Flood damage estimated at $13 million — The #PagosaSprings Sun

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

October 23, 2025

Assessments and discussions have followed the historic floods that took place on Oct. 11 and 14, with several governmental entities continuing to work to determine the extent of the damage caused by the floods and their effects on the area. Pagosa Country experienced two historic floods in four days thanks to moisture from the remnants of a pair of tropical storms, Priscilla and Raymond. The flooding for the San Juan River at Pagosa Springs peaked at 8,270 cubic feet per second (cfs) and 12.66 feet at 6 p.m. on Oct. 11 and again at 8,560 cfs and 12.82 feet at 5:15 a.m. on Oct. 14, putting the two events as the fourth and third highest on record, behind floods in October 1911 and June 1927. Other area river levels were also significantly impacted, including the Piedra and Blanco rivers.

Area river levels have continued to decline since Oct. 14, with the San Juan River at Pagosa Springs running at 537 cfs and 5.52 feet as of noon on Wednesday, Oct. 22. That compares to a median of 88.00 cfs for the same date and a mean of 143.67 cfs. The increased moisture has also led to a significant increase in the level of Navajo Lake Reservoir. On Oct. 9, Navajo was at 6,020.44 feet elevation. By Oct. 21, that had increased by 12.10 feet to 6,032.54, according to the Lake Navajo Water Database. It remains 52.46 feet below full pool, or 6,085 feet elevation. It remains down 8.51 feet from a year prior. The database shows that total inflows for water year 2026, which began on Oct. 1, are at 421.49 percent of the average, and the rivers feeding Navajo are running at 147.04 percent of average.

Colorado Drought Monitor map October 21, 2025.

The storms also helped area drought. As of Oct. 14, the last update available by the U.S. Drought Monitor, 65.53 percent of the county was abnormally dry or above, with 3.71 percent of the county falling into moderate drought. A week, prior, 100 percent of the county was in moderate drought or above, with 30.18 percent being in severe drought or above, with 0.31 percent of that being in extreme drought…

On Oct. 21, Town Manager David Harris updated the Pagosa Springs Town Council on the damages to town infrastructure caused by the recent flooding along the San Juan River, with an early โ€œthumbnail sketchโ€ assessment showing around $9 million worth of damages. The major costs are associated with debris removal, riverbank stabilization, inflow and infiltration of unwanted water into the sewer system, 10th Street culvert replacement, sewer line replacement on the 1st Street bridge after the line was damaged by debris, and damages to a river restoration project that the town invested in some years ago, he explained…[Riley Frazee] noted total damages in the county based off of initial assessments is around $13 million. Of that $13 million, about $8.125 million is from the Town of Pagosa Springs and about $4 million is from damage to public roadways in Archuleta County. Archuleta County Sheriff Mike Le Roux noted that there are still about 200 miles of secondary roadways to be assessed. During the Oct. 18 tour with Bennet, Le Roux noted about 30 miles of primary county roads require โ€œtotal reconstructionโ€ and about 60 miles require significant patching and repair. Frazee also mentioned that the San Juan River Village Metro District sustained sewer system and roadway damage of about $2 million, which also qualify as infrastructure.

San Juan River Basin. Graphic credit Wikipedia.

Two ranching properties awarded land conservation easements: Action helps preserve ‘Gateway to the Flat Tops’ — Colorado Cattlemenโ€™s Agricultural Land Trust

The Colorado Cattlemenโ€™s Agricultural Land Trust brokered a new 2,348-acre conservation easement with the Snyder family on Fish & Cross Ranch west of Yampa. CCALT/Courtesy photo

Click the link to read the release on the Steamboat Pilot & Today website (Colorado Cattlemenโ€™s Agricultural Land Trust):

October 22, 2025

The Colorado Cattlemenโ€™s Agricultural Land Trust has completed a new 2,348-acre conservation easement with the Snyder family on Fish & Cross Ranch, a working cattle ranch located at the base of the Little Flattops west of Yampa.

The ranch is in an area known as โ€œThe Gateway to the Flat Topsโ€ where landscape-level conservation investments through the Routt County Purchase of Development Rights program have created a โ€œstronghold of interconnected agricultural lands and habitat corridors,โ€ according to a land trust media release.

This new conservation easement adds to Routt Countyโ€™s commitment to conserve working landscape and allows the family owners to continue taking care of the agricultural lands and wildlife habitat. In exchange for county funds, the landowner grants a perpetual conservation easement, or deed restriction, on the property, protecting the land from development.

Ownership of the property remains vested with the landowner, who can use and manage the property consistent with the terms of the conservation easement.

โ€œTheir commitment to agricultural conservation will carry on to future generations of their family and continue to support the rural economy in South Routt County,โ€ CCALT Conservation Manager Monica Shields said.

โ€œAs was evident this summer, agricultural lands not only provide important wildlife habitat and scenic views, but the hay meadows and wetlands act as critical wildfire breaks during times of drought. The Fish and Cross Ranch, nestled up against the Flat Tops Wilderness area, serves all these critical community functions,โ€ added Shields.

Routt County Commissioner Tim Redmond noted the โ€œproperty links together U.S. Forest Service, BLM and state lands, as well as existing conservation easements, to form a pristine tract that protects views and critical wildlife corridors.โ€

Lands within the easement include sagebrush rangelands, aspen woodlands and irrigated pastures with senior water rights along Watson Creek tied to those lands through the conservation easement. The property is utilized as part of a larger cattle and hay operation operated by the Snyders as well as natural habitat. Allen Snyder and his family purchased the ranch in 2006, and four generations currently live and work on the ranch.

โ€œWe would like to thank everyone who helped make this easement possible, from the PDR board and county commissioners to the CCALT team and Natural Resources Conservation Service,โ€ said Tyler Snyder. โ€œWe are very blessed to be able to take a step forward in continuing to pass down the generational legacy of ranching in the Yampa Valley to generations to come.โ€

Since the initiation of the program in 1997, Routt County has helped fund the purchase of conservation easements on 68,535 acres for approximately $32 million. Funding for the program comes from a 1.5 mill levy in county property tax approved by voters through 2035.

The Colorado Cattlemenโ€™s Agricultural Land Trust brokered a new 120-acre conservation easement with landowner Susan Larson on Wild Goose Ranch south of Steamboat Springs. CCALT/Courtesy photo

In addition, earlier in October the land trust and the county program worked with landowner Susan Larson to conserve 120 acres of Wild Goose Ranch south of Steamboat Springs.

The easement secures irrigated hay meadows and riparian habitat and fulfills the conservation vision of Susan and her late husband, Jim Larson. The Wild Goose Ranch is comprised primarily of irrigated hay meadows with 92% of the easement area in active hay production.

โ€œSince our arrival in the Yampa Valley full time, our family has always felt a duty to protect the land and the water, especially here in the South Valley,โ€ Larson said. โ€œWe have felt even more strongly about this responsibility with all the growth that has occurred in the last several years all over Colorado and notably here in Routt County.โ€

This protection safeguards valuable wildlife habitat for elk, mule deer, moose, black bear and species of special concern such as the Columbian sharp-tailed grouse and greater sandhill crane, while also securing scenic views along Colorado Highway 131 and U.S. Highway 40, according to a media release.

Routt County Commissioner Sonja Macys noted, โ€œNestled in the highly scenic South Valley floor corridor, the ranch is a vital part of the iconic landscape of working agriculture and conserved lands that residents and visitors alike enjoy when descending Rabbit Ears Pass.โ€

The land trust has conserved more than 820,000 acres of farmland, ranchland, wildlife habitat and open space across Colorado, including more than 83,000 acres in Routt County.

Yampa River Basin via Wikimedia.

Save-the-Date / 2025 #ArkansasRiver Compact Administration Annual Meeting December 9, 2025

Map of the Arkansas River drainage basin. Created using USGS National Map and NASA SRTM data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=79039596

From email from the Kansas Department of Water Resources (Kevin Salter):

October 23, 2025

The 2025 ARCA Annual Meeting will be held on Tuesday, December 9, 2025 at:

Historic Cow Palace Inn, 1301 N Main St, Lamar, CO 81052

Meetings of ARCA are operated in compliance with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act. The meeting room is on the second floor with no elevator access, if you will need accommodations to attend this meeting please contact Stephanie Gonzales at (719) 688-0799.

The ARCA committee meetings will be held on Monday, December 8, 2025 at this same location.  Draft agendas for the ARCA Annual and committee meetings will be provided in advance of these meetings.

For those needing lodging at theย Historic Cow Palace Inn,ย there has been a block of rooms reserved for $100 per night (plus taxes); just mention โ€œARCAโ€ when making reservations.ย  The hotel phone number is (719) 691-6167 and their website isย https://www.historiccowpalaceinn.com/.

#Colorado tops nation in electric vehicle sales: Almost one-third of all new car sales from July through September were for EVs or plug-in hybrids — Allen Best (BigPivots.com)

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

October 23, 2025

Itโ€™s another one of those good news, bad news stories.

First, the bad news. The federal government withdrew its tax credits of up to $7,500 for purchase or lease of a new EV (and $4,000 for a used EV). Congress made that decision in early July, as part of the One Big Beautiful Act. The deadline was Oct. 1.

The good news is that the deadline spurred Coloradans to set a new record for purchases of EVs. From July through September, 32.4% of new vehicle sales in Colorado were EVs or plug-in hybrids. Colorado led the nation, slight ahead of California.

Colorado now has surpassed 210,000 EV registrations. To put that into perspective, then-Gov. John Hickenlooper in 2018 declared a goal of 940,000 registered EVs in Colorado by 2030.

The state has a long way to go. But it does have momentum.

This chart from the Colorado Automobile Dealers Association shows how the sales of EVs and plug-in hybrids has grown during the last five years in Colorado. Sales of EVs dropped in the first six months of this year but leaped to a record in response to the imminent federal deadline.

In a statement issued by his office, Gov. Jared Polis heralded the sales. โ€œColoradans and the free market are saying loud and clear that affordable, clean and efficient electric vehicles are here to stay,โ€ he said. Those electric cars, he said, save money while improving air quality.

First road charge for Coyote Gulch’s Leaf in Granby May 19, 2023. Note the Colorado Energy Office’s logo below the connectors on the unused charger.

We hear less about range anxiety. We still donโ€™t have high-speed charging stations to match the โ€œfilling stationsโ€ created in the 20th century. However, the state as of early October, had 1,487 high-speed charging ports at 458 locations around Colorado. They can be found from Cortez to Holyoke, and from Dinosaur to Lamar.

And the number of EVs is, in some places, reaching a tipping point.

Travis Madsen, transportation manager for the Southwest Energy Efficiency Project, reports a trip to New Mexico recently along Interstate 25. At Pueblo, he stopped to recharge. For the first time ever anywhere in his experience, he had to wait. All the ports were busy.

Madsen also had good news. From July through September, a record 167 new fast-charging ports were installed in Colorado.

Will this momentum continue?

Madsen doesnโ€™t expect sales to remain above 30% during the next few quarters. He does hope that public awareness has grown about the value of EVs regardless of federal tax credits. EVs still generally cost more, but they require less maintenance and can be fueled far more cheaply, especially at home. Department of Energy data show that current EVs are 2.6 to 4.8 times more efficient at traveling a mile compared to a gasoline internal combustion engine, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council.

To help maintain momentum, the state on Nov. 3 will raise Vehicle Exchange Colorado rebates from the existing $6,000 to $9,000 for new EV purchases and leases. For used EV purchases and leases, the prices will rise from $4,000 to $6,000. The program aims to enable income-qualified Coloradans to access EVs. Maybe that will include writers.

Screenshot

World Meteorological Congress endorses actions to promote AI for forecasts and warnings

Click the link to read the release on the World Meteorological Congress website (Clare Nullis):

October 23, 2025

The power of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to improve the accuracy, accessibility and reach of weather forecasts and early warnings has been recognized by the World Meteorological Organization, which will seek to ensure that all countries can benefit from its life-saving potential.

Key messages

  • AI can accelerate Early Warnings for All
  • Forecasts and warnings save millions of lives and billions of dollars
  • AI will compliment โ€“ not replace โ€“ traditional forecasting tools
  • WMO science for action supports the global economy
Credit: WMO / Melissa Debray

An Extraordinary World Meteorological Congress issued a call to the public, private and academic sectors to collaborate on the development of AI and machine learning (ML) technologies to protect communities and economies from hazards like extreme heat and rainfall. It also paved the way for AI/ML to be anchored in WMOโ€™s global observation, data processing and forecasting backbone.

The resolutions were part of a wider package of measures approved by the Extraordinary Congress to accelerate progress towards WMOโ€™s top overriding priority โ€“ to ensure universal coverage of early warning systems through the achievement of Early Warnings for All by the end of 2027.

โ€œEarly warnings are not an abstraction. They give farmers the power to protect their crops and livestock. Enable families to evacuate safely. And protect entire communities from devastation,โ€ UN Secretary-General Antรณnio Guterres told the Extraordinary Congress on 22 October in a ceremony which was one of the highlights of WMOโ€™s 75th anniversary activities.

โ€œWe know that disaster-related mortality is at least six times lower in countries with good early-warning systems in place. And just 24 hoursโ€™ notice before a hazardous event can reduce damage by up to 30 per cent. Early-warning systems work. And theyโ€™re finally getting the attention – and investment – they deserve,โ€ said the UN Secretary-General.

Mr. Guterres launched Early Warnings for All in 2022 with the goal of ensuring universal coverage by the end of 2027.

high-level event opened by Mozambique President Daniel Francisco Chapo heard an urgent Call to Action from WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo to accelerate progress.

โ€œThroughout this week, one thing has been made abundantly clear: the World Needs WMO,โ€ said Celeste Saulo in concluding remarks at the end of Congress.

โ€œThe visit of the United Nations Secretary-General, the participation of presidents and ministers and the global attention they attracted is a reminder that what we do matters. Now we must build on this momentum. This is the moment to turn visibility into impact. To translate recognition into investment. To make sure that our transformation continues โ€” that WMO remains not only relevant, but more essential than ever,โ€ she said.

Global forecasting backbone

Congress approved a new set of technical regulations concerning early warning services, providing a clear reference and ensuring that the authoritative and trusted role of National Meteorological and Hydrological Services in issuing reliable and accurate warnings are supported and enshrined in national legislation

It issued a โ€œcall to all stakeholdersโ€ to collaborate on the development of AI/ML environmental monitoring and prediction technologies, tools and applications, noting the โ€œunprecedented pace of progressโ€ and the โ€œtransformative potentialโ€ to achieve Early Warnings for All.

The resolution builds on decisions by the WMO Executive Council in June 2025. It reaffirms WMOโ€™s mission to facilitate international cooperation and standardization, building on decades of trust and data collection. AI must complement, not replace, existing well-honed scientific forecasting methods and infrastructure.

It emphasizes open data, open-source tools, and FAIR principles to foster transparency and global participation. It calls for ethical frameworks which establish principles for cooperation, intellectual property, and responsible AI use.

Congress also approved a resolution to integrate AI into the global forecasting infrastructure.

Acknowledging the significant disparity in forecasting capabilities among WMO Members, Congress stressed the need to support National Meteorological and Hydrological Services (NMHSs) globally, especially those in low- and middle-income countries, LDCs, and SIDS, to access and utilize new AI technology.

Due to rapidly evolving AI/ML technologies, Congress agreed to develop a new WIPPS strategy incorporating AI. The WMO Integrated Processing and Prediction System (WIPPS) is a worldwide network of operational centres that makes scientific and technological advances accessible and exploitable by Members, providing products related to weather, climate, water, and the environment.

While AI offers transformative potential for operational forecasting and warnings, the resolution recognizes that considerable challenges remain in AI systems’ capability to support forecasts of local high-impact weather systems and hydrological processes. These challenges must be addressed, tested, and demonstrated for operational use.

To ensure all Members benefit, the resolution requested WMO bodies enhance capacity development on AI use under WIPPS for low- and middle-income countries, LDCs, and SIDS. Furthermore, WIPPS pilot projects are essential to explore and deliver new prediction products, demonstrating AIโ€™s potential to enhance developing countries’ capabilities.

An ongoing pilot project between the meteorological services of Norway and Malawi, which demonstrate an AI weather prediction and the concept of Forecasts-in-a-Box, was presented to Congress. It has showed improvements in forecasts โ€“ and is being closely watched as a model for other countries with resource constraints.

In other action, Extraordinary Congress:

  • Advanced the goals of the Global Greenhouse Gas Watch by integrating key components into existing programmes, including the expanded World Weather Watch and the Global Atmosphere Watch Programmes.
  • Approved WMOโ€™s firstย Youth Action Plan, marking a structured approach to integrating youth perspectives into its work and empowering the next generation of leaders. This is a landmark step in nurturing young meteorologists, hydrologists and climate and ocean scientists, marking a new era of shared inter-generational responsibility and expertise in weather, water, and climate action.
  • Streamlined procedures on elections and appointment of the WMO Secretary-General.
  • Endorsed theย WMO Secretary-General’s restructuring of WMO, responding to evolving global challenges, the need for a more integrated Earth system services and increasing financial constraints.ย 
  • Requested the WMO Executive Council to set up a task force to develop recommendations for modification to the strategic and operating plans for 2026/2027 as a result of the ongoing liquidity challenges of WMO.

Executive Council 

WMOโ€™s Executive Council met on 24 October immediately following Extraordinary Congress.
It confirmed a total budget of 138.7 million for the biennium 2026/2027.  It agreed to the terms of reference and composition of the new task force which will identify proposals for realignment of WMOโ€™s Strategic and Operating Plans during the 2026โ€“2027 biennium, given the ongoing financial uncertainty.
Science for Action

The Extraordinary Congress was held as WMO celebrates its 75th anniversary, with the theme of Science for Action. 

WMOโ€™s work underpins resilient development, food, transport, energy, security, health, water management and disaster risk reduction.  

It is essential to the global economy and society and can leverage potential to unlock even more benefits for the global good.

Credit: WMO / Fabian Rubiolo

Science for Action

The Extraordinary Congress was held as WMO celebrates its 75th anniversary, with the theme of Science for Action

WMOโ€™s work underpins resilient development, food, transport, energy, security, health, water management and disaster risk reduction.  

It is essential to the global economy and society and can leverage potential to unlock even more benefits for the global good.  

The driest year on #NewMexicoโ€™s Middle #RioGrande since 1964 — John Fleck (InkStain.net)

The driest year at Otowi since 1964. Code: https://github.com/johnrfleck/water-tools

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

October 11, 2025

Total flow to date on the Rio Grande at Otowi is the lowest since 1964.

Otowi is the place where the river leaves the upper valleys and enters the canyons that lie at the head of the valley of Albuquerque, what we in New Mexico call the โ€œMiddle Rio Grande.โ€

The graph shows total flow to date this year, with previous drier years called out in red. You can see that the โ€œdrought of the โ€™50s,โ€ (which really extended well into the 1960s) was the big impact decadal-scale event here, not the โ€™30s, Dust Bowl.

If you squint, you also can see the subtle impact of the San Juan-Chama Project, which beginning in the 1970s began importing Colorado River water. Iโ€™m measuring total flow with this calculation, not what is formally called the โ€œOtowi Index Flow,โ€ the official measure of native water used for Rio Grande Compact accounting. This is the number that matters the most to me โ€“ itโ€™s the total amount of water we have to work with here in the Middle Rio Grande, the actual flow of water into the valley each year. You can see a subtle impact of that SJC water, raising up the floor in dry years. At least I think I can see that.

A Note on Method

I am not a computer programmer, or software engineer, or whatever you call that thing. But Iโ€™ve been writing computer code since I was a teenager in Upland, California, writing Fortran on punch cards that we would send to the guy who ran the school district mainframe to run in the middle of the night. (Southern Californiaโ€™s Mediterranean climate meant we did not have to trudge miles to school barefoot in the snow, but we did write code on punch cards.)

Iโ€™ve done it because itโ€™s fun (I did a stint as a free software volunteer on the GNOME project 20-plus years ago), as a toolkit for analyzing data in my haphazard career as a โ€œdata journalist,โ€ and in early days of newspaper Internet work, when we rolled our own web site code in Perl. I am a terrible coder, but with some help (site:stackexchange.com โ€œcryptic error messageโ€) I know enough to make my way around the data I have questions about. I was the guy at the newspaper who โ€œborrowedโ€ Lotus 1-2-3 from a friend to analyze city budgets, and persuaded the IT folks to put โ€œRโ€ on my desktop computer against their better judgment. But itโ€™s laborious stuff because of the gap between my subject matter expertise and my coding skills. As a result, there were things I didnโ€™t bother with.

Luis Villa, a friend from my GNOME days who went on to become a lawyer and big think person about โ€œopenโ€ and the commons, posed a question on his blog last month about the gateway language model coding tools provide into open data. The provocative header to the section of the post was โ€œAccessibility & Democratizationโ€:

โ€œVibecodingโ€ is a technique by which you tell a language model in plain language what you want your code to  do. It writes it. You run it. It chokes, you paste in the error message and say โ€œFix this.โ€ After a couple of iterations, it works. This is both dangerous and liberating. For me, it opens up vast areas of open data for analysis that I never would have bothered with because of the agony of pasting error messages into a search engine trying to find someone on Stackexchange who had the same problem, running their code, getting a new error message, turtles all the way down. I know the questions and the analytical structures I need, but turning those ideas into code was a pain in the ass!

In the case of the graph above, I had some old code I had written that downloaded USGS streamflow data, converted cubic feet per second (a rate) to acre feet over a specified time period (a volume), compared flow to date this year to flow to the same date in previous years, and made a graph.

This year has been super dry. I was curious about previous years that had been this dry. Updating the code to color those with lower flow than this yearโ€™s red was conceptually trivial, but would have been tedious and time consuming. Also, the old codeโ€™s visualization was ugly. Vibecoding the changes took an order of magnitude less time than writing all of that code by hand. Iโ€™m pretty sure it took longer to make the locator map in Datawrapper (which is fast!) than it did to update the code.

This would be a terrible idea, as Simon Willison argues, if my goal was to become a better programmer, or a software engineer writing production code. This is the same reason using language models to do your writing for you โ€“ if your goal is to come to understanding โ€“ is a terrible idea. The act of writing is an act of coming to understanding. For me, the knowledge work here is staring at the graph, incorporating what it is telling me into my knowledge framework, and doing the work of writing this blog post. I need to know enough to look at the code and the data it spits out to be confident that itโ€™s sane. But I donโ€™t care about the finicky syntax of Rโ€™s โ€œmutateโ€ and โ€œifelse.โ€

Code here, part of a set of water data analysis scripts Iโ€™ve used for years, updated this week with Anthropicโ€™s codebase management tools to fix a bunch of messes I knew needed fixing, freely licensed under the MIT license so you can do with them what you will.

Boaters, anglers want clarity around public access to Coloradoโ€™s streams: Coalition wants lawmakers to consider right to float and to wade — Heather Sackett (AspenJournalism.org)

No trespassing signs line a section of the Fryingpan River flowing through private property upstream of Basalt. The Fryingpan is a popular stream for anglers, though public access is limited. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

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

October 22, 2025

A group of recreation advocates are hoping Colorado lawmakers will settle the stateโ€™s legal gray area surrounding public river access. The Colorado Stream Access Coalition is fighting for the publicโ€™s right to use the stateโ€™s waterways for recreation, a right they say is guaranteed in the Colorado Constitution. 

โ€œOur position is that under the Colorado Constitution, itโ€™s always been understood that there was a public easement,โ€ said Mark Squillace, a law professor at the University of Colorado Boulder and an expert on water and natural resources policy. โ€œAnd if thereโ€™s a public easement, even though itโ€™s private property, the public gets to use it. We would like to see legislation that basically guarantees the right to both wade and float through private property.โ€ 

Squillace was referring to a clause in the state constitution that declares all unappropriated water in every natural stream to be the property of the public and dedicated to the use of the people of the state.

Kestrel Kunz, southern Rockies protection director at American Whitewater, testified at the Water Resources Committee in August, asking legislators to guarantee public access to rivers for all Coloradans, while respecting landownersโ€™ property rights. Kunz said American Whitewater gets regular reports of conflicts between boaters and property owners.

American Whitewater is seeking legal public protections for boating on Coloradoโ€™s rivers, to portage around hazards and to scout when needed.

โ€œColorado offers no clarity, no protection and no certainty for landowners or the public,โ€ Kunz said. โ€œThat lack of clarity is dangerous.โ€

The issue of stream access highlights a basic tension in Coloradoโ€™s laws and values: Are rivers just another category of property that can be privately owned and fenced off? Or are they so central to the stateโ€™s culture, identity and outdoor recreation economy that they should be considered public resources open to public use?

โ€œThere are a lot of very wealthy landowners in this state that are strongly opposed to the public having any rights in what they consider to be their rivers,โ€ Squillace said. โ€œAnd we donโ€™t believe they own the rivers. We think those are public resources that should be held in common for all the people to use.โ€

Paddlers float through North Star Nature Preserve on the Roaring Fork River upstream of Aspen. Some river access advocates want the state to clarify the right of boaters to touch the beds and banks of streams, and the ability to portage and scout for safety. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

The publicโ€™s right to use waterways was codified in a 19th century U.S. Supreme Court decision that said states own the beds of โ€œnavigableโ€ rivers, meaning rivers that were used for commerce at the time of statehood. But Colorado does not consider any of its rivers to be navigable, meaning the streambeds belong not to the state โ€” and therefore the public โ€” but to adjacent property owners. A 1979 Colorado Supreme Court decision in People v. Emmert ruled on the side of property owners, saying that the public could not float through private property. 

A subsequent Colorado attorney general opinion said boaters can float through private property, and as long as they donโ€™t touch the streambed or banks, they wonโ€™t be charged with criminal trespass. But stream-access supporters say this informal policy needs to be clarified into law and should also make allowances for boater safety. 

Kent Vertrees, a board member and staffer for Friends of the Yampa, said any new law should make it OK for people to get out of their boats to scout hazards and rapids, and portage around obstacles without fear of getting in legal trouble or being harassed by landowners. 

โ€œIf there is a new tree thatโ€™s fallen or something thatโ€™s blocking such as a fence, I believe I can get out of the river to safely get around,โ€ he said. โ€œAll Iโ€™m doing is portaging for this safety element. And thatโ€™s the gray area that needs to be figured out.โ€

Vida Dillard, president of the Roaring Fork Kayak Club, agrees. Her organization is part of the coalition supporting clarity around stream-access laws. The club, which has 53 active memberships, focuses on improving access to the sport for everyone, especially beginners. She said situations such as helping a swimmer or scouting could cause tensions with landowners, and that uncertainty disproportionately affects newcomers to kayaking.

โ€œWe teach our students to scout hazards and make really conservative choices,โ€ she said. โ€œAnd if youโ€™re afraid youโ€™re going to be trespassing or have a confrontation, it might make you less likely to hike out or make choices on the river that you need to make to be safe.โ€

Private property signs line a section of the Fryingpan River upstream of Basalt. Some advocacy groups a pushing for more public river access for anglers. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Wading into murky waters

According to Squillace, stream access is ripe for legislation because of the case of Roger Hill, a fly fisherman on the Arkansas River, which thrust the issue into the national spotlight. 

Hill had baseball-size rocks thrown at him by a property owner and later sued the state on the basis that he believed the river was navigable when Colorado became a state in 1876, and therefore the streambed he was standing on while casting his line was public. But the Colorado Supreme Court ruled in June 2023 that Hill had no legal standing in the case. 

โ€œI think it reflects the controversial nature of this issue,โ€ Squillace said. โ€œI think maybe the court was trying to duck the hard question of finally declaring that maybe the Arkansas River is navigable, in fact, and so should be open to public access.โ€

Coalition members will have to address a widening schism in their membership: those who think any new legislation should include the right of anglers, such as Hill, to wade and those who think it should remain more narrowly focused on the right to float. Some see the right to wade as an additional, expanded use and is where some landowners draw the line. 

American Whitewater recently left the coalition and together with Colorado Whitewater and the American Canoe Association, is pursuing legislation that would grant just the right to float. Vertrees said the right to float and the right to wade are two separate issues that shouldnโ€™t be lumped together. 

โ€œI personally cannot support [the right to wade] because I believe it will tank the whole thing,โ€ he said. โ€œI just personally believe that itโ€™s going to be hard to do them both at once.โ€

Anglers want to be able to walk up and down a streambed to fish, but only after entering the river through a public access point and not trespassing across private property to get there. This right to wade is particularly relevant to the Fryingpan River, which is a popular Gold Medal trout fishery where only about half of the river below Ruedi Reservoir is public and no trespassing signs line stretches of the waterway.

Bill Nein, of Salida, prepares to release a brown trout he caught back into the Fryingpan River. Some river access proponents want the state to clarify rules regarding public use of streambeds and banks for fishing. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

More education needed

Opponents of a law expanding access say that this is a private property issue and that landowners have the right to exclude others from their property. Garin Vorthmann testified on behalf of the Colorado Farm Bureau at the Water Resources Committee meeting in August. She said she was also working with a broad coalition of landowners, private businesses and real estate agents.

โ€œDepriving a landowner of the right to exclude people from their private property without just compensation is considered a taking,โ€ she told lawmakers. โ€œLegislation that would change the ownership of the bed or bank to be public or owned by the state obligates the government to provide just compensation to the landowner and will embroil the state in expensive litigation.โ€

Other experts say addressing this issue through legislation might only make it worse. A report released in September by the conservative-leaning Common Sense Institute said that โ€œthe path to clarification is fraught with innumerable bad outcomes where both sides and ultimately the state of Colorado will be worse off than they are nowโ€ and that โ€œattempts by either side to expand those rights at the expense of the other are likely to create more problems than they solve.โ€

Greg Walcher, former director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources and co-author of the report, said a better approach would be a public education campaign so that boaters know exactly where they are allowed to float: through land that is already owned by the state or federal government and therefore public. The study notes the importance of rivers to Coloradoโ€™s outdoor recreation economy, and the millions that the Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) grant program has invested in stream access and conservation projects in recent years. 

โ€œThe floating industry has become huge in Colorado, so we need to find a solution,โ€ Walcher said. โ€œAnd part of that is making sure people understand where they can and canโ€™t float.โ€

Proponents of stream access agree that education is important, and to that end, Steamboat Springs-based advocacy organization and content studio Rig to Flip is releasing a short film by Cody Perry called โ€œCommon Waters,โ€ which features the Hill case and outlines the issue as they see it: that Colorado is one of the worst states for providing public access to streams, and in a place that prides itself on an outdoor lifestyle, increased access and clarity on the rules are needed. 

With proponents still hashing out differing options on what a policy proposal should call for, any new legislation for the 2026 session wonโ€™t be introduced by the Water Resources and Agricultural Review Committee, but thereโ€™s still a chance lawmakers could take it up. Coalition members say they are continuing to meet with stakeholders and figuring out the best way forward.

โ€œAt American Whitewater, we believe that people are really only going to protect the resource if they have the opportunity to explore that place and understand and experience a river,โ€ Kunz said. โ€œSo our hope is that by allowing people to access these rivers in Colorado that we will ensure future generations of river stewards.โ€

Colorado Rivers. Credit: Geology.com

2 Northern #Colorado communities back away from #NISP, but project is ‘pressing on’ — The #FortCollins Coloradoan #PoudreRiver

The Northern Integrated Supply Project, currently estimated at $2 billion, would create two new reservoirs and a system of pipelines to capture more drinking water for 15 community water suppliers. Credit: Northern Water

Click the link to read the article on the Fort Collins Coloradoan website (Erin Udell). Here’s an excerpt:

October 24, 2025

Key Points

  • Eaton and Evans recently announced they are backing away from the Northern Integrated Supply Project, or NISP, due to rising costs.
  • The news comes months after Fort Collins-Loveland Water District, NISP’s largest participant, announced its hopes to sell its 20% share in the project.
  • Despite some growing reluctance, Northern Water plans to move forward with the full project.

