Romancing the River: The Headwaters Challenge — George Sibley (SibleysRivers.com) #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Click the link to read the article on the Sibley’s Rivers website (George Sibley):

August 29, 2024

An Apology: Our service that sends these posts hs malfunctioned; this one sat in limbo for the past two weeks. I hope we have things back to where we can again get it to you every 3-4 weeks.  – George

In the last post here, with the Colorado River’s Upper and Lower Basins in stalemate over how to distribute the suffering after the 2026 expiration of the Interim Guidelines, I suggested we use the time to do what we’ve all been saying we need to do, but find it hard to do: ‘think outside the box.’ The ‘box’ in this case being the Colorado River Compact. We can go back to Monday-morning-quarterbacking the rivermeisters as they try to figure out how to drag the Compact, its misbegotten two-basin division and its Marley’s-chain Law of the River into the 21st century. But for the moment – let’s just indulge in imagining river scenarios that might actually reflect Colorado River realities in the 21st century.

​In the last post (click if you need a review) I sketched out the nature of the ‘desert river,’ which is what the Colorado River is. Rivers flowing through deserts only exist at all because of mountains or other highlands that force air moving through (as in ‘prevailing westerlies’) to rise, cool, and condense whatever water vapor it is carrying into precipitation, rain or snow, that falls on the mountains and eventually flows downhill because that’s what liquid water does, eventually coalescing into a river. In this case, it flows out into deserts which by definition are arid regions with a paucity of precipitation and a powerful propensity for turning liquid water back into vapor. Once the desert river is in its desert, it begins to disappear because it gets so little recharge from precipitation beyond its mountain origins, and gives up its water to riparian life, to evaporation, to groundwater.  We can say with some accuracy that it is the nature of a desert river to gradually disappear into its deserts – as liquid water, anyway.

​The Colorado River is a true desert river; the mountains and highland plateaus surrounding the natural basin produce 85-90 percent of the river’s total water supply, according to the Western Water Assessment study of the ‘state of the river science.’ Now it almost entirely disappears in the deserts of the Southwest – the high ‘cold deserts’ of the Colorado Plateau and Southern Rockies piedmont, and the subtropical Sonora and Mojave Deserts below the plateau canyons. This is mostly due to human uses now; we remember with nostalgia that the Colorado River flowed naturally into the Gulf of California, but that was mostly during its snowmelt flood season; by late fall and through the winter there were probably many years when it did not make it through the delta jungle to the Gulf at all.

​The Compact experience should make us all leery of dividing a river into basins. But the way a desert river works suggests a natural division into two parts – as opposed to a two-basin political division, using state boundaries that have no relevance to down-on-the-ground geography. The natural division is a water-production region, in the highlands where the majority of the precipitation falls and the river forms its tributaries; and a water-consumption region, in the deserts where that produced water gradually disappears – especially now that humans are spreading it much farther than nature ever intended.

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

​Today, we’ll go to the headwaters, to explore the river’s ‘water-production’ region. The major water-production region for the Colorado River lies almost entirely above the 8,000-foot elevation, mostly on the west slopes of the Southern Rockies in Colorado and Wyoming, but also water from the Wind Rivers in Wyoming, and the east slopes of the Wasatch Range in Utah, and the high plateaus and mountains of eastern Arizona and western New Mexico that give Arizona the Gila River.

​The Western Water Assessment graphic below basically shows the water-production region for the Colorado River (whose natural basin is the black line). ‘April 1 SWE’ is the ‘snow water equivalent on April 1,’ the amount of water in the snowpack that constitutes the majority of the river’s water. Late March to early April is generally presumed to be the time of the highest snowpack in the mountains and other highlands surrounding the upper reaches of the River, so a map of the ‘April 1 SWE’ is a passable map of the river’s water-production area. The blue areas (inside the black line) are less than 15 percent of the 245,000 square-mile River Basin, and as you can see, it is not a contiguous area – just the places that rise high enough to make the moving air give up to the highlands its moisture as rain or snow. Water management decisions throughout the Basin begin to be made on the basis of the April 1 SWE. (The gray lines, by the way, are watershed boundaries for different tributaries and divisions of the river, not the waterways themselves.)

