manual measurement and so goes back much farther than SNOTEL measurements.
The April 1 snowpack this year was lower than in 1977, 1981, and 2002, the worst winters of the last nine decades, at least. Source: Center for Snow and Avalanche Studies and NRCS.
Early April storms have helped keep the snow around a bit longer in the mountains, but has done little to bolster the snowpack. It’s still at historically low levels.
The Claude “Bud” Lewis Carlsbad Desalination Plant in San Diego’s North County. Photo by Robert Marcos.
by Robert Marcos
Residents in the San Diego region currently pay between $3,707 and $5,179 per acre-foot of water1, making San Diego’s municipal water the fourth most expensive in America – after San Francisco, Seattle, and Portland.2
For years San Diego relied almost entirely on a single source of municipal water: the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. However, a severe drought in the early 1990s exposed the region’s vulnerability. This crisis sparked a multi-decade strategy by the San Diego County Water Authority to diversify its portfolio, effectively trading lower costs for long-term supply reliability.3
To break its dependence on Los Angeles, San Diego secured its own water rights through massive, high-cost agreements. This included a historic 2003 deal with the Imperial Irrigation District in the Imperial Valley, where the city pays farmers to conserve water and send it west. This “ag-to-urban” transfer, combined with paying to line the All-American Canal to prevent seepage, provided a secure but significantly more expensive supply than traditional imported water.4
The region further increased costs by investing in “drought-proof” technology, most notably the Claude “Bud” Lewis Carlsbad Desalination Plant, which opened in 2015. While it provides about 10% of the region’s water, it is the most expensive source in the portfolio, costing roughly $2,700 per acre-foot—far higher than imported Colorado River water. San Diego is also currently building the multi-billion dollar Pure Water recycling system to turn wastewater into drinking water, adding another layer of heavy infrastructure debt to monthly bills.5
Paradoxically, San Diegans’ success in water conservation has also contributed to rising rates. Because the Water Authority built massive infrastructure based on much higher population and demand projections, it must now spread the fixed costs of those debts and maintenance across fewer gallons of water sold. When residents use less water, the price per gallon must increase to cover the billions in outstanding loans for dams, pipelines, and treatment plants.6
Today the cumulative effect of these investments has made San Diego’s water rates among the highest in the country, with total bills projected to rise over 60% by 2029. While other California cities face potential shortages during droughts, San Diego often has a surplus; however, the cost of that security is borne entirely by local ratepayers through a complex “chain reaction” of wholesale price hikes and debt service.7
Click the link to read the article on The Denver Post website (John Meyer). Here’s an excerpt:
April 13, 2026
Outfitters insist there will be a rafting season this year, but the same lack of snowfall that negatively affected ski resorts over the winter — forcing many to open late and close early — will also hurt rafting since there has been less snow to melt. That, along with ongoing drought, means the low-water conditions typically found in late summer may come much earlier than usual. To make it work, river guides plan to adjust in ways they hope will help them make the best of what they have.
“The water’s not going to get to be high, boat-flipping water,” said David Costlow, executive director of the Colorado River Outfitters Association. “Usually, we try to get to the middle of July before we start entering low water. It will probably be early this year. It could be the end of June, first of July, but it depends on the next few weeks…
The winter snowpack is currently well below average across the state; in fact, it is about a quarter of what Colorado usually has at this time of year, according to the USDA National Water and Climate Center. That’s the lowest since record-keeping began in 1941. Meanwhile, warm spring temperatures triggered a much earlier runoff than normal. Outfitters are hoping spring rains will improve the situation, but three-month weather projections from the Climate Prediction Center of the National Weather Service are calling for above-normal temperatures and below-normal moisture through June. March is normally Colorado’s snowiest month, so outfitters were hoping for a boost last month. It didn’t come.
Rafting on Clear Creek is almost entirely dependent on rainfall during the season, even in good snow years, because it’s situated in a relatively small drainage. Outfitters there are hoping Colorado’s monsoon season, typically mid-July through August, delivers this year…he Upper Colorado draws on runoff from a much larger basin that includes the west side of Rocky Mountain National Park and the Never Summer Range. Reservoirs in that drainage include Grand Lake, and flows are controlled by water managers. Rafting on the Upper Colorado is concentrated west of Kremmling…On the Poudre, Johnson said his company is focused on providing quality experiences for as long as there is enough water to do so.
Juniata Reservoir, located near Grand Mesa, is where the city of Grand Junction stores water coming off Grand Mesa in the Kannah Creek watershed. That water flows down Kannah Creek and eventually into the taps of Grand Junction residents. Photo courtesy of City of Grand Junction
Local water utilities are raising the alarm about the severe drought Mesa County is in and are asking users to voluntarily limit their usage now to conserve water. At a Thursday press conference in Palisade, representatives from the area’s water utilities and the National Weather Service described the situation in stark terms. Grand Junction Public Utilities Director Randi Kim said the winter snowpack is delivering far less water than normal and spring runoff began more than a month early.
“This year in March, our snow survey indicated that our snowpack across the city’s Kannah Creek watershed was at 41% measured as snow water equivalent over the 35-year historical average,” Kim said. “Due to warm weather conditions, runoff in Kannah Creek started on March 26, which is about five to six weeks earlier than normal.”
In response, Kim asked Grand Junction’s water users to help conserve water now. Representatives from Ute Water suggested limiting outdoor watering as an important step in conserving water.
“With Grand Junction currently in D3 extreme drought, the city is asking all of our customers to take actions to conserve water,” Kim said. “Participating now in water conservation actions will help preserve the city’s water supply should that drought persist through the summer and necessitate the city rely upon our stored water rather than direct flows from Kannah Creek.”
[…]
Kim said the city’s Grand Mesa reservoirs are full and it has 1.75 years of water in storage, so it is not facing the prospect of running out of water this year…Data on the Colorado River Basin goes back 130 years. Experts say 2026 will be worse than any of those, likely by a longshot…A perfect storm of factors are behind those concerns.
Erin Walter, service hydrologist for the National Weather Service, said at the Thursday press conference that the record low snowpack has combined with record warm weather to make for especially challenging conditions. In March alone, Walter said Grand Junction saw eight consecutive days of record warm temperatures. That warm weather is persisting into April, Walter said, and forecasts predict it will continue through June. Those conditions could result in the worst drought on record…n reservoirs essential to the Western Slope, that means less water to work with. Green Mountain Reservoir, which includes the Historic User Pool that helps supply numerous farmers, is not expected to fill this year, according to Flinker. Meanwhile Blue Mesa Reservoir, which requires 419,000 acre-feet to fill and supplies water to the Gunnison River before it joins the Colorado River in Grand Junction, is forecast to get only around 200,000 acre-feet this year.
Water Managers anticipate flows in the San Luis Valley’s rivers and creeks will be very low in spring and summer 2026.
The Colorado Division of Water Resources Division 3 Engineer’s April 6 10-day report forecasted the total annual flow of the Rio Grande at the Del Norte gage will be 270,000 acre-feet, which is 42 percent of the long-term average. For reference, flows of the Rio Grande at Del Norte in 2018 totaled 280,400 acre-feet. The forecasted flow of the Conejos River system is 110,000 acre-feet, which is 37 percent of the long-term average. The snow water equivalent on April 9 for the Upper Rio Grande Basin was 12 percent of the median for 1991-2020.
The National Weather Service is forecasting hot temperatures along with below average precipitation into the summer. The irrigation season began on March 23 on the Rio Grande and March 16 on the Conejos River. As such, on-stream reservoirs are required to pass all inflows to satisfy the needs of downstream senior water rights holders. Given the low amount of snow, the exceptionally warm spring temperatures, and the anticipated summer drought conditions, it is possible that local rivers reached peak flow in March.
Rio Grande operations
The operators of reservoirs on the Rio Grande will time their releases of irrigation water to coincide with the canals being in priority to allow water to reach farmers. It is anticipated that many of the canals will only be in priority to divert water for a short time window, in some cases only days or weeks. As such, releases of irrigation water will begin in the next week.
The Santa Maria Reservoir Company will begin releasing stored irrigation water into North Clear Creek on April 14 at a rate of 200-300 cfs for 10 days. Additional releases will continue as farmers call for water. Rio Grande Reservoir will also begin releasing stored irrigation water into the Rio Grande on April 14 for approximately 20 days. The rate of the release will start at 100-150 cfs and increase up to 350-450 cfs. After deliveries are complete, releases will be limited to the natural inflows. As such, boatable flows on the Rio Grande may diminish as early as mid-May.
Entities including Colorado Parks and Wildlife, the San Luis Valley Water Conservancy District, and the Rio Grande Water Conservation District store water in reservoirs in the Upper Rio Grande Basin and call for releases for their operations in accordance with their water rights decrees.
Where possible, releases by these organizations will be prioritized during hot periods to supplement the natural flow of the Rio Grande and the South Fork of the Rio Grande to reduce high water temperatures to protect the health of fish. Unfortunately, there may not be sufficient water to keep temperatures below thresholds for responsible fishing. As such, anglers are encouraged to check temperature gages and not engage in catch and release fishing if water temperatures reach exceed 70 degrees. Temperature is measured at the 30 Mile Bridge, Wagon Wheel Gap, Del Norte, and South Fork Gages and can be viewed at the Colorado Division of Water Resources’ website (dwr.state.co.us). [ed. emphasis mine]
Platoro Reservoir. Photo credit: Rio de la Vista
Conejos River operations
Platoro Reservoir is passing inflows, which were 10 times higher than average for much of March because of rapid snowmelt. The Conejos Water Conservancy District allocated 6,500 acre-feet of project water to the irrigators. Unfortunately, river flows are currently too low to carry that water to farmers’ headgates and water will not be released unless river flows improve. It is likely that the river will have dry up points below Highway 285. Anglers are encouraged to check temperature gages below Platoro Reservoir and near Mogote before engaging in catch and release fishing.
Links to Stream Gages with Temperature Measurements:
Heather Dutton is district manager for the San Luis Valley Water Conservancy District, which provides leadership to the San Luis Valley water community, a forum for learning and development, and the service of well augmentation in five counties in the San Luis Valley. More by Heather Dutton
Sunset from the western shore of Antelope Island State Park, Great Salt Lake, Utah, United States.. Sunset viewed from White Rock Bay, on the western shore of Antelope Island. Carrington Island is visible in the distance. By Ccmdav – Own work, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2032320
Click the link to read the article on the NOAA website:
April 8, 2026
Key Takeaways:
Warmest March: The contiguous U.S. (CONUS) average temperature was 9.4°F above the 20th-century average, making March 2026 the warmest March in the 132-year record.
Prolonged warmth: The April 2025–March 2026 period now stands as the warmest 12-month span ever recorded for the CONUS (since 1895).
Record daily heat: 1,432 counties—over half the CONUS area and one-third of the population—observed their single warmest March day on record (1950–present).
Map of the U.S. Maximum Temperature Monthly Records in March 2026.
Record-dry year to date: The January–March period was the driest on record for the CONUS—less than 70% of average—breaking the previous record set in 1910.
Notable drought footprint: Dry conditions expanded drought to nearly 60 percent of the CONUS—the largest extent of drought since November 2022.
Cold in Alaska: Alaska had its fourth-coldest March on record (since 1925) and the coldest since 2007.
Map of the U.S. notable weather and climate events in March 2026.
Other Highlights:
Temperature
The CONUS average temperature in March was 50.85°F, 9.35°F above the 20th-century average, marking the first time any month’s average has exceeded 9°F above that baseline. Maximum daytime temperatures were especially high, averaging 11.4°F above the March average and 0.9°F above the April long-term average.
Much of the country south of the far northern tier, from the Pacific to the Atlantic, experienced much-above-average temperatures. A broad region spanning the central Pacific Coast, Great Basin, Southwest, and parts of the Rockies and southern Plains observed record warmth, highlighting the widespread extent of the month’s exceptional temperatures.
Ten states recorded their warmest March on record: Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and Wyoming. Across all of these states, average temperatures exceeded their respective April averages, with California also eclipsing its average May temperature by 0.7°F.
At the county level, more than 500 counties—covering over one-quarter of the CONUS and affecting an estimated 79 million people—recorded their warmest March on record, reflecting the broad geographic footprint of the month’s record warmth.
Hawai‘i’s statewide average temperature was 65.0°F, 1.5°F above the 1991–2020 average, ranking as the fifth-warmest March in the 36-year record. Daytime temperatures were near average, but statewide average minimum temperatures stood out at 59.2°F—the warmest March nighttime temperatures on record (1991–present), more than 1°F above the previous record set in 2006.
In contrast, Alaska’s statewide average temperature was 0.6°F, 10.2°F below the 1925–2000 average. While the North Slope remained near average, much of the state experienced much-below-average temperatures, with parts of the southeast interior, southern coast and panhandle recording record-cold conditions. Minimum temperatures were especially notable, ranking as the third-coldest March on record and the coldest since 1972.