Eaton and Evans recently notified Northern Water they will not be participating in the interim agreement or water allotment contract for its Northern Integrated Supply Project, or NISP, next year. Eaton Mayor Scott Moser notified Northern Water in a Sept. 2 letter. Evans Mayor Mark Clark’s letter was dated Oct. 7. Both communities, which cited NISP’s rising project costs in their decision, would entertain offers to sell their NISP shares, Evans and Eaton staff told the Coloradoan on Oct. 21. The project’s largest participant,ย Fort Collins-Loveland Water District, notified Northern Water of its interest in selling its 20% share in NISP back in July, the water district’s General Manager Chris Pletcher told the Coloradoan at thetime...

Over the years, the project has grown in both scope and price. As NISP’s once conceptual designs met reality, the scale of its reservoirs, pipelines and pump stations increased and the relocation of U.S. Highway 287 to accommodate Glade Reservoir proved to be “more complex and expensive than originally planned,” according to a staff presentation to Evans City Council on Oct. 7.

As #LakePowell recedes, beavers are building back — Alex Hager (KUNC.org) #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Jace Lankow and Zanna Stutz measure a beaver dam in Glen Canyon on September 16, 2025. Environmental advocates say the return of beavers to the canyon is a sign that nature is thriving in areas that were once submerged by Lake Powell. Alex Hager/KUNC

Click the link to read the article on the KUNC website (Alex Hager):

October 24, 2025

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.

To hike up this narrow canyon, Eric Balken pushed through dense thickets of green. In the shadow of towering red rock walls, his route along a muddy creekbed was lined with bushes and the subtle hum of life. The canyon echoed the buzzing and chirping of bugs and toads. But not long ago, this exact spot was at the bottom of a reservoir.

โ€œWe would have needed scuba gear 20 years ago,โ€ Balken said. โ€œWe would have been 150 feet underwater.โ€

As director of the nonprofit Glen Canyon Institute, Balken has tracked the rebirth of these canyons for years. They were once home to Lake Powell, the nationโ€™s second-largest reservoir. But as the Colorado River is strained by drought and steady demand, Powell has shrunk to record lows. In the wake of that shrinking, a sprawling web of canyons like this one are seeing the light of day for the first time in decades.

They serve as an unsettling visual reminder of the rapidly-diminishing water supply that provides for roughly 40 million people across the Southwest. They also cradle thriving ecosystems โ€“ a humming network of oases in the desert.

Employees of Glen Canyon Institute look out onto a section of Glen Canyon filled with vegetation on September 16, 2025. Some portions of the canyon have been above water for more than two decades, allowing native species to return to areas that were once submerged by Lake Powell. Alex Hager /KUNC

On this September afternoon, Balken was joined by a team of environmentalists and scientists looking for one specific species of charismatic rodent.

โ€œBasically,โ€ said Zanna Stutz, Glen Canyon Instituteโ€™s program manager, โ€œIf the beavers are here, it means good things are happening.โ€

She explained that beavers are a โ€œkeystone speciesโ€ and serve as an indicator for the health of the whole ecosystem. And in this particular side canyon โ€” a snaking tributary that leads into Lake Powell โ€” they are alive and well.

โ€œThere are all these different species of wildlife that are coming back here,โ€ Stutz said. โ€œIt is a place that is full of life. It’s full of biodiversity.โ€

Dams, lodges and footprints

Lake Powellโ€™s water levels have been retreating for the past two decades, revealing vast swaths of once-submerged land. The falling water levels have jeopardized hydropower generation and added anxiety to policy talks about managing the regionโ€™s water supply.

At the same time, they have put stunning geologic features and lush riverside habitats back in the open air.

Those habitats come back gradually. In the early stages, shortly after the reservoir has pulled out of an area, there is often little more than a flat plain of muddy sediment, with a few lonely seedlings poking out of the muck.

Further up the canyon, where the reservoir pulled out at least two decades ago, life has had time to come back in force. Plants grow thick and tall, teeming with the animals that call them home.

Jace Lankow holds a northern leopard frog in Glen Canyon on September 15, 2025. Beaver dams create ponds that serve as habitat for a variety of plant and animal species. Alex Hager/KUNC

Beavers are architects that make those animal communities even stronger. The continentโ€™s largest rodents move slowly on land, but theyโ€™re built for speedy swimming and can escape from predators better in the water. When they settle into a new area, they dam up streams to create ponds that provide them shelter.

Those ponds are providing for more than just beavers. Stutz said they provide a home for native fish, frogs and insects. They also allow water to seep into the banks and provide for plants for a longer portion of the year.

Recent studies have tracked the emergence of old river features and the return of native plants. This one aims to track the return of healthy ecosystems, using beavers as a marker of progress.

Glen Canyon Institute is paying for the study, and scientists from the Tucson, Arizona-based Watershed Management Group are helping carry it out.

One of those scientists, Nadira Mitchell, stood at the foot of a beaver dam and marveled at its size.

โ€œI don’t really know how long it would take them to build this huge structure,โ€ she said. โ€œBut you can definitely tell that they put in a lot of effort.โ€

The walls of Glen Canyon reflect off of a beaver pond on September 15, 2025. Beaver ponds can spread out the water from a stream, making it easier for plants to grow near their banks. Alex Hager/KUNC

The dam loomed chest high โ€” a messy tangle of branches, leaves, mud and rocks holding back a large pool of standing water. Little trickles emerged from the bottom of the dam, turning back into a babbling stream on the other side. Mitchell said this helps filter the water.

Upstream of the dam, on the other side of the pond, the landscape was littered with signs of beavers. Mitchell pointed to little footprints in the mud, a sign that the โ€œecosystem engineersโ€ may have been at work mere hours ago. Their wide, paddlelike tails had clearly dragged through the soft sand. All around the streamโ€™s edge, whittled-down branches bore tiny, distinct teeth marks.

Another scientist, Jace Lankow, pointed out a gently chirping toad that also called the pond home.

Lizbeth Perez bends down to look inside a beaver lodge in Glen Canyon on September 16, 2025. The area is rich with signs of beaver activity, from tiny footprints to large dams and lodges. Alex Hager/KUNC

His colleague Lizbeth Perez came across a strikingly large beaver lodge, a resolute-looking mound of sticks and mud with little openings near the bottom. She got down on her hands and knees, practically sticking her head underwater to peer inside.

โ€œThe water goes back all the way and it’s all dark,โ€ she said. โ€œIt’s a pretty well contained lodge.โ€

The team fanned out and took note of each sign of beavers, from footprints smaller than a human hand to lodges wider than a human wingspan. The team pulled out a tape measure and noted the length of a stream-wide beaver dam.

โ€œItโ€™ll be really exciting to mark that data point and look back on that for the years to come,โ€ Mitchell said.

Policies to protect

Lake Powell is at a crossroads. Dropping water levels are forcing difficult conversations about its future. They could soon drop too low to generate hydropower inside Glen Canyon Dam. They could even drop too low to allow water to pass from the reservoirinto the Colorado River on the other side. Some environmentalists are calling for a major shakeup to the regionโ€™s water storage system โ€” a policy change that would take Lake Powellโ€™s water and store it elsewhere.

The environmental advocates at Glen Canyon Institute say the habitats in these tributary canyons should be protected by those policies.

โ€œGlen Canyon is viewed by many water managers as a storage tank,โ€ he said, โ€œAnd it’s so much more than that. It’s not a barren landscape, it’s a living, breathing place.โ€

The wreckage of a motorboat, once submerged beneath Lake Powell, sticks out above the water on September 16, 2025. The nation’s second-largest reservoir has fallen to record lows in recent years. Climate scientists say it is unlikely to rise to previous highs as the region gets drier. Alex Hager/KUNC

But Lake Powellโ€™s decades-long legacy as a key piece of the Westโ€™s water storage system will make that difficult. The seven states that use the Colorado River are in the middle of tense negotiations about its future. As they try to balance the needs of major cities and a powerhouse agriculture industry, the needs of the environment can sometimes fall to the back burner. Sinjin Eberle, senior director of communications at the environmental group American Rivers, said that the balancing act may affect decisions about the beaver-laden streams of Glen Canyon.

โ€œManaging [Lake Powell] specifically for those side tributaries,โ€ he said, โ€œI’m not sure that that would be a priority for all of the stakeholders that would be at the table for this.โ€

Eberleโ€™s group receives funding from the Walton Family Foundation, which also supports KUNC’s Colorado River coverage. Eberle called the emergence of thriving habitats in Glen Canyon โ€œinspiring,โ€ but pointed to larger region-wide tensions that could get in the way of policy decisions designed specifically to protect them.

โ€œIt will be a real challenge to encourage leaders from the seven basin states and then the hydropower industry to be willing to keep Lake Powell at a level that is more beneficial for the side Canyon ecologies than the security that a higher Lake Powell gives to each individual state that depends on it,โ€ he said.

Researchers explore a section of Glen Canyon on September 16, 2025. Receding water levels have revealed geologic formations and allowed plants and animals to return. Alex Hager/KUNC

The National Park Service and the Bureau of Reclamation, which manage Lake Powell, did not provide comment for this story in time for publication.

Lake Powell levels sit below 30%, and climate change-fueled drought means the reservoir is unlikely to refill to the high marks set decades ago. Zanna Stutz said those climate trends may force the hand of policymakers. Lake Powell, she said, may never refill enough to drown these side canyons anew.

โ€œThe restoration of Glen Canyon is basically an inevitability,โ€ she said. โ€œThe sooner we can recognize how what’s happening in Glen Canyon is tied into this larger trend, the sooner we can shift from this being a happy byproduct and have it be taken into consideration and valued accordingly.โ€

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

After Massive Wildfire, Flash Floods and Groundwater Contamination Grip New Mexico — Christian Thorsberg (circleofblue.org)

The Hermitโ€™s Peak/Calf Canyon fire will affect the Gallinas River for years to come. Photo ยฉ Brett Walton/Circle of Blue

Click the link to read the article on the Circle of Blue website (Christian Thorsberg):

October 23, 2025

Three years after the Hermitโ€™s Peak/Calf Canyon wildfire burned over 500 square miles in New Mexico โ€” cementing the blaze as the stateโ€™s largest-ever โ€” residents are feeling the ripple effects of flood damage and water insecurity. 

Flash flooding is common following large burns, and the risks can last for a decade or more. Charred soils are unable to effectively absorb water, and trees are no longer around to soak up or slow rains, which run over burn scars โ€œlike water off a parking lot,โ€ Reuters reports.

Last year alone, 105 fires put 6 million acres โ€” primarily in the American West โ€” at risk of flooding impacts. 

In Mora, New Mexico, more than two dozen floods have ravaged homes since the Hermitโ€™s Peak/Calf Canyon blaze. More lives have been lost to water than fire. Meanwhile, mold after flooding has led to the abandonment or demolition of homes. Runoff of toxic heavy metals and other contaminants have left residentsโ€™ wells polluted and unusable.

In Context:ย As Flames Scorch Western Forests, Flagstaff Area Offers Roadmap for Post-Wildfire Flood Prevention

Rio Grande and Pecos River basins. Map credit: By Kmusser – Own work, Elevation data from SRTM, drainage basin from GTOPO [1], U.S. stream from the National Atlas [2], all other features from Vector Map., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=11218868

Western Water Assessment has produced a rapid assessment about the extreme flooding event that affected southwestern #Colorado on October 10-14, 2025

Click the link to access the report on the Western Water Assessment website:

Purpose of the report: This rapid assessment, produced by the Western Water Assessment (WWA), serves as a scientific resource for understanding drivers and impacts of the flooding events that occurred from October 10th -14th, 2025 in southwest Colorado. The report is designed to support local resilience building efforts and hazard planning for communities in the region. It provides the longterm and recent historical context for the flooding, hydrologic characteristics of the flood event, and an assessment of the local probability of an event of this magnitude. 

Key Findings: 

โ€ข The October 10th-14th, 2025 floods were the 3rd largest on record for Pagosa Springs, CO, with river levels reaching a maximum gauge height of 12.82 feet and peak flow rates of 8,570 cubic feet per second 

โ€ข A total of 12.5 inches of precipitation fell at a high-elevation observation site in the watershed over 5 days, saturating the watershed and driving the river to reach Major Flood stage twice in that period 

โ€ข Flood frequency analysis based on historical observations of runoff in Pagosa Springs suggests this flood has a return period of 25 to 40 years, meaning that there is a 2.5-4% likelihood of a flood of similar magnitude occurring in any given year. 

โ€ข Early reports following the flooding suggest that hundreds of residents and households were evacuated in Pagosa Springs and surrounding rural communities and many structures were damaged or destroyed by the floods including homes, bridges, and roadways. 

โ€ข Nearly two decades of exposure to drought conditions, increasing wildfire activity, and now the recent flooding collectively highlight the geographically unique and increasingly frequent natural hazard risks that rural mountain communities face in southwest Colorado. 

Supporting future resilience: Understanding the drivers, characteristics, and likelihood of extreme events like the floods of October 2025 is crucial for effective resilience planning. Scientific analysis that is tailored to local communities, like this assessment for Pagosa Springs and Vallecito, provides specific, actionable information that planners and residents can use to understand their unique exposure to hazards. The Western Water Assessment (WWA) is committed to providing usable science to support hazard planning and response in communities across Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. 

For further information on how WWA can support your community, please reach out to our team at wwa@colorado.edu.

Mediation ordered for Denver Water, environmental group over turbulent Gross Dam project — Michael Booth (Fresh Water News)

The middle section of the dam is arched to give the dam strength as water pushes up against the structure. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Michael Booth):

October 23, 2025

Denver Water and Save the Colorado must enter mediation at the end of the month to see if a deal is possible on the mid-project challenge to the water utilityโ€™s $531 million dam raising underway at Gross Reservoir in Boulder County, according to an order from the U.S. Court of Appeals.

A federal trial judge initially halted construction on the nearly finished dam, saying the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits for Denver Water violated U.S. environmental laws and that the water level at Gross could not be raised. Judge Christine Arguello later lifted the injunction on construction, for safety reasons, while Denver Water appealed the permit issues to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The 10th Circuit will take briefs from both sides of the dam dispute in November, and is now ordering a mediation session for Oct. 30. The conference is to โ€œexplore any possibilities for settlementโ€ and lawyers for both sides are โ€œexpected to have consulted with their clients prior to the conference and have as much authority as feasibleโ€ on settlement questions, the court order says.

Construction has continued since the injunction was lifted, with Denver Water pouring thousands of tons of concrete to raise the existing dam structure on South Boulder Creek. Denver Water has argued it needs additional storage on the north end of its sprawling water delivery system for 1 million metro customers, to balance extensive southern storage employing water from the South Platte River basin.

Denver Water’s collection system via the USACE EIS

Save the Colorado and coplaintiffs the Sierra Club, WildEarth Guardians and others argue too much water has already been taken from the Colorado River basin on the west side of the Continental Divide, and that the forest-clearing and construction at Gross is further destructive to the environment. Gross Reservoir stores Fraser River rights that Denver Water owns and brings through a tunnel under the divide into South Boulder Creek.

“We look forward to having a constructive conversation with Denver Water to find a mutually agreeable path forward that addresses the significant environmental impacts of the project,” Save the Colorado founder Gary Wockner said.

When securing required project permits from Boulder County, Denver Water had previously agreed to environmental mitigation and enhancements for damages from Gross construction. But Save the Colorado and co-plaintiffs sued to stop the project at the federal level, and Arguello agreed that the Army Corps had failed to account for climate change, drought and other factors in writing the U.S. permits.

Denver Water declined comment Tuesday on the mediation order.

The halt and restart of the Gross Dam raising came in what has turned out to be a tumultuous year for major Colorado water diversion and storage projects.

While the Gross Dam decisions were underway, Wockner was finishing negotiations with Northern Water over $100 million in environmental mitigation funding to allow the $2.7 billion, two-dam Northern Integrated Supply Project to move forward. Once the 15 communities and water agencies subscribed to NISP water shares saw the increasing price tag, some began pulling out.

Northern Water reviewed the scale of NISP with engineers, then said it planned to move forward at the previously announced scale. The consortiumโ€™s board has asked all 15 initial members to indicate by Dec. 31 where they stand with the project and its price tag.

More by Michael Booth

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

Fun beaver/fish interaction — Ben Goldfarb

Fun beaver/fish interaction: When I approached this pond, I startled brown trout preparing to spawn below it (beavs filter sediment & keep downstream substrate clean). The fish dashed to the dam & hid in its base. Beavers created perfect spawning grounds: pristine gravel adjacent to dense cover! ๐Ÿคฏ๐Ÿฆซ๐ŸŸ

Ben Goldfarb (@bengoldfarb.bsky.social) 2025-10-23T14:30:47.418Z

October rains stopgap worst flows: #RioGrande Water Conservation District quarterly meeting reviewed unexpected October rains, irrigation year end seems to be on schedule — AlamosaCitizen.com

Rio Grande in Del Norte, CO on October 14, 2025. Credit: Ryan Scavo

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

October 22, 2025

The October rains that changed this water year in the San Luis Valley came at a particularly critical time.

In September the closely-watched unconfined aquifer hit its lowest level ever recorded since monitoring of the troubled aquifer began in January 2002, according to the Davis Engineering report given at Tuesdayโ€™s quarterly meeting of the Rio Grande Water Conservation District.

Knowing that, now imagine the conversations that would be happening in the Valleyโ€™s farming and ranching community had there been diminished or no October rains. The year was shaping up to be among the worst for flows on the Upper Rio Grande and readings on the unconfined aquifer reinforced it.

Then October delivered heavy rains across the southwest, which resulted in historic fall seasonal flows on the San Juan and into the Rio Grande and Conejos River systems. The Rio Grande grew by 80,000 acre-feet and the Conejos River by 20,000 acre-feet as a result of the rains, said Craig Cotten, division engineer for the Colorado Division of Water Resources.

Colorado is now estimating a total annual flow of 470,000 acre-feet on the Upper Rio Grande, up from its earlier estimates for the year at 390,000 acre-feet. Still, the irrigation year on the Rio Grande will likely end on Nov. 1 as scheduled, said Cotten.

โ€œThatโ€™s a big amount of water in just a short amount of time,โ€ he said in noting the latest accounting for Rio Grande Compact purposes.

2026 budget hearing set

The Rio Grande Water Conservation District set a 2026 budget work session for Nov. 24; then a public hearing to adopt next yearโ€™s budget on Dec. 11. The water conservation agency is proposing a year-over-year increase to its mill levy. It is proposing a 1.75 mill levy property tax, up from 1.6 mills in 2025.

Rio Grande and Pecos River basins. Map credit: By Kmusser – Own work, Elevation data from SRTM, drainage basin from GTOPO [1], U.S. stream from the National Atlas [2], all other features from Vector Map., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=11218868

This shows how buffaloes were pushed west by white immigrantsโ€”just like Native Americans — Brett Chapman

Water rates to edge up slightly in 2026 — Cathy Proctorย and Kim Unger (DenverWater.org)

October 22, 2025

A core element of Denver Waterโ€™s mission is ensuring the large, complex system that collects, cleans and delivers drinking water for 1.5 million people is prepared to meet future challenges. 

And with more than 100 years of operations under its belt, Coloradoโ€™s largest water provider, which serves about 25% of Coloradoโ€™s population, is in the biggest period of capital investment in its history. Denver Water expects to invest about $1.7 billion into the system during the next 10 years. 

โ€œThe work we do provides the critical water supply that the community we serve needs to thrive and grow,โ€ said Denver Water CEO/Manager Alan Salazar.

โ€œContinuing to maintain and invest in the system that supports our water supply will ensure that we โ€” Denver Water as well as our customers โ€” are ready for what lies ahead, from a warming climate to the potential for new regulations, while keeping rates as low as good service will allow,โ€ Salazar said. 

Since 2022, Denver Water has replaced an average of 97,000 feet of water mains per year. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Responsibility to maintain and protect the stateโ€™s largest water system, along with a desire to encourage water conservation, keep essential indoor water use affordable and ensure the utility is financially stable, were incorporated into the Oct. 22 decision by Denverโ€™s Board of Water Commissioners to approve new water rates for 2026. 

Denver Water is protecting and preparing the complex system and its customers for the future in many ways, including: 

  • Theย Lead Reduction Program, which started in 2020, is protecting customers from the risk of lead in their drinking water and to date hasย replaced more than 35,000 old, customer-owned lead service linesย at no direct cost to customers.
  • The newย Northwater Treatment Plant, which began operations in 2024, can clean up to 75 million gallons of water per day and can be expanded when needed to 150 million gallons per day.
  • Theย Gross Reservoir Expansion Project, which began construction in 2022, is designed to nearly triple the reservoirโ€™s storage capacity.
  • Theย Landscape Transformation Program, which helps customers remodel landscapes dominated by water-intensive Kentucky bluegrass into water-wise, climate-resilient ColoradoScapes.
  • And ongoing work to replace aging water mains, upgrade infrastructure on the utilityโ€™s southern collection and treatment system, and reach aย net-zero carbon emissionsย goal by 2030.

Overall, Denver Water expects to invest $1.7 billion over the next 10 years in projects that will maintain, repair, protect and upgrade the system, and make it more resilient and flexible in the future. 

In addition to rates paid by customers, funding for Denver Waterโ€™s infrastructure projects, day-to-day operations and emergency expenses like water main breaks comes from bond sales, cash reserves, hydropower sales, grants, federal funding and fees paid when new homes and buildings are connected to the system.

The utility does not receive tax dollars or make a profit. It reinvests money from customer water bills and fees to maintain and upgrade the water system. 

And the utility is committed to delivering a safe, clean and affordable water supply to its customers while managing the impacts of the larger economy, from inflation to supply chain issues. 

How the 2026 water rates will affect individual customer bills will vary depending on where the customer lives (either in Denver or in one of the utilityโ€™s suburban distributor districts) and how much water they use. 

And major credit rating agencies recently confirmed Denver Waterโ€™s triple-A credit rating, the highest possible, citing the utilityโ€™s track record of strong financial management. 

Also, itโ€™s important to note that Denver Water has made clear in discussions with the Denver Broncos that any costs associated with relocating some of the utilityโ€™s operations facilities, if needed, to accommodate a new stadium cannot be financed or subsidized by its ratepayers. (See Denver Waterโ€™s statement on the Broncosโ€™ Sept. 9 announcement of Burnham Yard as their preferred site.) 

New rates for 2026

Monthly bills for single-family residential customers are comprised of two factors: a fixed charge, which helps ensure Denver Water has a more stable revenue stream to continue the necessary water system upgrades to ensure reliable water service, and a volume rate for the amount of water used.

Combining both of those factors, a typical single-family residential customer who uses 104,000 gallons of water annually will see their monthly bill increase by an average of $2.45 to $3.30 over the course of the year, depending on where the customer lives (in Denver or in one of the utilityโ€™s suburban distributor districts) and the type of service the customerโ€™s suburban distributor district receives from Denver Water. 

(See the infographic below for information about Denver Waterโ€™s suburban distributor districts, types of service and rates.) 

The monthly bill example above includes an increase to the fixed monthly charge, which is tied to the size of the meter. For most single-family residential customers with a 3/4-inch meter, the fixed charge will increase by $1.85 in 2026, to $20.91 per month.

The more you use, the more you pay

After the fixed monthly charge, Denver Waterโ€™s rate structure for residential single-family customers has three tiers based on the amount of water used. The tiers are designed to keep essential indoor water use affordable while encouraging water conservation outdoors. (See additional details about the 2026 rates for the three tiers in the infographic below.)

  • The first tierย 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 โ€” when there is very little or no outdoor watering.
  • The second tierย is for water consumption, typically used for outdoor watering, that is above the customerโ€™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 tierย is for water use of more than 15,000 gallons per month. It is priced at the highest level to signal potentially excessive water use and encourage conservation efforts by larger-lot customers.

Bills in the summer months can be higher if customers use water to irrigate their outdoor landscapes. 

Need help? 

Denver Water offers one-time payment assistance to customers who may qualify. The utilityโ€™s Customer Care representatives also can help customers navigate payment options and unique circumstances. Customers can reach them via denverwater.org/ContactForm or by calling 303-893-2444.

What customers can do to save water, money

Denver Water encourages all customers to conserve water where they can indoors and out.

Finding and plugging leaks inside the home can be done year-round, and the utility offers rebates for qualified water-saving toilets and sprinkler equipment.

To help customers remodel their lawns to create a more vibrant, diverse ColoradoScape, Denver Water in 2026 will again offer a limited number of customer discounts on Resource Centralโ€™s popular turf removal service and its water-wise Garden In A Box plant-by-number kits. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Outside, Denver Water encourages customers to conserve water by remodeling unused areas of water-intensive Kentucky bluegrass into more diverse, water-wise ColoradoScapes that fit naturally into our dry climate and are interesting to look at through all seasons. These drought-resistant and climate-resilient ColoradoScapes include tree canopies and plants that help maintain vibrant urban landscapes and benefit our communities, wildlife and the environment.

Using less water also means more water can be kept in the mountain reservoirs, rivers and streams that fish live in and Coloradans enjoy. It also can lower monthly water bills, saving money.

Note 1:ย An individual customerโ€™s monthly water bill will vary depending on where they live in Denver Waterโ€™s service area (in Denver or in one of the utility’sย suburban distributor districts), the types of service the suburban distributor district receives from Denver Water, and how much water the customer uses.

Note 2:ย The difference in volume rates (in the infographic above) for Denver Water customers who live inside Denver compared to those who live in the suburbs is due to the Denver City Charter (seeย Operating Rules), which allows permanent leases of water toย suburban water districtsย based on two conditions: 1) there always would be an adequate supply for the citizens of Denver, and 2) suburban customers pay the full cost of service, plus an additional amount.

#Drought news October 23, 2025: Widespread areas of improvement covered southwestern #Colorado and western #Wyoming but D3 remains across much of southwestern Wyoming and part of central Colorado

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

Click on a thumbnail graphic to view a gallery of drought data from the US Drought Monitor website. Here’s an excerpt:

This Week’s Drought Summary

Recently, precipitation has been spatially variable across the Contiguous U.S. (โ€œLower-48โ€). Over the past 30 days, heavy precipitation (4 to locally over 8 inches) fell on parts of central and southern New England, the interior Northeast (especially eastern New York state), the Ohio Valley (particularly northern Kentucky and adjacent areas), eastern South Carolina, eastern Florida, parts of the Tennessee and adjacent Mississippi Valleys, isolated sites in the central Plains, the higher elevations in the Rockies, central Arizona and other scattered locations across the Southwest, parts of the Great Basin, portions of California (where such amounts are unusual this early in the wet season), and the Pacific Northwest (where these amounts are not unusual).

In stark contrast, an inch or less of precipitation has been noted in the desert Southwest and lower elevations across the interior West, most of the central and southern Plains, the northern Great Plains, the northwestern Great Lakes, portions or northern and western Florida, and some interior sections of the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic region.

Given the regional variability, there were a lot of changes in the Drought Monitor this week, with large parts of the West, much of the Ohio and middle Mississippi Valleys, and scattered locations across northern Mississippi, the Eastern Great Lakes, and the Northeast. At the same time, conditions have deteriorated across much of the southern and south-central Plains, the South Atlantic region from interior Georgia through eastern Virginia, southern parts of the Lower Mississippi Valley, and scattered areas across the rest of the Southeast, the Mid-Atlantic region, the Northeast, the Upper Mississippi Valley, and the northern Plains.

In sum, the array of improvements and deterioration incorporated into this weekโ€™s Drought Monitor resulted in slight declines in overall coverage of the various drought severity levels across the Lower-48. Abnormally dry or worse conditions cover 72 percent of the country, down from 74 percent last week. About 21 percent of the country is experiencing Severe Drought or worse (D2-D4), down slightly from 23 percent last week. For the 50 states plus Puerto Rico in total, coverage of abnormally dry or worse conditions fell from 62 to just under 60.5 percent…

High Plains

A wide range of precipitation totals were observed last week. Generally, 1.5 to 3.0 inches hit the northern and western Dakotas, much of central and eastern Wyoming, and scattered locations in northwestern Wyoming. An inch or a little more fell on many locations in a swath from central Nebraska into southeastern South Dakota, but other locations reported several tenths of an inch of precipitation at best, with most areas from southwestern Wyoming through western Nebraska and from eastern Nebraska through Kansas reporting little or none. This pattern resulted in less change here than in most other regions. Areas of deterioration were introduced in parts of the east-central and southeastern High Plains Region while improvement resulted from heavier precipitation farther west. The most widespread areas of improvement covered southwestern Colorado and western Wyoming. Coverage of dryness and drought is considerably lower in this region than in others, with the total area entrenched in some degree of dryness or drought (D0-D4) dropping slightly to a bit over 36 percent this week. The extent of Extreme Drought (D3) was almost cut in half, from 3.3 percent down to 1.7 percent. There is no D4 in the Region, but D3 remains across much of southwestern Wyoming and part of central Colorado. The proportion of the Great Plains States in this Region experiencing some degree of dryness or drought (D0-D4) is relatively low compared to much of the Lower-48; specifically, 3 percent of North Dakota, 32 percent of South Dakota, 35 percent of Nebraska, and 28 percent of Kansas…

Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending October 21, 2025.

West

Some unusually heavy early-season rain and snow has affected portions of the West, including areas of central and southern California where October so far has been wetter than most such months on record. Large portions of central and upper southern California, the Great Basin, and the western and eastern tiers of Utah saw improvement on this weekโ€™s Drought Monitor, along with patches of central and eastern Arizona, southwestern Oregon, central and eastern Washington, and parts of eastern, southern, and western Montana. Only a portion of north-central Montana saw any deterioration. The total area covered by any dryness (D0-D4) declined from 80 to a bit over 74 percent this week while the coverage of the more intense drought categories (D2-D4) dropped from 38.5 percent to just over one-third of the Region. D3-D4 was still entrenched over a decent proportion of the Region, but declined from almost 9 percent last week to about 6.5 percent this week. The only remaining area of the most intense category (D4) is in north-central Idaho…

South

Moderate to heavy rain resulted in several areas of improvement in Tennessee, central and northern Mississippi, northeastern Louisiana, and eastern Oklahoma. Farther south and west, subnormal precipitation continued for another week, resulting in numerous areas of deterioration from central and southern Louisiana westward across Texas and central through western Oklahoma. The proportion of the Region experiencing some degree of dryness or drought (D0+) increased slightly this week, from 79 percent to about 80.5 percent. There was a bigger jump in areas covered by some degree of drought (37 percent, up from a bit over 32 percent). The most intense drought (D3 with some isolated patches of D4) cover parts of the panhandle of western Texas and a sizeable part of south-central Texas. The heaviest rains this week (2 to 4 inches) were observed in a broken pattern from northwestern Louisiana through northern Mississippi. In contrast, southern sections of the Lower Mississippi Valley and the vast majority of Texas and Oklahoma received a few tenths of an inch at best, with most sites reporting no measurable precipitation…

Looking Ahead

Over the next 5 to 7 days, two general areas are expected to receive heavy precipitation: The Pacific Northwest, and a swath from the southern Great Plains through the Lower Mississippi and Lower Ohio Valleys. Windward areas and higher elevations are expecting 5 to locally over 10 inches of precipitation, with 2 or more inches anticipated for other areas from the Cascades to the Pacific Coast. Meanwhile, 3 to 5 inches are expected from the Red River (South) Valley into eastern Texas and parts of the Lower Mississippi Valley. Elsewhere, totals exceeding 1.5 inches are forecast in the higher elevations of northern and central Idaho and adjacent areas. Moderate amounts (0.5 to locally over 1.5 inches) are expected to fall on the Ohio Valley, the Middle and Upper Mississippi Valley, and remaining locations in the southern half of the Plains outside Deep South Texas. Look for a few tenths to around an inch of precipitation in the northern Sierra Nevada, plus portions of the northern Intermountain West and Rockies. Elsewhere, light amounts at best are anticipated in most of New England, parts of the Mid-Atlantic region, the South Atlantic coastal plain, much of Peninsular Florida, Deep South Texas, most lower elevations across the interior West including the Southwest into central California, plus most of the Great Basin. Daily highs are forecast to average 4 to 8 deg. F below normal from central California through the Pacific Northwest and across the northern Intermountain West. Similar anomalies should affect the Atlantic Seaboard and Piedmont from northern Georgia through southern New England. Meanwhile, unusually warm weather will likely continue across the northern Plains, with daily highs averaging 5 to 10 deg. F above normal from northern Minnesota through the Dakotas and northern Great Lakes into northeastern New York. Also, highs averaging 4 to 8 deg. F above normal are expected from the Southwest through western and southern Texas. Low temperatures should average warmer with respect to normal across most of the Lower-48, especially over the Plains, Mississippi Valley, the Southwest, and the Great Basin. Low temperatures could average 6 to 13 deg. F above normal in the northeastern Great Plains and adjacent areas. The only broad area expecting below-normal lows (by 2 to 5 deg. F on average) stretches from Virginia northward through much of New York.