​You’ll note that the adjacent averaged annual ‘Runoff’ map indicates that considerably less water flows out of the water-production region than the ‘April 1 SWE’ map shows. Scientists have found that the amount of water that actually makes it into the Colorado River is only a fraction of the water that falls in the river’s water-production region. The Western Water Assessment’s study of the ‘State of the Science’ on Colorado River climate and hydrology claims that on average around 170 million acre-feetof water falls on the Colorado River Basin annually, with the largest portion of that falling on the highlands of the water-production area – yet the river carries on average less than a tenth of that precipitation. What happens to the rest of it?

​The short answer there is, the sun is what happens to it: the sun gives, and the sun takes away. The sun distills pure water vapor from the oceans, and the winds (also created by the sun) carry that vapor over the land areas, where begins the ‘dance’ I described in the last post, as water vapor gets pushed up against mountain slopes and condensed to precipitation which falls on the mountains as rain or snow – where the sun and winds quickly go to work on trying to transform it back to vapor.

This begins even in the depths of winter, in sub-freezing weather: the sun beating down on a ‘solid’ snowpack releases enough heat energy to turn the snow crystals directly to water vapor, without going through the liquid state – a process called sublimation. Sublimation happens when a snowpack is directly exposed to the sun; it also happens when the wind blows the snow around breaking down the ice crystals; and it happens when coniferous tree branches intercept and hold the falling snow or rain, which is vaporized off the branches by the sun. On a day of brilliant sun, fairly common in the water-production region, you can actually see ‘steam’ – water vapor – rising where snow sits on an exposed darker surface – rocks or branches. And all of this in temperatures below freezing.

The East River Valley, northwest of the historic town of Gothic, home to the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory. The mountain with the pointed peak in the distance is Mount Crested Butte. Photo credit: Mark Stone/University of Washington

​A major study of the water-production area is underway in the Upper East River valley near Crested Butte, as part of a U.S. Energy Department ‘bedrock to upper atmosphere’ study of water and energy; it includes what is probably the most intensive study of sublimation ever assembled. The science team is mainly working on sun and wind sublimation in open areas; early results suggest that around 10 percent of a winter snowpack disappears through that form of sublimation. Losses from branch interception might be as large as that or larger. Guesstimates over the years suggest that as much as a third of the precipitation that falls might disappear through sublimation of ‘solid’ snow to water vapor through the course of a winter.

The snowpack is only ‘safe’ from sublimation where it gets some protection from the sun and wind. Snow that makes it down to the ground in forested areas – not intercepted by branches – is sheltered somewhat from the sun and wind. ‘Aspect’ (location on the mountain) is also important: snow on the north and east slopes of mountains may never see the direct sun all winter, although it will feel the wind.

​Eventually winter turns to not-winter, and the accumulated snowpack begins to melt as the air generally warms (with sublimation also ratcheting up with heat). One of three things will happen to the resulting ‘snow water.’ Where slopes are steep or rocky or both, a lot of the water melting out will become runoff – water running off under the affluence of gravity: trickles run together and find their way into the stream flowing out of the watershed, streams meeting other streams in ever larger watersheds until rivers flow out of the mountains into the water-consumption region where they are quickly put to work by farmers and ranchers.

​Back up to the melting edge, however – if it can, the water melting out of snow will not run off but will sink into the ground, the preferred alternative for the ‘life project’ on the planet (but not always for the human users). How much water runs off, and how much sinks in, depends on how fast the snow melts and how steep or rocky the slope.

The water that sinks in – groundwater – passes first into a soil area laced and spaced by the roots of all the plant life living on the surface, from little tundra miniatures to great trees. This is variously called the ‘vadose zone,’ the interflow, or most plainly, the unsaturated zone. The roots in the unsaturated zone will take up a lot of that water for their plants to use: some of it will go into the plant’s structure and systems, but most of it – as much as 95 percent of it – will be transpired by the plant: emitted into the atmosphere as water vapor, a kind of air-conditioning system that increases with higher temperatures.