Precipitation
The average precipitation total for the CONUS in March was 1.83 inches, 0.68 inch below the 20th-century average, ranking as the eighth-driest March in the 132-year record. Combined with January and February deficits, this period marks the driest first three months of any year on record for the CONUS.
March 2026 U.S. Total Precipitation Percentiles.
March precipitation was much below average across much of the West, Southwest, portions of the Plains, Deep South and Southeast. In contrast, above-average precipitation totals fell across parts of the Northwest and northern Rockies, as well as across the Upper Midwest and Great Lakes region.
In total, nine states across the Lower-48 ranked among their 10-driest Marches. California received less than a quarter-inch of precipitation statewide—less than 10% of its 20th-century March average and the lowest March total in the 132-year record. Colorado and New Mexico each tied their second-driest March on record, while North and South Carolina each experienced one of their five-driest Marches. In contrast, Michigan received nearly twice its average March precipitation—its third-highest March total on record.
Simultaneously hot and dry conditions affected 12 states, where much-above-average temperatures occurred alongside much-below-average precipitation, with potential impacts on snowpack and water resources in the coming months. California exemplified these extremes, recording both its warmest and driest March on record.
Precipitation across Hawai‘i was much above average for the month, with many areas—including large portions of the Big Island, Maui, Moloka‘i and O‘ahu—experiencing their wettest March on record (since 1991). This exceptional wetness was driven by back-to-back Kona low systems mid-month that triggered widespread major flooding and landslides across the island chain.
Alaska’s statewide precipitation was much lower than average, especially over portions of the Southwest, the Alaska Peninsula and Aleutians. However, the cold air over mainland Alaska brought above-average snowfall to much of Southeast Alaska, with several locations recording their highest March totals in more than a decade.
US Drought Monitor map April 7, 2026.
Drought
According to the March 31 U.S. Drought Monitor report, about 59.9% of the CONUS was in drought, an increase of about 5.0% from the beginning of the month. Drought conditions persisted or intensified across much of the interior West, the Plains, Mississippi Valley, South and Southeast, with notable degradation across the Rockies and central Plains. In contrast, drought contracted or eased across portions of the Midwest, Great Lakes and Northeast.
Monthly Outlook
Above-average temperatures are favored across much of the CONUS for April, with the highest probabilities centered over the Great Basin, Four Corners region and parts of the Southeast. Above-average precipitation is favored for a corridor stretching from the southern Plains through the Mississippi Valley and Great Lakes into the Northeast, while drier-than-average conditions are forecast for the West and parts of the central Rockies and Southeast. Above-average temperatures and precipitation are indicated for northern and western parts of Alaska. Visit the Climate Prediction Center’s Official 30-Day Forecastsfor more details.
Drought is expected to persist and expand across much of the interior West, Southwest, Rockies and High Plains, as well as parts of the South, Southeast and Mid-Atlantic. However, some improvement or drought removal is forecast for parts of the southern Plains, Mississippi Valley and Northeast. Visit the U.S. Monthly Drought Outlook website for more details.
Significant wildland fire potential is above normal across portions of the Southwest, southern Plains and central High Plains and much of the Deep South and Southeast. For additional information on wildland fire potential, visit the National Interagency Fire Center’s One-Month Wildland Fire Outlook.
For more detailed climate information, check out our comprehensive March 2026 U.S. Climate Report scheduled for release on April 13, 2026. For additional information on the statistics provided here, visit the Climate at a Glance and National Maps webpages.
The Colorado River at Las Colonias Park in Grand Junction was running at about 350 cfs Wednesday. Streamflows are expected to be way below normal this spring; some may have already hit their peak for the year. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM
Water managers are planning for an extremely dry summer as Colorado wraps up winter 2026 with the worst snowpack on record for early April.
The Colorado River basin has seen slightly drier water years, but never a hotter one in the era of modern record keeping. A March heatwave that broke records statewide fueled an early peak of the snowpack, followed by rapid melting. This was the warmest March in 132 years of record-keeping for Colorado – three to four degrees Fahrenheit warmer than any other March, according to the Colorado Climate Center.
“Climate change definitely raises the probability of heat waves significantly,” said Peter Goble, assistant state climatologist at Colorado State University. “This heat wave was so far out of the range of what we’ve seen in March before that I don’t expect this to be the new normal, but it was certainly made to some degree more likely by climate change.”
The month of March decimated Colorado’s snowpack, which was thin to begin with, during a time when snowpack is usually still accumulating. The Colorado Basin River Forecast Center put the March 1 snowpack above Lake Powell at 52% of median. One month later, the April 1 numbers showed snowpack had declined dramatically to 23% of median.
“What snowpack was there was already among the lowest, if not the lowest on record, and it melted much more quickly than normal,” Goble said. “We saw melt rates more characteristic of May or June in March.”
Early April status reports and forecasts are important because they provide a critical snapshot of assessing where things stand and how much water will be available for the summer. This week is typically when snowpack peaks for the year before it begins a gradual melt out. But snowpack in the Colorado River headwaters this year peaked nearly a month early on March 17 and now sits at just 27% of median. Snowpack in the Roaring Fork River basin is 26% of normal.
“We’ve never seen anything like this in memory,” said Raquel Flinker, director of interstate and regional water resources at the Colorado River District’s State of the River meeting in Grand Junction Tuesday. “If there’s anything in your memory about a dry year that you’ve seen, a warm year that you’ve seen, 2026 is beyond all of that. It’s far beyond 2002, which has been the year we normally think of as the worst year in hydrology.”
The big question is whether that record-low snowpack will turn into record-low runoff. Forty million people in the American Southwest depend on water from the Colorado River, which comes from the melting annual snowpack. Some streams may have already peaked for the year, something that normally occurs in early June for Western Slope streams.
“The streamflows are going to be much below normal,” Goble said. “But the lowest snowpack on record does not necessarily guarantee the lowest streamflow on record.
”In a Tuesday water supply briefing, hydrologist Cody Moser with the CBRFC said that the forecasted April through July inflow to Lake Powell this year is 1.4 million acre-feet, just 22% of normal and the third-worst on record. That’s down from the March forecast, which predicted 2.3 million acre-feet of inflow. The benchmark for low Powell inflows is 2002, which saw just 964,000 acre-feet of water flow into the reservoir.
The streamflow forecast for the Colorado mainstem in Colorado (known as Division 5 by state water managers) is 38% of normal, according to the National Resources Conservation Service. The Yampa is at 36% of normal; Gunnison is 34% and the San Juan basin in the southwest corner of the state is forecast to have just 26% of normal streamflows this year.
Yampa calls
Water managers around the state are preparing for an exceptionally dry summer. Some municipal water providers have already implemented outdoor watering restrictions, and the Colorado Division of Water Resources is alerting farmers and ranchers to the possibility of more calls this season.
The Yampa River basin is poised to be one of the hardest hit this year. Mosher said on Tuesday that streamflows on the Yampa are forecasted to be close to the minimum on record.
“This forecast declined by 40% in the past month and here you see that huge melt off with our snowpack conditions,” he said.
Yampa River Operations Coordinator for Division 6 Water Resources Brian Romig sent a March 28 email to all water users in the basin reminding them of how calls work. When an irrigator with a senior water right isn’t getting all the water they are entitled to, they can place a call with state officials, who will then shut off upstream water users with junior water rights so the senior right can get its full amount of water. Under the cornerstone of Colorado water law, the oldest water rights get first use of the river.
The Yampa River was among the last to develop in the sparsely populated northwest corner of the state and it had never had a call until 2018.
“Call administration is a reality of our future,” said Division Engineer Erin Light. “I think it’s very possible we are going to see calls and the sooner people start to understand what that looks like and become accustomed to it, the better.”
Light said she has been hearing from water users about how early they have had to turn their ditches on to irrigate their fields – some the weekend of March 21 – due to the meager snowpack and record-high temperatures.
Light predicted that some ranchers won’t be able to grow all of the hay their animals need to feed them through next winter.
“Ranchers are going to have some big decisions to make as far as: Will they buy hay or will they have to sell cows,” she said.
In recent years, the River District has leased water out of Elkhead Reservoir and released it during the irrigation season to boost flows for downstream ranchers and keep a call off the river. But Light says this approach doesn’t help water users adapt to a future with less water. Once people know what to expect and how calls are administered, it’s less of a big deal, she said. And as river flows continue to dwindle due to drought and climate change, learning how to manage inevitable scarcity has never been more important.
“I think it’s a good thing for our water users to manage their water in such a way that they know in late August, they could be shut off,” Light said. “But we’re not giving that opportunity to the people on the Yampa River by trying to always keep the calls off.”
The Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners moved forward Wednesday with an intergovernmental agreement that expresses commitment “to protect the Crystal River from on-channel dams and transmountain diversions.” The agreement will be between Pitkin County, Gunnison County, the town of Marble, the Colorado River Water Conservation District and the West Divide Water Conservancy District. This was an approval of the first of two readings. The Colorado River Water Conservation District have yet to bring this agreement to their boards but have previously expressed support for the initiative, according to the district’s staff. Gunnison County and the town of Marble will be considering it in upcoming meetings.
“It would be an agreement that all the parties would oppose or not support any new dams on the main stem of the Crystal River, or any new trans-basin diversions out of the Crystal River,” Pitkin County Deputy Attorney Anne Marie McPhee told commissioners on Wednesday. “It is trying to keep the water in the river as long as possible.”
[…]
Despite moving the agreement forward after first reading, Commissioner Greg Poschman acknowledged that there has been concern around the agreement’s lack of enforcement ability, due to the signing bodies’ ability to leave the agreement at will. Poschman referenced specific criticism vocalized by Bill Jochems, a Pitkin County Healthy Rivers and Streams Citizen Advisory board member and Crystal River advocate.
“The expression from Mr. Jochems is, ‘it’s a nothing burger,’ right?” Poschman said on Wednesday. “It’s the weakest of all possible protections for the Crystal. Is that what we want to do at this point?”
Commissioner Francie Jacober commented that, despite the potential weakness that Jochems and Poschman pointed out, it would still be symbolically important for the county to lend their support to the intergovernmental agreement…The county has been pursuing a Wild and Scenic River designation for a portion of the Crystal River since the U.S. Forest Service found 39 miles of it eligible for the designation in 2002, according to county documents supporting Wednesday’s intergovernmental agreement. A Wild and Scenic designation could help with future conservation and preservation efforts.
March weather conditions promoted rapid intensification of snow drought. Snowpack peaked three to nine weeks early and sits at record low levels at most locations in Colorado, Utah and much of Wyoming. Record low snowpack was driven by low March precipitation and record hot March temperatures. Consequently, drought conditions expanded to cover 93% of the region, and annual streamflow volume forecasts are much below normal with 22% of normal inflow forecasted for Lake Powell.
March precipitation was below average for nearly the entire region. Large areas of less than 50% of average March precipitation were observed in all three states with the least precipitation falling in eastern Colorado and eastern Wyoming. Record low March precipitation was observed in Baca, Bent, Gunnison, Hinsdale, Las Animas, Prowers, and San Juan Counties in Colorado. Water year precipitation varied with above average precipitation in northwestern Wyoming, southern Colorado and southern Utah, while much of the remainder of the region received 50-90% of average water year precipitation.
An extreme and widespread heat wave hit the region during March, and temperatures were 9-12 degrees above average for much of the region. Record high March temperatures were observed at the majority of locations in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming. All-time maximum March temperatures were set across the region with many locations recording higher temperatures than all-time April records.
April 1 SWE conditions were record-low for all regional river basins, except those in northwestern Wyoming. On a statewide basis, record-low snowpack was observed in Colorado (24% median), Utah (22% median), and Wyoming (47% median). Snowpack in many southern Colorado and southern Utah watersheds has melted up to 65 days early, including the Upper Arkansas, Upper Dolores, and Upper Gunnison River basins in Colorado and the Dirty Devil, Escalante, Price, and San Pitch River basins in Utah. Record heat and low precipitation in March caused regional snowpack to peak nearly one month early. Typically, on April 1, only three of 213 Snotel sites in Colorado and two of 179 sites in Utah are melted out completely. On April 1, 2026, 36% of Snotel sites in Colorado, 60% of sites in Utah, and 28% of 196 sites in Wyoming were melted out. The snowpack in the Upper Colorado River basin peaked at a record low percent of median peak SWE and was 27% of median on April 1.
After low and early peak snowpack, annual streamflow volume forecasts were much below average on April 1. Annual streamflow volume forecasts ranged from 25-45% of average in Colorado, 20-55% of average in Utah and 25-100% of average in Wyoming. The inflow to Lake Powell is forecasted at 22% of average (1.4 million acre-feet). Regional streamflow forecasts were highest in the Snake and Missouri River basins of northern Wyoming where streamflow volume forecasts ranged from 65-100% of average.