The Climate Prediction Centerโ€™s 6-10 day outlook valid for October 29 โ€“ November 1 favors heavier than normal precipitation continuing across the Pacific Northwest, where odds for significantly above-normal precipitation range from 50 to 70 percent. Wet weather is slightly favored across most of the Rockies and Plains as well as parts of central and northern California, northwestern Nevada, and the Pacific Northwest. Wetter than normal conditions are nominally favored across Hawaii. Abnormally dry weather is expected from central and western Texas through central and southern sections of the High Plains and Rockies. Odds for subnormal amounts exceed 50 percent from eastern Arizona through parts of the Texas Big Bend. Meanwhile, warm weather is favored from California, the Southwest, and the Great Basin through parts of the northern Rockies, the High Plains, the northern Great Plains, the Great Lakes, and northern New England. There is a better than 60 percent chance for warmth from southern California into western New Mexico. Cool weather is forecast across the South Atlantic region from Maryland through parts of Florida along with the central and southern Appalachians and the adjacent central Gulf Coast. The Hawaii forecast favors warmth, with chances exceeding 50 percent across the western half of the island chain.

US Drought Monitor one week change map ending October 21, 2025.

Massive #GreenRiver water diversion project proposal denied in #Utah Supreme Court decision — ABC4.com

A detail of a map produced by Water Horse Resources, and published by the state of Utah, showing two pipelines from the Green River, one above Flaming Gorge Reservoir and one below, plus a connecting pipeline between the two. The map is on a Utah state website with a note saying it was โ€œleft at hearingโ€ on Nov. 11, 2018.

Click the link to read the article on the ABC4.com website (MJ Jewkes). Here’s an excerpt:

October 21, 2025

 The Utah Supreme Court ruled on a controversial pipeline project in Eastern Utah last Friday. In January 2018, Water Horse Resources, LLC proposed a pipeline project that would send 55,000 acre-feet of water every year from the Green River to the state of Colorado. However, on Nov. 7, 2020, the Utah State Engineer rejected the application…The proposal sought to pipe water to be used for โ€œbeneficial use in Colorado.โ€ However, a district court found Water Horse failed to establish evidence that the water can be put to beneficial use in Colorado. The pipeline would extend through Wyoming before dropping into an undecided location in Colorado.

Proposed pipeline by Water Horse would bring water from Utah to Colorado. (Courtesy//Utah Supreme Court)

Colorado officials declined to sign onto the project citing the lack of clear authority to administer the diversion of water into the state. Water Horse appealed the district courtโ€™s decision, leading to a years-long legal battle. On Friday, Oct. 17, 2025, the Utah Supreme Court reaffirmed the initial decision of the state engineer to reject the project…The Supreme Court ruling is not the end for the project. According to the courtโ€™s opinion, a renewed application could be submitted and potentially approved by the state engineer.

Green River Basin

Could Good Samaritans Fix Americaโ€™s Abandoned Hardrock Mine Problem? — Daniel Anderson (Getches-Wilkinson Center)

Photo credit: Trout Unlimited

Click the link to read the article on the Getches-Wilkerson Center website (Daniel Anderson):

October 20, 2025

Until the passage of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) in 1980, miners across the American West extracted gold, silver, and other valuable โ€œhardrockโ€ mineralsโ€”and then simply walked away. Today, tens of thousands of these abandoned hardrock mines continue to leak acidic, metal-laden water into pristine streams and wetlands. Federal agencies estimate that over a hundred thousand miles of streams are impaired by mining waste. Nearly half of Western headwater streams are likely contaminated by legacy operations. Despite billions already spent on cleanup at the most hazardous sites, the total cleanup costs remaining may exceed fifty billion dollars.

So how did we end up here? In short, the General Mining Law of 1872 created a lack of accountability for historic mine operators to remediate their operations, but CERCLA and the Clean Water Act (CWA) arguably add an excess of accountability for third parties trying to clean up abandoned mines today.

The Animas River running orange through Durango after the Gold King Mine spill August 2015. Photo credit: Jonathan P. Thompson/The Land Desk

The first legislation to address this problem was introduced in 1999. Many iterations followed and failed, even in the wake of shocking images and costly litigation due to the Gold King Mine spill that dyed the Animas River a vibrant orange in 2015. Finally, in December, 2024, Congress passed the Good Samaritan Remediation of Abandoned Hardrock Mines Act of 2024 (GSA).

The GSA is a cautious, bipartisan attempt to empower volunteers to clean up this toxic legacy. The law creates a short pilot program and releases certain โ€œGood Samaritansโ€ from liability under CERCLA and the CWA, which has long deterred cleanup by groups like state agencies and NGOs. EPA has oversight of the program and the authority to issue permits to Good Samaritans for the proposed cleanup work.

Despite the promise of this new legislation, critical questions remain unanswered about the GSA and how it will work. Only time will tell whether EPA designs and implements an effective permitting program that ensures Good Samaritans complete remediation work safely and effectively. EPA now has the opportunity as the agency that oversees this program to unlock the promise of the GSA.

The GSA left some significant gaps unanswered in how the pilot program will be designed and directed EPA to issue either regulations or guidance to fill in those gaps. EPA missed the statutory deadline to start the rulemaking process (July, 2025) and is now working to issue guidance on how the program will move forward. EPA must provide a 30-day public comment period before finalizing the guidance document according to the GSA. With EPAโ€™s hopes of getting multiple projects approved and shovels in the ground in 2026, the forthcoming guidance is expected to be released soon. While we wait, itโ€™s worth both looking back at what led to the GSA and looking ahead to questions remaining about the implementation of the pilot program.

A Century of Mining the West Without Accountability

The story begins with the General Mining Law of 1872, a relic of the American frontier era that still governs hardrock mining on federal public lands. The law allows citizens and even foreign-based corporations to claim mineral rights and extract valuable ores without paying any federal royalty. Unlike coal, oil, or gasโ€”which fund reclamation through production feesโ€”hardrock mining remains royalty-free.

As mining industrialized during the 20th century, large corporations replaced prospectors. Until 1980, mines were often abandoned without consequences or cleanup once they became unprofitable. The result: an estimated half-million abandoned mine features will continually leach pollution into American watersheds for centuries.

CERLCA Liability Holds Back Many Abandoned Mine Cleanups

Congress sought to address toxic sites throughย CERCLA, also known as the Superfund law, which makes owners and operators strictly liable for hazardous releases. In theory, that ensures accountability. In practice, it creates a paradox: if no polluter can be found at an abandoned site, anyone who tries to clean up the mess may be held responsible for all past, present, and future pollution.

The Clean Water Actโ€™s Double-Edged Sword

Even state agencies, tribes, or nonprofits that treat contaminated water risk being deemed โ€œoperatorsโ€ of a hazardous facility. That fear of liabilityโ€”combined with enormous costsโ€”has frozen many potential Good Samaritans in place. Federal efforts to ease this fear have offered little more than reassurance letters without real protection.

The Clean Water Act compounds the problem. Anyone who discharges pollution into a surface water via any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance must hold a point source discharge permit. By requiring these permits and providing for direct citizen enforcement in the form of citizen suits, the CWA has led to significant improvements in water quality across the country. That said, courts have ruled that drainage pipes or diversion channels used to manage runoff from abandoned mines may also qualify as point sources. As a result, Good Samaritans who exercise control over historic point sources, like mine tunnels, could face penalties and other liabilities for unpermitted discharges, even when they improve overall conditions.

The 2024 Good Samaritan Act Steps onto the Scene

After decades of failed attempts, the Good Samaritan Remediation of Abandoned Hardrock Mines Act was signed into law in December, 2024. The GSA authorizes EPA to create a pilot program, issuing up to fifteen permits for low-risk cleanup projects over seven years. Most importantly, permit holders receive protection from Superfund and Clean Water Act liability for their permitted activities. This legal shield removes one of the greatest barriers to cleanup efforts.

Applicants can seek either a Good Samaritan permit to begin active remediation or an investigative sampling permit to scope out a site for potential conversion to a Good Samaritan permit down the road.

In either case, applicants must show:

  • they had no role in causing, and have never exercised control over, the pollution in their application,
  • they possess the necessary expertise and adequate funding for all contingencies within their control, and
  • they are targeting low-risk sites, which are generally understood to be those that require passive treatment methods like moving piles of mine waste away from streams or snowmelt or diverting water polluted with heavy metals below mine tailings toward wetlands that may settle and naturally improve water quality over time

Under the unique provisions of the GSA, each qualifying permit must go through a modified and streamlined National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review process. EPA or another lead agency must analyze the proposed permit pursuant to an Environmental Assessment (EA). If the lead agency cannot issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) after preparing an EA, the permit cannot be issued. The GSA therefore precludes issuance of a permit where the permitted activities may have a significant impact on the environment.

The pilot program only allows forย up toย fifteenย low riskย projects that must be approved by EPA over the next seven years. Defining which remediations are sufficiently low-risk becomes critical in determining what the pilot program canย proveย aboutย theย Goodย Samaritanย modelย for abandoned mine cleanup. To some extent, โ€œlow riskโ€ is simply equivalent to a FONSI. But the GSA further defines the low-risk remediation under these pilot permits as “anyย actionย toย remove,ย treat,ย orย containย historicย mineย residueย toย prevent, minimize, or reduce (i) the release or threat of release of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant that would harm human health or the environment; or (ii)ย aย migrationย orย dischargeย ofย aย hazardousย substance,ย pollutant,ย orย contaminant that would harm human health or the environment.”

This excludes โ€œany action that requires plugging, opening, or otherwise altering the portal or adit of the abandoned hardrock mine siteโ€ฆโ€, such as what led to the Gold King mine disaster. Many active treatment methods are also excluded from the pilot program, therefore, because they often involve opening or plugging adits or other openings to pump out water and treat it in a water treatment plant, either on or off-site. As a result, the Good Sam Actโ€™s low-risk pilot projects focus on passive treatment of the hazardous mine waste or the toxic discharge coming off that waste, such as a diversion of contaminated water into a settlement pond.

The GSA requires that permitted actions partiallyย orย completelyย remediateย theย historic mine residue at a site. The Administrator of EPA has the discretion to determine whether the permit makes โ€œmeasurable progressโ€. Every activity that the Good Samaritan and involved permitted parties take must be designedย to โ€œimprove or enhance water quality or site-specific soil or sediment quality relevant to the historic mine residue addressed by the remediation plan, including making measurable progress toward achieving applicable water quality standards,โ€ or otherwise protect human health and the environment by preventing the threat of discharge to water, sediment, or soil.ย The proposedย remediation need not achieve the stringentย numeric standardsย requiredย byย CERCLAย orย theย CWA.

Furthermore, it can be challenging to determine the discrete difference between the baseline conditions downstream of an acid mine drainage prior to and after a Good Samaritanย remediationย isย completed.ย Notย onlyย doย backgroundย conditionsย confuseย the picture, but other sources of pollution near the selected project may also make measuring water quality difficult. This may mean that the discretion left to the EPA Administrator to determine โ€œmeasurable progressโ€ becomes generously applied.

Finally, once EPA grants a permit, the Good Samaritan must follow the terms, conditions, and limitations of the permit. If the Good Samaritanโ€™s work degrades the environment from the baseline conditions, leading to โ€œmeasurably worseโ€ conditions, EPA must notify and require that the Good Samaritantake โ€œreasonable measuresโ€ to correct the surface water quality or other environmental conditions to the baseline. If these efforts do not result in a โ€œmeasurably adverse impactโ€, EPA cannot consider this a permit violation or noncompliance. However, if Good Samaritans do not take reasonable measures or if their noncompliance causes a measurable adverse impact, the Good Samaritan must notify all potential impacted parties. If severe enough, EPA has discretion to revoke CERCLA and CWA liability protections.

Recently, EPA shared the following draft flowchart for the permitting process:

Disclaimer: This is being provided as information only and does not impose legally binding requirements on EPA, States, or the public. This cannot be relied upon to create any rights enforceable by any party in litigation with the United States. Any decisions regarding a particular permit will be made based upon the statute and the discretion granted by the statute, including whether or not to grant or deny a permit.

Challenges Facing the Pilot Program Implementation

Despite its promise, the pilot programโ€™s scope is limited. With only fifteen Good Samaritan permits eligible nationwide and no dedicated funding, the law depends on states, tribes, and nonprofits to provide their own resources. The only guidance issued so far by EPA detailed the financial assurance requirements that would-be Good Samaritans must provide to EPA to receive a permit. Definitions provided in this financial assurance guidance raised concerns for mining trade organizations and nonprofits alike with EPAโ€™s proposed interpretations of key terms including โ€œlow riskโ€ and โ€œlong-term monitoringโ€. Crucial terms like these, along with terms impacting enforcement when a permitted remediation action goes awry, like โ€œbaseline conditionsโ€, โ€œmeasurably worseโ€, and โ€œreasonable measuresโ€ to restore baseline conditions, are vague in the GSA. How EPA ultimately clarifies terms like these will play a large role in the success of the GSA in its ultimate goal: to prove that Good Samaritans can effectively and safely clean up abandoned hardrock mine sites. The soon-to-be-released guidance document will therefore be a critical moment in the history of this new program.

Funding the Future

Funding remains the greatest barrier to large-scale remediation efforts. Coal mine cleanups are funded through fees on current production under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act. Current hardrock mining, however, still pays no federal royalty. A modernized system could pair Good Samaritan permitting with industry-funded reclamation fees, ensuring that those profiting from todayโ€™s mining help repair the past. Without this reform, the burden will remain on underfunded agencies and nonprofits. However, this General Mining Law reform remains politically unlikely. In the meantime, the GSA creates a Good Samaritan Mine Remediation Fund but does not dedicate any new appropriations to that fund. Grants under Section 319 of the CWA (Nonpoint Source Pollution) and Section 104(k) of CERCLA (Brownfields Revitalization) programs may help, but funding opportunities here are limited.

The GSA includes provisions that allow Good Samaritans to reprocess mine waste while completing Good Samaritan permit cleanup work. These provisions include a key restriction: revenue generated from reprocessing must be dedicated either to the same cleanup project or to the GSA-created fund for future cleanups. A January 20, 2025 executive order to focus on domestic production of critical minerals led to a related Interior secretarial order on July 17, 2025, for federal land management agencies to organize opportunities and data regarding reprocessing mine waste for critical minerals on federal lands. Shortly after these federal policy directives, an August 15, 2025, article in Science suggested that domestic reprocessing of mining by-products like abandoned mine waste has the potential to meet nearly all the domestic demand for critical minerals. Legal and technical hurdles might prevent much reprocessing from occurring within the seven-year pilot program. Reprocessing projections aside, the political appetite for dedicated funding for the future may still grow if the GSA pilot projects successfully prove the Good Samaritan concept using a funding approach reliant on generosity and creativity.

Despite Significant Liability Protections, Good Samaritans Face Uncertainties

While the new law should help to address significant barriers to the cleanup of abandoned mines by Good Samaritans, uncertainties remain. The GSA provides exceptions to certain requirements under the Clean Water Act (including compliance with section 301, 302, 306, 402, and 404). The GSA also provides exceptions to Section 121 of CERCLA, which requires that Superfund cleanups must also meet a comprehensive collection of all relevant and appropriate standards, requirements, criteria, or limitations (ARARs).

In States or in Tribal lands that have been authorized to administer their own point source (section 402) or dredge and fill (section 404) programs under the CWA, the exceptions to obtaining authorizations, licenses, and permits instead applies to those State or Tribal programs. In that case, Good Samaritans are also excepted from applicable State and Tribal requirements, along with all ARARs under Section 121 of CERCLA.

However, Section 121(e)(1) of CERCLA states that remedial actions conducted entirely onsite do not need to obtain any Federal, State, or local permits. Most GSA pilot projects will likely occur entirely onsite, so it is possible that Good Samaritans might still need to comply with local authorizations or licenses, such as land use plans requirements. While it appears that GSA permitted activities are excepted from following relevant and applicable Federal, State, and Tribal environmental and land use processes, it is a bit unclear whether they are also excepted from local decision making.

The liability protections in the GSA are also limited by the terms of the statute. Good Samaritans may still be liable under the CWA and CERCLA if their actions make conditions at the site โ€œmeasurably worseโ€ as compared to the baseline. In addition, the GSA does not address potential common law liability that might result from unintended accidents. For example, an agricultural water appropriator downstream could sue the Good Samaritan for damages associated with a spike in water acidity due to permitted activities, such as moving a waste rock pile to a safer, permanent location on site.

Finally, the GSA does not clearly address how potential disputes about proposed permits may be reviewed by the federal courts. However, the unique provisions of the GSA, which prohibit issuance of a permit if EPA cannot issue a FONSI, potentially provide an avenue to challenge proposed projects where there is disagreement over the potential benefits and risks of the cleanup activities.

Measuring and Reporting Success of the Pilot Program

The Good Samaritan Act authorizes EPA to issue up to fifteen permits for low-risk abandoned mine cleanups, shielding participants from Superfund and Clean Water Act liability. Applicants must prove prior non-involvement, capability, and target on low-risk sites. Each permit undergoes a streamlined NEPA Environmental Assessment requiring a FONSI. To be successful, EPA and potential Good Samaritans will need to efficiently follow the permit requirements found in the guidance, identify suitable projects, and secure funding. The GSA requires baseline monitoring and post-cleanup reporting for each permitted action but does not require a structured process of learning and adjustment over the course of the pilot program. Without this structured, adaptive approach, it may be difficult for Good Samaritan proponents to collect valuable data and show measurable progress over the next seven years that would justify expanding the Good Samaritan approach to Congress. EPAโ€™s forthcoming guidance offers an opportunity to fix that by publicly adopting a targeted and tiered approach in addition to the obligatory permitting requirements.

The EPAโ€™s David Hockey, who leads the GSA effort from the EPAโ€™s Office of Mountains, Deserts, and Plains based in Denver, has suggested taking just such a flexible, adaptive approach in public meetings discussing the GSA. EPA, working in coordination with partners that led the bill through Congress last year, like Trout Unlimited, intends to approve GSA permits in three tranches. EPA currently estimates that all fifteen projects will be approved and operational by 2028.

The first round will likely approve two or three projects with near-guaranteed success. If all goes according to plan, EPA hopes to have these shovel-ready projects through the GSA permit process, which includes a NEPA review, with the remedial work beginning in 2026. These initial projects will help EPA identify pain points in the process and potentially pivot requirements before issuing a second round of permits. This second tranche will likely occur in different western states and might increase in complexity from the first tranche.

Finally, the third tranche of permits might tackle the more complex projects from a legal and technical standpoint that could still be considered low risk. This may include remediation of sites in Indian Country led by or in cooperation with a Tribal abandoned mine land reclamation program. Other projects suited for the third tranche might include reprocessing of mine waste, tailings, or sludge, which may also require further buy-in to utilize the mining industryโ€™s expertise, facilities, and equipment. These more complex projects will benefit most from building and maintaining local trust and involvement, such as through genuine community dialogue and citizen science partnerships. The third tranche projects should contain such bold choices to fully inform proponents and Congress when they consider expanding the Good Samaritan approach.

EPA appears poised to take a learning-by-doing approach. But the guidance can and should state this by setting public, straightforward, and measurable goals for the pilot program. This is a tremendous opportunity for EPA and everyone who stands to benefit from abandoned mine cleanup. But this is no simple task. Each permit must be flexible enough to address the unique characteristics at each mine site, sparking interest in future legislation so more Good Samaritans can help address the full scale of the abandoned hardrock mine pollution problem. But if EPA abuses its broad discretion under the GSA and moves the goalposts too much during the pilot program, they may reignite criticisms that the Good Samaritan approach undercuts bedrock environmental laws like the Clean Water Act. If projects are not selected carefully, for instance, the EPA could approve a permit that may not be sufficiently โ€œlow riskโ€, or that ultimately makes no โ€œmeasurable progressโ€ to improve or protect the environment. Either case may invite litigation against the EPA under the Administrative Procedure Actโ€™s arbitrary and capricious standard or bolster other claims against Good Samaritans.

While the GSA itself imposes only a report to Congress at the end of the seven-year pilot period, a five-year interim report to Congress could help ensure accountability. If all goes well or more pilot projects are needed, this interim report could also provide support for an extension before the pilot program expires. The guidance issued by EPA should only be the beginning of the lessons learned and acted on during the GSA pilot program.

Seizing the Window of Opportunity

The GSA represents a breakthrough after decades of gridlock. It addresses the key fears of liability that stymied cleanup. Yet its success will depend on how effectively the EPA implements the pilot program and the courage of Good Samaritans who are stepping into some uncertainty. If it fails, Americaโ€™s abandoned mines will continue to leak toxins into its headwaters for generations to come. But if the program succeeds, it could become a model for collaborative environmental restoration. For now, the EPAโ€™s forthcoming guidance could mark the first steps toward success through clear permitting requirements and by setting flexible yet strategic goals for the pilot program.

If you are interested in following the implementation of the Good Samaritan Act, EPA recently announced it will host a webinar on December 2, 2025. They will provide a brief background and history of abandoned mine land cleanups, highlight key aspects of the legislation, discuss the permitting process, and explain overall program goals and timelines. Visit EPAโ€™s GSA website for more information.

Download a PDF of the paper here. 

Map of the San Juan River, a tributary of the Colorado River, in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah, USA. Made using USGS National Map data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=47456307

Salmon clear last #KlamathRiver dams, reaching Williamson and Sprague rivers — Jes Burnsย andย Cassandra Profita (#Oregon Public Radio)

Populations of salmon re-establish spawning habitat in a tributary in Southern Oregon in October 2025. To get here, the salmon had to swim past Keno and Link River dams and through Upper Klamath Lake, which was made possible after four hydroelectric dams were removed downstream on the Klamath River last year. Photo credit: Paul Robert/Wolf Wilson

Click the link to read the article on the Oregon Public Radio (es Burns and Cassandra Profita):

October 17, 2025

Just a year after four dams were removed, fall Chinook have migrated nearly 300 miles into the Upper Klamath Basin in Southern Oregon.

For the first time in more than 100 years, Chinook salmon have been spotted at the confluence of the Sprague and Williamson rivers in Chiloquin, the government seat of the Klamath Tribes in Southern Oregon. 

Itโ€™s the latest milestone following the removal of four dams on the Klamath River last year, which was the largest river restoration project in U.S. history. 

โ€œA hundred and fifteen years that they havenโ€™t been here, and they still have that GPS unit inside of them,โ€ said the visibly giddy Klamath Tribal Chair William Ray, Jr. โ€œItโ€™s truly an awesome feat if you think about the gauntlet they had to go through.โ€ 

Ray said salmon traditionally comprised about a third of the diet of the Indigenous people in the Upper Klamath Basin. That food source vanished with the building of Copco 1 Dam in northern California in 1918. 

Related: Klamath River ecosystem is booming one year after dam removal

Scientists have been tracking the migration of this yearโ€™s run of fall Chinook as theyโ€™ve passed all of the old dam sites on the river. 

Last week they reached a huge milestone: A Chinook was photographed entering Upper Klamath Lake. But it was unclear how that fish and the others waiting to scale the fish ladder would fare in the lake, which has been plagued by water quality issues, including toxic cyanobacteria blooms.

โ€œThis past summer the water in the lake was so toxic that you could not drink it or swim in it,โ€ said Ray. 

Ray says the Klamath Tribes fisheries staff started tracing the tag on one of the Chinook as it passed through the Link River Dam fish ladder in Klamath Falls on Oct. 8. Just a couple days later, the fish was detected passing into the Williamson River, having swum approximately 15 miles through the lake.

A guide to salmon returning to the Upper Klamath Basin created by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in October 2025. Courtesy of Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife confirmed radio-tagged fall Chinook salmon have made it into the Sprague River. 

โ€œThe run so far this year has been incredibly exciting, and weโ€™re expanding our monitoring program on an almost daily basis to keep adapting,โ€ said Mark Hereford, ODFW Klamath fisheries reintroduction project leader. โ€œIt is incredible to be a part of this historic return and see where these salmon go and what they do.โ€ 

ODFW Public Information Officer Adam Baylor said tagged fish were also detected Tuesday in the spring-fed waters of Pelican Bay, on the opposite side of the lake.

A radio-tagged Chinook salmon swims amongst Kokanee and Redband Trout in a spring-fed pool alongside the Upper Klamath Lake in October 2025. Paul Robert Wolf Wilson

โ€œWe figure that right now, there are possibly more than 100 salmon that have made it โ€” that are above the Link River Dam,โ€ said Ray.

ODFW and the tribes are encouraging people not to touch or catch the salmon. The rivers in the Upper Klamath Basin are closed to all salmon fishing. 

โ€œWhatโ€™s next is to allow them to live their lives without any kind of interference,โ€ Ray said. โ€œWeโ€™re praying. Weโ€™re praying as loud as we can pray that the spawners will do their natural work and just keep coming back every year so the population can grow into a fishable population for us.โ€ 

In the meantime, Ray said the Tribes have a responsibility to continue habitat restoration work in the region to make sure the new visitors to the Upper Klamath Basin have healthy places to go.

Klamath River Basin. Map credit: American Rivers

A reversal of water fortunes: October brought full canals and bolstered reservoirs, and โ€˜a little extra head startโ€™ into winter — AlamosaCitizen.com #RioGrande #SanLuisValley

Greg Higel’s Alamosa County cattle ranch and hay operation opened ditches to take water in. Credit: The Citizen

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

October 17, 2025

The reversal of fortunes this water year for San Luis Valley irrigators โ€“ going from one of the deadest rivers on record to a bountiful water year that sees full canals and increased reservoir storage โ€“ has been breathtaking.

The โ€œwater yearโ€ for Valley farmers technically ends Nov. 1, which means no more water in the fields. Now with the mid-October rains from the southwest and resulting historic fall river flows, the state is talking to farmers about extending the water season a bit into November, which would allow for another week of irrigating and another cut of hay.

โ€œIโ€™m working hard, but Iโ€™m not complaining,โ€ said Greg Higel, whose Alamosa County cattle ranch and hay operation takes in surface water through the Centennial Ditch. It was private ditch operators like Higel who opened their head gates to begin diverting water off the Rio Grande. 

โ€œAll of us who live along the river on the flat have water out in the meadows today,โ€ said Higel. 

That was not the case before Sunday, Oct. 12, when it became evident the Upper Rio Grande would be impacted by La Niรฑaโ€™s first seasonal storm.

Back in April at the start of the irrigation season, State Engineer Jason Ullmann warned Valley irrigators that the 2025 water year looked troubling given the lack of snow in the San Juan Mountains and expectation for another light spring runoff. 

By August, the Rio Grande through Alamosa was disappearing before our eyes. Literally. The flow of the Rio Grande was 180 cfs at Del Norte, the Conejos at Mogote was running at 75 cfs, and downstream into New Mexico the Rio Grande had become a dry bed in Albuquerque.

The state is talking to farmers about extending the water season a bit into November, which would allow for another week of irrigating and another cut of hay. Credit: The Citizen

Then came the ocean storms over the Pacific and heavy rains through the southwest, and the rivers that are essential to the Valley and downstream into New Mexico sprang to life. The Upper Rio Grande at Del Norte hit 7,180 cfs, and unheard of flow this late into the water season. The Conejos River at Mogote hit its record high flow for the season, and farmers in the southern end of the Valley, like Higel on the west end, opened ditches to take water in.

โ€œThis helps us in the long run,โ€ said Lawrence Crowder, president of the Commonwealth Ditch.

The Commonwealth had six ditch riders working the storm and diverting water into fields throughout the week. Now the expectation is the water will freeze in the fields and then thaw in the spring to give irrigators โ€œa little extra head start.โ€

Total precipitation (inches) from 9-15 October 2025 with gridded data from the PRISM Climate Group and observations from the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail, and Snow (CoCoRaHS) network.

โ€œItโ€™s not going to dry out much between now and when the snow flies,โ€ Crowder said.

The October moisture also turned around the calculations of the Colorado Division of Water Resources and its delivery of water to the New Mexico state line under the Rio Grande Compact. The weather event, according to initial estimates by the Colorado Division of Water Resources, added 20,000 to 25,000 acre-feet of water to the Rio Grande system itself, and around 10,000 to 15,000 acre-feet that was diverted into the private ditches like the Commonwealth and Centennial.

โ€œAll of us who live along the river on the flat have water out in the meadows today,โ€ said rancher Greg Higel. Credit: The Citizen

With all the extra water, Colorado no longer thinks it overdelivered this year and instead likely owes in the neighborhood of 5,000 acre-feet to New Mexico. 

At the upcoming Rio Grande Water Conservation District quarterly meeting on Oct. 21, Colorado Division of Water Resources officials will deliver a report that should provide final estimates on the amount of water the great storm of October delivered and the impact it had on the Upper Rio Grande Basin.

In terms of flow on the Rio Grande, only the peak from October 1911 is higher than the current average flow for the period between October and April, according to research by Russ Schumacher of the Colorado Climate Center in Fort Collins.

Needless to say, the reversal of fortunes on the Upper Rio Grande was dramatic. At least for 2025.

Rio Grande and Pecos River basins. Map credit: By Kmusser – Own work, Elevation data from SRTM, drainage basin from GTOPO [1], U.S. stream from the National Atlas [2], all other features from Vector Map., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=11218868

How the #VallecitoCreek event compares to the devastating flood of 1911: โ€˜It’s good to see the extremes,โ€™ meteorologist says — The #Durango Herald

Durango flood of 1911 river scene. Photo credit Center of Southwest Studies, Fort Lewis College.