​For big old spruces in the subalpine forest, transpiration might be around 80 gallons a day on average (more on a warmer day); for lodgepole pine, maybe 40 gallons a day. That might not sound like lot, a mere 0.0002 of an acre-foot. But next time in the mountains, look at a forested slope across a valley, and try to estimate the number of trees there to the nearest thousand….  

​In addition, any time the flowing or standing water is exposed to the sun, the sun takes a cut through straight evaporation. Evaporation also increases with temperature. One of the East River project researchers, Dr. Rosemary Carroll, claims in a research paper that, in a typically dense montane forest, the total evapotranspiration (evaporation plus transpiration) can add up to equal the precipitation that fell on the forest.

So it becomes clear that the water produced in its mountains for the Colorado River is a ‘net’ figure – precipitation minus natural depletion from a) a winter of sublimation every day the sun shines, b) evaporation of water melted from snow when exposed to the sun, and c) transpiration by the forests of the water making its way underground.

​But we have to then add back in the groundwater that makes its way down through the unsaturated zone to a saturated zone below most of the thirsty roots. The top of the saturated zone is called the water table, which rises and falls with the amount of water saoking into the ground. Water in both the unsaturated and saturated zones filters its way downslope pulled by gravity and pushed by more water coming in above.

​Eventually it will makes its way to the bottom of the watershed where the stream flows; there, if the water table is higher than the stream level, the groundwater will feed into the stream. Scientists have figured out how to tell from a sample of stream water how much of it is runoff, and how much has come through the groundwater route; over a good water year with healthy water tables, the ratio of groundwater to runoff will be about 50-50, with runoff being greater during the spring flood season and groundwater dominating the fall and winter flows.

​Carroll notes in the same paper that the journey of groundwater to the stream might be very leisurely; while some of it might make its way through the cobble found in many mountain valleys in a matter of days, water that sinks into cracks and interstices in more solid rock might not show up in the stream for a century – or never, unless someone drills into the rock and installs a pump.  

​In the final tally, about one-fifth of the precipitation that falls in the high headwaters emerges as water for the river. Another portion of it is in ‘longterm storage’ as groundwater in aquifers. But the rest, probably more than half of it, has gone back to the vaporous state of water. The sun giveth, and the sun taketh away.

​The ‘Headwaters Challenge’ ought to be obvious. We can’t do a lot about what happens up in the alpine tundra – but are there management strategies for the forests we could employ that might cut down on the amount of water we lose to the sun there, increasing the net water production even a little to compensate for what we are losing to the warming climate? That’s the romantic exploration I’m on these days, reading a lot of scientific papers I only partially understand. I may or may not be ready to say anything about this in the next post – but I wanted to get the challenge in front of those who read this, to ask if any of you have any ideas….

Meanwhile – the apparent preference of the sun for water in the vaporous state should probably make us a little nervous. Obviously, the warmer it gets, the more water gets sublimated, evaporated and transpired – and we seem to be doing all we can to make the world warmer. Not a good survival strategy for species dependent on liquid water, even though we are convinced we cannot survive without the things whose byproducts make the world warmer…. That’s a bigger challenge facing us all.

Map credit: AGU

Topsoil Moisture % short/very short week ending August 25, 2024 — @NOAADrought

43% of the Lower 48 is short/very short, 6% more than last week. Soils dried out throughout the US, except on the West Coast and in the Northeast. Greatest drying was in the Eastern U.S. All of WV is short/very short.

Researchers Urge Closing Outdated Water Rule to Aid #ColoradoRiver Crisis — Darden School of Business University of #Virginia #COriver #aridification

The Colorado River’s Horseshoe Bend. Photo credit: Gert Boers/Unsplash

Click the link to read the release on the University of Virginia website (McGregor McCance):

August 26, 2024

Researchers investigating the historic stresses of the American West’s water supply have identified a simple solution that could put parts of the Colorado River Basin on a more sustainable path.

In a new paper published today, a consortium of scientists and water experts including University of Virginia Darden School of Business Professor Peter Debaere recommend that closing Colorado’s “free river conditions” loophole would serve as a key initial step to reducing water stress in the region.

“Closing this loophole in Colorado’s water rights system could save millions of cubic meters of water and be the state’s modest contribution to solving water stress in the Colorado River Basin,” said Debaere, an expert in the economics of water and water markets.