Regional drought intensified during March, and 93% of the region is experiencing severe drought conditions. Extreme drought conditions developed across a broad swath of Utah, western Colorado and southeastern Wyoming, and now cover 45% of the region. Drought in western Colorado worsened by two to three categories, and exceptional drought developed in northwestern Colorado where exceptional drought conditions coincided with the 137,000-acre Lee Fire in August 2025.
West Drought Monitor map April 7, 2026.
Pacific Ocean temperatures have warmed, and ENSO-neutral conditions (ocean temperatures are within 0.5ºC of average) now exist. Warming sea surface temperatures prompt an 80% probability of ENSO-neutral conditions during April-June, and NOAA issuing an El Niño Watch. ENSO forecasts predict a 60% chance of El Niño conditions developing by May-July and continuing through the end of 2026. There is a 25% chance of a very strong El Niño developing during the beginning of the 2027 water year. NOAA seasonal forecasts for April-June suggest an increased probability for below average precipitation and up to a 70% probability for above average temperatures.
Significant weather event: March heat wave. The heat wave during March 2026 was unprecedented in the western U.S. climate records since 1895. March 2026 average temperatures shattered records in Colorado (by 4.3ºF), Utah (by 5.5ºF), and Wyoming (by 2ºF). Amongst weather monitoring sites with at least 50 years of data, new March temperature records were set at 85% of sites in Colorado, 82% of sites in Utah and 60% of sites in Wyoming. In Utah, previous March temperature records were exceeded by 9.7ºF in Alta and 8.9ºF in Escalante. New all-time maximum March temperature records were set at 80-90% of weather sites in Colorado and Utah, and at 70% of sites in Wyoming. At many locations in Colorado and Utah, new March temperature records exceeded April maximum temperature records. Maximum March 2026 temperatures along the Front Range of Colorado reached the 90s with Burlington, CO recording 99ºF on March 26. Extremely high March temperatures were present across the majority of the West, and record statewide March temperatures were set in Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Oklahoma, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Utah and Wyoming. A new record March temperature was also set for the contiguous U.S.
For decades, the desert town of Borrego Springs – in eastern San Diego County, thrived upon what appeared to be an unlimited supply sunshine and groundwater. Lacking an alternative supply of water this isolated community was entirely dependent on the prehistoric groundwater that was lying beneath it. This finite resource acted as the lifeblood for two competing interests: a flourishing agricultural sector and a steady expansion of residential and resort development.1
The valley’s economic foundation was laid by industrial-scale agriculture. Beginning in the mid-20th century, farmers realized that the high water table and intense desert sun created perfect conditions for citrus, grapes, and nursery crops. Water was pumped aggressively to transform the arid landscape into a lush production hub. At its height, agriculture accounted for roughly 70% of the valley’s water consumption, providing the jobs and revenue that initially put Borrego Springs on the map.
Parallel to the farming boom, the town marketed itself as a serene, upscale getaway, leading to significant residential growth. Developers built golf courses, luxury resorts, and sprawling retirement communities that promised a “green” lifestyle in the middle of the desert. These amenities required massive amounts of groundwater to maintain verdant fairways and private pools. For years, the abundance of the aquifer made it easy to ignore the fact that the community was growing far beyond the environment’s natural recharge rate.2
However, the “golden age” of water use eventually hit a breaking point as the aquifer began to rapidly decline. Decades of extracting more water than the earth could replace caused the water table to drop by more than 100 feet in some areas. As the ground sank and the cost of pumping from deeper depths rose, the sustainability of the valley’s twin economies came into question. The very resource that invited growth became the primary limiting factor for its future.3
Today, Borrego Springs stands as a cautionary tale of desert over-extraction. Under California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, the community has been forced to implement drastic water reductions, leading to the fallowing of many farms and strict mandates for residents. While the groundwater once fueled a dream of limitless desert prosperity, its depletion now dictates a new era of conservation, proving that growth without replenishment is ultimately a race toward an empty well.4
A team including scientists, Indigenous people and conservationists point to the ecosystem connecting Yellowstone and the Yukon as an example of a region where humans and nature are flourishing together.
Governments cannot reach their climate goals without rethinking humanity’s relationship to the Earth.
That is the overarching takeaway from a new paper published [April 9, 2026] in Frontiers in Science by a global team of scientists, conservationists and Indigenous people. The authors examined a set of climate targets from around the world, including the Paris Agreement, through the lens of a “Nature Positive” approach to climate change, in which biodiversity loss is halted and reversed by 2030 compared to a 2020 baseline.
They found that climate progress cannot happen without widespread attempts to increase biodiversity, protect intact ecosystems and reverse ecological damage from centuries of consumption.
For too long, humanity—particularly in the Global North—has viewed the environment as either a resource to mine, or a hindrance to economic growth, said Harvey Locke, the paper’s lead author and a co-founder of the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative.
“Nature is essential to the functioning of the Earth system, which is in turn essential to people, and people are essential to the economy,” he said. “That is the hierarchy, nothing else.”
The paper characterized the present global economic order as occurring in the “sweet spot” between competing environmental, societal and economic interests, but says that trichotomy has occurred at the expense of other species and the planet. To maintain a habitable planet, humanity must nest its economy within the limits of Earth’s environment, the authors said.
One of the most severe examples of the current imbalance is climate change, Locke said.
“We’ve wildly exceeded the planetary boundary for putting CO2 into the atmosphere and we’re wildly destabilizing the Earth system through the destruction of nature,” he said. “Everyone in humanity loses—everyone—if we continue to destabilize the Earth system. And everyone wins if we work toward stabilizing it.”
As an example of how economies can grow while ecosystems are preserved and biodiversity is restored, Locke pointed to the Rockies in North America, particularly the region spanning Yellowstone to Yukon.
According to the National Park Service, the greater Yellowstone ecosystem is “one of the largest nearly intact temperate-zone ecosystems on Earth.”
“We have a wider distribution of bears and wolves and bison today than we did thirty years ago. We have more protected areas now than we did thirty years ago. And meanwhile the human population has flourished in that landscape,” Locke said, “in big measure because people value nature.”
The greater Yellowstone area’s growth has not been without its pains. As more people settle in the mountains, urban and suburban enclaves sprawl into forests, increasing fire risks. Grizzly bears and wolves, while magnates for tourists and their dollars, have also become political lightning rods, with some arguing that their rising populations are exceeding the capacity that the growing human settlements in the area will accept.
“If we don’t grow wisely, we will kill the goose that’s laying the golden egg,” Locke acknowledged.
The idea that humans are just one cog in nature’s fabulously complex and interconnected machine is an Indigenous premise, said Leroy Little Bear, one of the paper’s authors and a member of the Kainaiwa tribe that resides near the border of Canada and Montana.
If Indigenous groups across the world had more stewardship over ecosystems, species and land management decisions, it would go a long way toward restoring biodiversity and creating societies and economies that are better tailored to Earth’s environment, Little Bear said.
“We come from and operate on the basis of relationships,” he continued. “When you’re related to everything else in the environment, everything out there—the water, the rocks, the trees, the birds—are all animate. So if they’re animate then they all have the same kind of spirits as you have. How would I treat my relatives?”
But European settlers and their descendents have taken a different approach, he said. “In Western thought, we separate ourselves from nature and to a very large extent, we take the Biblical view that everything is made for the benefit of humans.”
To make their point, the authors collected an “enormous number of references to previous work,” said Cara Nelson, a professor of restoration ecology at the University of Montana who was not involved with the paper. By Daniel Case – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=63321074
“I felt they did a really great job of identifying this inherent property of life on Earth: interconnection and interdependency,” she said.
To help change human economies’ relationship to natural systems, Locke said the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative is exploring creating natural asset companies, where the value of the organization is tied to the preservation of nature, not its destruction, so private capital can spur conservation.
“You basically think about nature like gold. It’s gonna go up in value because it’s perceived to have value,” Locke said. “And we’re not making any more of it.”
A tourist visits the lower reaches of Flaming Gorge Reservoir in Utah in September 2021. (Dustin Bleizeffer/WyoFile)
Click the link to read the article on the Wyofile website (Dustin Bleizeffer):
April 10, 2026
The outlook for the Colorado River, and Lake Powell in particular, continues to worsen due to an historically warm winter and dismal snowpack.
Projections show that Lake Powell on the Utah-Arizona border could drop low enough this year that it stops producing hydroelectric power at the Glen Canyon Dam. If it drops even lower, the dam is in danger of structural failure.
Wyoming relies on some of that hydroelectric power, according to state officials. The state will also play a major, legally obligated role in trying to help prevent such a catastrophe. Primarily, the Bureau of Reclamation will release extra water from Flaming Gorge Reservoir — potentially 1 million acre feet, which is more than a quarter of its storage capacity of about 3.8 million acre-feet.
In addition to recreation and economic impacts at Flaming Gorge on the Wyoming-Utah border — boat ramps may be rendered inoperable — Wyoming officials worry about potential mandatory water use reductions in the southwest corner of the state, as well as potential legal entanglements over a seven-state negotiation that has so far failed to resolve how stakeholders will share the pain of a declining Colorado River.
Buckboard Marina owner Tony Valdez, seen here Sept. 26, 2022, says he’s made continual adjustments to boat docks to keep up with lowering water levels at Flaming Gorge Reservoir. (Dustin Bleizeffer/WyoFile)
Adding to frustrations and fears, the water crisis is so severe and crashing so rapidly that stakeholders can’t even track — with confidence — its extent.
“Even though these projections are painting an incredibly dire picture for us, we need to be mindful that runoff might even be worse than what’s being projected,” Wyoming Senior Assistant Attorney General Chris Brown said Friday, adding that dry soil throughout the region is a wildcard in water calculations. “It’s bad. It’s incredibly bad what we’re seeing in the Upper [Colorado River] Basin right now.”
Brown joined Wyoming State Engineer Brandon Gebhart Friday at a Wyoming Colorado River Advisory Committee meeting to provide an update on the crisis (click here to see a slidedeck presented at the meeting).
“The information we’re getting is evolving just about as quickly as the hydrology is declining, so we’re trying to react to what we’re seeing in almost real time,” Brown said. “We don’t know what’s actually going to happen.”
This graphic depicts the “probable” water year for the Colorado River Basin in 2026. (Bureau of Reclamation)
An extra release from Flaming Gorge, which will begin on or before May 1, is a certainty, according to Wyoming water officials. That’s because the reservoir was specifically built to serve as a sort of water bank to ensure legally obliged deliveries to downstream states Nevada, Arizona and California. Among four storage reservoirs in the upper basin, Flaming Gorge has the most — and the most legally unrestricted – water to send downstream to Lake Powell.
“It’s the low-hanging fruit,” Brown said. “It’s the biggest, by far, and it’s got the most available water.”
But this year, even considering decreased releases from Lake Powell to help maintain Glen Canyon dam’s functionality, “anything we do as far as upstream [extra water] releases is not going to be enough,” Brown said.
Flaming Gorge Reservoir on the Utah side near the dam in September 2021. (Dustin Bleizeffer/WyoFile)
"Ramble On" is 56 years old and Robert Plant just walked onto The Late Show and made it sound like he wrote it this morning. pic.twitter.com/MkePb2dMMc
— Guitar Gods Unleashed (@UnleashedG23066) April 9, 2026
Click the link to read the article on the Pagosa Springs Sun website (Clayton Chaney and Randi Pierce). Here’s an excerpt:
April 8, 2026
On Tuesday, April 7, the Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD) announced that the district is implementing voluntary drought restrictions, with the agency anticipating increased drought restrictions within the next two weeks. According to a statement from the district, “The Voluntary water reduction stage is intended to give the community advanced notice of developing drought conditions and to begin encouraging water conservation and voluntary water use reduction. The Voluntary stage does not trigger the drought surcharge or tier rate multipliers.” The statement explains the trigger points for the voluntary stage are:
A curtailment order on Four Mile Creek prior to May 1.
A maximum snow water equivalency (SWE) less than 75 percent of median.
Reservoir levels with the addition of diversion flow less than 90 percent.
The statement notes, “With a maximum Snow Water Equivalency (SWE) of less than 75% of Median as of April 6, 2026, the District is implementing Voluntary Drought Restrictions as of April 7, 2026. PAWSD will implement the next level of mandatory drought restriction stages as dry conditions continue, and these do trigger drought surcharges and/or tier rate multipliers.”
An email to The SUN from District Engineer Justin Ramsey also notes the move is due to the National Integrated Drought Information Center upgrading the drought state in Archuleta County from severe to extreme…
According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), as of 2 p.m. on Wednesday, April 8, the San Juan River in downtown Pagosa Springs had a flow rate of 451 cubic feet per second (cfs). Based on 90 years of water records, the record high flow for that date was recorded in 1960 at 1,380 cfs, while the record low was recorded in 1964 at 65 cfs. The median flow for that date is 351 cfs and the mean flow is 418 cfs. The Piedra River near Arboles was flowing at a rate of 365 cfs, as of 2 p.m Wednesday, April 8, according to the USGS. Based on 63 years of water records, the median flow for April 8 is 567 cfs and the mean flow is 690 cfs. The record high flow for April 8 was recorded in 1985 at 2,370 cfs, while the record low was recorded in 1977 at 100 cfs.