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

October 17, 2025

The flooding that breached the levees of Vallecito and Grimes creeks on Oct. 11 and forced the evacuation of 390 Vallecito homes has been described as โ€œunprecedented.โ€ Record flow rates fueled by record rains left the little valley awash, with recovery efforts expected to continue for months. The event โ€“ which owed its debut to Tropical Storm Priscilla and, to a lesser extent, Tropical Storm Raymond โ€“ is a striking reminder of the power of Mother Nature. But when compared with another destructive flood that inundated towns, drowned fields of crops and washed out miles of railroad tracks, the Vallecito flood hardly made a splash…

The 1911 Flood occurred 114 years ago on Oct. 5, 1911 on the Animas River. According to the Animas Museum in Durango, โ€œ1911 was a wet year for southwest Colorado with heavy snows in the high country and heavy rains through the summer.โ€ A gentle rain began Oct. 5, the museumโ€™s summary said. By morning, 2 inches of rain had fallen and the storm showed no sign of letting up. The Animas Museum described the Animas Riverโ€™s waters as โ€œunstoppable.โ€

[…]

The river flowed at an estimated rate of 25,000 cubic feet per second, washing out railroad tracks and shutting the stretch of Denver & Rio Grande Western Railwayโ€™s railroad for nine weeks. By comparison, the Animas River reached 4,860 cfs on Tuesday, less than a fifth the amount in 1911. Matt Aleksa, meteorologist for the National Weather Service in Grand Junction, said the 1911 Flood was โ€œway worseโ€ than the flood that washed through Vallecito last weekend. The only real comparable details, he said, are both events were caused by tropical storm systems that resulted in consecutive days of heavy rainfall. He said 1911 opened with a strong winter and heavy snowpack. In the summertime, runoff combined with a strong monsoon season, and disaster finally struck in October when a tropical storm rolled through. The soils were already saturated, meaning moisture from rain wasnโ€™t absorbed into the ground and instead flowed over it. In 1911, Durango received almost 3.5 inches of rain over 36 hours. Silverton received 4 inches of rain. Gladstone north of Silverton received 8 inches of rain, Aleksa said. Between 2 and 4 inches of rainfall was measured in the Animas River Basin and 4 to 6 inches was measured at higher, mountain elevations. He said the Durango area probably received half the precipitation last weekend as it did during the 1911 Flood.

Track of the October 1911 hurricane, along with rainfall measurements in the southwestern US. From the National Weather Service report โ€œTHE EFFECTS OF EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC TROPICAL CYCLONES ON THE SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATESโ€, https://www.weather.gov/media/wrh/online_publications/TMs/TM-197.pdf . h/t Jeff Lukas for pointing out this report.

#Durango Public Works proposes water, sewer rate hikes — The Durango Herald

Lake Nighthorse and Durango March 2016 photo via Greg Hobbs.

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

October 20, 2025

Infrastructure funds teetering above red line

There is no way around it: The city of Durango must increase water and sewer rates next year and follow up with annual rate increases going forward, according to city officials. For water rates, the city proposes an average monthly increase of $2.80 for residential accounts and $16.76 for commercial accounts. For sewer rates, the city proposes an average monthly increase of $9.18 for residential accounts and $78.14 for commercial accounts. The city, which has a number of significant water infrastructure projects planned for the next decade โ€“ including a $35 million to $40 million replacement of the pipeline that delivers Durangoโ€™s drinking water โ€“ expects its water fund to be $3 million in the red by the end of 2030, officials said. The sewer fund requires a rate increase just to meet operational expenses, which are projected to exceed revenues next year…

The Public Works Department is recommending 10% and 20% increases to water and sewer rates, respectively, to be followed by annual increases yet to be determined. What residents should expect of annual rate increases will be informed by a rate study outlined in pending water and sewer master plans to be completed in 2027, said Bob Lowry, interim Public Works director…Had the city incrementally raised rates annually โ€œsince Day 1,โ€ current rates would be significantly higher. If rates arenโ€™t raised soon, larger increases will be necessary later on, and utility customers will feel them all the more in their pocketbooks. Lowry said itโ€™s best practice to review water and sewer rates annually and to adjust them no less frequently than every other year.

Map of the San Juan River, a tributary of the Colorado River, in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah, USA. Made using USGS National Map data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=47456307

โ€œthe nearest thing I have seen to being trueโ€ — John Fleck (InkStain.net)

Exploring the data commons (I need to update the legend, the black lines are max and min)

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

October 9, 2025

A bunch of odds and ends cluttering my brain, blog posts that are half written in my mind that are in the way:

Quoting Luis Villa on accessing the open data commons

Yes.

See graph above.

I always have had more questions (sometimes ill-posed, sometimes well-thought-through) than my coding abilities can execute. (See also domestic wells below.)

Source

The Commons

I pay for a subscription to Newspapers.com in order to have access to a large portion of my written work. I view what I have written over the course of my life โ€“ newspapers, books, blogs โ€“ as a mindful and intentional contribution to the information commons. But this aligns poorly with the formal economic and legal structures โ€“ โ€œinstitutionsโ€ as we might define them for our water resources students, the rules that serve as the foundation for the more common-language definitions of โ€œinstitutionsโ€ that might apply here, the organizations of publishing โ€“ newspapers and book publishers and Inkstain.

The newspaper paid me well (it wasnโ€™t a lot of money, but I viewed it as a fair transaction) and owned what I produced. I pay now for the privilege of reading it. The books are more complicated. I choose to make Inkstain freely available.

Derrida and Adorno, two philosophers I have been poking at of late, are helping me think about the definitional challenges โ€“ not โ€œthe commonsโ€ in particular, but what weโ€™re doing when we attach words/concepts to things, the cultural quicksand beneath our linguistic feet.

That Postcard

Point Sublime
โ€œthe nearest thing I have seen to being trueโ€

Found this in a stack of old Dad stuff. It is my origin story, my father as a young artist in a moment of profound change. In laying the groundwork for his life, it laid the groundwork for mine.

Domestic Wells

OpenET-reported change in evapotranspiration, 2000-2004 compared to 2020-2024. Green is places water consumptive use from all sources has gone up. Brown is places it has gone down.
Density of domestic wells in greater Albuquerque. Dark green is >150 wells per square kilometer. Brown is no wells at all.

See Luisโ€™s comment above about vibe coding and open data.

I am not sure what to do with this. I canโ€™t unsee it.

Iโ€™m out on the epistemological thin ice here, but as a journalist I spent much of my life working in areas where that ice is thin, itโ€™s where the interesting stuff happens.

Ostrom and the Colorado River

Iโ€™ve mostly been grabbing the handrail and trying not to fall off as my Wilburys friends, in what we see as a discourse vacuum, charge ahead with our critique of Colorado River governance:

In a 2011 paper, Elinor Ostrom laid out one of the final versions of her โ€œdesign principles,โ€ characteristics of successful institutional arrangements for collective action around natural resource systems. We spend a lot of time on this in the class I teach with Bob Berrens each fall for UNM graduate students. It was at the heart of my book Water is For Fighting Over, and it is at the heart of Ribbons of Green, the book Bob and I wrote that UNM Press will be publishing next year.

(Did I mention how much I love teaching?)

There are two design principles in particular that are at the heart of the current Colorado River challenges. Quoting from Ostrom 2011:

  • How are conflicts over harvesting and maintenance to be resolved?
  • How will the rules affecting the above be changed over time with changes in the performance of the resource system, the strategies of participants, and external opportunities and constraints?

There is an additional principle from Ostrom that shows up over and over in her work, thatโ€™s embedded in her explicit principles: a need for a shared understanding of the quantification of the resource.

I am thinking through how these ideas relate to the current Colorado River challenges. Those challenges suggest what I had thought was a functional system lacks these three things. I am thinking a lot about what I described in 2015 when I was writing Water is For Fighting Over, versus what I see happening in 2025. What has changed, or what did I miss?

In which I get my first ambulance ride

Burying the lead here (I always hated the artifice of the journalistic jargon-spelling โ€œledeโ€), but I had occasion recently to spend a few days in the bubble of the medical-industrial complex. Iโ€™m fine, I think, but the identification of a โ€œnewโ€ life-changing risk is in actuality the identification of a risk that has probably been there all along. Itโ€™s just that now I know about it.

Which means I can do some stuff to reduce that risk, including magical pharmacology (โ€œIf I crash,โ€ I told my bike-riding buddy Sunday, โ€œbe sure to tell the EMTโ€™s!โ€) and also saying more โ€œnosโ€ to the stresses of my life of public engagement. My contributions to the commons are not without personal cost, as well as the personal benefits I derive. (Sorry, J.)

It also means that I spend a lot of time thinking about this (new?) risk. This is subtext to all the rest of what I just wrote.

More on the October 2025 rain and floods in southwest #Colorado — Russ Schumacher (Colorado #Climate Center)

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Climate Center website (Russ Schumacher):

October 17, 2025

Our post from over the weekend highlighted the first round of heavy rainfall and flooding in southwest Colorado. There was a break in the rain on Sunday, October 12, and then a second round of heavy rain on Monday the 13th associated with moisture from remnant Tropical Storm Raymond. Thatโ€™s right, a one-two punch of tropical moisture from the larger Priscilla and then from Raymond a couple days later. Here are some observations of the total precipitation over the entire event.

Total precipitation (inches) from 9-15 October 2025 with gridded data from the PRISM Climate Group and observations from the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail, and Snow (CoCoRaHS) network.

With soils already saturated and rivers and creeks running high, the Monday rainfall led to even more flooding in La Plata and Archuleta Counties. The San Juan River at Pagosa Springs actually peaked slightly higher on Tuesday morning than it did on Saturday, once again reaching major flood stage.

River stage for the San Juan River at Pagosa Springs from October 9-17, 2025. From https://water.noaa.gov/gauges/pspc2.

The high elevations of the San Juan mountains received another 3-4โ€ณ of precipitation on Monday (a bit of it as snow on the higher peaks), with 1-3 additional inches at lower elevations around Pagosa Springs, Bayfield, and Durango. This brought the 7-day total precipitation to a remarkable 10.2 inches at the Upper San Juan SNOTEL station, with over 9โ€ณ at several other sites.

7-day precipitation at southwestern Colorado SNOTEL stations from 9-15 October 2025. From the USDA NRCS interactive map

Volunteer observers from the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail, and Snow network (CoCoRaHS) recorded over 7 inches of rainfall in 7 days north of Bayfield and northwest of Pagosa Springs. These are huge rainfall totals for this part of the state!

CoCoRaHS precipitation observations for the period from 10-16 October 2025 in La Plata and Archuleta Counties. From https://maps.cocorahs.org/

Updating the table from the previous post to show seven-day precipitation accumulations at the Upper San Juan SNOTEL station, we see that the 10.2โ€ณ from the recent storm is surrounded only by huge winter snowstorm cycles. In the years since that station was established in 1978, there arenโ€™t any fall rainstorms that come anywhere close to rivaling it.

Ranking of the top 7-day precipitation totals at the Upper San Juan SNOTEL station since 1978, with overlapping periods removed. Data from ACIS.

The hurricane and flood of October 1911

Looking back farther in history, however, there is one event that surpassed this one in terms of the level of flooding in the southwestern US (including Colorado): the โ€œSonora hurricaneโ€ of October 1911. This caused the flood of record on many rivers in southern Colorado, including the San Juan at Pagosa Springs (the 17.8 feet shown on the graph at the beginning). Jonathan Thompson of the Land Desk had a great summary a few years ago about that flood along with other historic floods in the region. (h/t John Orr for pointing me to this). 

The track of the 1911 hurricane appears to be somewhat similar to what happened with Priscilla this year, with tropical moisture streaming ahead of the decaying circulation. (Animations below are from this year, the map below that is the track of the 1911 hurricane.)

Animation of precipitable water fin GFS model initializations, every 6 hours between 9-15 October 2025. Images from https://schumacher.atmos.colostate.edu/weather/gfs.php
Animation the standardized anomaly of precipitable water (right) from GFS model initializations, every 6 hours between 9-15 October 2025. Images from https://schumacher.atmos.colostate.edu/weather/gfs.php
Track of the October 1911 hurricane, along with rainfall measurements in the southwestern US. From the National Weather Service report โ€œTHE EFFECTS OF EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC TROPICAL CYCLONES ON THE SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATESโ€, https://www.weather.gov/media/wrh/online_publications/TMs/TM-197.pdf . h/t Jeff Lukas for pointing out this report.

There are a lot more rainfall observations available now than there were during the 1911 storm (thank you, CoCoRaHS observers and SNOTEL network, among others!), but from the available data, the rainfall totals over 1-2 days in the 1911 storm were greater than those in the 2025 event, but the fact that there were *two* tropical cyclone remnants in 2025 made the total precipitation over 5-7 days much greater. The break in the rainfall on Sunday in between the two waves of heavy rain was certainly important, or the flooding could have been closer to what happened in 1911. 

And it turns out there was a particularly controversial rainfall observation in October 1911 โ€” I was not really aware of this previously, but my predecessor Nolan Doesken was involved in many of the debates surrounding the chart shown here.

Photo of the cooperative observer form from Gladstone, Colorado, October 1911.

This is the observation form from Gladstone, Colorado, north of Silverton, at around 10,500 feet elevation. It shows 8.05โ€ณ on October 5, 1911. Thereโ€™s no question that a lot of rain fell in southwestern Colorado during that storm based on the floods that happened, but if itโ€™s possible for over 8โ€ณ of rain to fall in one day at 10,500 feet, that has major implications for the robustness of infrastructure that is needed. A later study of the flooding near Gladstone by Pruess, Wohl, and Jarrett found that it was not consistent with such large rainfall accumulations (or at least not within 24 hours), and the Gladstone observation is now generally deemed to be unreliable.(Thanks to Jeff Lukas for pointing this paper out.) Even so, Silverton recorded 4.05โ€ณ on October 5, 1911, and flooding on the Animas and San Juan Rivers reached record levels (at least since measurements have been in place)

The good news: improvements in drought conditions

The flooding in southwestern Colorado led to the destruction of multiple homes and to major disruptions around the region. But the flip side is that all the rain will help to ameliorate the lingering drought in the area. Everyone would prefer that the water arrive more steadily rather than in a huge burst like this, but as noted in this Colorado Sun story, small reservoirs like Vallecito saw big boosts in their storage from the storm. On this weekโ€™s US Drought Monitor, there were widespread two-category improvements in southwestern Colorado, going either from D2 (severe drought) to D0 (abnormally dry), or from D1 (moderate drought) to nothing on the map. Two-category improvements in one week are very rare for the Drought Monitor, typically only applied when there are major rain events associated with tropical systems.

Summary of US Drought Monitor changes for the week ending October 14, 2025. Courtesy of Allie Mazurek, Colorado Climate Center.

Both the Animas and Rio Grande Rivers saw huge increases in streamflow, with 7-day average flows near record levels for the fall, and close to the average early-summer peak from snowmelt runoff. On the Rio Grande, only the peak from October 1911 is higher than the current average flow for the period between October and April. [Daily data is missing for the Animas in October 1911, but it surely peaked even much higher than shown on the graph.]

Flows on the Animas River at Durango. Water Year 2026 is shown in black in comparison to past years. From https://climate.colostate.edu/drought/#streamflow
Flows on the Rio Grande near Del Norte. Water Year 2026 is shown in black in comparison to past years. From https://climate.colostate.edu/drought/#streamflow

Other than around the San Juan Mountains, this event didnโ€™t end the drought that goes back to last winter (or even longer, depending on how you define it) across western Colorado, but did put a nice dent into the precipitation deficits that had mounted over that period. Now itโ€™s time to look ahead to the snow accumulation season and see what arrives in the usual source of water in western Colorado: the mountain snowpack.

We got pulled in to analyzing this major storm, along with some other activities this week, but we will be finalizing and releasing our recap of Water Year 2025 within the next week or so, so please stay tuned for that! [Subscribeย hereย if you want to get it delivered straight to your inbox. And use the โ€˜subscribeโ€™ box here on the blog if you like these posts and want to get them in your email โ€” itโ€™s a different mailing list.]

Jane Goodall told us never give up — Stephen Trimble (WritersOnTheRange.org)

The Lee-Curtis proposal would bring OHV traffic into the wildness and quiet of Cathedral Valley in Capitol Reef National Park. Photo courtesy Stephen Trimble

Click the link to read the article on the Writers on the Range website (Stephen Trimble):

October 20, 2025

In her โ€œLast Wordsโ€ interview that was broadcast after her death, Jane Goodall talked about her calm in the face of โ€œthe dark times we are living in now.โ€ She devoted her life to battling for conservation but attributed this serenity to the time she spent in the forest with the chimps. All those weeks and months and years of quiet observation.

Such quiet is a rare gift. I havenโ€™t been in Goodallโ€™s Tanzanian rain forest, but recently shared Utahโ€™s Capitol Reef National Park with a 25-year-old cousin visiting from urban America. Once in the canyons he kept pausing to say, โ€œitโ€™s so peaceful, so still.โ€ He was astonished and renewed by that quiet.

This canyon country stillness is under attack. The assaults come in waves powered by motorized vehicles, engines revving.

First, the Trump administration proposes abandoning the 2023 Bureau of Land Management travel plan for Labyrinth Canyon. This 300,000-acre Utah wildland along the Green River just north of Canyonlands National Park is a gemโ€”a fretwork of slickrock canyons along the river. Labyrinth preserves quiet for rafters, hikers, and bighorn sheep. No death-defying rapids here on this lazy, looping stretch easily paddled by families in canoes.

In a model compromise, the current Labyrinth plan maintains access to more than 800 miles of off-highway-vehicle (OHV) routes, closing only 317 miles to vehicles. In the surrounding Moab region, more than 4,000 miles of routes remain open. OHVs have plenty of room to roam.

But moderation is never enough for Utah politicians determined to motorize every inch of our public lands. They are pushing to reopen 141 miles of closed OHV routes at Labyrinth and hoping for even more. You can comment here before October 24.

In another backtrack on conservation in Utah, the administration has solicited bids for coal leasing on 48,000 acres of BLM land, much of it on and near the boundaries of national parks. The big views from Capitol Reef, Zion, and Bryce Canyon donโ€™t stop at the park boundaries. Visitors, many from other countries, would be horrified by such industrialization of these world-class destinations. Rural Utah depends on these tourists to survive economically.

These are lands that even the conservative second Bush administration deemed unsuitable for mines. As Cory MacNulty, with the National Parks Conservation Association, said of the proposed leasing, โ€œItโ€™s absurd.โ€

Now the OHV battalions are threatening to overwhelm Capitol Reef National Park.

Utah Republican Senators Mike Lee and John Curtis introduced a bill on October 5 to open virtually every road in Capitol Reef to off-roaders. They claim that disabled Americans need this fundamental change to park policy, though even the parkโ€™s back roads are currently accessible by moderately high-clearance cars and trucks. Thereโ€™s absolutely no need to permit noisy and destructive OHVs.

The senatorsโ€™ second bill would potentially open other national parks to OHV use. Lee tried to pass nearly identical bills in 2021 and encountered a buzzsaw of resistance from national park advocates.

As retired Capitol Reef superintendent Sue Fritzke said, โ€œOHVs would denigrate the very resources those sites have been set aside to protect, with increased dust and noise and impacts on wildlife, endangered species, and visitors.โ€

At each mile farther into remote corners of the park, off-highway vehicles become more problematic. Even though a majority of riders obey the rules, some will go off-road. They just will. Their vehicles are designed for this exact purpose. In Capitol Reefโ€™s considerable backcountryโ€”as in all underfunded national parks and monumentsโ€” staffing does not allow for constant patrolling to apprehend and ticket wrongdoers.

Capitol Reef is a place to slow down, not speed up. To revel in quiet, not reach for earplugs. To share the healing land with tenderness and restraint.

Lee disrespects national park values with these twin bills, and Curtis, who likes to tout his nature sensitivity on hikes with constituents, should know better. Their misguided proposals should be left to wither in committee and die. Those of us who love the restorative peace of national parks will just keep fighting such regressive bills.

Stephen Trimble: Photo credit: Writers on the Range

In her last interview, Jane Goodall asked us to never give up: โ€œWithout hope, we fall into apathy and do nothing. If people donโ€™t have hope, weโ€™re doomed. Letโ€™s fight to the very end.โ€

We will.

Stephen Trimble is a contributor to Writers on the Range, writersontherange.org, an independent nonprofit dedicated to spurring lively conversation about the West. He is a writer and photographer in Utah.

The Gifford Homestead in Capitol Reef National Park. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

Federal Water Tap, October 20, 2025: Abandoned Mine Cleanup Application Review to Begin This Fall, EPA Says — Brett Walton (circleofblue.org)

The โ€œBonita Peak Mining Districtโ€ superfund site. Map via the Environmental Protection Agency

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

The Rundown

  • Democrats on budget committees tell EPA and Interior to halt potentialย staff cutsย during the shutdown.
  • White House budget office says $11 billion inย Army Corps infrastructure projectsย will be paused.
  • BLM will begin an environmental analysis of a proposed expansion of aย Mojave Desert gold mineย that will need more groundwater to operate.

And lastly, EPA prepares to permit abandoned hardrock mine cleanups under a new Good Samaritan law.

โ€œIf you were a nonprofit or a county with a serious water pollution issue coming out of an old set of mine tailings, you could not work on that problem. The moment you touched it, you accepted total liability for the pollution going downstream. So nobody would ever do anything about all these 140,000 abandoned mines. Almost every one of them having some environmental problem. Almost all of it connected to water.โ€ โ€“ Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO) speaking with the Western Governorsโ€™ Association podcast about the problem of cleaning up abandoned mines in the western United States.

Last year the Good Samaritan Remediation of Abandoned Hardrock Mines Act was signed into law. It requires the EPA to permit 15 pilot cleanup projects to be completed within seven years. The projects can be located on private, federal, or state land.

David Hockey, acting director of the EPA Office of Mountains, Deserts, and Plains, said the agency will review project applications starting this fall. He hopes to have the first projects under construction next year and all 15 in progress by summer 2028.

By the Numbers

$11 Billion: Army Corps infrastructure projects that will be โ€œpaused,โ€ Russell Vought, the director of the White House budget office, wrote on X. Vought blamed the government shutdown for the freeze. The targeted projects are mostly in states where Democrats are in power, E&E News reports.

News Briefs

Potential Shutdown Staff Cuts
Leading Democrats sent letters to the heads of EPA and Interior asking them to halt potential job cuts at their agencies during the shutdown.

Sen. Jeff Merkeley and Rep. Chellie Pingree are the ranking Democrats on the budget committees that oversee spending by those agencies.

Their concern is over the administrationโ€™s use of โ€œreduction in forceโ€ during the shutdown to pare the federal workforce closer to President Trumpโ€™s vision of a diminished bureaucracy, even though Congress is supposed to set funding levels.

โ€œThis coordinated, government-wide approach to implementing RIFs during a lapse in appropriations appears designed to circumvent the appropriations process,โ€ they wrote in their letter to Lee Zeldin, EPA administrator.

Of particular concern, they wrote, are proposed changes and reductions to the EPAโ€™s science assessment and research division.

Similar concerns were raised in the letter to Doug Burgum, the interior secretary.

Studies and Reports

State Revolving Fund Audits
The EPA Office of Inspector General reviewed the financial documents for the state revolving fund programs, the main federal vehicle for water infrastructure funding.

The review found that 42 state drinking water programs and 43 clean water programs had an independent financial audit.

Audited financial statements help to identify wasteful and fraudulent spending.

On the Radar

Shutdown Continues
Nineteen days and counting, as of this writing.

Proposed Mojave Mine Expansion
The Bureau of Land Management will do an environmental impact analysis for a proposed expansion of the Castle Mountain open-pit gold mine in Californiaโ€™s part of the Mojave Desert.

The expansion would extend the mineโ€™s life by 30 years and would entail construction of a 32-mile pipeline to supply 2,250 acre-feet of groundwater per year.

The mine is part of FAST-41, a federal program to accelerate project permitting and environmental reviews through close interagency coordination. The project dashboardsuggests that permitting for the Castle Mountain expansion will be completed by December 2026.

Public comments are being accepted through November 20. Submit them via the above link.

A virtual public meeting will be held on November 5 to outline the project and collect public input. Register here.

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

#ColoradoRiver users are at a crossroads as two looming decisions hang over the Westโ€™s future: — The #Aspen Times #COriver #aridification #CRD2025

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

Click the link to read the article on The Aspen Times website (Ali Longwell). Here’s an excerpt:

October 8, 2025

The Shoshone water rights acquisition and negotiations on post-2026 Lake Powell and Mead operations dominate conversations at the Colorado River Districtโ€™s annual water seminar

Western Slope elected officials, water managers, engineers, and conservationists met in Grand Junction on Friday, Oct. 3, all focused on one thing: the uncertain future of the Colorado River.

โ€œWater users, as a lot, tend to crave certainty, and that certainty seems more and more elusive these days,โ€ said Peter Fleming, general counsel for the Colorado River District, at this yearโ€™s annual seminar hosted by the River District.

While the seminar broached many of the challenges and opportunities facing those who rely on the Colorado River, most discussions came back to two looming decisions that will dictate how the future looks for the 40 million people, seven states, two counties, and 30 tribal nations that rely on the waterway.ย  This includes the River Districtโ€™sย proposed $99 million acquisition of the Shoshone water rightsย and the interstateย negotiationsย over the post-2026 operations of Lake Powell and Lake Mead. Both decisions will have ramifications for all Colorado River users โ€” including agriculture, recreation, and municipal water โ€” but are stalled by competing interests, be it political, geographic, or otherwise…The River District is currently working through a multi-year process to purchase the Shoshone water rights from Xcel Energy for $99 million. The rights โ€” established in the early 1900s โ€” are the oldest, non-consumptive water rights on the Colorado River…The Shoshone water right is currently tied to the hydroelectric power plant in Glenwood Canyon, which returns 100% of the water used to produce electricity to the river. However, he said that uncertainty surrounding the plantโ€™s longevity, given its age and location โ€” which he called an โ€œarea of great geohazardโ€ โ€” led the River District to seek acquisition of the rights. Under the proposed acquisition, Xcel would continue to operate the plant…The district intends to purchase the right and reach an instream flow agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board โ€” theย only entity that can hold an instream flow water rightย in Colorado.ย Doing so would maintain the status quo of the river, the River District claims. Defining what the status quo looks like, though, has led to disagreements between the West Slope entity and East Slope water providers…

Water allocation on the Colorado River dates back to the 1922 compact agreement, which divided the river between the upper and lower basins. Right now, itโ€™s not the compact, but the 2007 operational guidelines for Lake Powell and Lake Mead that are being renegotiated. While the four Upper Basin states โ€” Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming โ€” rely predominantly on snowpack for water supply, the Lower Basin states โ€” Arizona, Wyoming, and Nevada โ€” rely on releases from Lake Powell and Lake Mead. The 2007 guidelines for the two reservoirs, which govern how they store and release water, are set to expire in 2026. The seven states have until Nov. 11 to try and reach a consensus on the reservoirsโ€™ post-2026 operations; otherwise, the federal government will step in and impose its own plan.ย 

Becky Mitchell, who has been negotiating on Coloradoโ€™s behalf, said on Friday that she is โ€œhopefulโ€ for this seven-state consensus โ€œbecause the alternative is not great.โ€ย  โ€œI think weโ€™ve kicked the can and weโ€™re at the end of the road,โ€ Mitchell said…Throughout the negotiations, the Lower Basin states have advocated for basin-wide water use reductions. The Upper Basin states, however, have pushed back on the idea, claiming they already face natural water shortages.ย 

โ€œIn Western Colorado, it happens every year,โ€ [Andy] Mueller said.ย 

Click here for Coyote Gulch’s Bluesky posts from the seminar (Click on the “Latest” tab.)

Fig. 1. The Colorado River Basin covers parts of seven U.S. states as well as part of Mexico. Credit: U.S. Geological Survey

Whatโ€™s the โ€˜hub-bubโ€™ about at the #Colorado State University Spur campus? — Allen Best (BigPivots.com

CSU Spur at dusk October 14, 2025. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots

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

October 17, 2025

We heard about Coloradoโ€™s warming but uncertain climate. We heard about research projects. But what exactly is this new Climate Hub all about?

Colorado State University has created a Climate Hub that is to be based at its Spur campus in the heart of what used to be industrial Denver. This is on the grounds of the National Western Complex.

This is north of downtown Denver, near Coloradoโ€™s transportation hub: the intersection of Interstates 70 and I-25. When I first visited the National Western, no interstate highways existed anywhere. That dates me. I can vaguely remember my grandfather, a farmer/rancher from northeastern Colorado, boosting me up atop a fence to see all the cattle. I suspect that some were his.

The cattle have all disappeared except during the Stock Show each January. You can still smell a bit of manure, though, when walking from the parking lot to the Hydro Building, one of four major and architecturally interesting buildings erected on this new campus so far. A certain amount of research goes on at this campus. A correspondent from Gardner, a hamlet in south-central Colorado, mentioned that he had just mailed water and soil samples that he needed tested to the laboratory in the Hydro Building. Denver Water operates its lab there.

As for this event, I suspect it would fall under the label of โ€œmarketing.โ€ I was there for the full two hours of presentations and heard much that was interesting but left without understanding exactly what was new.

CSU undeniably has its fingers in what the Climate Hub, at its website, calls โ€œa defining challenge of our time.โ€

Russ Schumacher, the state climatologist, a professor at CSU, was an obvious choice for leading off a program like this. He recapped the climate report issued in 2024: We have already warmed an average 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit, he said. The 10 warmest years in Coloradoโ€™s recorded history going back to the 1870s have been in the 21st century. Last year was the fourth warmest, but this year, not as warm โ€” but still in the top 20 on record.

And much more warming is in store, between 1 and 4 degrees Fahrenheit by 2050, given current emissions trajectories.

โ€œPrecipitation is more complicated,โ€ he explained. โ€œIf you look at long-term trends, it hits hard, too, but you see a lot of ups and downs.โ€

Flooding will worsen, as will wildfires. We can also expect more heat waves and droughts.

Oh yummy. Somebody other than Russ, with his happy persona, could leave you very depressed.

The Climate Hub โ€œexplainerโ€ meeting on Oct. 14 on the CSU Spur campus. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots

But then, thatโ€™s the story at CSU. They are figuring out solutions. Debby-downer is not the vibe.

For example, there was no talk of converting the world into vegetarians. Instead, Dr. Sara Place, who is an associate professor of feedlot systems (yes, Iโ€™m not making this up), talked about the effort to reduce the methane from the burping of cattle. Itโ€™s burps, not farts, that produce this significant component of our greenhouse problem. They constitute 3.1% of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

The takeaway static from the cows-burping presentation was that 80% of the methane emissions come from cattle grazing on grass, not cattle chowing down in feedlots as they fatten up for the conveyor belt to the butchery. And yes, solutions are being devised, although I am at a loss to explain any of this.

Somewhat similarly, we got a peek at the research that has been underway at CSU now for a number of years to tighten up the methane emissions leaking from our โ€œnaturalโ€ gas infrastructure. โ€œYou canโ€™t manage what you donโ€™t measure,โ€ said Dr. Dan Zimmerle.

And still other research, some of it global in scale, is underway, a bit difficult to summarize in something less than, well, maybe a 10,000-word tome. And some of it very Colorado-centric. One presenter asked if any of those in the room had been to Sterling? To Eads? (These are towns in eastern Colorado). My hand was only among a few raised in the room.

This was all part of an explanation about a new concept called digital twins. They can observe what is happening in the field from laboratories.

Surprising, though, was a tag-team effort to peel us back from the narrow confines of what we think we know to imagine possible futures. It was a marked departure from the usual conveyor belt of facts and exhortations at climate meetings.

Courtney Schultz, director of the CSU Climate Initiative, quoted an author, Jim Dater, who had said that the future cannot be predicted. The only useful ideas about the future should (at first) appear to be ridiculous.

Only later did I think about science itself. Some of the big ideas, such as plate tectonics, were originally seen as ludicrous, to be laughed out of the room.

We were asked by Lynn Badia, a professor of English, to engage in what she called speculative storytelling.