In Colorado, when the river carries enough water to meet everyone’s needs, the “free river condition” allows anyone — regardless of whether they own water rights — to take as much water as they want from the river.

The new paper, “Closing Loopholes in Water Rights Systems to Save Water: The Colorado River Basin,” appears in the journal “Water Resources Research,” published by AGU, a global organization dedicated to Earth and space sciences. Debaere is part of a consortium that includes researchers from the UVA School of Engineering and Applied Science and other scientific and academic partners.

The 1,450-mile Colorado River is a lifeline for the American West. It quenches the thirst of 40 million people across seven states, more than 25 Native American tribes and parts of Mexico. It also irrigates some of the country’s most productive farmland and generates hydropower used across the region. The seven states using Colorado River water are divided into two groups: Upper Basin (Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico) and Lower Basin (Arizona, Nevada, California).

But this vital resource is under threat: the amount of water flowing into the Colorado has been shrinking as rising temperatures have increased evaporation and reduced the snowpack that feeds the river. At the same time, demand from farms and cities has been rising.

That increasing stress on limited resources further highlights the problems associated with Colorado’s free river loophole.

Describing free river conditions as “an antiquated relic from when water was relatively abundant,” the paper suggests that the approach perpetuates the imbalanced supply and demand. That raises the likelihood that Lower Basin water users exercise a “compact call,” essentially charging that the Upper Basin is not ensuring the legally required amount of water. Such a maneuver could result in additional caps or restrictions on water use in the Upper Basin.

“Colorado can help avert this by closing its free river loophole,” the paper states.

The current challenges came to a head in mid-2022, when water levels in Lake Powell and Lake Mead, the two major reservoirs on the Colorado River, dropped so low that they threatened the intake of water for hydropower. The situation was dire enough for the Biden administration to step in.

Further progress proved difficult, however. California, Arizona and Nevada only agreed to major water cuts in exchange for federal funding. Fortunately, an unusually wet winter in 2022-2023 plus conservation efforts have eased the immediate crisis.

Government officials said Lake Powell and Lake Mead were still only at 37% capacity as of Aug. 15. In 2000, they were nearly full.

Within each state in the Upper and Lower Basins, water users like farms or cities have their own rights to a fixed amount of water, with earlier users having stronger claims.

During shortages, users with older water rights have priority. They receive their allocation first and can claim water from users with newer rights, who consequently receive reduced amounts or no water at all.

This long-standing system is increasingly under strain due to climate change. The strain is exacerbated by two factors: first, the river has been overallocated since the first Colorado River Compact was signed; and second, there is no explicit agreed-upon cap on water usage, Moreover, the system lacks a cap that could adjust to changing water availability.

The seven states are currently negotiating how to share the shrinking supply, as some current guidelines for how the basin will share water expire at the end of 2025.

“Finding a compromise among the seven states will be difficult but closing the free river condition could be a way in which Colorado might contribute to the process,” Debaere said.

Figure 1. (a) Colorado River Basin Map with largest dams and Division 5. (b) Active diversion structures in Division 5;circles indicate the diverted water volume at the structure in 2017.Water Resources Research 10.1029/2023WR036667DEBAER ET AL. 2 of 9

During free river conditions in 2017 —and in spite of downstream water challenges and lowering reservoir levels, for example — water users diverted an estimated 108 million cubic meters more than their water rights allowed, according to the new paper. That’s water that could have been stored in Lake Powell.

Debaere said that while the annual excess water taken during free river conditions is significant but not exorbitant, closing this loophole is crucial for other reasons.

It would better define water rights and prevent withdrawals beyond legal limits. This is important for future reforms, such as capping overall water use or introducing programs to leave fields fallow. These efforts won’t work if unlimited water access is occasionally allowed.

Closing this loophole could also be Colorado’s contribution to easing water stress in the Colorado River Basin, especially as the seven basin states struggle to agree on reducing overall water use.

“Abolishing the free river condition will not only reduce water use but also prepare the water rights system for future reforms,” Debaere said.