Click the link to read the article on The Aspen Times website (Ryan Spencer). Here’s an excerpt:
April 11, 2026
An unprecedented March heatwave has forecasters shrinking already-low estimates for how much water will flow into the Colorado River during spring runoff, which is already well underway this year. The latest models show that the Colorado River is projected to deliver only about 1.4 million acre feet of water — roughly one-fifth of normal — to Lake Powell, the nation’s second-largest reservoir. Colorado River Basin Forecast Center hydrologist Cody Moser said during a water briefing on Tuesday, April 7, that if those projections were to bear out, it would be the third lowest amount of water delivered to Lake Powell in the reservoir’s 63 year history.
“We are on the extreme end of things,” Moser said. “We had a huge heatwave at the end of March with significant snowmelt.”
Westwide SNOTEL basin-filled map March 1, 2026.
At the start of March, snowpack across the Colorado River Basin and projections for the spring runoff were already low, raising concerns of water shortages and an early start to what could be a dangerous fire season across the West. Then came a “very dry March” with a record-shattering heatwave that melted large amounts of the snowpack from the “most crucial areas for spring runoff,” Moser said. Nearly all of these areas had less than 50% of average precipitation in March, and have seen less than half of the average precipitation since October, he said.
A map of the Colorado River Basin shows that dozens of snow telemetry sites across the seven-state basin had the lowest snowpack on record at the start of April 2026. Credit: NRCS
Averaged across Colorado, March was an “astonishing” 13 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than the 20th century average, almost 10 degrees warmer than the 1991-2020 average and more than 4 degrees warmer than any previous March, according to the state’s monthly climate summary. Large parts of the mountains experienced record-breaking temperatures lasting for days on end and leading to a rapid melt-off of the state’s already historically-low snowpack. Colorado started April with a snowpack that state climatologists said was the worst in at least the past 75 years. Colorado’s snowpack peaked in early March — a full month earlier than normal — at 8.5 inches of snow-water equivalent, or roughly half of the 30-year median, according to the state’s snow telemetry data. Normally, the state’s snowpack peaks on April 8, but by the time that date rolled around this year, the data show the statewide snowpack had declined to just 3.6 inches of snow water equivalent. That’s less than half what it was a month earlier, and just 23% of normal for that point in the season.
Banks of Lake Powell, Arizona in March 2026 | Page Buono
Click the link to read the article on the American Rivers website (Page Buono and Sinjin Eberle):
March 18, 2026
The situation is clear: the precipitation outlook in the Colorado River Basin is dire, the river cannot sustain the demands placed on it, and this year we’re likely to face unprecedented management decisions with potentially catastrophic consequences.
Despite decades of warnings and years of negotiations, there remains no clear blueprint for how the West can live with less water. That future is no longer hypothetical—it is already here.
Lake Powell’s drastically low water levels are evident in the discoloration of ancient cliffs that were submerged for decades, often referred to as “the bathtub ring” in March 2026 | Page Buono
We often talk about the Colorado River and drought in ways that can feel removed, impersonal, abstract, and buried in jargon. But beneath the stories, there are real lives, livelihoods, ecosystems, and traditions that make the region what it is, and that are very much at stake.
West Drought Monitor map April 7, 2026.
On March 3, for example, the US Drought Monitor released their latest report, revealing that “snow water equivalent” is less than 70% of normal across the Central Rockies, and less than 50% in the Four Corners.
But it isn’t just one fire in one year – throughout the Southwest and in California, regions are experiencing some of the largest, most catastrophic wildfires in history, and they’re occurring much more frequently.
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
The Salton Sea is a paraodox for a multitude of reasons. The most striking is that the Salton Sea can exist only as long as the Imperial Valley continues to drain 1.3 million acre feet of salt and pesticide-laden runoff into it, annually. That’s exactly how much the Sea loses to evaporation every year. So ironically, the more Colorado River water that’s conserved by Imperial Valley’s farmers the faster the Salton Sea is going to dry up.1
Fact: In 1924 the federal government officially designated the Salton Sea as a permanent repository for agricultural drainage, which authorized the Imperial Irrigation District to use it as a drainage basin for irrigation runoff. This was necessary because increasing salt levels in the soil were threatening to put thousands of acres of highly-productive farmland out of production.2
The Imperial Valley functions as a critical “winter salad bowl” for the United States, yet this massive agricultural output creates a severe environmental health paradox for its residents. While intensive farming produces millions of tons of vegetables, it relies on practices like agricultural burning and heavy pesticide application that release fine particulate matter and toxic chemicals into the air. This pollution is compounded by a shrinking Salton Sea, which acts as a basin for agricultural runoff; as it dries, it exposes toxic lakebed dust containing arsenic and pesticides that wind then carries into local communities. Consequently, children in the Imperial Valley suffer from asthma at rates nearly double the California state average, with roughly one in five children diagnosed—a direct cost of the region’s agricultural success borne by its most vulnerable residents.3
The Salton Sea’s Top 10 Contradictions
It’s a vital yet highly-polluted refuge: The Sea acts as a critical Pacific Flyway habitat for millions of birds, yet it is highly contaminated with agricultural toxins, heavy metals, and selenium.
Sustained by Wastewater: The lake requires constant inflow of polluted farm drainage (tailwater) to survive; restricting this agricultural runoff is necessary for water quality but speeds up its drying.
Agriculture vs. Air Quality: Farming irrigation sustains the lake, but as water efficiency increases, less water reaches the sea, accelerating the exposure of dry lakebed (playa) and the resulting toxic dust storms.
Species Management vs. Habitat Collapse: State agencies work to protect endangered species, but the increasing salinity is killing the fish and food sources those species need.
Environmental Destruction as Restoration: Major restoration projects often involve breaking up existing, albeit shrinking, habitats to create smaller, managed ponds.
Terminal Lake Reality: It is a closed basin that cannot flush itself, meaning all contaminants from decades of agriculture are trapped and concentrated indefinitely.
Water Transfers vs. Regional Health: The Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA) transfers water to urban areas, reducing inflows to the sea and damaging local communities’ health for external economic gain.
Natural vs. Artificial Conflict: It is managed as a wildlife refuge but was created entirely by a catastrophic engineering failure of a canal, resulting in a fragile “artificial” ecosystem.
Salinity vs. Stability: Efforts to reduce nutrient inflow (to curb algae) can lead to faster shrinking, while allowing nutrients causes massive fish die-offs and odor.
The “Green” Paradox: Developing the area for green energy—namely lithium extraction—requires long-term stability in a region deemed too dangerous for human health due to toxic air.
Today, Governors Jared Polis (D-Colo.), Mark Gordon (R-Wyo.), Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-N.M.) and Spencer Cox (R-Utah) released a statement on the proposed draw down of Flaming Gorge and other upper basin reservoirs:
“This is an unprecedented year on the Colorado River, and likely will be one of the worst on record. A dry year like this reminds us of why it is critical that all who rely on this resource learn to live within its means and adapt our uses accordingly.
The Upper Division States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, are actively and strictly regulating water uses. Because of such diminished runoff, existing state laws in the Upper Division States require water users to face cuts to water rights dating back to the 1800s – these cuts are mandatory, uncompensated, and will have significant impacts on water users, including Upper Basin Tribes, and local economies.
It is critical that any releases made by the federal government from Flaming Gorge and other upstream reservoirs are in compliance with existing agreements, particularly the 2019 Drought Response Operations Agreement between the Bureau of Reclamation and the Upper Division States and governing law and done for the purpose of protecting Lake Powell. We must have a clear understanding of how these proposed releases will effectively protect elevations at Lake Powell. Once the releases conclude, we expect that all water released from Flaming Gorge and other upstream reservoirs will be fully recovered.
Further, any releases must be appropriately sized. Years like this one remind us that appropriate water storage helps us survive the dry years, and that we must be prepared not only for this year but future dry years, as well as average years.
As we continue to comply with commitments to our water users and the Law of River, we recognize the impacts of water shortages and water releases from Upper Basin reservoirs on local communities – not only related to future water supply availability, but also how they affect jobs and local recreational and other economies. We recognize the need to live within the available supply and expect other communities to do so as well.”
The Colorado River is pictured where if flows near Hite, just beyond the upper reaches of Lake Powell, on Friday, Sept. 19, 2025. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch)
So many crises threaten society these days. Daily news about war, the emergence of AI, runaway costs of living, the threat of new pandemics, the growing dangers of fascism in Washington — it’s a deluge of worry, and it can be hard to think about much else.
But the pile of troubles in recent years has diverted attention from the long-term crisis of climate change, arguably humanity’s supreme challenge, which is not going away just because it gets less attention. Some commentators have suggested that no one has the bandwidth anymore to think about climate change. But climate change doesn’t care about your bandwidth, and conditions in Colorado prove the point. [ed. emphasis mine]
The state just had its warmest winter on record by almost 2 degrees Fahrenheit, and average temperatures from December through February were more than 8 degrees above the 20th century average, as Newslinereported last month. Cities up and down the Front Range saw record-high numbers of 60-degree days this winter. The state is also fantastically dry, part of an aridification process driven by global warming.
As reporter Chase Woodruff wrote, “Hotter, drier conditions in Colorado have stressed water supplies, made the state’s forests more vulnerable to insects and diseases, and greatly increased wildfire risk.”
Waterways in Colorado this year are universally expected to see below-normal flows, including the Colorado River, which is forecast to run at just 68% of normal. The Colorado River, a vital resource for 40 million people, this century has experienced critical streamflow depletions. The river is down 20% from historic annual averages. Some projections suggest Lake Powell, a crucial reservoir on the river, could dropfor the first time below the minimum level needed for it to produce hydropower at the Glen Canyon Dam, energy generation relied on by almost 6 million people.
Low snowpack that’s contributing to streamflow shortages is also a blow to the Colorado ski industry, which generates $4.8 billion a year and supports more than 46,000 jobs across the state. At the current trajectory, the industry will disappear by the end of the century. Climate modeling shows the ski season could be shortened by more than a month by 2050 and more than two months by 2090. And it’s not just less snow — climate change is to blame for increasingly poor snow.
The latest forecasts suggest Coloradans should brace for more brutal wildfires this year. Hot and dry conditions, along with low moisture content in vegetative fuels, are already at levels on the Front Range typical of peak fire season. Worsening conditions as summer unfolds will further increase the state’s vulnerability to wildfires. Tinderbox conditions are becoming the norm: The three largest wildfires in Colorado history all occurred in 2020, and the state’s 20 biggest fires have all occurred in the past 20 years.
There is no scientific doubt that climate change contributesto bigger, fiercer wildfires and other extreme ecological events, and there is no scientific doubt that the primary cause of climate change is the human combustion of fossil fuels.
Yet government policies, especially as guided by MAGA priorities, reject the science. In February, the Trump administration revoked the so-called endangerment finding, which recognized the dangers of greenhouse gas emissions and allowed climate regulations under the Clean Air Act. The administration is forcing coal-fired power generation in Colorado to persist past a planned retirement date, apparently to accommodate coal business interests.
Climate change so far has not figured prominently in 2026 statewide elections. The platforms of the top Democratic candidates for governor, U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet and Attorney General Phil Weiser, both mention climate change as a problem to confront. But Bennet touts a “market-based path to cut emissions” that resembles the disappointing carrot-over-stick approach of the administration of Gov. Jared Polis, under whom the state has failed to meet its own greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.
Many Coloradans fear the federal government, and they’re struggling to pay for housing, health care and other necessities, while national and world events seem ever more alarming. But, though it usually doesn’t produce spectacular daily headlines, climate change threatens eventually to leave whole regions of the Earth uninhabitable.
The worst effects of climate change can still be avoided, but only if voters insist leaders address it with the emergency response it demands.
Colorado statewide annual temperature anomaly (°F) with respect to the 1901-2000 average. Graphic credit: Colorado Climate Center
Click the link to read the release on the NRCS website:
April 9, 2026
In a typical year, early April marks the transition into peak snowpack. Accumulation is still ongoing, particularly across the central and northern mountains, and runoff has yet to fully begin. This year, that sequence has shifted. Snowpack peak snow water equivalent (SWE) timing occurred early, with many basins reaching maximum SWE in late-February to mid-March. In the San Juan Mountains, peak SWE was largely driven by a late February storm, after which snowpack shifted into net melt through March rather than functioning as a late-season accumulation period.
As of April 9, 2026, statewide SWE is 22 percent of median, following a brief increase to 26 percent after early April storms. While beneficial at the site level, these storms did not change conditions and sites have resumed melt-out patterns.