We were quickly induced to exercise some of this outside-our-boxes imagining. Canโ€™t say that anything I imagined for Olde Town Arvada in 2050 was all that imaginative. High(er) rises? Fewer blue skies. The next round, I got a little more adventurous: glasses that you could wear that would allow you to see the essence of the person you were looking at.

Again, only later, did I ponder smart phones. Twenty-five years ago could I see people wandering down sidewalks, sauntering across streets, seemingly mindless of traffic or, for that matter, anything else around them, their faces scrunched close to little boxes in their hands? We call them smart phones, and sometimes I seem them in droves โ€” and just down the street.

โ€œHave you exaggerated the possible changes to the point of absurdity?โ€ Badia asked us.

It was fun. I am so accustomed to trying to verify facts, not to imagine the future.

Others in attendance that I consulted afterward echoed my read on the event. CSU wants to make its presence better known and the willingness to work with the private sector. That already exists with the methane-testing center. Zimmerle said they were working with many oil and gas companies trying to respond to increasing regulation by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. A member of the Climate Central team talked about providing help to Fort Collins Utilities.

One individual pointed to two themes: (a) the value of collecting, analyzing and making available substantive data; and (b) a growing partnership between universities and the private sector, filling in the new gap caused by the termination of the federal government as a research partner.

You can also see that at the CSU Climate Hub website in its statement that it โ€œpartners with diverse groups to co-create impactful solutions.โ€

The Legacy building, which is located across the street from the Hydro and Terrra buildings on the CSU Spur campus in Denver, appears to be ready for imminent occupancy. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots

As we left the Hydro building, I paused to study the latest edifice โ€” a word I use with deliberation โ€” that is soon to be available for public occupation. Just down the street, though, were train cars, perhaps containing crude oil. Who knows.

When I first moved from the mountains to Denver in 1998, I remember the vacant field west of the train tracks at Union Station. Nothing there. A place of homeless people, maybe. Now? The folks from Aspen and Vail have built luxury real estate. Some of the units overlook the train tracks that to this day are used by coal trains exporting carbon from the coal pits of Wyoming to distant power plants.

I could not then imagine the scene observable today at Union Station. Frankly, it has been very hard for some people to imagine the end of the fossil fuel era. But I may live long enough to see the end of those coal trains. I can imagine that.

Friday quick takes: Energy impotence? Uranium. Floods and reservoirs — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org)

The West Elk coal mine near Somerset, Colorado. Itโ€™s the largest coal producer in the state. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

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

October 17, 2025

๐Ÿ”‹Notes from the Energy Transition ๐Ÿ”Œ

President Donald Trumpโ€™s quest for what he calls energy dominance has run into a few snags, many of which are of his own making. Letโ€™s set aside, for a moment, the fact that the term โ€œenergy dominanceโ€ doesnโ€™t really make sense (What is energy dominating? Or are we dominating energy? Or โ€ฆ????). Letโ€™s assume that itโ€™s just an insecure maleโ€™s version of energy independence (so woke!), or just a dumb term for producing enough energy to keep all the data centers running. 

In that case, donโ€™t you think youโ€™d want to use all of the tools โ€” or weapons, if you prefer โ€” at your disposal? Certainly any reasonable person, even one who doesnโ€™t care about pollution or greenhouse gas emissions, would do that, pushing for more solar, wind, battery storage, hydropower, and geothermal, in addition to nuclear and natural gas. But as has been shown over and over, Trump tends to let his personal whims โ€” along with a desire to crush everything that he thinks Democrats favor โ€” erase rationality. 

As a result, he has waged war on the most promising energy sources (i.e. solar and wind), while trying to dust off the old, dying ones (i.e. fossil fuels) and prop them up on the battle lines in hopes they wonโ€™t fall down too soon. Well, itโ€™s not working out so well. 

Oil and gas drilling is continuing on federal lands, although at a much slower pace than during the Biden administration, even though Trump has handed out drilling permits like candy at a parade. Thatโ€™s in part due to low oil prices, and in part due to higher drilling costs: Trumpโ€™s tariffs have increased the price of pipe and other materials used on the rigs.

The number of rigs actively drilling has stayed somewhat steady over the last nine months, but rig counts remain below what they were in 2023 and 2024 and there are no signs that Trumpโ€™s โ€œdrill, baby, drillโ€ rhetoric is having the desired effect. Source: Baker Hughes, Land Desk graphic.

But the most obvious failure is playing out in the administrationโ€™s bid to revitalize the flagging coal industry. Letโ€™s take a look:

  • After the administration and congressional Republicans made much ado about rescinding Biden-era moratoria on new federal coal leasing, the Interior Department rushed to auction off parcels containing hundreds of millions of tons of coal in Montana, Wyoming, and Utah. They flopped:
    • In Montana, the Navajo Transitional Energy Companyย bid $186,000ย for a tract containing an estimated 167 million tons of coal adjacent to its Spring Creek Mine in the Powder River Basin. Thatโ€™s a mere 1/10 of one cent per ton. Contrast that with other Powder River Basin leases in 2012 that brought in more than $1/ton. The feds rejected the bid, saying it was below fair market value.ย 
    • The dismal result prompted the Bureau of Land Management to cancel the 441-million-ton West Antelope coal lease sale in Wyoming.ย 
    • And then the Interior Departmentย rejected a single lowball bidย for a lease containing about 6 million tons of federal coal in Utah.ย 
    • On a somewhat related note: After the Trump administration announced it would subsidize the coal industry to the tune of $625 million, PacifiCorp said it would go forward with its plans toย convert the Naughton coal plantย in Wyoming to run on natural gas.

Youโ€™d think that maybe the administration would get a hint and adjust their strategy accordingly. Yeah, right.


A warning sign in the Lisbon Valley. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.
โ›๏ธ Mining Monitor โ›๏ธ

Last week, Anfield Energy announced that Utah regulators had approved its proposed Velvet Wood uranium mine in the Lisbon Valley. โ€œPermitting Complete, Construction to Follow,โ€ the companyโ€™s press release says, adding that they expected to break ground within 30 days. The project was the first beneficiary of Trumpโ€™s accelerated โ€œenergy emergencyโ€ permitting, and the BLM completed its environmental review in a mere 13 days. 

The company may be jumping the gun a bit. The Utah Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining actually gave only tentative approval to the project, conditioned upon the company posting a $539,000 bond. And it specifies that no ground disturbance can happen until the project gets other applicable agenciesโ€™ go-ahead. 

But as Sarah Fields of Uranium Watch points out, Anfield has not yet received approvals from other state agencies for its radon ventilation shafts, wastewater treatment plant, or its air quality permit.


Trump “emergency” fast-tracks Utah uranium mine — Jonathan P. Thompson


Paradox Valley.

***

Anfield โ€” or at least its PR team โ€” is busy as of late. They also announced that they had completed the first phase of exploratory drilling at the defunct JD-7 uranium mine in the Paradox Valley. While these announcements are a dime-a-dozen, I was a bit intrigued by this one, because the JD-7 is like a poster child of the follies of the last uranium โ€œboom.โ€ Itโ€™s an open pit, a gaping wound overlooking the valley, but never actually produced any uranium because the โ€œboomโ€ busted before it even really began. Somehow Iโ€™m not convinced that this time will be much different.


A day in Uranium Country — Jonathan P. Thompson


๐Ÿฅต Aridification Watch ๐Ÿซ

As one might expect, the recent rains and resulting flooding boosted reservoir levels. Navajo Reservoir saw its surface level jump considerably (rising about 10 feet) due to all that water in the San Juan River. However, itโ€™s still lower than it was this time last year.

Source: Lake Navajo Water Database

Lake Powell, which is much, much bigger, only added 1.28 feet to its surface level, and remains 32 feet below what it was on this date last year. But as the following graph shows, the big water is still making its way into the reservoir, so its level could keep climbing.

๐Ÿ“ธ Parting Shot ๐ŸŽž๏ธ

Iโ€™m on the road right now, making my way from southern Oregon to southwestern Colorado via a circuitous route. And no, Iโ€™m not in the Silver Bullet (Iโ€™ll reveal the purpose of the trip later, along with more details about Land Desk transportation). I donโ€™t have my good camera with me, but Iโ€™ve tried to get some snapshots anyway.

Gravestones in City Cemetery, Yreka, California. Photo credit: Jonathan P. Thompson
Snow and water in the eastern Sierras. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.
Basin and Range country along Hwy 50. Photo credit: Jonathan P. Thompson

#Colorado Launches Diversion Measurement Installation Program โ€“ No-Cost Devices for Water Users on the Western Slope — Colorado Water #Conservation Board #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Beaver Creek Ditch June 12, 2021. Photo credit: Scott Hummer

Here’s the release from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (Michael Elizabeth Sakas):

October 17, 2025

The Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) is announcing the launch of a new program to install diversion measurement structures on the Western Slope at no cost to water users. Utilizing $7 million in federal funding, the structures will allow Colorado to improve water management within the Upper Colorado River Basin. 

โ€œAccurate and effective measurement of diversions on the West Slope is critical to protect Coloradoโ€™s apportionment of water for our water users,โ€ said Colorado State Engineer Jason Ullmann. โ€œThis funding is critical to helping those on the Western Slope meet the challenges of water management in the West.”

The Diversion Measurement Installation Program will be administered by the CWCB, in coordination with the Division of Water Resources (DWR) and a hired consultant, SGM. Eligible water users will have a measurement structure installed at their point of diversion, at no cost to them. A diversion measurement structure is a device installed at or near a point where water is diverted from a river, stream, or ditch, in order to accurately measure the volume or flow rate of water being diverted. Common examples include flumes and weirs. 

Water users with a missing or faulty measurement device may apply to the CWCB for a measurement device to be installed at their point of diversion, free of charge. To be eligible, their legal water right must be actively put to beneficial use. The Program does not include the installation of headgates or other diversion structures. 

โ€œItโ€™s a win for Colorado that we can use this funding to help water users with the costs of a measurement device,โ€ said Upper Colorado River Commissioner Becky Mitchell. Mitchell voted to approve the use of federal funding for diversion measurement at a November 2024 meeting of the Upper Colorado River Commission (UCRC), as part of the UCRCโ€™s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Spend Plan. 

Because the Program is federally funded through the UCRC, it is limited to the Upper Colorado River Basin. It covers streamflow diversions in Coloradoโ€™s Gunnison River Basin (DWR Division 4), the Colorado River Basin (DWR Division 5), the Yampa and White River Basins (DWR Division 6, excluding the North Platte), and the San Juan and Dolores River Basins (DWR Division 7). 


Applications for measurement structures in Divisions 6 and 7 will be made available later this year. CWCB has two upcoming public meetings to provide additional information and assist with applications. The Division 6 meeting will be held on Tuesday, November 4, from 3:30 to 6:00 at the Colorado Northwestern Community College, 2801 W 9th St, Craig, CO 81625. The Division 7 meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 12, from 3:30 to 6:00 at the Florida Grange, 656 Highway 172, Durango, CO 81303. Virtual options are available for both meetings; please see cwcb.colorado.gov/diversionmeasurement for Zoom links. 

Applications for Divisions 4 and 5 will be made available in 2026. Further application rounds will be available in 2027 and 2028. All structures will be installed by 2029, when the federal funding authorization expires. 

Interested water users may submit a Statement of Interest form, available at cwcb.colorado.gov/diversionmeasurement, to be kept informed on the Programโ€™s timeline. Questions may be sent to DNR_diversionmeasurement@state.co.us.

Klamath salmon are spawning in the #WilliamsonRiver for the 1st time since the early 1900s — The Yurok Tribe #KlamathRiver

Paying farmers proves most cost-effective way to conserve Colorado River, study says — Jennifer Solis (NevadaCurrent.com) #COriver #aridification

โ€œAbout 80% of the water goes to agriculture. If youโ€™re using a big share and itโ€™s more cost-effective, then thatโ€™s going to need to be the target,โ€ said a co-author of the study. (Photo: Bureau of Reclamation Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0)

Click the link to read the article on the Nevada Current website (Jennifer Solis):

October 6, 2025

The most cost-effective and quickest way to conserve the Colorado Riverโ€™s shrinking water supply amid persistent drought and rapid population growth is changing how states handle the largest use of water on the river: agriculture.

Agriculture uses about 80% of the riverโ€™s water, but the good news is that paying farmers not to use water allotted to them has proved to be remarkably cost-effective. 

Thatโ€™s according to a comprehensive study examining 462 federally funded Colorado River conservation and supply projects using available spending data from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 

The study, published in the Journal of the American Water Resources Association last week, was conducted by UC Riversideโ€™s School of Public Policy in partnership with the Utah Rivers Council.

The water projects examined โ€“ ranging from large-scale infrastructure such as reservoirs and wastewater treatment plants to agricultural water use โ€“ totaled about $1 billion in federal funding between 2004 and 2024.

โ€œHow much water is actually being saved for every dollar we are spending?โ€ asks Mehdi Nemati, an assistant professor of public policy, co-author of the study. โ€œIf we want to be more efficient or gain more water saved per dollar spent, then answering this question matters.โ€

โ€œThe big message is not all water savings are equal. Some projects saved water at a fraction of the cost of others,โ€ he continued. 

Agricultural conservation programs conserved water for as low as $69.89 per acre-foot. On average, agricultural conservation programs cost about $417 per acre-foot, while local supply projects โ€”such as reservoirs, wells, and wastewater treatment facilitiesโ€”cost more than $2,400 per acre-foot on average. (An acre-foot is the amount of water needed to cover one acre of land to a depth of one foot, or about 325,851 gallons.)

โ€œSpending money to conserve water within the agriculture sector seems to be one of the most cost-effective ways. Thereโ€™s also a lot of room to improve and save more water in this sector,โ€ Nemati said. โ€œAbout 80% of the water goes to agriculture. If youโ€™re using a big share and itโ€™s more cost-effective, then thatโ€™s going to need to be the target.โ€

Historically, farmers have been reluctant to lower their water use out of fear the government might take their water permanently. But the study found that agricultural conservation programs, particularly those that provided financial incentives to promote behavioral changes among farmers, were successful at delivering water savings at a relatively low cost.

The most common type of agricultural conservation program was paying farmers who rely on the Colorado River to reduce their water use on crops during certain non-critical periods, saving an average of 747 acre-feet per year at a cost of about $140 per acre-foot.

Paying farmers to temporarily leave their fields empty โ€“ particularly for water-intensive crops like alfalfa โ€“ produced an average annual water saving of 17,500 acre-feet per year at an average cost of about $193 per acre-foot, according to the study.

โ€œGrass, alfalfa, corn pasture, these are all water intensive crops. Thatโ€™s where we get our most savings per dollar, and there is huge room for savings. I would say these are low hanging fruit,โ€ Nemati said.

Other programs studied paid farmers to replace flood irrigation with precision methods such as drip or sprinkler systems, which demonstrated substantial efficiency improvements while maintaining agricultural productivity.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation spent about 30% of water conservation funding between 2004 and 2024 on agricultural projects.

Agricultural conservation projects had an average lifespan of about three years, meaning once those short-term projects end water savings are expected to gradually decline. 

Water-intensive crops are where the savings are

Much of the funding used to pay farmers to conserve Colorado River water was provided by the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act, which helped double agricultural water conservation from 1.5 million acre-feet of water to over 3 million acre-feet of water, according to the study.

Water recycling and treatment facilities also proved to be a cost-effective way to conserve substantial amounts of water in the long-term, despite higher initial construction costs. Water recycling and treatment facilities had an average lifetime cost of $385 per acre-feet with an average annual water savings of about 18,600 acre-feet.

Despite the large potential for water savings through water reuse projects, only about 7% of the bureauโ€™s water conservation funding was spent on reuse projects. California got the lionโ€™s share of that funding, about 80%. Upper Basin states received only 4% of reuse funding, while Tribal areas received no funding. 

Thereโ€™s a lot of room for improvement in water recycling across states that rely on the Colorado River. One recent study found that Upper Basin states โ€“ Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico โ€“ recycled less than 5% of their water, as compared to Lower Basin states โ€“ California, Arizona and Nevadaโ€“ which recycled more than 30% of their water.

The study also revealed a major disparity in federal funding for water conservation projects between the Upper Basin and Lower Basin states.

Between 2004 and 2024, Upper Basin states only received about 6% of overall water conservation spending by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, while about 75% was directed to the Lower Basin, and about 19% was designated for Tribal areas, some of which extend across both regions.

Nevada received nearly $6 million for 28 water conservation projects for an average annual savings of roughly 1,500 acre-feet at a cost of about $3,800 per acre-foot. 

Itโ€™s a stark contrast to Upper Basin states like Colorado, which received about $610,000 in federal funding for 47 water conservation projects for an average annual savings of about 2,100 acre-feet at a cost of about $285 per acre-foot. 

Itโ€™s an example of how federal dollars could be more efficiently used to conserve water across the Colorado River Basin by rethinking funding priorities.

โ€œIn some areas in Nevada there has been tremendous investment in the urban side and efficiency gains in the urban side. But if youโ€™re looking at the lowest dollar per acre feet, water-intensive crops are the areas we want to target,โ€ Nemati said.

โ€œThere are areas in the Upper Basin that could save water for a fraction of money being used in Nevada or southern California,โ€ he said.

Map credit: AGU

Flooding in the Four Corners Country: The #SanJuanRiver in #PagosaSprings hits major flood level for the second time in days — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org)

The San Juan River has peaked above 8,000 cfs twice in the last several days, reaching the highest levels seen since the 1927 flood. Source: USGS.

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

October 16, 2025

Just after the Southwest suffered through one of the drier summers on record, the remnants of cyclone Priscilla barreled through the region and dumped enormous amounts of rain in the San Juan Mountains and other areas. Previously dry arroyos became raging torrents, and the rivers swelled up and, in many cases, jumped their banks and wreaked havoc and destruction. And it happened not once, but twice โ€” so far โ€” with the first wave hitting over the weekend of Oct. 11, and the second wave underway as I write this on Tuesday morning. 

Priscilla favored โ€” if thatโ€™s the right word here โ€” the high country, depositing more than four inches of rain during the first wave at Columbus Basin in the La Plata Mountains, more than five inches at the Vallecito SNOTEL station, and more than six inches at Wolf Creek Pass. Interestingly, Molas Pass south of Silverton received โ€œonlyโ€ three inches during the first wave.

Rain totals for select locations from the first wave of the storm (Oct. 10-12). Source: National Weather Service.

The moisture on Wolf Creek and surrounding areas made its way into the San Juan River, which ballooned into a roiling monster that inundated parts of downtown Pagosa Springs, including sections of the hot springs resort. During the first wave, the riverโ€™s flow reached 8,270 cubic feet per second, which was the highest level since the flood of 1927. And during the second wave, it reached a whopping 8,450 cfs.

Note that this is for water years (which is why todayโ€™s flows appear under 2026), that several years are missing prior to 1935, and that the 1911 number is an estimate and the 1927 number may be as well. Source: USGS.

While todayโ€™s high waters pale in comparison to those that raced through Pagosa (destroying homes and infrastructure) in 1911, it is notable that they far exceed those during the flood of 1970, which was the largest flooding to hit the region in more recent memory.ย Hereโ€™s my take on the 1911 flood in Pagosa:

Clearly all the water will relieve some drought conditions, though certainly not cure them yet. And it is a huge start to the 2026 water year, as can be seen in this graph of accumulated precipitation at Wolf Creek Pass. The station has received 9.9 inches of rain in just two weeks, the highest amount on record.

The San Juan wasnโ€™t the only river to rage. Vallecito Creek above the reservoir hit a mind-blowing 6,980 cubic feet per second on Oct. 11, forcing the evacuation of hundreds of homes in the area. The second wave was substantial, as well, but so far isnโ€™t as extreme as the first wave.

The Animas River through Durango, meanwhile, also grew tremendously, but did not reach flood stage during the first wave, topping out at just under 5,000 cfs. Levels are still increasing as I write this, but it doesnโ€™t appear that they will go much higher this time around. Stay safe everyone!


And, if you want to read more about the history of flooding in the Four Corners Country, check out my long-read from a few years back. Iโ€™ve taken down the paywall for a limited time on this one, so everyone can read it โ€” even you free-riders! (And if you like it, maybe youโ€™d consider subscribing).

The 1911 Flood: Could it happen again? — Jonathan P. Thompson


Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending October 14, 2025.

The latest seasonal outlooks through January 31, 2026 are hot off the presses from the #Climate Prediction Center

What exactly is #Nebraskaโ€™s dispute with #Colorado about? — Allen Best (BigPivots.com) #SouthPlatteRiver

South Platte River south of Brush. Photo/Allen Best

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

October 16, 2025

Colorado say this is really an effort by Nebraska to renegotiate the 1923 South Platte River Compact. But is the core of this story about water for metropolitan Denver?

Mark Twain in July 1861 traveled through the northeast corner of what was then Colorado Territory, stopping briefly at a place called Overland City. Itโ€™s now called Julesburg. It lies along the South Platte River no more than three or four miles from the Nebraska border.

After briefly serving in the Civil War, the young fellow was on his way to the gold mining riches of the Sierra Nevada. In โ€œRoughing It,โ€ his later recounting of that and other Western adventures, he called the encampment the โ€œstrangest, quaintest, funniest frontier town that our untraveled eyes had ever stared at and been astonished with.โ€

Governor Clarence J. Morley signing Colorado River compact and South Platte River compact bills, Delph Carpenter standing center. Unidentified photographer. Date 1925. Print from Denver Post. From the CSU Water Archives

Twain always was the master of overstatement. But then, you need to remember he had come of age on the Mississippi River when reading his description of the South Platte River. He called it a โ€œmelancholy streamโ€ that was โ€œonly saved from being impossible to find with the naked eye by its sentinel rank of scattering trees standing on either bank. The Platte was โ€˜up,โ€™ they said โ€” which make me wish I could see it when it was down, if it could look any sicker and sorrier.โ€

Oh, that Clements fellow could milk a moment. He spent only an hour there before continuing west. I actually spent a night in Julesburg. The next morning I drove to the community cemetery. Itโ€™s located east of the town, the river, and Interstate 76. From the cemetery I made out an incision in the side of a hill. It was the remnant of the effort begun in 1894 to create a ditch. The ditch was to export water from the South Platte 13 river miles in Colorado and into Nebraska, there to irrigate farms in Perkins County.

Investors in that ambition, the Perkins County Canal, ran out of money. A compact governing the South Platte between Colorado and Nebraska negotiated in 1923 left Nebraska with the right to build the canal and divert up to 500 cubic feet per second from mid-October until April 1, according to Nebraska Public Media, and the idea was studied again in the 1980s. But again, it got no traction.

Three years ago, Nebraska set out again to realize the diversion. It has set aside $628 million, most of it received from the federal government as part of the Covid-19 pandemic stimulus. The state has taken steps to plan and permit the project through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

In July, Nebraska asked the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that Colorado has violated the compact, both by not delivering enough water in the non-irrigation season and also by preventing Nebraska from building the canal. Colorado has said it is abiding by the compact and acknowledges Nebraskaโ€™s right to build a canal.

Colorado Gov. Jared Polis and Attorney General Phil Weiser, who hopes to succeed Polis as governor, announced yesterday that they had urged the U.S. Supreme Court to reject the case.

โ€œNebraskaโ€™s claimed violations rely on speculative and premature allegations. To the extent any legal issues arise in the future, there are alternative forums to resolve them. The Supreme Court need not take a case that would put the court and the parties on a long, time-intensive, and expensive path that might well, in the end, put the states right back where they were before Nebraska filed (its) proposed complaint,โ€ said Weiser.

โ€œEven if the court decides to take up part or all of Nebraskaโ€™s case. Iโ€™m confident that we will win on the merits. Both the facts and the law are on our side.โ€

The South Platte River originates in South Park and then wanders northeast, entering Nebraska just a few miles west of Coloradoโ€™s northeast corner. The red line here distinguishes the upper South Platte Basin in Colorado from the lower basin. The compact between Colorado and Nebraska speaks only to the lower basin. Image: U.S. Geologic Survey.

Coloradoโ€™s brief in response to Nebraskaโ€™s lawsuit is just that, at least by legal standards: 35 pages long. It opens with this statement: โ€œLike every western state, Nebraska wants more water.โ€ Colorado acknowledges Nebraskaโ€™s right to build a canal, it says, but the Cornhusker state has โ€œonly just begun to plan and permit its project.โ€

In other words, Colorado contends that whatever may eventually be disputed is not ready for prime time. The Supremes have better ways to spend their time.

Why the Supreme Court? Because interstate issues must go before the highest court. In such cases, it commonly appoints a โ€œspecial master,โ€ typically a retired judge, to hear the case and report findings to the Supremes.

For example, a special master was used in the dispute between Texas, New Mexico and Colorado involving the Rio Grande. A special master was also enlisted in the dispute between Kansas and Colorado involving the Arkansas River.

Colorado wants to avoid this battle.

Coyote Gulch’s VW Bus South Park 1973.

A hard-working river

The South Platte may be among the hardest-working rivers in the United States. It arises in South Park, flanked by the Mosquito and Tarryall ranges, southwest of Denver, flow 380 miles through Colorado before entering Nebraska. Between 70% and 85% โ€” seemingly authoritative sources differ substantially in estimates โ€” of Coloradoโ€™s nearly 6 million residents live in the South Platte River Basin. The basin also has 30% of the stateโ€™s irrigated agriculture, well more than half coming from the flows of the South Platte or its tributaries.

What exactly is this dispute about?

Nebraska, says Colorado, โ€œappears to be using the prospect of the canal and this request for Supreme Court action as leverage to renegotiate the South Platte River Compact.โ€

Oct. 15 was Coloradoโ€™s deadline for responding to the lawsuit filed by Nebraska against Colorado on July 15. The press conference where Nebraskaโ€™s politicos announced the lawsuit was full of rhetoric. โ€œWeโ€™re going to fight like heck. Weโ€™re going to get every drop of water,โ€ said Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen. โ€œWeโ€™ve been losing to Colorado on this issue for too long.โ€

He piled it on. โ€œThey want absolutely everything. Theyโ€™re even stealing the water from their own farmers, for crying out loud,โ€ he said according to a July 16 story in the Nebraska Examiner.

Pillen said Colorado is storing more water for its โ€œupstream economy,โ€ presumably reference to the Denver metropolitan area.

Polis, in his Oct. 15 comments, made no mention of metropolitan Denver, instead emphasizing the threat to โ€œour robust agriculture industry and our rural communities in Northeastern Colorado.โ€ He dismissed the lawsuit by Nebraska as โ€œmeritless.โ€

The South Platte River provides the water crucial for even a marginal economy in the lower South Platte River Valley of Colorado. Perkins County Canal Project Area. Credit: Nebraska Department of Natural Resources

The Denver Post, in a Sept. 21 story, mined the agriculture component after reporter Elise Schmelzer followed Weiser to a meeting in Julesburg to meet with farmers there. Darrin Tobin, a Sedgwick County commissioner, said if the canal gets built, it will potentially turn everything in the last 20 miles of the South Platte River Valley to the state line into โ€œalmost an unusable wasteland.โ€

If the canal is built, Nebraska will use much of the winter river flow that Coloradans rely upon to fill ponds, which are used for augmentation. These augmentation ponds allow the farms to use more water during irrigation season.

Irrigated land produces more and hence has higher property values, which means a broader tax base. Sedgwick County ranks 44th among Coloradoโ€™s 64 counties in per capita income.

What is this dispute about?

Is this really about retaining the vitality of places like Ovid and Julesburg? I have to think itโ€™s more โ€” as the Nebraska governor insinuated โ€” about the situation of metropolitan Denver and other northern Front Range communities.

The South Platte long, long ago ceased to be able to support a population this large and farms, too. Denverโ€™s first major transmountain diversion began importing water from the Colorado River headwaters through the original bore of the Moffat Tunnel in 1936. Now, the headwaters of the Colorado River are all but plumbed out. Too, the Colorado River has its own problems.

In recent years, Front Range communities have started looking inward, to impose greater efficiencies. Denser populations enable that. Denver has actually expanded its population greatly in the last 20 yeas without using more water. The city has been rising, not expanding. The growth in demand comes from the outer rings of suburbs and the exurbs.

Platte Valley Water Partnership project overview. Credit: Parker Water

Revealing are the plans by Parker Water and Sanitation District, now joined by Castle Rock, to build a pipeline far down the South Platte River to the Sterling area. The plan would be to hold back water during winter or those occasional times of spring runoff when the river is carrying uncommitted amounts of water. This plan, called the Platte River Water Partnership, would involve some new impoundments of water.

The Lower South Platte Water Conservation District, which consists almost entirely of farmers, supports the plan in collaboration with Parker Water. They see some benefits to โ€œnewโ€ water, courtesy of Parkerโ€™s checkbook, and an alternative to โ€œbuy and dry.โ€ย The broad outlines are explained in this story published in Big Pivots during July.

Ron Redd, district manager of Parker Water and Sanitation District, right, makes a point to Jim Yahn and Joe Frank at the structure used to divert water from the South Platte River to Prewitt Reservoir. Owners of Prewitt, who are part of Yahnโ€™s organization, have decided they do not want to be part of Parkerโ€™s ambitions. Frank leads the South Platte River Water Conservancy District. Photo/Allen Best

The fundamental story is that the newer and more affluent cities on metropolitan Denverโ€™s southern fringe rely heavily on unsustainable pumping of groundwater. They have started lessening that dependency in the last 20 years, and this is an effort to further reduce that dependency.

As you might expect, the issues in this dispute between the two states are somewhat complex. I found a Sept 24 essay by J. David Aiken, a professor in the Department of Agriculture Economics at the University of Nebraska โ€” Lincoln, illuminating.

Aiken takes the story back to the drought of 2002, the year that Colorado was finally forced to address a long-festering issue about the impact of wells drilled for agriculture along the riverine aquifer in the South Platte Valley. That action yielded 4,000 (out of 9,000 total irrigation wells being required to cease pumping.

We then have a study in 2017 South Platte storage. It found that Colorado was allowing an average 332,000 acre-feet of water to flow into Nebraska beyond minimum compact compliance. That was followed by a study of how these โ€œsurplus flowsโ€ could be used by Denver instead. of buying agriculture land for its water rights, a.k.a. โ€œbuy and dry.โ€

Then came work by Denver metro water interests on a study about how to take advantage of the 332,000 acre-feet. Soon after came Parker Waterโ€™s plans to avoid buy-and-dry in its partnership with the lower-valley irrigators by figuring out how to retain the remaining uncontested water.

Who will this contest between Colorado and Nebraska?

Nebraska has some valid complaints about Coloradoโ€™s actions, says Aiken, but Colorado โ€œwill likely raise some very interesting legal issues of their own, which could lead to Nebraskaโ€™s not being able to pursue the Perkins County Canal project.โ€

Whooping Crane. Photo: Kenton Gomez/Audubon Photography Awards

A legal wildcard

One legal wildcard will be whether Nebraska could demonstrate that the Denver metro water supply projects in the South Platte Basin would reduce flows through the protected critical habitats in Nebraska used by whooping cranes. The species is listened as endangered by the federal government. This argument could strengthen Nebraskaโ€™s case.

Aiken makes many other points, and I wonโ€™t try to explain them all here. You can read for yourself hereOr watch the webinar from earlier in September which preceded his essay.

Here is Nebraskaโ€™s 55-page filing with the Supreme Court. And Coloradoโ€™s 35-page response can be found here.

When Nebraska first announced its renewed Perkins County canal plans, I shrugged it off as a minor tempest. But now I find it more interesting, part of the tightening vise on Coloradoโ€™s still rapidly-growing Front Range cities. Certainly, weโ€™re not Las Vegas. Not even a Phoenix. In some ways, we are still luxuriant with water. But now, Colorado is seeing the bottom of the cup. This new reconciliation has been underway since the early 1990s.