In addition to Debaere, co-authors of the new paper represent organizations including: International Business School Suzhou, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, Suzhou, China; B3 Insight, Denver; Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering, University of Alabama; Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and Department of Systems and Information Engineering, University of Virginia; Sustainable Waters, Crozet, Va.

“New plot using the nClimGrid data, which is a better source than PRISM for long-term trends. Of course, the combined reservoir contents increase from last year, but the increase is less than 2011 and looks puny compared to the ‘hole’ in the reservoirs. The blue Loess lines subtly change. Last year those lines ended pointing downwards. This year they end flat-ish. 2023 temps were still above the 20th century average, although close. Another interesting aspect is that the 20C Mean and 21C Mean lines on the individual plots really don’t change much. Finally, the 2023 Natural Flows are almost exactly equal to 2019. (17.678 maf vs 17.672 maf). For all the hoopla about how this was record-setting year, the fact is that this year was significantly less than 2011 (20.159 maf) and no different than 2019” — Brad Udall

August was a wet month for the #SanLuisValley: our months of precipitation forecast to be followed by dry, warm autumn — @AlamosaCitizen #RioGrande

Great Sand Dunes National Park San Luis Valley. Prairie sunflowers and dunes in warm early morning light, August 27, 2024. With a continued wet summer, flowers are abundant in the park and preserve! Credit: NPS, Patrick Myers

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

August 29, 2024

While the rest of the state is melting in heat, Alamosa and the San Luis Valley have been soaking in rain. But that’s not unusual for August when you look back at this century.

What is unusual is four consecutive months of measurable precipitation, which the Valley has felt this spring and summer going back to the 1.7 inches of rain in May. In fact, 2024 is going down as one of the wettest summers on record since the year 2000. 

Between May and August there has been a total of 6.14 inches of rain on the Upper Rio Grande this year. Two wetter four-month periods were in 2001 when 7.13 inches of rain accumulated between May and August, and 2022 when 7.08 inches of precipitation was measured.

This much rain, particularly in August, can be both a blessing and hindrance to the Valley landscape and way of life. A benefit to the flows of the Upper Rio Grande and overall desert environment; a detriment to the farmer looking to sell hay or barley crops. 

This wet hay isn’t so good for the dairy farmer looking to purchase, and barley grown in this much rain can cause the buying brewery to turn away.

September through November looks like a drying-out period overall with above-seasonal high temperatures. If that’s the case, a snowy Christmas and New Year will be in order to keep the gains in the Upper Rio Grande from the steady summer rains. 

WET YEARS (May through August)

2001: 7.13 total 4 month total

2022: 7.08 inches 4 month total

2024: 6.14 total 4 month total

2017: 5.68 inches 4 month total

July and August are typically the rainiest months of the year. Here’s how the two months compare

AUGUST RAIN BY YEAR

2000: 1.02 in.

2001: 3.22 in.

2002: 0.32 in.

2003: 1.26 in.

2004: 0.60 in.

2005: 1.59 in.

2006: 1.08 in.

2007: 0.49 in.

2008: 1.23 in.

2009: 0.70 in.

2010: 0.47 in.

2011: 1.27 in.

2012: 0.50 in.

2013: 2.47 in.

2014: 0.53 in.

2015: 0.50 in.

2016: 2.16 in.

2017: 0.73 in.

2018: 0.64 in.

2019: 0.85 in.

2020: 0.33 in.

2021; 0.10 in.

2022 3.80 in.

2023: 0.39 in.

2024 1.80 in. (through Aug. 28)

JULY RAIN BY YEAR

2000: 0.37 in.

2001: 2.75 in.

2002: 0.84 in.

2003: 0.94 in.

2004: 0.72 in.

2005: 0.17 in.

2006: 2.94 in.

2007: 2.62in.

2008: 0.36 in.

2009: 0.45 in.

2010: 1.03 in.

2011: 0.14 in.

2012: 0.99 in.

2013: 0.80 in.

2014: 1.52 in.

2015: 1.34 in.

2016: 0.31 in. 

2017: 3.52 in. 

2018: 1.05 in. 

2019: 0.89 in. 

2020: 1.58 in. 

2021: 1.14 in. 

2022: 1.62 in. 

2023: 0.01 in. 

2024 0.64 in.