#Drought news April 2, 2026: Out West, widespread degradations were centered across the Intermountain West, including #Colorado, #Utah, and #Wyoming, and to a lesser extent across portions of #Arizona, #NewMexico, and #Nevada

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

This U.S. Drought Monitor (USDM) week saw extensive degradations across areas of the West, Plains, South, and Southeast. Out West, widespread degradations were centered across the Intermountain West, including Colorado, Utah, Idaho, and Wyoming, and to a lesser extent across portions of Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, and Montana. Continued degradations are expected in the coming weeks and months due to anomalous heat and record-low snowpack levels. In the Plains, drought expanded and intensified from Oklahoma to South Dakota. In the South and Southeast, dry conditions persisted this week, adding to significant longer-term (9- to 12+ month) precipitation deficits (ranging from 8 to 20+ inches), with the most severe drought conditions centered over portions of Texas, Arkansas, Georgia, and Florida. In the Northeast and Midwest, light-to-moderate rainfall (1 to 3 inches) during the past week led to targeted improvements in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York.

At the end of March, mountain snowpack conditions remain well below normal for the time of year, with record to near-record low levels observed across all western states. Additionally, many Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) SNOw TELemetry (SNOTEL) network monitoring stations are reporting very shallow snow depths or no snow on the ground. Region-level (2-digit HUC) snow water equivalent (SWE) values (percent of median) are as follows: Pacific Northwest 55%, Missouri 56%, Upper Colorado 24%, Great Basin 18%, Lower Colorado 14%, Rio Grande 8%, and Arkansas-White-Red 8%. In California, statewide snowpack is 18% of normal (April 1), with the Southern Sierra at 32%, Central Sierra at 21%, and Northern Sierra at 6%. Despite poor snowpack conditions, California’s reservoirs remain at or above historical averages for the date (March 31), with Lake Shasta and Lake Oroville at 113% and 123% of average, respectively. In the Southwest, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (March 29) reports critically low levels at Lake Powell (24% full; 41% of average for the date) and Lake Mead (33% full; 52% of average for the date), with the total Colorado River system at 36% of capacity (compared to 41% at the same time last year)…

High Plains

On this week’s map, widespread changes were made across the region in response to below-normal precipitation (time scales from 1 to 6 months), declining soil moisture, scattered low streamflows, elevated evapotranspiration rates, and associated anomalously warm temperatures—not only in recent weeks, but moving through the entire cool season. In South Dakota, record to near-record low streamflows have been observed during the last 120-day period as well as below-normal soil moisture levels observed at the South Dakota Mesonet monitoring stations. Additionally, the NDMC’s CMOR map shows numerous ag-related impact reports from the Black Hills region in southwestern South Dakota. For the week, the region was very dry with warmer-than-normal temperatures (3 to 15+ °F above normal) observed across much of the region, with the greatest anomalies observed in Nebraska and Kansas. Looking at climatological rankings for the past 90-day period (January 1 to April 1), several locations ranked among their warmest on record, including Grand Island, NE (warmest on record; +9 °F departure from normal); North Platte, NE (warmest on record; +10 °F); Rapid City, SD (warmest on record; +9 °F departure from normal); Goodland, KS (warmest on record; +11 °F departure from normal); and Dodge City, KS (warmest on record; +8 °F departure from normal)…

Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending March 31, 2026.

West

Conditions deteriorated significantly on the map this week in response to the combination of record to near-record heat and very poor snowpack conditions. The recent heat wave accelerated snowmelt across the region over the past few weeks, with many NRCS SNOTEL stations reporting little to no snow on the ground or unseasonably low levels. Peak runoff is occurring earlier than normal—or has already passed in some locations—raising concerns about reduced inflows into reservoirs moving through spring and into the summer months. In the Upper Colorado River Basin, Lake Powell is 25% full, while upstream reservoirs show mixed conditions, including Flaming Gorge (82% full), Blue Mesa (50%), and Navajo Lake (62%). In Rio Grande Basin in New Mexico, Elephant Butte is 12% full and Caballo Reservoir is 7% full. In Arizona, the Salt River Project reports the Salt River system at 56% full, the Verde system at 63%, and the combined system at 63% (compared to 70% last year)…

South

On this week’s map, widespread degradations were made in drought-affected areas of Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Arkansas, while isolated areas of Mississippi and Tennessee saw degradations. During the past 30-day period, the National Drought Mitigation Center’s Conditions Monitoring Observer Reports (CMOR) tool showed numerous impact reports across the region. For the week, dry conditions prevailed across the region. Looking at climatological rankings for the past 90-day period (December 31 to March 31), several locations ranked among their driest on record, including Austin, TX (4th driest; -5.53 inches), Brownsville, TX (driest on record; -3.38 inches), Oklahoma City, OK (driest on record; -3.61 inches), Monticello, AR (driest on record; -8.95 inches), and Jackson, MS (driest on record; -7.4 inches). In Texas, Water for Texas (April 1) reports statewide reservoirs at 73.5% full, with eastern reservoirs in good condition while many western and southern reservoirs remain below normal, including Falcon Reservoir (19% full). Average temperatures for the week were above normal across the region (3 to 15+ °F) with dry conditions prevailing…