As for the South Platte and the 1923 Colorado-Nebraska compact, remember that it allowed Nebraska to divert up to 500 cfs from Oct. 15 through March. On Wednesday night, the river was flowing 270 cfs at the Balzac Gage near Sterling. There are asterisks to this that we donโ€™t want to get into, but the point is that there isnโ€™t much river here and hence the quarrel.

Twain has often been credited with saying that whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting over. Actually, somebody else almost certainly made up that phrase now grown tiresome in its use. But if Weiser, is correct, there will likely be plenty of fighting. He told the Post in September that more than a billion dollars might be spent in litigation during the next decade, and he insisted that all the time in the courtroom will leave neither state better off.

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

R.I.P. Ace Frehley: “No more tomorrow, baby”

Here’s the link to the obituary in The New York Times (Gavin Edwards). Here’s an excerpt:

October 16, 2025

Ace Frehley, the original lead guitarist of the hard-rock band Kiss, who often performed in white-and-silver face makeup as the group sold millions of records during his two tenures with it, from 1973 to 1982 and then from 1996 to 2002, died on Thursday in Morristown, N.J. He was 74…A consummate showman, like all the members of Kiss, Mr. Frehley was known for playing guitars rigged with pyrotechnic effects and for his distinctive stage persona: He was known as โ€œthe Spacemanโ€ or โ€œSpace Aceโ€ because of the silver stars on his face. He designed the bandโ€™s logo, with its lightning-bolt letters…

Many rock fans initially dismissed Kiss as gimmicky charlatans. Its members werenโ€™t photographed without their stage makeup until 1983. But the bandโ€™s energetic and theatrical live shows built a following of teenagers, known as the Kiss Army. The band placed eight singles in the Top 40 during Mr. Frehleyโ€™s tenure, and he played on seven of them, including โ€œLove Gun,โ€ โ€œChristine Sixteenโ€ and โ€œI Was Made for Loving You.โ€

[…]

During Mr. Frehleyโ€™s time with Kiss, the band released 11 albums, both studio and live, that went gold or platinum in the United States. (Kiss ultimately sold more than 100 million albums.) With the passage of time and the enduring popularity of its party anthem โ€œRock and Roll All Nite,โ€ the band saw its critical reputation improve. Kiss was inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in 2014. The guitarist Tom Morello of Rage Against the Machine inducted the band, making the case for Kissโ€™s influence on everyone from Metallica to Lady Gaga. Mr. Frehley, he said, โ€œblazed unforgettable, timeless licks across their greatest records.โ€ Mr. Frehley himself bragged in a 2024 interview with the website Antihero that โ€œout of the four founding members of Kiss, I definitely have been the most successful solo artist.โ€ That was true largely because of his single โ€œNew York Groove,โ€ a Top 20 hit with a stomping beat that is now played at Citi Field after every Mets victory. โ€œNew York Grooveโ€ was the most successful single from a typically excessive Kiss stunt: In 1978, the four members all released solo albums simultaneously.

#Drought news October 16, 2025: Heavy to excessive precipitation pounded the higher elevations of #Colorado. Most areas from west-central through south-central portions of the state received at least 3 inches of precipitation

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

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

This Week’s Drought Summary

A late-season surge of tropical moisture brought heavy precipitation and areas of flooding to parts of the Four Corners States. Amounts of 4 to locally over 6 inches were reported in parts of interior Arizona and southern Colorado. Farther east, a potent coastal storm system brought gusty winds and heavy rains to parts of the East Coast. Rainfall totals approached one foot near Georgetown and Pawleyโ€™s Island, SC while amounts of 7 to 10 inches were scattered across South Carolina and near Whiteville, NC. Totals of 4 to 6 inches were measured at scattered locations from South Florida northward through eastern Massachusetts. Wind gusts reached 60 to 65 mph at several buoys near the North Carolina Coast; Cape Lookout, NC; and Island Beach Park, NJ. In contrast, only a few tenths of an inch, at most, fell across southeast California, most of the Great Basin, the central and northern High Plains, much of the Great Plains, the Great Lakes Region, portions of the Middle and Lower Mississippi Valley, much of the interior Deep South, and the Gulf Coast Region. Drought designations improved by multiple categories in some of the wetter areas across interior Arizona, southern Colorado, and eastern South Carolina while broad areas of 1-category improvement covered the central and southwestern Four Corners Region, The Middle and Lower Ohio Valley and adjacent locations, and portions of the Atlantic Coast from south Florida through southern New England. In contrast, dryness and drought persisted or intensified across large parts of the Deep South away from the Atlantic Coast, the central Gulf Coast Region, the Lower Mississippi Valley, the east-central and south-central Great Plains, and scattered locations across the northern tier of the Lower-48 from Montana through northern New England…

High Plains

Heavy to excessive precipitation pounded the higher elevations of Colorado. Most areas from west-central through south-central portions of the state received at least 3 inches of precipitation, with much heavier amounts โ€“ approaching 8 inches in spots โ€“ falling on the higher elevations of south-central Colorado. This precipitation let to widespread improvements, with some of the wetter areas noting 2-category improvements. Elsewhere light to moderate precipitation (generally 0.5 to 1.5 inches) fell on most of the Plains and Wyoming, with amounts over an inch recorded in isolated sections of central Kansas, eastern North Dakota, and westernmost Wyoming. Significant areas of dryness development or deterioration were limited to eastern Kansas and the southern tier of South Dakota…

Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending October 14, 2025.

West

Late-season tropical moisture surged into the Four Corners States, bringing heavy to excessive precipitation to large parts of Arizona, western New Mexico, and eastern Utah. Improvement was also noted in scattered areas across central and western Utah, and southwestern Montana. The only areas of deterioration were in north-central and northeastern Montana, where parts of a few counties slid from D0 into moderate drought (D1). In other parts of the West Region, precipitation amounts were nondescript, and dryness and drought were essentially unchanged…

South

Recent rainfall allowed for some improvement in dryness and drought across western Tennessee, adjacent Mississippi, central Oklahoma, and western Texas. However, deterioration was more common in aggregate across the South Region, with most of northwestern Mississippi, Louisiana, and eastern Oklahoma noting some intensification. There were scattered areas of moderate to locally heavy rainfall, but most of the Region recorded subnormal amounts for the week…

Looking Ahead

During October 15-20, 2025, heavy precipitation (1.5 to 3.0 inches) is forecast for coastal and windward locations from the Cascades to the Pacific Ocean, across eastern Montana and adjacent North Dakota, along a frontal boundary from the Middle Mississippi Valley through the central tier of the Great Lakes Region, and across scattered locations in northwestern Pennsylvania, the Tennessee Valley, and the Lower Ohio Valley. Moderate amounts of 0.7 to 1.5 inches are anticipated in the remainder of the Pacific Northwest, the higher elevations of the northern Intermountain West, central and northern Wyoming, the northern tier of the Plains, parts of the central Great Plains, most areas from the southeastern Great Plains through the Gulf Coast Region, the interior Deep South, most of the Ohio Valley, the lower Northeast, and southern New England. Meanwhile, a few tenths of an inch at most are expected across the South Atlantic Region, most of the southern half of the Plains, and the southwestern quarter of the Lower-48. Temperatures should average generally below-normal from the Rockies westward, and above-normal from the Plains to the Atlantic Coast. Daily highs are expected to average 4 to 5 deg. F below normal from southeastern California through southern Idaho and eastern Oregon while readings top out 8 to 11 deg. F above normal on average across central and southern Texas and most of Maine.

The Climate Prediction Centerโ€™s 6-10 day outlook valid for October 21-25 favors heavier than normal precipitation across central and northern California, northwestern Nevada, and the Pacific Northwest. Chances for totals in the top one-third of historical occurrences exceed 60 percent west of the Cascades. Wetter than normal conditions are nominally favored across Hawaii, most of Alaska, southern sections of the Rockies and High Plains, central and western Texas, and from the Great Lakes through much of the mid-Atlantic Region and Northeast. Subnormal precipitation is more likely across central and northern sections of the Rockies and Great Plains as well as parts of the South Atlantic Region. Warmer than normal weather is expected from the northern Intermountain West to the Appalachians, plus much of the South Atlantic and Northeast. Southern Texas and most of Maine are most likely to experience warmer than normal weather. Unusually warm weather is also favored across the eastern half of Mainland Alaska and across Hawaii. Temperatures are expected to average closer to normal from the Rockies through the West Coast and across the Carolinas and Virginias. The central tier of Alaska is also expected to average near normal while subnormal temperatures are nominally favored across western Mainland Alaska.

US Drought Monitor one week change map ending October 14, 2025.

Romancing the River: In Pursuit of the Real 1922 Compact — George Sibley (SibleysRivers.com) #ColoradoRiver #COriver #arididfication

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

October 15, 2025

Wonk warning: Iโ€™ll be explicating the chart above. If this sort of thing bores you, or just gets you more, not less confused about whatโ€™s going on with the river today as the negotiators for post-2026 system management continue to negotiate with a November 11 deadline, then Iโ€™d say take a break until next post, when Iโ€™m going to try to explain why I call this stuff โ€˜Romancing the River.โ€™

For those reading on here, remember my purpose from earlier posts: to show a reasonably equitable division of the consumptive use of the Colorado River waters among the seven states and Mexico, with no โ€˜temporaryโ€™ division into competitive Upper and Lower Basins โ€“ the Compact they really wanted to do in 1922. I present the table above as just a draft effort in that direction; there will be arguments about some of the specific figures, but the method to the madness might have some merit.

All the consumptive use information is from Bureau of Reclamation records accessible online, or from other cited historical documents going back to the 1922 Compact. The Bureau publishes consumptive use records every five years โ€“ eventually. (Figures for 2016-2020, for example, still have โ€˜Coming soon!โ€™ where one would click to get them.) All quantities are expressed in millions of acre-feet (maf) or thousands (kaf).

To just jump into it, hereโ€™s a column-by-column explication of the chart. I suggest clicking on the image above to get an enlargable view of the table. If nothing else, this table is kind of a history-in-numbers of the Colorado River in the 20th century CE. (It is important to remember too that, thanks to the 1952 McCarran Amendment, all the Indian tribal rights are negotiated intrastate, although suits and appeals go to the federal courts โ€“ a separate set of challenges from what the seven states are trying to negotiate right now.)

Column 1, River Users: I make no reference to the Upper and Lower Basin, but it does make sense to distinguish between the โ€˜hot desertโ€™ states below the canyon region, and the โ€˜cold (orographic) desertโ€™ states above the canyons, due to the significant difference in system losses โ€“ evaporation, transpiration, bank and aquifer storage and other losses. We will start with some analysis of those lines in the table, one for each set of desert states (considerably higher for the subtropical โ€˜hot desertโ€™ region than the higher and cooler โ€˜cold (or steppe) desertโ€™ region.

System Losses, Structural Deficit and Surpluses: These constitute the riverโ€™s wild card. Natural system losses were listed in the paragraph above โ€“ all the natural things that happen to water mixed with sun, wind and thirsty ground. Storage reservoirs are built on snowmelt rivers to increase the amount of water available for use through a longer period of time, storing the two-month snowmelt flood for use through the rest of the year. But increasing in reservoirs the amount of water available for use does not increase the amount of water; in fact, it decreases that, as the stored water spreads out in reservoirs under a desert sun that can evaporate annually as much as six acre-feet per acre off of open water in the lower Colorado River.

This was completely ignored in the Colorado River Compact, despite the fact, that as Eric Kuhn and John Fleck pointed out in their book Science Be Dammed, there were scientists who tried to advise the commissioners. Today, with two huge reservoirs, another half dozen big reservoirs and a lot of little ones, along with around 600 miles of large open aqueducts meandering through the hot deserts, somewhere between 12 and 16 percent of the river is lost to the system under the sun and wind.

The compact commissioners, thinking they had an 18 maf river, believed that evaporation would be covered by the surplus they anticipated above and beyond the quantities consumed by the seven states and Mexico. That was actually the case, well into the 1980s. But as more users materialized in the states above the canyons, and the Central Arizona Project began to draw from the mainstem, the โ€˜structural deficitโ€™ from ignoring the system losses began to draw down the big reservoirs. These natural system losses were estimated at around 800,000 af annually from the mainstem for the states below the canyons, and between 400,000 and 500,000 from Powell and the other Colorado River Storage Project reservoirs.

Another element in the structural deficit was consistent provision for Mexicoโ€™s treaty allotment of 1.5 maf per year. The compact made the Upper and Lower Basin each responsible for half of whatever portion of that allotment which was not covered by surplus flow (up to 750 kaf). Beginning in 1971, however, under a 1970 reservoir management agreement, the Bureau began releasing the Upper Basinโ€™s full half of the 1.5 maf each year, whether it was a โ€˜surplus yearโ€™ or not. A similar arrangement was not made for the Lower Basin share of the Mexican allotment; the Bureau apparently has just continued to charge it to โ€˜surplusโ€™ โ€“ along with the Lower Basinโ€™s system losses โ€“ whether or not there was actually that much surplus. These โ€˜structural deficitsโ€™ were almost as responsible for the big 21st-century reservoir drawdown as was the โ€˜millennial drought.โ€™ A figure of around 2 maf was established for these natural and cultural commitments: 1.5 maf for the โ€˜hot desertโ€™ states, 1.2 maf for the โ€˜cold desertโ€™ states โ€“ those states having consistently delivered their 750 kaf share for Mexico (leaving the 450 kaf in the table). The three states below the canyons have apparently agreed to accept responsibility for their 1.5 maf after 2026, although they are not saying much yet about how that consumption will be divided up.

Back now to the columns.Column 2, Authorized Allotments: These are based on the 18 million acre-feet (maf) river we all believed we were working with back in the 1920s. The Colorado River Compact allotted 7.5 maf to each of its Basins. The Boulder Canyon Project Act made the Bureau water-master for the Lower Basin states, and set their individual allotments, contested by Arizona but confirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in the lastย Arizona v. Californiaย case (BCPA/SC). The Mexican allotment was set by the 1944 two-rivers treaty. And in 1948, the four Upper Basin states created the Upper Colorado River Compact. Knowing by then that it was not an 18 maf river, they gave themselves percentages โ€˜of whateverโ€™s leftโ€™ (OWL) after compact obligations to the downriver states and their share of the Mexican treaty obligation were fulfilled. This column shows what that โ€˜% OWLโ€™ would be if those states actually got 7.5 maf regularly. The cold-desert states have never even come close to those figures.

Column 3:ย This column shows the allotments for the 14.5 maf average of the riverโ€™s โ€˜naturalโ€™ flows for the 1930-2000 period, the period when all of the riverโ€™s major development took place. All of the โ€˜averagingโ€™ fell on the states above the canyons. Allotments for Mexico and the three states below the canyons were legally and physically โ€˜set in concreteโ€™ at 9 maf โ€“ legally by the Supreme Court affirmation of the BCPA allotments, and physically by the two big linked reservoirs, Mead and Powell. The four states above the canyons took their floating percentages from what nature provided, or didnโ€™t โ€“ estimated natural flows for that period ranged between 5 and 24 maf. The average โ€˜of whateverโ€™s leftโ€™ (OWL) after the obligatory quantity was sent to the states below the canyon and Mexico was assumed to range between 5 and 6 maf โ€“ if no attention was paid to the structural deficit and system losses. And for most of that period, there were no worries there; the states above the canyon were not using that much water until the substantial transmountain diversions (100 percent depletions) were completed. The table figures for those states (unlike the figures for the states below the canyons) amounted to wishful thinking for a future that will never happen.

Column 4 gets real: a compilation of three columns with five-year consumptive use averages for three periods, covering the time when the physical development of the river storage and delivery systems was being completed, and consumptive use of the river was approaching full development too โ€“ but just on the edge of the trauma of the โ€˜millennial droughtโ€™ (which may last for a millennium) and the near-collapse of the storage system.  The attempt at normal distribution for the 2001-2005 period might be considered just beyond that edge โ€“ like the roadrunner cartoons, when Wiley Coyote runs a few yards into the air beyond a cliff โ€“ then looks downโ€ฆ. These dates are bookended by two โ€˜reservoir coordinationโ€™ elements in the โ€˜Law of the Riverโ€™: the 1970 โ€˜Criteria for the Coordinated Long-range Operation of Colorado River Reservoirsโ€™ and the 2007 โ€˜Interim Guidelinesโ€™ for coordinated operation of the Powell and Mead Reservoirs, set to expire next year.

The Bureauโ€™s five-year compilation tables include, for the first time maybe, the system losses/structural deficit.

Something worth noting: Californiaโ€™s consumptive use during this 35-year period started well above the stateโ€™s 4.4 maf compact allotment, and then declined, while uses for all the other states were increasing. This is because Californiaโ€™s major users had decided, before Hoover Dam was even started, that they would โ€˜borrowโ€™ 800,000 af of unused Upper Basin water until the Upper Basin needed it. They would, in other words, grow on borrowed water. The Bureau of Reclamation allowed this, because they assumed that the Colorado River would eventually be augmented by even greater public works from some larger river basin. Optimism is a sunny thing. On the strength of this, the Metropolitan Water District on the Southern California coast built its 250-mile aqueduct to carryย twiceย the 500,000 af that was their share of Californiaโ€™s 4.4 maf allotment. They began decreasing their โ€˜borrowedโ€™ usage during this 35-year period, in anticipation of the 2006 California Limitation Act โ€“ thanks mostly to the California State Water Project exporting water from Northern California.

Arizonaโ€™s jump in usage between 1971-75 and 1991-95 was due to the completion of the Central Arizona Project. To give a more accurate picture of โ€˜the completed river system,โ€™ only its 1991-95 and 2001-2005 figures were used in compiling Column 5.

Column 5: A compiled average for the three five-year periods โ€“ resulting in the 14.5 maf river of 1930-2000.

Column 6: An attempt to divvy up the system losses/structural deficit (SLD) between the seven states and Mexico. My operating assumption is that the โ€˜hot desertโ€™ states and the โ€˜cold desertโ€™ states should share these losses proportionally to their consumptive use. This meant creating percentages of the 9.0 maf of decreed use for the four entities below the canyons; the four entities above the canyons were already operating on percentages.

Iโ€™m sure the state (guess which one) with a lot of pre-compact โ€˜seniorโ€™ water will object vehemently to this concept, wanting all the junior users to absorb those losses. This is a misapplication of the appropriation doctrine, in my estimation; it was set up for resolving differences among specific users, not for the resolution of major river management issues related to natural phenomena like evaporation and riparian storage, or natural and cultural changes like a warming climate. These issues fall equally on all users, everyoneโ€™s fault and responsibility. But such rational and moral arguments will probably not dent Californiaโ€™s resolve of seniority uber alles.

Column 7 just adds those proportionate shares of the system losses/structural deficit to the consumptive use averages for the seven states and Mexico in Column 5, leaving the system losses/structural deficit lines empty. This is not increasing the amount of water for each state; it is increasing the amount of consumption each has to manage. This column, Iโ€™m arguing, is the seven-way equitable division of consumptive use that the Compact commissioners wanted to create in 1922, but lacked the information about both the river and their futures to develop. Now, a century later, that future is here, like it or not, and weโ€™re sadder but wiser in knowing the river.

Thereโ€™s probably an error at the bottom of this column; instead of 0.00 in the โ€˜Surplus or Drainโ€™ column, it should probably be โ€˜-2.00 mafโ€™: the difference between the 14.5 maf 20th-century river and the 12.5 maf early 21st-century river. This was the frightening drawdown of the early 21st century decades.

Column 8 then uses the Column 7 figures to calculate what percentage of the 14.5 maf river each of the eight entities โ€˜owns.โ€™

Column 9 then applies those percentages to the 12.5 maf Colorado River of the 21st century โ€“ and subtracts from each stateโ€™s total consumption its share of system losses and structural deficit โ€“ thus showing what each state will actually have with which to try to do what it is doing today with its presumed allotment for consumptive use of the 14.5 maf river of bygone days. Read it and weep. (Note that Iโ€™ve put the 1.5 and 0.45 maf system losses/structural deficit numbers back in Column 9 to remind you that they have not disappeared from the system; theyโ€™ve just been re-collated from those portions of the individual statesโ€™ total consumptive uses.)

I would welcome comments and criticisms of this work. I do believe it is the kind of pinning down of numbers we need to finally do for the Colorado River, if we are going to go into the post-2026 era with our eyes open. โ€˜Woke,โ€™ you might say.

By my next post, there will probably either be a new management plan for the river in the messy agonies of birthing โ€“ or there wonโ€™t. If there is, I would wager a six-pack that they will drag along the old two-basin cold-war division. And Iโ€™d wager further that the ratio of total consumptive use for the four โ€˜statesโ€™ below the canyons to the four states above the canyons will be between within a few points either way of 70-30. Is that โ€˜equitableโ€™? Given the amount and productivity of land under cultivation, and the number of people gathered in large metropolitan ganglia, and the location of most of the Indian nations, it probably is. But โ€“ itโ€™ll probably be another point of discussion.

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

Probabilistic Physics-Guided Deep Neural Networks With Recurrence and Attention Mechanisms for Interpretable Daily Streamflow Simulation — Sadegh Sadeghi Tabas,ย Vidya Samadi,ย Catherine Wilson,ย Biswa Bhattacharya (AGU Water Resources Research)

Overview of the 18 CAMELS HUC2 basins (or zone) across CONUS.

Click the link to access the article on the AGU website (Sadegh Sadeghi Tabas,ย Vidya Samadi,ย Catherine Wilson,ย Biswa Bhattacharya). Here’s the abstract:

September 22, 2025

As Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) are being increasingly employed to make important simulations in rainfall-runoff contexts, the demand for interpretability is increasing in the hydrology community. Interpretability is not just a scientific question, but rather knowing where the models fall flat, how to fix them, and how to explain their outcomes to scientific communities so that everyone understands how the model arrives at specific simulations This paper addresses these challenges by deciphering interpretable probabilistic DNNs utilizing the Deep Autoregressive Recurrent (DeepAR) and Temporal Fusion Transformer (TFT) for daily streamflow simulation across the continental United States (CONUS). We benchmarked TFT and DeepAR against conceptual to physics-based hydrologic models. In this setting, catchment physical attributes were incorporated into the training process to create physics-guided TFT and DeepAR configurations. Our proposed physics-guided configurations are also designed to aggregate the patterns across the entire data set, analyze the sensitivity of key catchment physical attributes and facilitate the interpretability of temporal dynamics in rainfall-runoff generation mechanisms. To assess the uncertainty, the modeling configurations were coupled with a quantile regression by adding Gaussian noiseย ย with increasing standard deviation to the individual catchment attributes. Analysis suggested that the physics-guided TFT was superior in predicting daily streamflow compared to the original TFT and DeepAR as well as benchmark hydrologic models. Predictive uncertainty intervals effectively bracketed most of the observational data by simultaneous simulation of various percentiles (e.g., 10th, 50th, and 90th). Interpretable physics-guided TFT proved to be a strong candidate for CONUS daily streamflow simulations. [ed. emphasis mine]

Created by Imgur user Fejetlenfej , a geographer and GIS analyst with a โ€˜lifelong passion for beautiful maps.โ€™ It highlights the massive expanse of river basins across the country โ€“ in particular, those which feed the Mississippi River, in pink.

Release: #Colorado Governor Jared Polis, Attorney General Phil Weiser Urge U.S. Supreme Court to Reject #Nebraska Case on #SouthPlatteRiver

Perkins canal drawing showing the Colorado portion, courtesy Nebraska Department of Natural Resources.

Here’s the release from Governor Polis’ office (Lawrence Pachecoย and Shelby Wieman):

October 15, 2025

Governor Jared Polis and Attorney General Phil Weiser today urged the U.S. Supreme Court to reject a case about the South Platte River Compact and Nebraskaโ€™s efforts to build the Perkins County Canal. Colorado is complying with its obligations under the compact and not obstructing Nebraskaโ€™s efforts to build the canal, so there is nothing for the court to review at this time, according to a brief filed with the court.   

The South Platte River originates in Colorado and supplies water for the stateโ€™s biggest cities and some of its most productive agricultural lands. The river starts in the Rocky Mountains and winds roughly 380 miles northeast into Nebraska. The South Platte River Compact is an agreement between Colorado and Nebraska that establishes the Statesโ€™ rights and responsibilities to use water in the South Platte. 

While Colorado acknowledges Nebraskaโ€™s right to build the Perkins County Canal, Nebraska has failed to move forward on the project for over 100 years. Recently, Nebraska officials have taken preliminary steps to plan and permit the project through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, but numerous steps lie ahead during which Nebraska, and others who might be affected by the project, will identify potential issues and fully study any impacts.

Nebraska appears to be using the prospect of the canal and this request for Supreme Court action as leverage to renegotiate the South Platte River Compact. Colorado will ensure that Nebraska honors the letter of the Compact, just as Colorado always has. 

โ€œWater is the lifeblood of our state. We have always faithfully honored the century-old South Platte Compact and all other water agreements with our downstream neighbor states, and we will continue to do so. We refuse to sit idly by while Nebraska chases a meritless lawsuit that threatens Coloradoโ€™s precious water resources, our robust agriculture industry, and our rural communities in Northeastern Colorado,โ€ said Governor Jared Polis. 

Attorney General Weiser said Colorado is complying with the compact and not interfering with Nebraskaโ€™s efforts to build the canal. As such, Nebraska hasnโ€™t raised any claims ripe for Supreme Court review. Whatever issues arise in the future can be addressed through federal permitting processes or lower courts. 

โ€œNebraskaโ€™s claimed violations rely on speculative and premature allegations. To the extent any legal issues arise in the future, there are alternative forums to resolve them. The Supreme Court need not take a case that would put the court and the parties on a long, time-intensive, and expensive path that might well, in the end, put the States right back where they were before Nebraska filed their proposed complaint,โ€ said Attorney General Weiser. โ€œEven if the court decides to take up part or all of Nebraskaโ€™s case, Iโ€™m confident that we will win on the merits. Both the facts and the law are on our side.โ€

Nebraskaโ€™s claims that Colorado authorizes water uses that harm Nebraska during the irrigation season are not supported by facts. Jason Ullmann, the State Engineer and Director of the Division of Water Resources, said Nebraska has only recently suggested they were concerned that Colorado was not meeting its obligations during the irrigation season.

โ€œFor over 100 years the Colorado State Engineerโ€™s Office has worked with Nebraska and performed the hard work of ensuring Colorado meets its compact obligations on the South Platte River. This means we make difficult decisions every day on who receives their water and when based on the priority system and compact terms. As a result, water users in Colorado and Nebraska all receive their allotted share, said Jason Ullmann, State Engineer and Director of the Division of Water Resources โ€œWe were surprised and disappointed by Nebraskaโ€™s lawsuit and are hopeful once all the briefs are filed that we can resume discussions to meet the mutual needs of both of our States.โ€

The Supreme Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction over interstate disputes, such as border disputes and water rights. States must file a motion for leave to file a bill of complaint to bring a case to the court. The Supreme Court must still decide whether to accept the case.

The case is Nebraska v. Colorado, case number 220161.

Read Coloradoโ€™s Response in Opposition to Nebraskaโ€™s Motion for Leave to File Bill of Complaint (PDF).

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

Rivers begin to recede after surge from heavy rains: Now itโ€™s time to measure and account for the extra water in management of the #RioGrande Compact — AlamosaCitizen.com

The Rio Grande at 7,000cfs, which was its peak after a series of end-of-season rain storms. Credit: Ryan Michelle Scavo

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

October 14, 2025

The dangerous high waters on the San Juan River and Upper Rio Grande are beginning to recede following the surge from heavy rains that created historic autumn peak streamflows on the San Luis Valleyโ€™s river system.

The high flows also came at the end of irrigation season for Valley farmers and the Colorado Division of Water Resources, which will now account for the extra water in its management of the Rio Grande Compact.

The Rio Grande itself peaked at 7,000 cfs from the bounty of rain that came through the southwest region here in mid-October. The Colorado Division of Water Resources is estimating that the out-of-character weather event added 20,000 to 25,000 acre-feet of water to the Rio Grande system itself and around 10,000 to 15,000 acre-feet that was diverted into the Valleyโ€™s canal system, according to staff engineer Pat McDermott.

That measuring of the water and accounting for how it fits into this yearโ€™s obligations under the Rio Grande Compact is underway. The irrigation season ends Nov. 1.

McDermott, in a report Tuesday to Rio Grande Basin Roundtable members, said not all of the water will be of beneficial use to the Valley and the Upper Rio Grande Basin. The middle Rio Grande could see about 5,000 acre-feet flow downstream, but with a largely dry riverbed in Albuquerque, benefits from the October storms likely wonโ€™t extend as far south as Elephant Butte.

โ€œThis is not a significant event in New Mexico,โ€ McDermott said.

For the reservoirs on the western and southern end of the Valley, it has been. Rio Grande Reservoir, Platoro Reservoir and Terrace Reservoir all will increase storage, with the reservoirs all in priority during the irrigation season for the first time since 2019.

Rio Grande Reservoir will have somewhere between 2,000 and 4,000 acre-feet of storage, Platoro Reservoir has increased its storage and Terrace Reservoir has gone up about 2,000 acre-feet, McDermott said.

โ€œThis is kind of unusual to have this big a flow event,โ€ McDermott said. โ€œIt doesnโ€™t happen.โ€

McDermott noted the importance and effectiveness of the Valleyโ€™s canal ditch riders, who worked to push water into their ditches to help with the surges of streamflow.

The Empire Canal, Monte Vista, the Rio Grande Canal, the Farmers Union, San Luis Valley Canal all opened their ditches to take in water, McDermott said.

โ€œWe here have very, very cooperative owners that have opened up their ditches after several months of non-use. We want to thank all those ditch operators for getting out there and taking some of this available flow. It is a wonderful thing.

โ€œThis is a really good thing for our basin,โ€ said McDermott. โ€œItโ€™s going to give us an opportunity to get some water back out into the ditches late in the season, which we donโ€™t see very often.โ€

Much of Valley will now go into its offseason with moist soils. But as McDermott noted, areas like the critical Saguache Creek, Carnero Creek, and the east side of the Valley down south through Trinchera didnโ€™t receive much benefit from the rains. 

The next best thing would be a normal to above-normal snow season in the San Juan Mountains and Sangre de Cristo range. 

La Niรฑa is still looking weak. But as October has shown, weather can happen.

Rio Grande and Pecos River basins. Map credit: By Kmusser – Own work, Elevation data from SRTM, drainage basin from GTOPO [1], U.S. stream from the National Atlas [2], all other features from Vector Map., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=11218868

Colorado Water Trust Responds to Devastating #Drought Conditions with Unprecedented Restoration Efforts — Kate Ryan and Blake Mamich

Colorado Drought Monitor map October 7, 2025.

Here’s the release from the Colorado Water Trust (Kate Ryan and Blake Mamich):

October 7, 2025

Coloradoโ€™s rivers are running on empty asย drought grips the intermountain west. But a record-setting response from Colorado Water Trust is helping keep critical stretches of rivers around our state flowing for fish, farms, and communities alike.

This year, Colorado Water Trust is operating more projects across more rivers than at any point in its 24-year historyโ€”and restoring more water to streams than ever before. Across the state and on both sides of the Continental Divide, Colorado Water Trust is partnering with local irrigators, water districts, state agencies, and funders to release more than 16,000 acre-feet of water (over 5.2 billion gallons) back into rivers when itโ€™s needed most. This unprecedented effort highlights how collaboration and creativity can sustain Coloradoโ€™s rivers through crisis, offering a model of resilience at a time when the stateโ€™s waterways face one of their toughest seasons yet.