Statewide SWE declined from 60 percent of median from March 1, 2026 to 20 percent of median by April 1, 2026. The most rapid decline occurred during a concentrated melt period from mid to late March, when sustained record temperatures drove accelerated depletion across the network. During this interval, SWE declined at an average rate of 0.25 inches per day. March temperature data averaged roughly 9°F above normal, with 26 days exceeding median. Rather than intermittent melt cycles, snowpack experienced sustained energy input, accelerating SWE loss across elevations, including high-elevation zones that typically remain stable into April.
Across the Colorado monitoring network, snowpack is clustered at the lower end of the observing SNOTEL period. As of the end March, 103 of 117 sites are reporting values at or near the 0th percentile with 95 percent of sites at the lowest or second lowest values. This pattern extends beyond Colorado, with SNOTEL sites across the Intermountain West averaging near the 12th percentile at the end of March. [ed. emphasis mine]
March streamflow observations are above median across much of Colorado. Outside of the eastern Sangre de Cristo Mountains, where flows are closer to 58 percent of median, many basins are averaging 140 percent above median. Under normal conditions, above median runoff would indicate strong water supply. This reflects a shift in timing and a reduction in total volume. Snowmelt that would typically contribute to April through July runoff (primary period) is now entering into river systems. Several headwater locations are approaching or have reached seasonal peak streamflow flow timing weeks earlier than average. Early flows may appear favorable in the short term, but in this case may represent a compression of the runoff period rather than an increase in total seasonal supply.
At the 50 percent outlook, primary period runoff is expected to fall 11.4 million acre-feet (MAF) below median runoff volume statewide, with 9.4 MAF of that deficit concentrated in western slope basins, including the Colorado Headwaters, Gunnison, Yampa-White-Litte Snake and San Miguel-Dolores-Animas-San Juan (SMDASJ) basins. The 30 percent forecast remains well below median, while the 70 and 90 percent forecasts reduce volumes further, with Colorado Headwaters ranging from 3.5 to 4.8 MAF below median across the outlook range.
Figure 1. Primary period streamflow forecast at the 70 percent exceedance probability (NRCS 1991-2020 median). Basin-scale runoff departures exceed 4 MAF below median in the Colorado Headwaters and more than 2 MAF in the Gunnison. 56 of 80 points fall at or near the lowest values.
April-July runoff forecasts at the 50 percent exceedance probability are in the range of 27-35 percent of median depending on basin, with continued degradations from prior outlooks. The South Platte basin is higher relative to other basins, with a forecast at 54 percent of median. At the 70 percent exceedance streamflow forecast and 90 percent exceedance streamflow forecast, a majority of points fall near the lowest values in their period of record. Figure 1 highlights the lower range of outcomes. Many of these gauges have observing periods exceeding 100 years, placing drier projections at the bottom in the historical record.
October brought above-normal precipitation, particularly in southern basins where a significant portion fell as rain and contributed directly to runoff and reservoir storage. Since then, precipitation has remained well below normal across the state and has limited snowpack development during the primary accumulation window. Statewide reservoir storage is near average at 89 percent of median. A portion of this year’s runoff has already occurred during March, and the snowpack entering April is substantially below normal. These conditions limit the volume available for the rest of the runoff period, consistent with projected runoff volumes well below median. Short-term forecasts indicate above average precipitation, which may provide temporary increases in snowpack. Conversely, seasonal Climate Predication Center outlooks favor above-normal temperatures and below-normal precipitation. Forecasts remain centered below median and are trending toward the lower exceedance range.
Colorado’s Snowpack and Reservoir Storage as of April 1, 2026
In 2050 the food on our dinner plates will look very different than it does now. A changing climate will force a shift from water and land-intensive staples like beef and dairy to more resilient alternatives. Rising temperatures and erratic weather patterns have already reduced the yields of traditional crops like potatos, coffee, bananas, wheat, corn, and rice. As those staples become harder to produce humanity will pivot toward more resiliant crops like millet, sorghum, beans and lentils—which can thrive in degraded soil and arid conditions.
The most dramatic shift will occur in our protein consumption, specifically the move away from industrial livestock. Cattle farming is both a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and highly vulnerable to water scarcity. By mid-century, traditional beef and pork will likely become luxury items. In their place, lab-grown meat, insect proteins, and plant-based meat substitutes will become the norm, offering the same nutritional benefit at a fraction of the environmental cost.
Beyond meat alternatives, we can expect to see insects and algae integrated into the mainstream diet. While we turn our noses up to them now, crickets and mealworms are highly efficient protein sources that require minimal land and water. Similarly – seaweeds and microalgae like spirulina will move from health-food niches to primary ingredients, valued for their ability to grow rapidly in saltwater without the need for synthetic fertilizers or freshwater irrigation.
Technology will also personalize our nutrition to combat food insecurity and supply chain instability. With the rise of vertical farming and hydroponics in urban centers, fresh produce will be grown blocks away from where it is consumed, reducing “food miles” and spoilage. We may also see the widespread use of biofortified crops—genetically engineered to contain higher levels of essential vitamins—to compensate for the nutrient density loss currently being observed in plants grown under high CO2 levels.
Ultimately, the diet of 2050 will be defined by diversification and efficiency. The era of relying on a handful of global commodities is coming to an end, replaced by a circular food economy that prioritizes local resilience and low-impact nutrients. While these changes are born of necessity, they offer a path toward a more sustainable relationship with the planet, ensuring that a growing population can be fed sustainably in a warming world.
This U.S. Drought Monitor (USDM) week saw degradations across the areas of the West, Southeast, and Mid-Atlantic, while rainfall during the past week led to improvements in drought-affected areas of the South, Plains, and Midwest. In the Midwest, widespread improvements were made after another round of precipitation during the past week leading to removal of areas of drought on the map in Iowa, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. In these areas, precipitation totals ranged from 2 to 5 inches. Similarly, significant rainfall was observed in portions of Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana leading to targeted improvements. Out West, generally dry conditions prevailed across much of the region, although modest precipitation totals were observed in areas of the Pacific Northwest, Northern California, Intermountain West, and Southwest with the highest totals logged in California. Despite the much-needed precipitation, conditions deteriorated on the map in Oregon, California, Nevada, Wyoming, Montana, and New Mexico. In the Hawaiian Islands, conditions have improved significantly during the past two months due to historic rainfall events observed across the island chain. Elsewhere, dry conditions continued across much of the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic, leading to degradation in conditions from Virginia to Florida.
According to the latest U.S. temperature and precipitation analysis by NOAA’s Center for Environmental Information, March 2026 was the warmest March on record for the contiguous U.S. (CONUS) with average temperatures reaching 9.4 °F above the 20th-century average. For the month, 1,432 counties observed their single warmest March day on record (1950-present). Moreover, the April 2025 to March 2026 period was the warmest 12-month span recorded for CONUS since 1895. In terms of precipitation, the January to March period was the driest on record for CONUS, breaking the previous record set in 1910…
On this week’s map, rainfall (1 to 4 inches) during the past week led to targeted improvements in far eastern portions of Kansas and Nebraska. Meanwhile, conditions deteriorated on the map in areas of central and western Kansas, and southwestern South Dakota. For the week, average temperatures were 4 to 10+ °F below normal across much of the region with the greatest departures observed in the Dakotas. Looking at climatological rankings for the past 60-day period (March 7 to April 7), several locations ranked among their driest on record, including Dodge City, KS (driest on record; -1.51 inches); Goodland, KS (driest on record; -1.05); and Manhattan, KS (2nd driest; -1.81 inches). In terms of hydrologic conditions, the U.S. Geological Survey is reporting below to much below normal streamflows across southwestern South Dakota, southern Nebraska, and central/western Kansas…
Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending April 7, 2026.
Conditions continued to deteriorate in the region with degradations made across southern Oregon, Northern California, southwestern Montana, northwestern Wyoming, and New Mexico. Despite some precipitation falling across the mountain ranges of the region this week, the snowpack conditions remain extremely poor with the remaining snowpack primarily restricted to the highest elevations. In Colorado, NRCS is reporting statewide SWE at the lowest on record. Historically, median peak SWE in Colorado occurs on April 8, however, this year peak SWE occurred on March 8. In Washington state, the Department of Ecology issued a statewide emergency drought declaration as projected water supplies are expected to be well below normal levels. In the Colorado River Basin, Lake Powell is 24% full, while Lake Mead is 33% full, according to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Across areas of the Far West, very dry conditions were observed during the past 30-day period (March 7 to April 7), with record to near-record dryness at the following locations: Eugene, OR (10th driest; -2.57 inches); Medford, OR (9th driest; -1.38 inches); Crescent City, CA (2nd driest; -5.58 inches); Mount Shasta, CA (driest on record; -5.35 inches); San Francisco, CA (5th driest; -2.34 inches); Santa Cruz (driest on record; -3.13 inches); Monterey, CA (3rd driest; -2.8 inches), and San Diego, CA (driest on record; -1.24 inches)…
On this week’s map, improvements were made in drought-affected areas of Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Arkansas, while areas of Tennessee saw degradations. In terms of precipitation during the past week, moderate to heavy rainfall accumulations (ranging from 3 to 6 inches) were observed in Texas, Oklahoma, and isolated areas of Louisiana. In Arkansas, some beneficial rains fell in the far-western portion of the state, which led to a boost in streamflow conditions. However, dry soils and significant precipitation deficits remain across the state with the NDMC CMOR tool showing many new impact reports during the past week. Looking at climatological rankings for the past 60-day period (February 7 to April 7), record to near-record dryness was observed in the region, including in Monticello, AR (4th driest; -5.7 inches), and Monroe, LA (7th driest; -6.69 inches). In Texas, Water for Texas (April 7) reports statewide reservoirs at 74% full, with eastern reservoirs in good condition while many western and southern reservoirs remain below normal. Average temperatures for the week were above normal across the region (2 to 12+ °F)…
Looking Ahead
The NWS Weather Prediction Center 7-Day Quantitative Precipitation Forecast calls for precipitation accumulations generally ranging from 1 to 4 inches across eastern portions of the Southern Plains, Midwest, and Northeast, with the heaviest totals (locally 3 to 4 inches) along a corridor extending from eastern Oklahoma and Arkansas through the Mid-Mississippi Valley into eastern portions of the Upper Midwest. Across the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic, very dry conditions are expected, with little or no precipitation across most areas. The highest totals in the region are expected in isolated areas of eastern Florida, where accumulations may reach 2 to 3 inches. Across the High Plains, light-to-moderate precipitation accumulations ranging from 0.25 to 1.5 inches are expected, with the greatest totals across the eastern extent of the region. In the West, moderate-to-heavy liquid precipitation accumulations are expected across areas of California, particularly along the central and northern Sierra Nevada and coastal ranges, as well as portions of the central and northern Rockies, with lighter to moderate totals across portions of the Pacific Northwest. Dry conditions are expected to prevail across much of the Southwest, including areas of the southeastern California deserts, southern Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico.
The NWS 6–10-Day Temperature Outlook (valid April 14–18, 2026) calls for above-normal temperatures across nearly all of the contiguous U.S., with the highest probabilities across the eastern half of the country, including the Midwest, Southeast, Mid-Atlantic, and Northeast. Below-normal temperatures are limited to areas along the broader U.S.–Canada border region in the Northern Plains and Upper Midwest, while near-normal temperatures are expected across parts of the Pacific Northwest.
In terms of precipitation, the 6–10-Day Outlook calls for above-normal precipitation across the Far West, northern Rockies, New Mexico, Texas, the South (eastern extent), portions of the central and southern Plains, Midwest, and Northeast. Near-normal precipitation is expected across the Intermountain West, Desert Southwest, areas of the South, Mid-Atlantic, and coastal New England. Below-normal precipitation is favored across the Southeast and portions of the Mid-Atlantic.
US Drought Monitor one week change map ending April 7, 2026.
Just for grins here’s a slideshow of early April US Drought Monitor maps for the past few years.
UPDATE: March brings spring flowers and an update from NCEI’s Monthly U.S. Temperature and Precipitation Analysis. 🥵 This was the warmest March on record for the contiguous U.S. Learn more. https://t.co/mlvPCKiXmnpic.twitter.com/uepJiBzOZY
Click the link to read the article on the Big Pivots website (Allen Best):
April 8, 2026
Will inflows into Lake Powell will drop below those of 2002? You remember that year? A year of heat, drought and fire. An essay about changes and what precipitates them.
Just what we need in Colorado, an El Niño that could cause a hotter-than-average summer for the Western United States and other parts of the globe, continuing into 2027.
Risk of an El Ninõ has been rising, reported the Washington Post on Monday citing the work of a medium-range weather forecasting organization. This one could push global temperatures to record levels, particularly in 2027. “Real potential for the strongest El Ninõ event in 140 years,” wrote Paul Rondy, a professor of atmospheric science at the State University of New York at Albany.