Colorado is in the grip of a devastating drought.ย Nearly 45% of the stateย is currently experiencing at least moderate drought conditions, with significant portions in severe and extreme drought. Streams across the state are shrinking, water temperatures are rising, and ecosystems, farms, and communities are all feeling the strain.ย In many places, streamflow gauges are reporting flows in the lowest 10-25 percentile for this time of year. Rivers in some regions are hitting historically low levels far earlier in the season. This year marks theย earliest call on the Yampa River in recorded history. The situation is dire, and without swift, creative intervention, stretches of Coloradoโ€™s treasured rivers could be left dry.

In response, Colorado Water Trust is rising to meet this challenge by running nearly all of its projects across the state, ensuring that water is returned to rivers when it is needed most. The scale of the response is unprecedentedโ€”this year is predicted to see more water restored to Coloradoโ€™s rivers through Colorado Water Trustโ€™s work than in any other year since the organization was founded. Some of this yearโ€™s projects include:

This map shows the 15-mile reach of the Colorado River near Grand Junction, home to four species of endangered fish. Map credit: CWCB

Colorado River: On the Colorado River, Colorado Water Trust is again operating its project on the 15-Mile Reach, a stretch of river critical to the survival of four endangered and threatened fish species. Colorado Water Trust is expected to restore well over 1 billion gallons of water to this critical reach by releasing water from Ruedi Reservoir near Basalt which is then restored to the Fryingpan and Roaring Fork Rivers before it reaches the 15-Mile Reach of the Colorado River. Through innovative partnerships with the Grand Valley Water Users Association, Orchard Mesa Irrigation District, and the Upper Colorado Endangered Fish Recovery Program, water is being delivered at key times to support flows in this fragile habitat. Backed by generous support from corporate partners such as Niagara Cares, Coca-Cola, and Coors Seltzer, this project has become a model of collaboration and creativity.

Yampa River: Further north in the Yampa Valley, Colorado Water Trust is implementing our projects on the Upper and Lower Yampa River. Releases from Stagecoach Reservoir, made possible through collaboration with Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District and the Colorado Water Conservation Board, have been restoring significant volumes of water to the Upper Yampa as it passes through downtown Steamboat Springs since June. This water is vital for endangered fish within the reach, as well as the recreation economy downstream. Additionally, on the Lower Yampa, strategic releases out of Elkhead Reservoir in coordination with the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the Colorado River District are sustaining critical habitat for endangered fish, as well as supporting the agricultural community downstream. These projectsโ€”already amounting to thousands of acre-feetโ€”are keeping the Yampa River flowing through one of its most critical seasons. Without these boosts, irrigators, fish, and the communities of the valley would be facing even greater hardship. These projects are made possible thanks to generous funding from the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the Yampa River Fund, Colorado River District, and more.

Around the state: On smaller tributaries, Colorado Water Trust is also making a difference.The Slater Creek Project, in partnership with local ranchers and Western Resource Advocates, is improving conditions for an important headwater tributary to the Yampa River while supporting the local agricultural economy. So far, this project has restored over 100 million gallons of water to Slater Creek. On the Fraser River, Colorado Water Trust has teamed up with the Grand County Mutual Ditch and Reservoir Company to improve late-season flows through the Vail Ditch Project. This effort, which will return roughly 16 million gallons of water this year, helps cool the river and support critical trout spawning runs. In Boulder County in the Indian Peaks Wilderness by the Continental Divide, Colorado Water Trustโ€™s project out of Jasper Reservoir released water and accounted for approximately 32% of flows in Middle Boulder Creek upstream of Barker Reservoir and 25% of flows in Boulder Creek in downtown Boulder. Across the state, permanent long-term projects are also running, steadily and reliably delivering water to rivers during the hottest, driest part of the year.

Taken together, these efforts represent the most ambitious season in Colorado Water Trustโ€™s history. By weaving together partnerships with irrigation companies, conservancy districts, state and federal agencies, and local communities, and by drawing on the support of a diverse array of fundersโ€”Colorado Water Trust is delivering hope where it is needed most.

โ€œThese projects demonstrate the power of partnership to keep rivers flowing, even in the toughest years,” said Kate Ryan, Colorado Water Trustโ€™s Executive Director. โ€œIt just goes to show how everyoneโ€”no matter who you are or where you liveโ€”cares about protecting Coloradoโ€™s rivers and the people who depend on them.โ€

While drought continues to tighten its grip on Colorado, these projects demonstrate that collaboration and innovation can keep rivers alive. In the face of crisis, Colorado Water Trust is proving that when partners and funders come together, rivers can be sustained for people, farms, fish, and communities alike. This year will mark the most flow ever restored to Coloradoโ€™s rivers through Colorado Water Trustโ€™s workโ€”a milestone born from collaboration, ingenuity, and urgent necessity.

โ€œItโ€™s a strange mix of pride and worry,โ€ said Blake Mamich, Program Director for the Colorado Water Trust โ€œOn one hand, Iโ€™m thrilled to see so much water restored to rivers this year. On the other, I know that the only reason we can do this work at this scale is because itโ€™s so needed: drought and climate stress are hitting us harder and harder. Thatโ€™s a hard truth we carry with us every day.โ€

As Colorado enters one of its most critical water years in recent memory, Colorado Water Trust is committed to ensuring that, even in the face of historic drought, Coloradoโ€™s rivers will continue to flow.


About Colorado Water Trust

Colorado Water Trust is a statewide nonprofit organization with a mission to restore water to Coloradoโ€™s rivers. Since 2001, theyโ€™ve restored over 26 billion gallons of water to Coloradoโ€™s rivers and streams. ColoradoWaterTrust.org.

Release: #ColoradoRiver Water Supplies Cut in Upper Basin — Matt Moseley and Kendra Westerkamp (Upper Colorado River Commission) #COriver #aridification

Photo credit: Upper Colorado River Commission

Click the link to read the release on the Upper Colorado River Commission website:

October 8, 2025

As the Upper Division States negotiate ways to equitably and sustainably manage the Colorado Riverโ€™s future supplies, their water users face the harsh reality of living within the riverโ€™s 21st-century limits.

This year, in New Mexico, the San Juan Chama project received 31% of their normal Colorado River water supply, a 69% reduction, which is used by Albuquerque and Santa Fe, as well as for agricultural purposes.

โ€œThe San Juan-Chama Project contractors are absorbing unavoidable natural hydrologic shortages and have had to learn how to operate under constrained supplies, higher costs, and mounting climate pressures,โ€ said Diane Agnew, the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Water Utility Authorityโ€™s Water Rights Program Manager. โ€œThis ongoing uncertainty in water availability is placing significant strain on water users, challenging infrastructure investments, and disrupting water management strategies that are critical to our communities and economy.โ€

In Colorado, the Dolores Water Conservancy Districtโ€™s water users faced cuts of up to 44%. Thousands of acres remain fallowed both on the Ute Farm & Ranch and north towards Dove Creek.

โ€œOur farmers are left with year-by-year gambles with last-second planning going late into May and limiting farmersโ€™ abilities to make long-term, successful crop rotation planning,โ€ said Ken Curtis, GM of the Dolores Water Conservancy District. โ€œThe Dolores snowpack is disappearing, and the historic runoff has dropped by even greater magnitudes. Water is no longer reliably available.โ€

2025 marks the fifth year out of the last eight years with shortages impacting the Conservancy District. Many acres have remained fallow since 2021, when available project water supplies dropped to zero. Local farmers did not have the time and resources to bring fields back into production prior to this current shortage โ€” all of their shortages are uncompensated and involuntary.

The District supplies water to the Ute Mountain Ute Tribeโ€™s Farm and Ranch Enterprise. The Tribe was forced to turn off irrigation spigots to 60% of their land and lay off farm workers. The crop plan for 2025 only included the existing, high-value alfalfa needed to sustain the Farm & Ranch Enterprise [FRE].

โ€œWe [FRE] are merely surviving, not adapting,โ€ said FRE irrigation manager Michael Vicente when responding to his view of the historic drought. Severe water shortages in Utahโ€™s Uintah Basin, driven by Colorado River cuts, are forcing ranchers to reduce cattle herds, raising production costs and straining the local economy.

โ€œSpring runo๏ฌ€ was dismal at best. Early 1900s era water rights only received a week or two of natural flow delivery. Shortages were so severe that in some basins, they even a๏ฌ€ected senior 1861 water rights.

These shortages are directly impacting cattle production,โ€ said Dan Larsen, Board Member at the Colorado River Authority of Utah. โ€œRanchers are being forced to cut back their herds, which not only raises costs for producers but also ripples through our entire local economy.โ€

Hydrologic shortage is also impacting Utahโ€™s Demand Management Pilot Program, which is exploring voluntary, compensated water conservation in the Colorado River system in Utah. For example, the Central Utah Water Conservancy District enrolled 4,500 acre-feet of water in the program; however, the water rights held by the District were cut in priority on June 8, much earlier than the typical mid-summer cut, resulting in only around 900 acre-feet being delivered to the Program.

Agricultural producers are weighing potential impacts from hydrologic shortage on their operations as they consider participating in conservation-related pilot programs Nick Sampinos, a farmer along the Price River, said โ€œPersistent drought conditions are a constant challenge, however, the Utah Demand Management Pilot Program has provided us with much needed assistance and set the stage for economic sustainability of our farming operation well into the future.โ€

In Wyoming, historic drought and Colorado River shortages have driven the Blackโ€™s Fork River down to a 1891 priority date, forcing the state to regulate o๏ฌ€ water rights to more than 52,000 irrigated acres in 2025 in that drainage alone.

โ€œThis year, more than 163,000 acres of irrigation were shut o๏ฌ€ in Wyomingโ€™s portion of the Green River Basin,โ€ said Kevin Payne, Division IV Superintendent of the Wyoming State Engineerโ€™s O๏ฌƒce. โ€œThis is an extraordinary reduction with serious impacts on producers and rural communities across southwest Wyoming.โ€

The Upper Basin has consistently used less than its legal entitlement through strict water administration. The four states of the Upper Basin remain committed to continued work in implementing and expanding water management initiatives, including accounting for conservation-related activities in 2026.

The Upper Basinโ€™s sacrifices arenโ€™t abstract; they carry real human and economic consequences. As Colorado River negotiations continue, Upper Basin leaders are clear: river operations must adapt to the actual supply and prioritize rebuilding storage to restore resiliency.


About the Upper Colorado River Commission (UCRC):

The UCRC is an interstate administrative agency made up of duly appointed representatives from the four Upper Division States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming.

Map credit: AGU

Federal Water Tap, October 13, 2025: Underwater Dam again Built across #MississippiRiver in #Louisiana — Brett Walton (circleofblue.org)

Map of the Mississippi River Basin. Made using USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=47308146

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

October 13, 2025

The Rundown

  • Army Corps, for fourth consecutive year, authorizes anย underwater damย to keep salt water from moving up the Mississippi River in Louisiana.
  • A cold-water flow experiment atย Glen Canyon Damย to disrupt non-native fish downstream will end within a week.
  • Senate passes aย defense spending authorization billย with water-related provisions.

And lastly, EPA sits on a โ€œforever chemicalโ€ toxicity assessment, ProPublica finds.

โ€œDo not make American families pay the price for Trumpโ€™s war on affordable American energy.โ€ โ€“ Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) speaking on the Senate floor to rally votes to end President Trumpโ€™s national energy emergency. Heinrich and his Democratic colleagues faulted the White House for increasing electricity prices by cancelling wind and solar projects and fully supporting data center developments, which consume large quantities of electricity. Yet, the Democratsโ€™ effort to repeal the emergency declaration failed.

In context: Data Center Energy Demand Is Putting Pressure on U.S. Water Supplies

By the Numbers

River Mile 53.1: Approximate location of the front of the saltwater โ€œwedgeโ€ that is pushing up the Mississippi River, in southern Louisiana, according to the Army Corps of Engineers. If the wedge moves far enough upriver it will endanger drinking water supplies for communities that draw from the river. Chloride concentrations are higher in the trailing sections of the wedge. The Corps estimates that the point at which they exceed EPA drinking water standards is 15 to 25 miles behind the wedge front.

News Briefs

Saltwater Barrier
The Army Corps of Engineers, for the fourth consecutive year, has authorized the construction of an underwater dam across the bottom Mississippi River as a way of keeping salt water from the Gulf of Mexico from moving upriver and spoiling municipal water supplies.

A contractor is building the dam at river mile 64. As of October 10, the front of the saltwater wedge was estimated at river mile 53.1.

Salt water intrudes when river flows are too feeble to push it out. These low-flow conditions have happened in the late summer or early fall every year since 2022.

Because salt water is heavier than fresh, the intrusion happens along the bottom of the river, which is why the temporary earthen dam is placed across the river bed.

If salt water moves too far upstream, it will contaminate the water supply for communities whose intake pipes extend into the river. In 2023, the Army Corps barged 153 million gallons of fresh water to communities in southern Louisiana that were affected by the saltwater intrusion.

Senate Passes Defense Spending Bill
The Senate passed a bill that authorizes defense spending for fiscal year 2026. The bill also has a number of water-related provisions.

It requires the Defense Department to conduct a pilot wastewater surveillance study at four or more military installations. The goal is to test wastewater for substances that would identify drug use among service members or the presence of infectious disease. (Wastewater surveillance grew in prominence as a testing tool during the Covid pandemic.)

It establishes a working group on โ€œadvanced nuclearโ€ technologies that could power desalination facilities.

It requires a report on energy and water use for any data center built or expanded on military property.

It repeals a moratorium on the burning of PFAS substances, including firefighting foam.

The bill includes an amendment from Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) that requires NASA to pay for new drinking water wells for the Eastern Shore town of Chincoteague. The townโ€™s existing wells were contaminated with PFAS when the land was owned by the Navy. That land has since been transferred to NASA.

Studies and Reports

EPA Sits on โ€˜Forever Chemicalโ€™ Report
An EPA report on the toxicity of PFNA โ€“ one of the thousands of PFAS in circulation โ€“ was ready to be published in mid-April, ProPublica reports. But the agency has not yet released it.

PFNA is one of six PFAS that the Biden administration decided to regulate in drinking water. The Trump administration announced in May that it would attempt to reverse that decision for four of the chemicals โ€“ including PFNA.

On the Radar

Glen Canyon Dam Flow Experiment
The Bureau of Reclamation began releasing cool water from the depths of Lake Powell in mid-August.

The cold water is meant to disrupt smallmouth bass spawning downstream of Glen Canyon Dam. Smallmouth bass are a non-native species that federal agencies and their partners are attempting to rein in to protect threatened native species like the humpback chub.

The cold-water flow experiment is set to end by October 20.

Because the cold-water flows bypass Glen Canyon Damโ€™s turbines, the dam has been producing less power. That means more power purchased on the market. According to the Western Area Power Administration, which markets federal hydropower, purchased power expenses are โ€œsignificant.โ€ WAPA opposed the cold-water release plan, arguing the end date should be October 1, which would reduce purchased power costs.

Sales of hydropower fund the operation and maintenance of Glen Canyon Dam.

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

I was wrong about President Trump, okay!?: But I was right about “governance by spite” — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org)

Carrizo Sunrise. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

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

October 7, 2025

๐Ÿคฏ Trump Ticker ๐Ÿ˜ฑ

I was wrong, and woefully so. I want to apologize for that and let you know how remorseful I am: I dearly, dearly wish that I was right. But alas โ€ฆ

See, back in November I wrote a dispatch about what to expect from the incoming Trump administration, particularly concerning public lands and the environment. It actually turned out to be fairly accurate on the public lands stuff, but there was this one offending paragraph that, I fear, may have lulled some of my readers into complacency (when they should have been preparing to resist). Here it is:

Oh, boy. Trump has been in office for less than nine months, and already heโ€™s checked off all of the boxes that naive little me figured (and hoped) he would never dare even attempt. He and Goebbels-clone Stephen Miller and friends are going full-on fascist and trampling on the First Amendment and the U.S. Constitution in general, they are prosecuting political opponents, they are using the โ€œDepartment of Warโ€ to target the โ€œenemy within,โ€ they are suing and bullying the media for reporting the truth and making fun of him, and they have engaged in a brutal โ€” and performative โ€” intimidation and terror campaign against immigrants and anyone who โ€œlooksโ€ like they might be an immigrant. Making it even worse, the President of the United States treats it all like some sort of joke, acting like a pre-pubescent middle school bully while posting stupid videos portraying he and Russell Vought (a primary architect of Project 2025, which Trump disavowed during the campaign) as the grim reaper out to destroy Americaโ€™s democracy (and the economy).

So, yeah, I was way off. Apologies for my naivety.

But I was right about one thing. I predicted Trump would practice governance by spite. He has, and done it to the extreme. Not only are his words malicious, but so are his policies, fueled by a lust for vengeance. His tariffs are aimed at punishing other countries (even though they ultimately only punish American consumers and businesses โ€” even his beloved oil and gas industry).

His quest for โ€œEnergy Dominanceโ€ is anything but that. Sure, heโ€™s trying to help out his fossil fuel tycoon buddies, but I think heโ€™s even more interested in retribution against the โ€œlibsโ€ and the environmentalists that takes the form of an all-out assault on the environment, the climate, public lands โ€” and everyone who cherishes or depends on these things. If he wanted to bolster energy, he would have at least stood aside and let the burgeoning solar and wind do their thing alongside fossil fuels by taking an โ€œall of the aboveโ€ approach. Instead, he has done everything possible to stifle these energy sources, simply because they are cleaner than coal and gas. He shut down the Solar for All program, thus denying thousands of low- and middle-income families access to rooftop solar and a smidgeon of their own energy independence and lower utility bills. Whereโ€™s the dominance in that?

And now the Trump administration has canceled some $8 billion in federal funding for clean energy, efficiency, and grid reliability projects across the nation, many of them in the West. And while one might think that this is just another assault on clean energy (which it is), or maybe a way to slash expenses to pay for tax cuts for billionaires (that, too), itโ€™s primarily motivated by, yet again, revenge: The cuts were limited to states that voted for Kamala Harris in the 2024 election.

Yes, you read that correctly. While funding was zeroed out for blue states, identical projects in neighboring red states were left untouched. He is doing this to punish Democrat-leaning states, but the victims end up being small and large businesses that banked on those funds, the folks who work for those firms, the environment, and ultimately folks like you and me who will see our utility bills increase (because someone has to pay for those grid upgrades). And guess what? You wonโ€™t be saved just because youโ€™re in a red congressional district.

This is not normal, nor is it politics as usual.

In fact, the funding that the Trump administration is taking away from individuals, organizations, and businesses, was allocated by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act, both of which Congress passed during the Biden administration. The vast majority of the funding from those bills went to Republican states and districts that voted for Trump in 2024. The funded projects created thousands of new jobs across the country and added up to billions in investment in communities in the Phoenix area, along Coloradoโ€™s Front Range, in Nevada, and elsewhere.

Iโ€™m not saying all of these projects were wonderful, or that theyโ€™d all succeed. Some were full on boondoggles, others would inflict more harm than good. But the funding was approved by Congress, and the organizations that received them were banking on them, had invested a great deal of their own money into the funded projects, and had built up workforces. For the administration to then take back the money, some of which had already been spent, for purely political, vindictive reasons, is both wrong and cruel.

And if you think that this is just for a bunch of solar panels, think again. Hereโ€™s a list of some of the biggest projects that were defunded (which includes some funds that Trump had previously cancelled).

  • $2.2 billion: Amount rescinded for hydrogen fuel production and distribution hubs in California and the Pacific Northwest.
  • $250 million: Amount clawed back from the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon toย fund transmission and power grid upgrades.
  • $70 million: Amount rescinded from Xcel Energy toย installย 1,000 megawatt-hour iron-air battery energy storage systems in Colorado and Minnesota.
  • $50 million: Amount rescinded from the Tribal Energy Consortiumโ€™s Ignacio, Colorado-based program aimed at reducing methane emissions from tribal owned and operated oil and gas wells and facilities located on tribal lands.
  • $326 million: Amount rescinded from Colorado State University for aย projectdesigned to develop methods for reducing methane emissions from oil and gas wells.
  • $15 million: Amount rescinded from Kit Carson Electric Cooperative in northern New Mexico for a grid resilience project.
  • $6.6 million: Amount rescinded from Navajo Transitional Energy Company for studying and developing a carbon capture retrofit project for the Four Corners coal-burning power plant in New Mexico.

Hundreds of millions of dollars more are being clawed back from Portland General Electric, Southern California Edison, Tri-State Generation and Transmission, the Imperial Irrigation District, and the Electric Power Research Institute โ€” the list goes on and on. But it never extends to similar projects in red states.

Even as Energy Secretary Chris Wright was announcing the funding cuts, for example, his department went forward with a $2.23 billion loan for Lithium Americas and its contentious Thacker Pass mine in Nevada (which voted Republican in the last presidential election). In exchange, the administration took a 5% equity stake in both the company and in the firm. Never mind that the project is opposed by the Reno-Sparks Indian Colony, the Burns Paiute Tribe, and the Summit Lake Paiute Tribe, as well as by numerous environmental groups, and that the price of lithium is lower than itโ€™s been since 2021. Go figure.


๐ŸŒต Public Lands ๐ŸŒฒ

As expected (and as I correctly predicted would happen), the Trump administration is busy unraveling environmental protections and resource and travel management plans for public lands around the West. The most recent targets include:

  • The Bureau of Land Managementโ€™s Rock Springsย resource management planwhich covers about 3.6 million acres of public lands in southwestern Wyoming, including the Red Desert. A solid, common-sense plan was first released about two years ago that aimed to push energy and other development away from the most sensitive areas. It was years in the making, and was a compromise. And yet, Wyomingโ€™s right-wing was up in arms, saying it was too restrictive. That prompted the BLM to go back to the drawing board and incorporate more public input. They came back with a far less restrictive plan, a compromised compromise, I guess you could call it. Thatโ€™s not enough for the current administration and their industry donors, however: The BLM is going to revise it again, this time to bring it in line with Trumpโ€™s โ€œUnleashing American Energyโ€ agenda.ย More details and commenting instructions here.ย 
  • The BLM is โ€œreassessingโ€ the off-road route designations in its Labyrinth/Gemini Bridges travel plan that includes about 300,000 acres of slickrock-covered public lands near Moab. The new plan was issued late in 2023, and left a whopping 800 miles of roads and trails opened to motorized travel. The off-road-vehicle lobbyย sued to overturn the plan, but were shot down in court. You have until Oct. 24 toย comment on this one.

During water year 2025, drought moved into and intensified throughout most of the Interior West. Source: U.S. Drought Monitor.

๐Ÿฅต Aridification Watch ๐Ÿซ

The 2025 water year has come to an end (on Sept. 30), and while we know it was a fairly lousy one for most of the Western U.S., the data is now beginning to come in letting us know just how lousy it was. Some of the stats arenโ€™t updated yet, and may not be for a while, thanks to the government shutdown and the Trump administrationโ€™s fear of the word โ€œclimate.โ€ 

For the most part, the water year started out quite nicely, precipitation wise, with above โ€œnormalโ€ amounts of rain and snow falling in October and November. But that was followed by a severe lack of snow, a dry, warm spring, and a late-to-arrive monsoon. The snowpack deteriorated, spring runoff was weak, and drought intensified under the hot, dry sun of summer, with only a bit of relief finally arriving in September. 

Resulting low streamflows led to a 33-foot drop in Lake Powellโ€™s surface level during the water year. Here are the charts and the numbers:

  • 8.08 million acre-feet: Total Lake Powell inflows, water year 2024 (Unregulated inflows = 7.98 MAF)
  • 3,578 feet: Lake Powellโ€™s surface elevation on Oct. 1, 2024
  • 5.14 million acre-feet: Total flows into Lake Powell during the 2025 water year. (Unregulated inflows = 4.69 MAF)
  • 3,545 feet: Lake Powellโ€™s surface elevation on Oct. 1, 2025
  • 11.96 MAF: Inflows during water year 2023
  • 21.65 MAF: Inflows during water year 1984 (the highest since Glen Canyon Dam was completed in 1963).ย 
  • 9.85%: Percent of the Western U.S. that was experiencing severe to exceptional drought at the beginning of the 2025 water year.
  • 44.12%: Percent of the Western U.S. that was experiencing severe to exceptional drought at the end of the 2025 water year.


๐Ÿคฏ Annals of Inanity ๐Ÿคก

You just canโ€™t make this stuff up. MAGA-world is rife with conspiracies about the Charlie Kirk killing last month, which is hardly surprising. I guess itโ€™s tough for some folks to believe that some 22-year-old Mormon kid from a Republican, gun-loving family could assassinate a right-wing entertainer and provocateur on his own. He must have had help from that ever-elusive Antifa (which is not an organization, but simply a shortening of the term anti-fascist). Or maybe it was Mossad โ€” a favorite theory among a certain sect of the right wing. 

But then thereโ€™s Candace Owens, MAGA podcaster and Crazytown mayoral candidate. Sheโ€™s raising the possibility that Phil Lyman was involved in the plot to assassinate Kirk. Yes, that Phil Lyman: the former San Juan County Commissioner who gained notoriety after leading an ATV ride โ€” with Ryan Bundy and his โ€œmilitiaโ€ buddies making a cameo โ€” down Recapture Canyon just days after the Bunkerville standoff. Lyman has since swerved further and further into MAGA-land, served as a Utah state representative, received a pardon from Trump, and hurled some conspiracy-laden accusations of his own after losing the gubernatorial election to Gov. Spencer Cox. 

I tried to listen to Owensโ€™ argument and alleged evidence (including the link, with a suggestion not to click on it) regarding Lyman and couldnโ€™t make any sense of it. But I guess Owensโ€™s following is big enough for folks to take it kind of seriously. Even Cox, whom Lyman has assailed with accusations of his own, took to social media to defend his right-wing rival. Meanwhile, Iโ€™ll be making some popcorn while I wait to see how this one plays out.

Just Add Water: The Jasper Lake Donation and a New Model for Water #Conservation in the West — Kate Ryan & Matt Moseleyย (#Colorado Water Trust)

Jasper Reservoir from dam. Photo credit: Colorado Water Trust

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Water Trust website (Kate Ryan & Matt Moseley):

September 16, 2025

Introduction

In an era where climate change and overconsumption threaten our waterways, a remarkable act of generosity and foresight has emerged from the Indian Peaks Wilderness area of Colorado. On August 29, 2024, an anonymous donor gifted Jasper Lake, including the parcel of land surrounding it and the senior water rights it stores, to the Colorado Water Trust. This marked the largest water donation in Coloradoโ€™s history.  This act ensures the protection of 37 miles of Boulder Creek, safeguarding its flow, ecosystems, and recreational value for generations to come.  Since 2024, 100 million gallons of water have been restored to the river as a result of this donation, and the annual benefit will continue to accrue to Boulder Creek streamflow indefinitely.  A warming climate will continue to put pressure on Boulder Creek, but this source of water will be protected forever.

Over the past 25 years, the Colorado Water Trust has restored 27 billion gallons of water to 814 miles of rivers and streams throughout Colorado.  Here is how it works: Much like a land trust can invest in conservation easements to protect property for future generations, the Colorado Water Trust invests in water rights to protect streamflow in our rivers. Water in Colorado is not only the lifeblood of our state and economy, but the right to use it can also be bought and sold.  Instead of diverting water out of the river, the Water Trust uses water rights to protect that water in the river.

In the western United States, where water scarcity is an ever-pressing reality and climate change threatens to exacerbate hydrological extremes, the permanent donation of storage water from Jasper Lake to environmental benefit marks a profoundly important milestone.  This is not merely a gift of water; it is a precedent-setting, visionary act that fuses water law ingenuity, ecological foresight, and an ethic of stewardship.  In an era dominated by competing interests and escalating scarcity, the Jasper Lake donation offers a replicable path forward for other Western states grounded in cooperative frameworks, legal adaptability, and the kind of selfless generosity that serves the public interest.

Jasper Lake Donation

In 1890, nearly a century before Congress designated the Indian Peaks Wilderness as a part of the nationโ€™s Wilderness Preservation system, the Boulder High Line Canal Company constructed Jasper Reservoir.  Known to hikers and wilderness visitors as Jasper Lake, the reservoir has been a source of agricultural water in Boulder County and areas east of the mountains since that time. Nestled just east of the Continental Divide, this enclave for cold-water fish, moose, and backpackers doubled in purpose. Irrigation companies and the Colorado Power Company operated the reservoir over the next century.

Since the 1890s, Jasper Lake has been in a series of private ownerships, having been bought and sold multiple times. In recent years, the City of Boulder leased Jasper Lake water from private owners and provided that water to various Boulder County irrigators.  During that time, the Colorado Water Trust worked with the owners of Jasper Lake to craft a plan for its use for environmental improvements and public benefit.  As these conversations progressed, the owners generously offered Jasper Lake as a donation to the Water Trust.

The Water Trust then sought out a steward for the reservoir with both the capacity and knowledge necessary to manage and maintain the reservoirโ€™s infrastructure. While the Water Trust owns multiple water rights, it focuses its time and energy on transactions that boost streamflow.  Finding the right stewardโ€”one who would commit to using Jasper Lake water in environmentally-compatible operationsโ€”would free the nonprofit from the burden of operating a high-hazard dam while meeting its mission to add water to Coloradoโ€™s rivers. Accordingly, the Water Trust sought a partner with a desire to uphold the environmental and community values vital to operating Jasper Lake in a way that complements the mission of the Water Trust. Luckily, the nonprofit found such a willing steward and partner in the Tiefel Family.

The Tiefel Family, long-time residents of Colorado, have a deep-rooted connection to the stateโ€™s natural landscapes and water resources. Known for their unwavering commitment to environmental preservation, the Tiefel Family has dedicated themselves to protecting Coloradoโ€™s vital water ecosystems. With a passion for ensuring that future generations can enjoy the natural beauty of Boulder Creek and its surrounding areas, the Tiefel Family established 37-Mile LLC. Named after the length of protected streamflow from Jasper Lake through the wilderness and down Boulder Canyon, 37-Mile LLC is a testament to its mission of safeguarding the regionโ€™s water resources from development pressures while promoting sustainable agricultural and irrigation practices.

โ€œOur stewardship of Jasper Reservoir aligns with our broader vision of environmental conservation and community enrichment,โ€ said Doug Tiefel of 37-Mile LLC. โ€œThe family is honored to partner with the Colorado Water Trust to ensure that the reservoirโ€™s water continues to benefit the local ecosystems and communities, reinforcing our legacy of environmental responsibility.โ€

Jasper Reservoir/Boulder Creek. Credit: Colorado Water Trust

With the support of the Tiefel Family and 37-Mile LLC, the Colorado Water Trust entered into an arrangement that benefits all involved.  After the Water Trust accepted the reservoir donation, 37-Mile LLC entered into a purchase agreement to acquire the reservoir subject to a public access easement and a set of restrictive covenants that permanently protect public access to the reservoir and ensure that water released from Jasper Lake will continue to provide environmental benefits well into the future. As an additional benefit, once the water has traveled through Boulder Canyon and to the plains, agricultural producers can then use the water downstream.

The Jasper Lake water donation is truly exceptional in its structure and intent. The reservoir is ideally positioned at high elevation with a long carriage distance, benefiting stream flow in a highly visible and environmentally conscious area like Boulder Creek.  The ability for a secondary use downstream for agricultural benefit further enhances its value.  Most environmental water transfers have historically involved direct flow rightsโ€”typically less reliable and subject to seasonal variability.  What makes Jasper Lake unique is that it involves the donation of storage water, which is highly reliable and valuable.  Unlike junior water rights that may or may not be available in a dry year, this donation ensures actual wet water in the stream, when and where it is needed.