This, explained the Post, could also yield milder winter temperatures in the United States.
We already know something about warm winters. November was the third warmest November on record in Colorado. December and February broke records, as Colorado state climatologist Russ Schumacher has reported.
Then came March and a records-busting string of days during the “heat dome.” Fort Collins went over 90, a threshold not achieved on average until June. These hottest and earliest thresholds were breached at locations across Colorado.
Across the Colorado River Basin, average daily temperatures during March were the warmest on record. This wreaked havoc on an already so-so or less snowpack.
“March was not … helpful,” consulting climate researcher Jeff Lukas observed drily in a LinkedIn post on Monday. “Record heat for the Upper Colorado River Basin and near-record-low precipitation in what should be one of the snowiest months. The basin-wide snowpack peaked at the earliest date and lowest level on record.”
In Colorado, the snowpack in the Eagle River drainage on April 1 was 21% of the 30-year average. The Roaring Fork River was 26%. On the Yampa it was 20%. On the San Juan, it was 17%. In all these cases and others, the snowpack had fallen by half or more compared to March 1.
Lake Powell, already shrunken to 24% to 25% of capacity, will almost assuredly show even more shoreline. As of Tuesday the reservoir level was down almost 31 feet from a year ago. The Colorado River Basin Forecasting Center on Tuesday predicted 22% of average flows into Powell. Rain and snow could still help, but at least in the next 10 days, they are unlikely.
Two benchmarks, 1977 and 2002, exist for awful-flow years on the Colorado River since Glen Canyon Dam was completed in the 1960s. In 2002, flows into Powell were shockingly low, about 25% of average. The decline after two so-so years was remarkable. Powell, however, had been 94% full to start the century.
Margins have narrowed. Becky Bolinger, a climate researcher in Colorado, pointed out Monday on LinkedIn that the Colorado River Basin Forecast Center currently projects flows April-through-July flows will be a little greater than 2002. “I think it is entirely plausible that the actual volume for 2026 comes in as a new record low,” she wrote.
What will the Bureau of Reclamation do? It operates the big dams on the Colorado River, including Glen Canyon. Average releases from Glen Canyon Dam since 2000 have been 8.29 million acre-feet.
One Colorado hydrologist, once again writing on LinkedIn, speculated that the Bureau will reduce the releases from Powell to 6 million acre-feet and conceivably even lower. That would leave Powell above the minimum level needed to produce power, if barely. Power production from 2000 to 2023 declined 17%.
The value of clean power is great. It is part of the portfolio of nearly all electrical cooperatives in the region, including those in Colorado, as well as municipal providers. The greater value, say utility executives, is the ability of the dam’s hydro unit to restart the Western grid, if necessary. This is called a black start. Such a need is unlikely but huge if it were to occur. The giant amounts of battery storage, however, have reduced that importance in the last few years.
Those reduced flows from Powell, however, would likely annoy Arizona and California. The Colorado River Compact of 1922 split the water in the river system between the lower-basin states and Colorado and other upper-basin states. It put a figure on the division: 7.5 million acre-feet. (And more must flow from the upper basin for Mexico and to account for evaporation). In 1922, they thought there was plenty left for Mexico and more yet to flow into the Pacific Ocean. Wisely, in 1948, the upper basin states, in their compact amongst themselves, instead used a percentage.
In question is what exactly the 1922 compact says is the obligation of upper basin states? Must they allow all the water in the Eagle, Yampa and other headwaters rivers be allowed to flow downstream to deliver 7.5 million acre-feet? What if that much water isn’t there?
Colorado River Basin states have notoriously been at an impasse about how to share the shrinking river. The position of Colorado — and other upper-basin states — was pithily captured in a statement by Becky Mitchell, Colorado’s chief negotiator, “We’ve been asked to solve a problem we didn’t create with water we don’t have,” she has said.
“It’s plain: the precarious situation facing the Basin today was fueled by overuse in the Lower Basin,” wrote Nick Peters, the chief system planning and projects officer for Colorado Springs Utilities, in an op-ed published during March in Colorado Politics.
Peters argued against a short-term deal in response to the exigency of this year’s dramatic declines.
In late March, I saw Mitchell at an event in Fort Collins celebrating the 60th anniversary of the Colorado Water Center. “I follow you to Lamar. I follow you to Grand Junction. I follow you to Silverthorne. I follow you here to get an interview,” I said jokingly.
“You can follow me tomorrow to Durango to the basin roundtable there if you want,” she answered with a smile.
We spoke about the Colorado River, but not on the record.
Two days later, I saw that she had traveled to southwest Colorado while I likely still slumbered. There, she delivered enough fire and brimstone to bring the attendees gathered at the roundtable in Ignacio to their feet in a standing ovation, according to the Durango Herald.
In Fort Collins, the Colorado Water Center dinner had been arranged around tables. I had signed up to be at Jennifer Gimbel’s table. As a director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board, she had once represented Colorado in the Colorado River affairs. She is now senior policy scholar at the Water Institute.
“It’s my understanding they were hoping to get a deal for 20 to 30 years. Now they’re looking at five years,” she told me. “They really need to just look at this year.”
I asked her whether the negotiations have been as transparent as they should be. Some have said they are not. We can hear the talking points of Becky Mitchell and other negotiators, but we have not heard about their strategies.
Gimbel pointed me to the frequent appearances of Mitchell at the basin roundtables and other water forum. She’s constantly on the road.
Schlatter and Megdal traced the trajectory of prior agreements on the Colorado River, pointing to the role of federal leadership in forging agreement.
“In this round of negotiations, federal leadership has been lagging,” they write. ”The Department of the Interior has not made clear what the consequences might be for the states if they fail to agree. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has been without a permanent commissioner since President Donald Trump retook office in January 2025. And federal staff have only recently begun helping to facilitate the discussions.”
They also say this: “We believe that agreement between the seven states is still possible. It may be less effective to bring in a third-party facilitator at this stage in the negotiation process, though, because of the degraded trust, hardened positions and shortage of time.”
Earlier in the evening, a film had been shown that extolled the work of the water center. Colorado State University produced Elwood Mead, after whom the reservoir along the Arizona-Nevada border is named, and others. The current staff of the water center includes Brad Udall, who has deep roots at many levels in the Colorado River Basin
Udall said something that captivated me, in part because it improved upon my own thoughts. I had been toying with an essay that laid out how Colorado during the roughly first 130 years of its existence had been all about putting water to beneficial use. And the last roughly 35 years had been most prominently about reconciling its past with the new limits. I was thinking in part of groundwater mining but also the fact that there really is no water to be had on the surface. There’s less. We’ve hit the wall and it is moving.
In Udall’s thesis — which I learned from him later he has delivered in several slide shows — the history of the Colorado River Basin can be seen in three phases. The 19th century water law meets 20th century infrastructure now colliding with 21st century population and climate change.
And 2026 seems to be a seminal year in that journey. We already have had heat records tumbling left and right, with an El Nino likely to deliver more. We quite possibly will see a record for low inflow into Lake Powell, undercutting 2002.
Dillon Reservoir in 2002. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots
I remember June 2002 quite well. On that month’s first Sunday I stood atop a mountain in Colorado and saw smoke from the Hayman Fire, which soon became the biggest fire in Colorado history (it’s now ranked 4th) as well as fire from the Coal Seam Fire near Glenwood Springs. More came later. It was a smoky summer in Colorado.
A few weeks ago, I heard former Gov. Bill Ritter and Bryan Hannegan, the CEO of Holy Cross Energy, fret about the risk of wildfire. The drought, said Ritter, “puts us in a very, very difficult and delicate position.”
State officials, meanwhile, are gearing up to address Front Range forests vulnerable to bark beetles. And at the Public Utilities Commission, Chairman Eric Blank has been openly worrying about whether Colorado will have enough electricity this summer to meet demand if we have unusually hot weather.
Changes mostly occur in increments, but there are times that changes take giant steps. “This year is going to teach us a lot,” said Nathan Coombs, manager of the Conejos Water Conservancy District in the San Luis Valley, when I saw him in Fort Collins. The district depends upon water storage in Platoro Reservoir, located in the San Juan Mountains. The normal inflow into the reservoir in late March, he said, was 12 to 15 cubic feet per second. “This morning, it was 195, because of the heat melting the snow.”
Two days later, at a forum in Alamosa, Coombs, a fourth-generation farmer, further explained the predicament. These earlier flows must be allowed to proceed downstream. Only later in the year will the reservoir be allowed to retain water. But will there be any?
Maybe we will get giant rain and snowstorms yet this spring. In the next 10 days, the forecast is for both wetter and warmer than normal. And, as Coombs and others pointed out, big rainstorms last October left the soil saturated.
October, of course, should bring snow, not rain, to higher elevations. We are living in different times, mostly warmer. Then there’s that elevated risk of an El Niño and a much, much warmer summer ahead of us and the winter beyond that.
Here are the typical outcomes from both El Niño and La Niña for the US. Note each El Niño and La Niña can present differently, these are just the average impacts. Graphic credit: NWS Salt Lake City office
Watering restrictions take effect on April 15. Courtesy of City of Arvada
Click the link to read the article on the Arvada Press website (Rylee Dunn). Here’s an excerpt:
April 7, 2026
After one of the driest winters on record in Colorado, the City of Arvada has declared a Stage 1 drought and will begin implementing mandatory watering restrictions on April 15. Starting April 15, all Arvada water customers — including residents, businesses and city-managed properties — will have to start following a mandatory two-day per week watering schedule. Outdoor watering is prohibited from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. Amy Willhite, Arvada’s Water Resources Administrator, said the watering restrictions will help Arvada preserve its water supply amid rising temperatures and historically low snowpack levels.
“Maintaining a reliable water supply is a public health and safety priority for the City of Arvada,” Willhite said. “Restricting outdoor watering ensures we can continue to have the supply needed for drinking, cooking, cleaning, and other essential needs this year and in the future.
“These conservation measures protect our water supply through the current drought, and unknown future conditions,” Willhite continued. “In a significant drought, it becomes the responsibility of our entire community to conserve water.”
The city’s goal with the restrictions is to reduce water use across the city by 20%. Once the restrictions take effect, single-family residential homes with even-numbered addresses will be permitted to water on Sundays and Thursdays. Homes with odd-numbered addresses will be allowed to water on Wednesdays and Saturdays. Apartment buildings and commercial buildings will be permitted to water on Tuesdays and Fridays unless otherwise instructed. Trees, shrubs, vegetable gardens, and flowers can be watered using a handheld hose or drip irrigation outside of 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.
The Colorado River flows near Hite, Utah on July 4, 2022. The river’s water supply is shrinking, and states are caught in a standoff about how to cut back on demand. Alex Hager/KUNC
Click the link to read the article on the KUNC website (Scott Franz):
April 8, 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.
Last month’s record breaking heat across the Mountain West led to the worst snowpack on record in Colorado and Utah, along with a significantly downgraded forecast for the upcoming supply of Colorado River water.
Cody Moser with the federal Colorado Basin River Forecast Center said in a monthly briefing Tuesday [April 7, 2026] that just 1.4 million acre feet of Colorado River water is expected to reach Lake Powell through July. That’s less than a quarter of what’s considered normal.
It’s also much lower than the 2.3 million acre feet Moser’s office projected a month ago, before the heat wave in the West melted away an already meager supply of snowpack.
“With record low snow pack, we have well below normal water supply forecasts,“ he said. “In many cases, our April through July (water) volume forecasts rank in the lowest five on record when compared to historical observations.”
The forecast for how much water will reach Flaming Gorge Reservoir also dropped more than 20% since the last monthly projection. Flows for the Yampa River are also projected to be near the record low.
Moser added it’s likely some rivers and streams in western Colorado have already reached their peak runoff for the year.
He said the water supply forecasts could improve if wet conditions arrive, or decline even further if the West remains dry.
The worsening river forecasts arrive as the seven states that use the waterway remain at an impasse this spring over how to share and conserve the water in the future.
If states can’t reach a deal, the Interior Department is expected to identify its preferred option for how to manage Lake Powell and Lake Mead after the current operating guidelines expire this fall.
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum told Arizona radio station KTAR News this week that the worsening spring runoff conditions are going to “require everybody to dig in and take bigger cuts than they want, and we haven’t reached that spot yet.”
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
Arches visitor numbers soared during the Mighty Five campaign, plummeted in 2020 during the first COVID wave, surged in the pandemic’s aftermath, then corrected and plateaued. The correction corresponds with the implementation of the timed-entry reservation system. Source: NPS.
Earlier this year, the Trump administration cancelled the timed-entry reservation system for Arches National Park. The move was inspired in part by complaints from some Moab and Grand County elected officials and business owners who claimed the system had hampered overall visitation to the area, thereby hurting businesses’ bottom lines and diminishing tax revenues.