Through a uniquely cooperative agreement involving the Water Trust, a generous donor, a family with strong farming and ranching ties to the region, and planning support from the City of Boulder, this donation not only protects two critical componentsโ€”agricultural heritage and instream ecological healthโ€”but also creates a new archetype for interagency collaboration.  The result is a permanent, flexible, and legally sound environmental asset that will benefit both the creek and downstream users in perpetuity.

This project involving Jasper Lake and its water rights represents a new concept in water management, one that the Water Trust hopes to replicate many times in the future. It proves out the potential for the prior appropriation system to rise to meet environmental challenges without the application of an administrative public trust regulatory layer. The biggest challenge is financial. These are market-based transactions and so the Water Trust must either accept donations or be prepared to make competitive offers to be able to acquire permanent public access, remove development potential, and safeguard environmental benefits.

How the Water Trust was Formed; Colorado Water Law 101

Some of the best legal minds in Colorado and the West meticulously brewed the initial notion for a nonprofit trust that would utilize water rights for environmental benefit. The Water Trust was founded in 2001 by water rights scholar David Getches and now-retired water attorneys Michael Browning and David Robbins.  Browning, who was the first chair of the board credits the initial concept being introduced by fellow law colleague Larry McDonnell, who was also on the faculty at the University of Colorado Law School.  With early guidance from David Harrison, the Water Trust has grown from a fledgling nonprofit to a respected water rights innovator, facilitating over sixty transactions that have restored millions of gallons to rivers and streams across Colorado.

The Water Trust emerged from the recognition that the prior appropriation doctrine, often seen as rigid and zero-sum, could be creatively applied to benefit rivers.  The Water Trust set out to proactively secure senior water rights for instream flows in collaboration with the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB), a state agency that holds the exclusive authority to place water to the beneficial use of instream flow in the State of Colorado as a way to preemptively address concerns about the future of the doctrine.  Colorado has been a pure prior appropriation state since even before the 1873 Centennial State ensconced the practice in its constitution. Known as the โ€œColorado Doctrine,โ€ a set of laws that the Territorial legislature passed in the 1860s established that:

  1. The stateโ€™s surface waters and groundwaters constitute a public resource for beneficial use by public agencies, private persons and entities;
  2. A water right is a right to use a portion of the publicโ€™s water supply;
  3. Water rights owners may build facilities on the lands of others to divert, extract, or move water from a stream or aquifer to its place of use;
  4. Water rights owners may use streams and aquifers for the transportation and storage of water.

The Water Trust operates squarely within the strict prior appropriation structure that the Colorado Doctrine established. In some western states, such as California, the public trust doctrine has been recognized to create an affirmative duty of state government to act as legal guardian for natural resource assets, including streams and rivers. Colorado, however, has remained a pure prior appropriation state since the 1800s.

The creation of the CWCB instream flow program in 1973 was an environmental era attempt to address streamflow issues without creating an exception to prior appropriation.  As the federal government legislated into law environmental measures including the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, the State of Colorado ensured that water right administration and the practice of prior appropriation would remain untouched by federal environmental measures. However, the initial CWCB instream flow program was not effective enough in protecting streamflow. At the outset, the CWCBโ€™s instream flow program could only appropriate junior water rights and acquire senior water rights at minimum stream flow rates โ€œnecessary to preserve the environment to a reasonable degree,โ€ which were often insufficient for genuine environmental protection. This shifted in 2002 when the legislature enabled the CWCB to acquire senior water rights and change their use to instream flow in water court, achieving more reliable priorities and stream flow rates โ€œto improve the environment to a reasonable degree.โ€

Still, by the turn of the Century, the CWCB had acquired only a handful of senior water rights for instream flow use, and consequently, not all Coloradans found the state instream flow program to be satisfactory. Citizen-led groups had proposed multiple ballot initiatives, but each had failed to recognize one form or another of public trust in Colorado.  Michael Browning explained that the Water Trustโ€™s formation in 2001 was partly a response to concerns surrounding the public trust doctrine and its potential impact on established water rights in Colorado. The founders of the Water Trust aimed to acquire senior water rights voluntarily and work with the CWCB to convert them to instream flow use, preserving their priority dates. The founders understood that acquiring senior priorities for instream flow water rights was key to both meeting environmental priorities and safeguarding the prior appropriation system in an era where many people value sustainability and recreation equally with consumptive water use.

Key early strategies involved acquiring agricultural water rights and partnering with the CWCB for holding and applying them to instream flow use. Browning described the initial concept of purchasing existing water rights for agriculture and converting them to instream flows.  The founders sought input from environmental and agricultural groups to ensure they wouldnโ€™t be seen as a threat and engaged with the CWCB to navigate the politics of instream flows.  Over time, the Water Trust strategy has expanded to include acquisition of reservoir rights like Jasper Lake and exploring ancillary uses such as downstream agricultural application, with environmental benefits accruing on a stream reach but no instream flow use per se.

It has always been crucial for the Water Trust to be perceived as working within the prior appropriation water rights system and not as a radical group trying to undermine it.  From the outset, the Water Trust has committed to voluntary transactions and working through water courts. The initial board consisted of water engineers and lawyers, with an effort to include representatives from agriculture. Browning noted that there were initial fears from some in the water community, but the boardโ€™s credibility helped alleviate opposition.  Over time, the Water Trust has grown from a small, Denver-based nonprofit to an influential statewide organization, with staff in the Upper Arkansas Basin and southwest Colorado, establishing roots in the communities where it has the greatest impact.

The first Water Trust acquisition of the Moser Water Rights on Boulder Creek near the Blue River was instructive.  A retiring ranching couple wanted to protect their land under conservation easements, but then discovered they could also protect their senior water rights to benefit the environment.  Their senior water rights gained a dual-purpose when the Mosersโ€™ collaborated with the Water Trust:  CWCB-facilitated instream flow for the creek, and downstream augmentation supply for the Colorado River District, stored in Wolford Mountain Reservoir.  The initial funding for the first water right purchase was primarily private, with the water right costing around $15,000. A significant turning point was the involvement of the Walton Family Foundation, which provided substantial grants allowing the Water Trust to grow and hire staff, including Amy Beattie as its first full-time executive director. Linda Bassi, Chief of the Instream Flow program for the CWCB, was also a key supporter, recognizing the opportunity to enhance the seniority of instream flow rights. The Water Trust developed a partnership with the CWCBโ€”the Water Trust would work with water right owners to purchase water rights and develop streamflow restoration projects, and the CWCB would hold and operate the acquired water for instream flows.

Case studies such as the Little Cimarron River transfer further highlight the Water Trustโ€™s innovative model.  In that project, water rights were split to allow both early-season irrigation by the landowner and late-season instream flow use by the CWCB, satisfying both agricultural and environmental needs without the typical winner-takes-all approach.  This was the first โ€œsplit-seasonโ€ use of water for both irrigation and instream flow approved in Colorado water court. Nuanced arrangements like this have allowed the Water Trust to earn the confidence of landowners, water users, and government entities alike.

How the Water Trust has Adapted; Water Law 201

Under the Prior Appropriation Doctrine, water rights are governed by โ€œfirst in time, first in right.โ€ While this doctrine has often been characterized as overly rigid, seasoned attorneysโ€”such as the late Colorado Supreme Court Justice Greg Hobbs and othersโ€”have long shown how water rights can be changed for new uses while maintaining senior priority. As Hobbs is purported to have said, and as board members and staff attorney for the Water Trust have expressed: Weโ€™ve done this forever for our clientsโ€ฆ now letโ€™s do it for our rivers.

Colorado law permits changes of use to be decreed by its water court, provided thereโ€™s no injury to other vested and decreed water rights.  Changing a water right requires limiting the use to historical consumption and diversion patterns in time, place, and amount.  The change process is cumbersome, often requiring tens of thousands of dollars in legal and engineering fees in addition to multiple years to usher a water court application from start to finish.  However, the end result is essential for water users who need a reliable supply, because the seniority, or date of appropriation assigned to a water right originally, is maintained throughout the change of use process.  Historically, an overwhelming proportion of these transfers have involved shifting water from agriculture to municipal or industrial uses.  In recent years, and thanks in part to the fortitude of the Water Trust and the CWCB, instream flow rights transfers have grown to become 1% of water right changes statewide.  While the shift is small, it has transformed rivers like the Little Cimarron and the Alamosa, adding flowing water back into riverbeds that were once unseasonably dry.  It signals that environmental uses are not second-class claims but essential components of modern water management.

The Jasper Lake donation exemplifies this principle.  The donor, instead of selling the valuable storage water on an open market, permanently gifted it for environmental useโ€”a use now recognized and legally protected under Colorado law.  And it was not only the generous donor who has supported their local stream systemโ€”37-Mile LLC as the buyer agreed to a set of strict covenants, essentially stripping the Jasper Lake water right of its development potential. This donation operates within the same legal framework as the early consumptive use transfers, including the Moser and Little Cimarron water rights, proving that environmental values can thrive without rewriting the rulebook.

Borrowing from Land Conservation Practices to Save Rivers

The water from Jasper Lake is not just turned loose; it is released into Jasper Creek, from which point it flows down 37 miles of Middle Boulder Creek and Boulder Creek before the Tiefel Family diverts it back out of the stream system for irrigation use. Unlike many Water Trust projects, there is no CWCB instream flow use of the water. Instead, the Water Trust ensured that the water would remain in Boulder Creek by choosing to partner with 37-Mile and requiring, as a condition of their partnership and sale, that 37-Mile would agree never to redivert the water until it reaches that 37-mile point, in addition to several other restrictions.

The restrictions that the Water Trust imposed include restrictive covenants and a public access easementโ€”legal constructs adopted from land use law.  Applying these principles, the property and water rights are permanently tied to ecological and public uses, while still respecting historical agricultural use for the Jasper Lake water. This flexibility was a key component that made the donation viable and attractive, and avoiding water court for a change of use enabled the participants to save on costs and time. The protections that the Water Trust tied permanently to Jasper Lake, the parcel of land surrounding it, and the water rights stored in it include the following:

  1. An easement allowing the public to access Jasper Lake and the parcel of land surrounding it. Colorado law limits the liability of landowners who hold title to inholdings on public lands provided there is signage, which was key to the ability of 37-Mile to take on this responsibility;
  2. Jasper Lake water must be stored until at least August 15 of each year, which provides the public with an opportunity to enjoy the beauty of its waters;
  3. The owner of the Jasper Lake water right must take water deliveries beginning on or after August 15 of each year, which ensures that flows in the Boulder Creek drainage are boosted after snowmelt, when fish and the environment need it most;
  4. The owner of Jasper Lake must take steps to avoid abandonment of the water right;
  5. The owner of Jasper Lake must allow Colorado Parks and Wildlife to stock the lake with fish; and
  6. Finally, if the owner of Jasper Court ever goes to water court, they must consult with the CWCB regarding the possible addition of instream flow use to the water right.

The covenant model ensures that the ecological intent of the donation is locked in perpetuity, regardless of future ownership changes.  This legal durability is critical in an age of shifting climate variability and volatile hydrology.  Moreover, the Jasper Lake donation includes an engineering-informed management plan that allows for strategic releases during critical low-flow periods, providing adaptive benefits for aquatic species, riparian vegetation, and downstream users. It is this combination of legal permanence and operational flexibility that makes the model so powerful.

Why Storage Matters: True Volume, True Impact

Storage rights, especially those high in the drainage area like Jasper Lake, offer great flexibility in release and can be timed to supplement flows when needed most. The long carriage distance of Jasperโ€™s releases down Boulder Creek allows for significant stream flow restoration. Storage water can be released during dry seasons when streamflow is lowest, directly improving water quality, mitigating temperature spikes, and sustaining aquatic life. As the old adage goes, โ€œThe solution to pollution is dilution.โ€ More water in the stream doesnโ€™t just benefit fish and bugs; it improves drinking water quality for downstream communities and strengthens overall watershed health.

This is a crucial point: while senior direct flow rights can sometimes provide benefit when left in the stream, they often do so inconsistently.  Stored water, by contrast, provides discretely measurable volumes that can be scheduled and managed.  This transformed the Jasper Lake donation from a gesture to a guaranteed outcome.  Drinking water providers, such as those in the Boulder and Denver metro areas, depend on baseflows to keep treatment costs low.  High-quality source water means fewer chemicals and less energy to meet Safe Drinking Water Act standards.  In this way, streamflow restoration becomes an upstream investment in downstream public health.

Perhaps most importantly, leaving water in the river should be understood not as a passive default, but as an affirmative beneficial use.  Traditionally, beneficial use has been defined through diversionโ€”water being taken out of the river for agriculture, industry, or municipal supply.  But Colorado law now affirms that instream flows can meet the beneficial use standard when they are legally protected and used to preserve the natural environment.  This conceptual shift is profound.  It re-centers the health of the river itself as a priority, recognizing that a flowing stream provides ecological services, supports recreation economies, enhances water quality and sustains life throughout the basin.

Why Permanence Matters: Creative and Collaborative Solutions

What makes the Jasper Lake donation especially promising is its emphasis on collaboration.  Governments, nonprofits, agricultural stakeholders and local communities worked in unison to ensure the projectโ€™s success.  Each party brought their priorities to the tableโ€”agricultural heritage, legal acumen, ecological resilienceโ€”and emerged with a better outcome than any could have achieved alone.

There are few other legal mechanisms in Colorado to protect water for the environment: RISIDS (Recovery Implementation for Endangered Species), Wild & Scenic River designation (with only one such stretch in Colorado), or narrowly focused instream flow rights used by the CWCB.  The Jasper Lake project expands this limited toolbox, showing that partnerships and legal creativity can yield conservation outcomes without requiring federal mandates.

Another instructive comparison is the Water Trustโ€™s work on the Yampa River system, where cooperative agreements among the CWCB, environmental organizations, and agricultural users have led to temporary instream flow leases and beneficial use deliveries to preserve flows during dry years.  These leases, though helpful, are inherently limited by duration and uncertainty.  That uncertainty is, at least to some extent, mitigated by the existence of the Yampa River Fund, an endowed and locally-managed fund that pays for water leasing and sponsors other work to improve the Yampa River and its tributaries.  Jasper Lake moves even beyond that, embedding conservation in perpetuity.

A Model for the West

Twenty-nine states operate under some form of the prior appropriation doctrine.  The Jasper Lake donation stands as a model that others can emulate.  Michael Browning said he still sees great opportunities for similar initiatives in other western states, especially those in the Colorado River Basin, emphasizing the role of nonprofits in adapting the water rights system to recognize environmental and recreational values.  By demonstrating that private rights can be permanently converted to public goodsโ€”without litigation, without legislative overhaul, and without harming other usersโ€”this project charts a replicable path forward.

While unique in the seven states of the Colorado River Basin, the Water Trust is not alone. The Oregon Water Trust, founded in 1994, and the Washington Water Trust, founded in 1998, are similar organizations.  There is an Arizona Water Trust that primarily focuses on land donations that may include water rights.  Montana, New Mexico, and Utah have all explored instream flow programs, but few have integrated storage donations.  In the Upper Snake Basin of Idaho, a pilot effort to lease stored water for environmental flows is promising, but still temporary.  Jasper Lake shows that permanent storage donations are possible, legal, and immensely beneficial. Especially in the seven basin states, the Colorado Water Trust serves as a useful model and tool for others to replicate.

Lessons Learned

Perhaps the most profound lesson from Jasper Lake is the value of permanence. One-time leases and short-term mitigation projects are common, but they do not provide the stability or reliability that rivers need.  Permanency ensures predictability.  It signals to ecosystems and economies alike that someone is planning for the long term.

Moreover, the donation sets a precedent that stored water can and should be used for instream benefitโ€”and that such uses are not just legally viable but deeply beneficial to the broader hydrological system.  As we consider future projects, the importance of true volume, collaborative administration, and permanence cannot be overstated.

Another key takeaway is the importance of patience.  Water transactions require timeโ€”not just to navigate the legal and engineering hurdles, but to build the trust among stakeholders that makes such projects durable.  Funders, partners, and policymakers must embrace this long view.  Water transactions require the same patience and investment mindset we bring to ski areas, resorts, transportation, reservoirs or other large infrastructure projects.  But the payoffโ€”cleaner rivers, healthier ecosystems, and stronger communitiesโ€”is well worth it.

Gratitude and Foresight

As Michael Browning said, โ€œProgress is possible with goodwill and a shared need.โ€  The Jasper Lake donation is more than a gift.  It is a template, a catalyst, and a moral benchmark.  It shows that with legal creativity, trust among partners, and courageous donors, we can build a more resilient and ecologically rich future.

As the West grapples with aridification and changing demands, projects like Jasper Lake shine like beacons.  They show us what is possible when we work together and think beyond ourselves.  None of this would be possible without the extraordinary foresight and generosity of the donor.  In a market where water rights fetch increasingly high prices, the choice to donateโ€”permanently, and without reservationโ€”is not only rare but deeply courageous.  It reflects an ethic of care that transcends personal gain and speaks to a commitment of legacy, community, and the natural world.

The success of the Colorado Water Trust also reflects gratitude for the legislative frameworks that made it possible.  Coloradoโ€™s instream flow program, the CWCBโ€™s administrative role, and the legal structure built into prior appropriation water law all played essential roles. The Jasper Lake project didnโ€™t require new laws; it simply needed the right vision and the will to collaborate. All it required was to Just Add Water. 

Jasper Lake is truly a remarkable and historic gift.

The Water Report
Written by: Kate Ryan & Matt Moseley 
Read the original article here.

Author Bios: 

Kate Ryan is a water lawyer who joined Colorado Water Trust in 2018 and was appointed as Executive Director in 2023. Her past clients included farmers, ranchers, municipalities, landowners, and the CWCB. Before going to Berkeley Law she obtained a masterโ€™s degree in geography at the University of Colorado. Kate does her work at the Colorado Water Trust in order to support that which she holds most dearโ€“our incredible state and the people within, the beautiful rivers and mountains we explore, and a future for her kids where they can experience a continuation of it all.

Matt Moseley is a communication strategist, author, speaker and world-record adventure swimmer. He is the principal and CEO of the Ignition Strategy Group, which specializes in high-stakes communications and issue management. As the author of three books and is the subject of two documentaries, he uses his swimming around the world to bring raise awareness about water issues. He is the co-chair of the Southwest River Council for American Rivers and is a member of the Advisory Board for the Center for Leadership at the University of Colorado at Boulder. He lives in Boulder with his wife Kristin, a water rights attorney and their two children.

Colorado Rivers. Credit: Geology.com

#Renewable Energy and Weather — Peter Goble (#Colorado Climate Center)

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Climate Center website (Peter Goble):

October 8, 2025

A recent email query about renewable power got me thinking about where we produce renewable power and why. The reasons are complicated. However, the weather is critical in determining where we generate renewable energy such as solar and wind power. Iโ€™ll be candid enough to say that I like renewable power, but my goal for this blogpost is not to comment on the merits of generating electricity one way or another. My goal is simply to share a couple maps from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and discuss why we see the patterns we do. 

Solar Power: Solar power production potential is determined by geographic factors such as latitude altitude, and weather. Figure 1 below, from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory shows โ€œGlobal Horizontal Solar Irradianceโ€ across the Contiguous United States. For practical purposes, we can think of this as โ€œsolar power production potential,โ€ or even more simply โ€œhow much sunlight do you get?โ€

Figure 1: Global Horizontal Irradiance across the Contiguous United States. Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

Perhaps the most obvious pattern in Figure 1 is the difference between the northern and southern United States. The โ€œSun Beltโ€ is aptly named. The southern United States receives more direct sunlight than the northern United States because it is closer to the equator. Northern states are blessed with nice, long summer days with plenty of sunshine hours, but sunlight pierces the atmosphere at a more direct angle at lower latitudes. Even within Colorado, we can see a difference in solar power potential from south-to-north. Areas like the Four Corners, San Luis Valley, and Comanche Grasslands (all in southern Colorado listed west-to-east respectively) stand out as sunny areas.

Altitude is an important factor as well. Even under clear skies, not all sunlight that passes through the top of earthโ€™s atmosphere makes it to the surface. Some is scattered by particulates and some is absorbed by water vapor, dust, or ozone. Sunlight is thus less intense at lower elevations. Therefore, all else being equal, high elevation areas will have more solar power production potential than low elevation areas. You have probably felt this either hiking in our Colorado mountains or traveling down to sea level. The sun feels more intense on the skin, and it is easier to burn at higher altitudes.

Why is it that Coloradoโ€™s highest elevations do not show as high of solar production potential as the valleys? Weather. Our mountains are more likely to be shrouded by clouds due to orographic lift: As air is forced over our mountain ranges it must rise. As air rises it cools. As air cools, the water vapor in the air condenses, forming clouds, and oftentimes, rain or snow. One obvious example of the role of weather in solar power generation potential can be seen looking at Oregon. Western Oregon has a wealth of onshore airflow from the Pacific Ocean, bringing thick, low clouds and drizzle, which block sunlight. Eastern Oregon is high desert. The Cascade Mountain Range blocks clouds and moisture from moving inland. As a result, solar power production potential is much higher in eastern Oregon than western Oregon. While it is less obvious in Colorado than Oregon, some of our driest and least cloudy locations stand out. For instance, the San Luis Valley (south-central Colorado) is known as โ€œThe Land of the Cold Sunshine.โ€ This area receives less than 10โ€ณ of precipitation annually, and has some of our highest solar power production potential in the state.

Wind Power: We can also take a look at wind power production potential across the United States, and dissect some of the drivers behind it. Figure 2 shows annual average wind speeds at 10 meters (~33ft) above ground level across the contiguous United States. A few patterns jump out here: 1. If we look at the western United States (including Colorado), higher elevation terrain does have higher average wind speeds. 2. The middle of the country is windy. 3. The east side of the Rocky Mountains is windy, including in Colorado. 4. Oh boy, our poor neighbors to the north (sorry, Wyoming)! 

Figure 2: Average wind speeds at 10 meters above ground level. Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory For what itโ€™s worth, most wind turbines are much taller than 10 meters, thus a better reference height would be more appropriate for looking at wind power. NREL does produce maps at higher reference heights. I chose a low reference height because it is closer to the weather as we feel it.

Winds with height: On average, we do see wind speeds increase with height. This is due to increased pressure gradients, decreased friction, and reduced air density. However, Figure 2, which shows average windspeeds, does not tell the whole story. Our mountain air is only ~70-80% as dense as sea level air, so it takes stronger gusts to produce the same amount of force. Turbines at higher elevations will not generate as much power for a given windspeed as turbines at lower elevations.

The middle of the country: Figure 2 also clearly shows the โ€œwind beltโ€ is the high plains and southern plains around 100 degrees longitude (North Dakota down to west Texas). This area is frequently subject to sharp boundaries between air masses, or fronts. As a result, it is often windy. The terrain roughness is also an important factor. It is easier to get frequent high winds over open grasslands than forests. Eastern Colorado can be thought of as part of this wind belt, and has a relatively smooth, grassy surface with few obstacles.

East side of the Rockies: If we look at Colorado in Figure 2 we see that higher elevations are winder, but we can also see that there is an increase in winds east of the Continental Divide. There is both a sharp increase in wind speeds at high elevations immediately east of the Divide, and higher average wind speeds more generally across the eastern Colorado Plains. Our prevailing wind direction in Colorado is most commonly west-to-east, especially from October through April. Thanks to our old friend gravity, air traveling uphill slows down, and air traveling downhill speeds up. We call the days when air races down the eastern side of the Rocky Mountains downslope wind days. These blustery days are usually unseasonably warm, but can be cold if the air is coming from the north or northwest. Cross-mountain airflow does not automatically create downslope winds. Sometimes air in the valleys is too cold and dense to be forced out of the way by air moving over the Rockies. On these days we more commonly see wavy streaks of clouds instead of strong surface winds. In fact, you may also notice in Figure 2 that Denver and surrounding areas are somewhat protected, sitting in the Platte River Valley. Denver has plenty of windy days, but sometimes the strong winds pass overhead without completely mixing down to the surface.

Windy Wyoming: I love the way southern Wyoming from Cheyenne to Casper stands out in Figure 2. Southern Wyoming is the closest thing to a gap in the Rocky Mountains, so when changing weather crosses the Rockies, air gets forced through southern Wyoming like a wind tunnel. The impacts of these gap winds bleed into Colorado. For instance, Wellington is windier than Fort Collins or Denver on average. Gap winds, combined with downslope winds, also are a factor in southeastern Colorado. There are high wind warning signs on I-25 south of Pueblo as winds race down the leeward side of the Sangre de Cristos, and shoot through the gap between the Sangre de Cristos and Wet Mountains. You will see many wind turbines in this area too.

Nature sets the initial conditions for where solar and wind power can be most readily generated. Overall, Colorado experiences both plenty of sunshine and plenty of wind. Some parts of our state are especially well positioned for one or the other. Our southern valleys have strong solar production potential due to a combination of relatively low latitude, high altitude, and clear skies. Our eastern plains have strong wind production potential due to frequent exposure to strong weather fronts, relatively smooth, grassy terrain, and being downwind of the Rocky Mountains.

The September 2025 briefing is hot off the presses from Western Water Assessment Intermountain West Dashboard

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

October 8, 2025 – CO, UT, WY

September precipitation was mixed across the region, with below normal conditions in Utah and northeastern Wyoming, and above normal conditions in eastern Colorado and southeastern Wyoming. Temperatures were near to above normal for the majority of the region, with a large pocket of record-warm temperatures in southwestern Wyoming. The first snowfall of the season was observed on September 22 in Utah and September 23 in Colorado. Drought conditions remained the same in Utah and improved in Colorado and Wyoming, with regional drought coverage at 61% as of September 30. Monthly streamflow conditions were near to below normal across much of the region. The probability of La Niรฑa conditions developing is 60% by mid to late fall. NOAA seasonal forecasts for October-December suggest an increased probability of below average precipitation and above average temperatures for the region.

The region experienced a mix of moisture conditions in September, with very dry conditions in western and northern Utah, and wet conditions in northeastern Colorado and southeastern Wyoming. Below normal precipitation occurred throughout most of Utah and northeastern Wyoming, while above normal precipitation occurred throughout most of eastern Colorado and southeastern Wyoming. A large pocket of record-wet conditions occurred in northeastern Colorado, and a pocket of record-dry conditions occurred in Johnson County, Wyoming.

September temperatures were near to above average throughout most of the region, except for pockets of 0 to 2ยฐF below normal temperatures in southern Colorado and southern Utah. The majority of Wyoming and northern Utah experienced 2 to 4ยฐF above average temperatures, with pockets of 4 to 6ยฐF above  average temperatures in northern and western Utah, and northern and western Wyoming. One small pocket of 6 to 8ยฐF above normal temperatures occurred in Park County, Wyoming and an area of 2 to 4ยฐF below normal conditions occurred in Las Animas County, Colorado. A large pocket of record-warm temperatures occurred in southwestern Wyoming.

The first snowfall of this snow season was observed on September 22 at 10,715 feet in Bald Mountain Pass on Mirror Lake Highway in Utahโ€™s Uinta Mountains. On September 23, Colorado received up to 8.8 inches of snowfall, particularly east of the Continental Divide above 10,500 feet, with the most falling in Glendevey. As of October 1, all SNOTEL sites are reporting no accumulated snow. Here are the top five snowfall totals in Colorado from September 23:

  1. Glendevey, Colorado – 8.8 inches
  2. Arapahoe Peak, Colorado – 8 inches
  3. Cameron Pass, Colorado – 7.2 inches
  4. Berthoud Pass, Colorado – 7.2 inches
  5. Winter Park, Colorado – 7 inches

Drought conditions improved during September in Colorado and Wyoming, while all of Utah continues to remain in at least moderate (D1) drought. By September 30, regional drought coverage was 61%, a 6% improvement since the end of August. Colorado saw the removal of exceptional (D4) drought conditions on the West Slope and a 14% reduction in extreme (D3) drought. Wyoming also saw a 6% decrease in D3 drought conditions near Yellowstone region and in the south-central portion of the state. Coverage of extreme drought conditions in Utah decreased by 4% and severe (D2) drought declined by 4%.

Monthly streamflow conditions were near to below normal across large parts of the region, with much below normal conditions in northwestern Wyoming and western Utah during September. Several USGS stream gages reported September streamflow conditions in the lowest 3% of all historical observations, including seven in Wyoming, six in Utah, and one in Colorado. While the majority of streamflow gages in the region reported near to below normal conditions in September, several gages reported above to much above normal conditions, particularly along the Front Range in Colorado. Additionally, a few USGS stream gages reported September streamflow conditions in the highest 96% of all historical observations, including two in Utah and one in Wyoming.

There is a 60% chance of La Niรฑa conditions developing by November. By January, there is an equal probability of La Niรฑa or neutral ENSO conditions and the probability for La Niรฑa decreases throughout the remainder of winter 2026. The NOAA Monthly Precipitation Outlook suggests an increased probability of above average precipitation for northern Wyoming and below average precipitation for southeastern Colorado in October. The NOAA Monthly Temperature Outlook suggests an increased probability of above average temperatures for all of Colorado, eastern and central Wyoming, and southern Utah in October. The NOAA Seasonal Outlooks for October-December suggest an increased probability of below average precipitation in all of Colorado, southern and eastern Utah, and southeastern Wyoming, and an increased probability of above average temperatures throughout the region.

The Colorado River is in a water crisis as consumption continues to outweigh the natural supply each year. To stabilize the system, Colorado River Basin that water use must be balanced with natural river flows. According to the recent report, โ€œAnalysis of Colorado River Basin Storage Suggests Need For Immediate Actionโ€ (Schmidt et al. 2025) the basin currently has 6.3 million acre-feet of accessible water storage in Lakes Powell and Mead. If next year is a repeat of this yearโ€™s unforgiving hydrology and water use remains the same in the basin, Schmidt et al. estimate that consumptive use will exceed the natural flow in the river basin by at least 3.6 million acre-feet, leaving only 3.6-3.7 million acre-feet left in storage above critical elevations in Lakes Powell and Mead by late summer 2026. According to the report, depleting half of the basin’s storage by the end of water year 2026 will leave water managers with limited flexibility when the new post-2026 operating regime comes into effect. To avoid this outcome, the basin requires immediate and substantial reductions in consumptive use.

Learn more: https://www.colorado.edu/center/gwc/media/670 

Significant weather event: On September 23, Denver set a daily rainfall record of 1.28โ€ of precipitation at Denver International Airport, making it the wettest September 23 since records began in 1872. Denverโ€™s Central Park weather station recorded 1.33โ€ of rain, making September 23 the wettest day since June 22, 2023 for Denver. This same storm brought heavy, wet snow to the high country, with the most snow reported at the Glendevey weather station in Larimer County at a total of 8.8โ€ of snow (see above for the top five snowfall totals from September 23). Here are the top five rainfall totals from September 23 in Colorado: 

  1. Central Park in Denver – 1.33 inches
  2. Denver International Airport – 1.28 inches
  3. Broomfield – 1.22 inches
  4. Fort Collins – 1.13 inches
  5. 9NEWS in Denver – 1.05 inches

Sources:

https://https://snowbrains.com/utah-mountains-receive-first-snow-of-winter-2025-26/

www.9news.com/article/weather/weather-impact/snow-rain-totals-wettest-day-forecast/73-8232e7e0-2bb7-4378-936b-3cd3f4980d09

https://weather.com/news/news/2025-09-24-colorado-first-noticeable-snowfall-of-the-season