A new analysis is throwing that reasoning into doubt. And it raises the question of whether visitation to Arches is fueling Moab’s tourism industry, or the community and its amenities are drawing folks to the national park, or something in between. But it also should spur a conversation on who or what a national park should be serving.
During the Cold War, when Moab was primarily a uranium mining and milling town, with a bit of sightseeing, jeep-riding, and river-floating tourism on the side, Arches National Park was relatively quiet, with an average annual visitation of about 250,000 between 1965 and 1986. Winters could be downright empty: During January 1979, the first year monthly counts were recorded, only 2,970 people — or less than 100 per day on average — entered the park.
Domestic uranium production peaked in 1980. In 1984, the massive Atlas uranium mill just down the road from the entrance to Arches National Park shut down, and the industry effectively perished, creating an economic vacuum into which outdoor recreation-oriented tourism could slide. The Groff brothers opened Rim Cyclery in 1983, began renting mountain bikes a year later, and hosted the first Canyonlands Fat Tire Festival and Moab Stage Race (for road bikes) in 1986. The latter included a race from Moab, into Arches National Park, and back, something that would not fly nowadays.
Arches annual visitation also exceeded the 400,000 mark for the first time that year and climbed swiftly thereafter. While it’s difficult to suss out the cause and effect here, it is pretty clear that Arches visitation did not drive Moab’s transformation into a mountain bike and outdoor recreation mecca. If anything, it was the other way around. Arches visitation plateaued in the early 2000s, but Moab and Grand County’s amenities and tourism related sectors — retail trade, real estate, and services — continued to add jobs and in-migration remained strong.
The non-national-park public lands around Moab see far more visitors than Arches National Park each year. Source: BLM.
Arches visitation and Moab’s might as an amenities economy continued to mirror each other. Utah’s Mighty Five marketing campaign helped drive Arches visits from less than 1 million in 2009 to 1.7 million in 2018. This led to packed parking lots, trail traffic jams, interminable waits at the entrance gates as lines of cars spilled out onto the highway for a mile or more, and dozens of instances in which rangers had to turn visitors away because the park simply couldn’t handle any more.
In 2021, a post-Covid surge drove visitation up to 1.8 million, prompting park officials to finally pull the trigger on timed entry, an idea that had been floating around for years. Requiring visitors to reserve their spot would spread the crowds out, at least, while also giving them more predictability. It sucks to drive for hours or even fly across the world to see Delicate Arch, only to get turned away at the gate. The program was launched as a pilot in April 2022, and made permanent the following year. Arches visitation tumbled soon thereafter, dropping to 1.46 million in 2022 and 1.48 million in 2023.
Last spring, Moab resident Matt Hancock presented an analysis to the Grand County commissioners purportedly showing that timed-entry led to the visitation decline, which resulted in a decrease in transient room tax collections. And that decline, he argued, was costing Moab about $45 million annually in direct visitor spending, which then rippled out into the community in the form of lost tax revenue and the services they fund.
Direct visitor spending in Grand County, Utah, dropped off after the COVID surge, but remained above pre-COVID levels through 2024, throwing doubt on claims that Arches’ timed-entry drove the post 2021 decline. Source: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute County Tourism Dashboard.
Grand County Commissioner Brian Martinez then formulated an “Access and Capacity Enhancement Alternative” plan for managing Arches National Park. It favored expanding infrastructure and packing more crowds into the park, and slammed any sort of “demand restrictions” such as timed-entry, saying Grand County “considers its impact on visitation, the local economy, and the community to be unacceptable.”
Martinez presented the plan to a group of state and federal officials at a closed State of Utah and National Park Service Workshop in Salt Lake City aimed at exploring ways to give local officials more control over public lands. A few months later, reservation systems were nixed at Arches, Yosemite, Glacier, and Rocky Mountain National Parks.
Will this boost visitation and Moab’s economy? Possibly, but not likely, according to yet another look, this one by Moab resident Emily Campbell. She also finds a correlation between Arches visitor number declines and timed entry, but points out that the corresponding transient room tax decreases could be attributed to other factors, such as a shift in visitors’ lodging choices. They may be camping on public lands, for example, or staying in neighboring counties, where hotels and such tend to be less expensive.
Meanwhile, other sectors of the economy have thrived, with food services, retail, and construction taxable sales shooting up even as Arches visitation has lagged. Perhaps it’s a sign that Moab’s economy is diversifying slightly, if only from relying heavily on tourism to also depending on folks that actually live there, but earn their incomes from outside the county.
Rather than trying to build on this diversification, however, Grand County is continuing to throw resources at yet another study aimed at determining the economic impact of timed entry — regardless of the fact that the reservation system has been suspended, at least for now.
Of course, all of this skirts around the deeper and bigger issue: the purpose of national parks. Is it really to bolster gateway communities’ tourism industries and enrich local business owners? Or is it, as the National Park Service’s mission states, to preserve “unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations”?
That’s what parks officials should be thinking about, first and foremost. They should manage the park for the long-term benefit of the park and the resources there. Secondary to that is its effect on the visitors’ experience. Limiting the number of people traipsing around the park by whatever means will be better for the park (or at least not worse for it). And spreading out the crowds with a reservation system will not only make Arches more enjoyable to visit, but will also make it more predictable. That, in the long run, will be better for the park, for its visitors, and, yes, for the gateway communities, too.
Moab’s tourism industry might be wise to get outside the growth at all costs mindset as well. The place has been adding hotel rooms at an astounding rate, looking to capitalize on the Moab mystique. But there are limits to how much visitation can continue to increase without not only wrecking the surrounding public lands but also diminishing the experience and driving folks away. Who knows, the tourism industry could bust just as hard as uranium mining did 40 years ago.
March certainly went out like a lion, though maybe not in the way that the saying is normally understood. It was hot. Damned hot. I’ll give a more thorough rundown on the heatwave and a final snowpack analysis in a later dispatch (after the next storm system moves through in hopes that it might improve the situation). But for now here’s a few stats from the heat wave.
204; 279: Number of monthly high-temperature records that were broken or tied in Arizona and Colorado, respectively, during the last two weeks of March.
102° F: Temperature at the Phoenix airport on March 18, setting a new monthly record and beating the earliest first 100-degree day by eight days.
105° F: The temperature in Phoenix on March 19, 20, and 21, breaking the March record yet again.
78.8° F: Average temperature in Phoenix for the month of March, 6.5° higher than the previous record high average temperature for the month.
109° F: Recorded temperature in Yuma, Arizona, on March 20.
78° F: Temperature in Del Norte, Colorado, on March 20, a new monthly record.
92° F: Temperature in Trinidad, Colorado, on March 21, smashing the previous monthly record high of 85° set … two days earlier.
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
Click the link to read the article on the Tuscon.com website (Tony Davis). Here’s an excerpt:
April 8, 2026
U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, pressed Monday to spell out how he’ll handle the Colorado River’s water crisis, wouldn’t get specific but said repeatedly that “nobody will be happy” with how his department will split a rapidly dwindling supply of river water among the seven states, including Arizona, that want a piece of it. Speaking at a roundtable in the Tucson area populated by a host of public lands industry leaders and University of Arizona President Suresh Garimella, Burgum pledged to hand down a decision this month on the first of two crucial, divisive issues his office is confronting regarding the river. That decision will be how much water the Interior Department’s Bureau of Reclamation will release from its upstream reservoirs in the four Upper Colorado River Basin states to head off a potential calamity in which Glen Canyon Dam, forming the boundary between the Upper and Lower Basins, would no longer receive enough water to continue generating electricity that serves customers in seven Western states.
The white bathtub ring clinging to the sandstone walls of Glen Canyon is more than a marker of a receding lake; it is a physical manifestation of a century-old accounting error. PHOTO BY BOB HEMBREE (MARCH 2019)
The white bathtub ring clinging to the sandstone walls of Glen Canyon is more than a marker of a receding lake; it is a physical manifestation of a century-old accounting error. For decades, the conventional story of the Colorado River’s decline has been framed as a tragic stroke of bad luck. The narrative, popularized in modern classics like Cadillac Desert, suggests that the framers of the 1922 Colorado River Compact simply did their best with a limited record of “eighteen years of streamflow measurement” taken during an unusually wet “binge.”
However, emerging historical research and systems analysis tell a more complicated and troubling story. In their definitive study, Science Be Dammed, authors Eric Kuhn and John Fleck argue that the crisis we face in 2026 was not an accident of nature but a predictable consequence of “selective science.” The decision-makers of 1922 were not victims of ignorance; they were sophisticated professionals who chose to ignore inconvenient data in favor of a political vision that required the river to be larger than it actually was.
Eugene Clyde LaRue measuring the flow in Nankoweap Creek, 1923. Photo credit: USGS
The Inconvenient Hydrologist
As the seven basin states gathered at Bishop’s Lodge in Santa Fe to carve up the river, they were joined by Eugene Clyde (E.C.) LaRue, a hydrologist for the U.S. Geological Survey. [Eric Kuhn responding to my X post, “Actually LaRue was never allowed to attend a Commission meeting. He asked, but Hoover said no.] LaRue presented the commissioners with a conclusion that threatened the very foundation of their negotiations. His data, which included early gauge records and historical flood markers, suggested that the river’s long-term average was approximately 15 million acre-feet (maf)
LaRue explicitly warned the commission that the period between 1905 and 1922 was a hydrological anomaly. Had the negotiators included the drier records from the late 1890s, the estimated annual flow would have dropped significantly. As Kuhn and Fleck note, the decision-makers had at their disposal a relatively thorough, almost modern picture of the river’s hydrology. They chose to ignore it because accepting LaRue’s science might have left them with a flow too low to reach the compromises necessary to develop the West.
Members of the Colorado River Commission, in Santa Fe in 1922, after signing the Colorado River Compact. From left, W. S. Norviel (Arizona), Delph E. Carpenter (Colorado), Herbert Hoover (Secretary of Commerce and Chairman of Commission), R. E. Caldwell (Utah), Clarence C. Stetson (Executive Secretary of Commission), Stephen B. Davis, Jr. (New Mexico), Frank C. Emerson (Wyoming), W. F. McClure (California), and James G. Scrugham (Nevada) CREDIT: COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY WATER RESOURCES ARCHIVE via Aspen Journalism
Paper Water and the System Trap
By sidelining LaRue and enshrining a “paper water” figure of 16.4 million acre-feet into the Law of the River, the commissioners fell into a classic “system trap.” They created a legal stock of water rights that far exceeded the river’s physical flow. This inflated number was essential to the “reinforcing loop” of 20th-century growth. It provided the legal certainty needed to secure federal funding for massive infrastructure projects like the Hoover Dam and the Glen Canyon Dam.
This intentional overestimation created a massive “information delay.” For eighty years, the system appeared stable only because the Upper Basin states were slow to develop their shares, allowing their “unused” water to flow downstream. This masked the fundamental deficit, leading to a state of “overshoot” in which the regional economy came to depend on water that did not exist. Professor Rhett Larson describes the resulting legal framework as a system of “calling shotgun” that was excellent for settling a desert but is catastrophic for managing one in a time of scarcity.
The End of the Delay
Today, the “delay” has finally ended, and the “inconvenient science” of 1922 has become the undeniable reality of 2026. The river’s source is being further depleted by “aridification,” a process climate scientist Brad Udall describes as a “sponge above our head” that evaporates moisture before it can reach the streamflow. We are now witnessing the collision of a 100-year-old legal fiction with a 21st-century climate reality.
The current impasse between the Upper and Lower Basins is a symptom of “policy resistance,” where every actor is incentivized to protect their “paper” share even as the “wet” water disappears. As Professor Andrea Gerlak observes, if a system has 25 years to produce an agreement and fails, there is likely something fundamentally wrong with the system itself. Solving the crisis at Lake Powell will require more than engineering; it will require a paradigm shift that finally aligns our laws with the river’s actual physical limits.
March was…not helpful. NOAA CBRFC's April 1st (50% exceedance) forecast now has Lake Powell April-July inflows at 1400 KAF, 22% of average. Only 2002 (963 KAF) and 1977 (1208 KAF) ended up with lower inflows than that. If dry conditions continue through spring, 2026 could drop below 2002.
Click the link to read the article on the CU Boulder Today website (Lauren Lipuma and Yvaine Ye):
March 31. 2026
For the past weeks, temperatures in Colorado have surged 20 to 30 degrees above average for March, normally one of the state’s snowiest months.
That’s on top of an unusually warm and dry winter for the American Southwest, a region already grappling with long-term water shortages since around 2000. In Colorado, snowpack sits at about 40% of normal levels, among the lowest since comprehensive modern records began roughly four decades ago.
In parts of the southern Colorado River Basin, a 250,000-square-mile watershed spanning seven states in the southwest, snowpack has dropped to less than one-third of normal. The basin provides water for 40 million people and 5.5 million acres of farmland.
Snowpack acts like frozen water towers, said Ben Livneh, associate professor in the department of Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering. As temperatures rise and the Southwest enters its typically hot and dry spring and summer months, melting snow provides about 80% of the water used by downstream communities in the Colorado River Basin.
In response to the snow drought, Denver’s water authority recently declared a Stage 1 drought, the first drought alert the city has issued since the summer of 2013. Other Front Range cities are considering similar measures.
“In Colorado, our peak snowpack happens around mid-April, so there is still a chance that we could get more snow,” said Livneh, who’s also the director of the Western Water Assessment (WWA) at the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES). According to the National Weather Service, a storm is bringing precipitation to Colorado this week, with the potential for a few inches of accumulation in the mountains. “But at this point, it does look like we have a long way to go to catch up.”
CU Boulder Today sat down with Livneh to talk about the impact of a snow drought on Colorado communities, whether drought is the new normal and what individuals can do.
How dry is it?
Colorado lies in a mountainous region far from the ocean, so our climate naturally varies a lot. As a result, it’s not uncommon to see big swings between wet years and dry years.
Right now, we are in a very dry period, and the numbers are pretty stark. There’s barely any snow on mountains in lower elevations, and some snowpack could melt early because of the warm weather. When we look ahead to the amount of water expected to flow into our reservoirs, which would be the water people actually get to use, the current forecasts fall among the lowest we’ve seen since the early 1980s when the detailed snow measurements began.
Across Colorado, snowpack sits at below 50% of normal levels as of March 30, 2026. (Credit: National Weather Service)
How does this year compare with previous drought years?
There were some years that were drier, like 1977 and 1981. But those years weren’t as warm as this year. Over the past 40 years, since we’ve had continuous observation data, 2002 and 2012 were also warm with low precipitation, but they weren’t as dry as this year.
We have a lot of systems in place that were specifically designed to handle individual bad years, like these big, impressive reservoirs. But we’ve been in a dry period for the past 25 years, and every dry year puts additional stress on our infrastructure.
What could be causing this snow drought?
We’re currently in the warmest 25-year period on record, and warming is one of the clearest signals of recent climatic changes. When it’s warmer, the atmosphere can hold more moisture.
At the same time, the climate in our region naturally swings between wetter and drier decades. It’s almost like a pendulum that shifts every 20 or 30 years.
What may be happening now is that those two things— climate change and natural fluctuations— are overlapping, creating something of a perfect storm for this year.
What is the WWA doing to help?
WWA is working to support decision makers to best manage their water, based on what is actually available, as well as what is forecasted in the Colorado River Basin.
Much of our regional economy relies on water, from the ski industry to food growers and power generators. The stress from drought is widespread.
Our region’s planning and treaties in the past were based on assumptions about historical conditions. Now we’re trying to figure out whether these dry conditions are a drought or perhaps closer to the long-term normal conditions.
We are also trying to get a better sense of what mountain communities are experiencing and what types of information they need, because many of them rely on the snowpack and snow melt as their primary reservoir for water.
Should people be worried about water shortages right now?
This is really a large-scale phenomenon, so if anything, I would encourage people to get curious about the science and what we can say about the current conditions. Indoor water use doesn’t consume very much, and cities are not really at risk of running out of water. But people should be mindful not to waste water outdoors. Pay attention to city rules for outdoor water use, like when you can turn on your sprinklers and water your lawn.
Other than that, I encourage people to go outside. This is certainly a big departure from what we think Colorado winters should be like, but it also offers opportunities for people to bike to work more often, or spend more time outdoors doing things they might not otherwise be able to do.
The next Aspinall Unit Coordination Meeting for the Aspinall Unit & Gunnison River will be heldThursday, April 23rd, 2026 at 1:00 pm.
This meeting will be held virtually via Microsoft Teams. There will not be an in-person meeting location for this meeting. The link to the Teams meeting is below.
Reclamation conducts Public Operations Meeting three times per year to gather input for determining upcoming operations for the Aspinall Unit & Gunnison River. The meeting agenda will include updates on current snowpack, forecasts for spring runoff conditions and spring peak operations, the weather outlook, and planned operations for the remainder of the year.
Contact Andrew Limbach (alimbach@usbr.gov or 970-248-0644) for more information regarding Aspinall operations or the Operation Group meeting.
Denver Water crews use a special tube [Federal Sampler] to gather snow samples near Winter Park as part of pre-set snow courses. ASO uses these ground measurements to supplement data collected from the planes to determine how much water is in a watershed. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Metal signs mark the survey site in a patch of forest above the cabin. Once the team arrived, Mike Ardison, a hydrologic technician for the Colorado Snow Survey, unloaded a green trundle off his back, then unwrapped it to reveal sections of a hollow, aluminum tube. It extends to roughly eight feet long once he fits the pieces together…To measure the snow levels, Domonkos and Ardison work their way along the snow course, dropping the tube at a series of set points along the path. A column of snow captured inside reveals the height, then the pair hang the tube from a spring-powered milk scale to clock the weight. Digital scales might be more accurate, but Ardison said their batteries wouldn’t last long in normal winter temperatures…
Crouched over a notebook, [Brian] Domonkos punched a calculator to arrive at a figure for the site. He let out a sigh when he arrived at the final number: 2.2 inches of snow-water equivalent, less than half the previous record low measured on the same date in 1977…Other measurements taken at snow courses around April 1 were just as alarming. Out of the 64 sites in Colorado with at least 50 years of data, 60 reported either record-low snow levels or tied the lowest on record…Those results confirm 2026 as the worst year for Colorado snowpack in recorded history, said Russ Schumacher, a professor of atmospheric science at Colorado State University and Colorado’s state climatologist. A lack of historical precedent means it’s harder to fully predict the impact of such low water levels. Schumacher, however, expects reservoir levels to rapidly decline in the summer and fall. Fire risk is harder to predict, but he said major wildfires usually appear in years when the snowpack is lower and melts early.
“We’re maybe in one of these liminal spaces where you can see what’s coming, but it’s not here yet,” Schumacher said. “And, yeah, that’s a challenging situation.”
Click the link to read the discussion on the USBR website:
The Colorado Basin River Forecast Center (CBRFC) geographic forecast area includes the Upper Colorado River Basin (UCRB), Lower Colorado River Basin (LCRB), and Eastern Great Basin (GB).
Water Supply Forecasts
April 1 water supply forecasts are well below normal and summarized in the figure and table below. Snowpack and soil moisture are the primary hydrologic conditions that impact the water supply outlook, while future weather is the primary source of forecast uncertainty.
Water Year Weather
The 2025–26 meteorological winter (December–Februrary) was the warmest winter on record for vast swaths of the CBRFC area. In March, an extraordinarily anomalous high pressure system — of a strength that is more typical of July — impacted the Southwest. This ridge brought summertime temperatures at a time when most mountainous areas are usually still building a snowpack.
Across the region in mid-to-late March, temperature records were smashed for several days on end. In Flagstaff, AZ, 11 days reached or surpassed the previous March high temperature record of 73°. Shockingly, on two days the mercury climbed to 83° and 84° , significantly surpassing the April high temperature record of 80° . At 8,710 feet above sea level in Alta, UT, where March high temperatures average in the 30s, temperatures reached at least 60° on eight days. Nine days of at least 100° were observed in Phoenix, AZ, including the earliest 100° day on record. The depth and duration of this heat wave was unprecedented in the period of record. It will likely go down as one of the most extreme weather events to ever impact the CBRFC area.
The same ridge of high pressure that brought searing temperatures to the low elevations and snowmelt across high elevations also resulted in very dry air and no precipitation. Numerous SNOTEL sites across the CBRFC area observed their driest March on record.
The water year as a whole tells a different story. In October, several rounds of heavy rain tied to decaying tropical storms brought record flooding to portions of AZ, southern UT, and southwest CO — making it one of the wettest Octobers on record. Water year-to-date (October–March) precipitation is highly variable, ranging from well below normal across much of Colorado and Utah’s mountains, to near/above normal in the Upper Green River Basin and portions of the LCRB. The figures and table below summarize March temperatures and water year 2026 precipitation.
Snowpack Conditions
Snow water equivalent (SWE) has been tracking at or near record low much of the season. An extremely dry March and significant snowmelt during the last half of the month led to historically low April 1 snow water equivalent conditions across the region. An NRCS-Utah Snow Survey Special Report states that “at no time since systematic snowpack measurements began around 1930 has April 1 snowpack been this low in the state of Utah, and 2026 SWE is roughly five times lower than the previous record low”. A similar analysis performed by the Colorado Climate Center concluded that “this has been the worst year for Colorado snowpack in recorded history, and most locations have less than half of the previous record low”.
UCRB and GB April 1 snow covered area is 25-30% of the 2001-2025 median, which is also the lowest on record for early April dating back to 2001. 1 April 1 CBRFC model SWE conditions are generally less than 30% of normal across the UCRB and GB. SWE conditions are summarized in the figure and table below.
Soil Moisture
CBRFC hydrologic model soil moisture conditions impact water supply forecasts. Basins with above average soil moisture conditions can be expected to experience more efficient runoff from rainfall or snowmelt while basins with below average soil moisture conditions can be expected to have lower runoff efficiency until soil moisture deficits are fulfilled. The timing and magnitude of spring runoff is impacted by snowpack conditions, spring weather, and soil moisture conditions.
Mid-November 2025 soil moisture conditions were below normal across most areas as a result of warmer and drier than normal weather during the 2025 water year. Higher elevation soil moisture/baseflow conditions typically don’t change much during winter months as snow is accumulating. However, this has not been the case this winter. Model soil moisture conditions as a percent of average have improved across most basins as a result of snowmelt and precipitation falling as rain instead of snow. CBRFC hydrologic model soil moisture conditions are shown in the figures below.
Upcoming Weather
Mild and unsettled weather is expected over the CBRFC area into the middle of April, with a few chances for rain showers and very high elevation snowfall. Above average temperatures will dominate the period. The 7-day precipitation forecast and the Climate Prediction Center (CPC) 8–14 day temperature and precipitation outlooks are shown in the figures below.
Climate Prediction Center precipitation and temperature probability forecasts for April 14–20, 2026.
The All American Canal, the largest diversion on the Colorado River, passes through Winterhaven, CA on its way to the Imperial Valley. The Colorado River is seen flowing next to it.
April 2, 2026
In the southeast corner of California, 300-foot-tall sand dunes rise from a sunbaked landscape dotted with ocotillo and creosote bushes. Summer temperatures here regularly exceed 110 degrees, and annual rainfall is comparable to that of the Sahara Desert. Despite its unforgiving terrain, more than 180,000 residents live in Imperial County, one of the country’s most productive agricultural regions and more recently a magnet for data center development and lithium extraction proposals. This has all been made possible by turn-of-the-20th century canals that carve up the region, supplying it with more than a million gallons of Colorado River water every minute.
“We’ve often called it the lifeblood of Imperial Valley,” said Robert Schettler, a spokesperson for Imperial Irrigation District, the area’s public utility, which manages the region’s over 3,000 miles of drains and canals. “If something were to happen to that river, we would all have to pack up and leave.”
Something is happening to the Colorado River. Over the past century, its average water supply has fallen by nearly a third due to prolonged drought and climate change. Experts predict that decline will continue, threatening cities, tribes and farms that depend on the river’s flow, from Wyoming, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico to Arizona, Nevada and Northern Mexico. Most of the Colorado River’s water starts as snowpack in the Rocky Mountains, but after the American West experienced the warmest winter ever recorded, snow levels are now at historic lows, prompting experts to warn that 2026 may be one of the river’s driest years yet.
That could spell disaster for Imperial County, whose harsh desert landscape of windblown sand and rugged burnt-orange mountains was transformed more than a century ago into productive, gridded farmland dotted with small cities such as Brawley, El Centro and Calexico…Imperial Valley’s agricultural industry consumes by far the largest share of water in the region, about 97% of the 3.1 million acre-feet managed by the Imperial Irrigation District every year…Those ambitious and largely successful conservation efforts have come at a cost. Much of the water used by farmers historically flowed into the nearby Salton Sea, but as farmers have reduced their water use, less runoff has reached the man-made lake, accelerating an existing environmental crisis Over the last three decades, the Salton Sea has shrunk by more than 60 square miles, exposing a dry lakebed laden with pesticides, particulate matter and heavy metals. Those contaminants are carried as dust through the air into nearby communities, contributing to a childhood asthma rate triple that of the national average. Now, farmers such as Brian Strahm, whose family has been growing crops in the area for four generations, are concerned they may have to decrease their water use further. That may prove difficult since farmers have already put in place many efficiency measures, Strahm said…Farmers say cuts could seriously harm the area’s already struggling economy. In addition to being the county with the highest percentage of Latinos in California, Imperial has among the highest unemployment rates of any county in the country, at nearly 19%. For those who do find work, the agricultural industry offers a lifeline, accounting for one out of every six jobs in the region.
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