Looking Ahead

The NWS Weather Prediction Center 7-Day Quantitative Precipitation Forecast (QPF, liquid equivalent) calls for precipitation accumulations generally ranging from 2 to 4 inches across eastern portions of the Southern Plains, Midwest, and Northeast, with the heaviest totals along a corridor from eastern Texas through the Lower Mississippi Valley into portions of the Upper Mississippi Valley. In the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic, light-to-moderate liquid precipitation accumulations ranging from 0.5 to 2 inches are expected. Across the High Plains, light-to-moderate liquid precipitation accumulations ranging from 0.5 to 2 inches are expected, with the greatest totals across portions of the Dakotas. In the West, light-to-moderate liquid precipitation accumulations are expected across areas of the region, with the highest totals across portions of the Pacific Northwest, northern California, and southern Oregon. In the higher elevations, snow is expected across the Sierra Nevada, southern Cascades, northern Great Basin, and portions of the central and northern Rockies. Dry conditions are expected to prevail across much of the Southwest, including areas of southern California, southern Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico.

The 6–10-day temperature outlook (valid April 7–11, 2026) calls for above-normal temperatures across much of the western U.S., Southern Plains, and areas of the South, with the highest probabilities centered over the California, Nevada, Utah, and Arizona. Below-normal temperatures are favored across the Northern Plains as well as the New England. Near-normal temperatures are expected across much of the eastern U.S., including the Mid-Atlantic and Southeast, as well as portions of Texas. In terms of precipitation, the 6–10-day outlook calls for above-normal precipitation across areas of the eastern half of the western U.S., Plains states, South, much of the Midwest, and Florida. Below-normal precipitation is favored across portions of the Mid-Atlantic and southern extent of New England. Near-normal precipitation is expected across areas outside of these regions, including portions of the western U.S. and Southeast.

US Drought Monitor one week change map ending March 31, 2026.

200- to-1,000-year Snow Anomaly Observed in #Colorado Mountains: New analysis by the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory reveals that the 2026 snow #drought is unprecedented in the recent historical record #snowpack #runoff #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Graph created by RMBL Principal Research Scientist Ian Breckheimer, PhD, on March 23, 2026, courtesy of Ian Breckheimer

Click the link to read the article on the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory website:

GOTHIC, Colorado, April 1, 2026 — The Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL) reports that, as of late March, spring 2026 snowpack surrounding its Gothic, Colorado, campus was at its lowest level recorded in more than 50 years of observations. In the absence of recent climate change, these conditions likely would occur only once every 200 to 1,000 years.

This new analysis by RMBL Principal Research Scientist Ian Breckheimer, PhD, draws on long-term field datasets and 40 years of satellite imagery that track the seasonal disappearance of mountain snowpack — a vital water resource for the ecosystem and the primary source of water in the drought-stricken Colorado River.

According to Breckheimer’s findings, at most sites in the Gunnison Basin, the 2026 snowpack levels and timing of snowmelt are far outside the historic range of variability:

Gunnison Valley slopes and lower elevations: a 1-in-60- to 300-year event

Crested Butte valley bottoms: a 1-in-300- to 400-year event

Mid-slopes of Flat Top Mountain and surrounding areas: a 1-in-500- to 1,000-year event

When accounting for recent climate change, which has caused snowpack to melt 3 to 5 days earlier each decade since 1993 at many sites, the likelihood of this year’s low snowpack level increases. However, it is still rare, with an estimated chance of occurring just once in 25 to 50 years. Moreover, at mid-elevations (between 8,000 and 9,000 feet), low snowfall and warm temperatures have combined to completely melt the current year’s snowpack 35 to 50 days earlier than the historical average. Although storms this week are bringing significant new snow to the higher peaks in the Gunnison Basin, sites where snowpack has already disappeared (most sites below 9,000 feet elevation) will receive mostly rain from this event.

“This is not the new normal,” says Breckheimer, “but it is exactly the kind of extreme event that will test how prepared our ecosystems and communities are for increasing variability.”

The research underscores the importance of long-term ecological observation. RMBL, which sits at an elevation of nearly 10,000 feet in Gothic, Colorado, hosts one of the most well-studied mountain ecosystems in the world, with decades of continuous data on snowpack, hydrology, and ecological response. These datasets make it possible to place current conditions into historical context and estimate how common they might be with and without recent observed climate change.

The implications extend beyond the Gunnison Valley. Snowpack dynamics directly influence water availability, wildfire risk, ecosystem health, and agricultural systems across the western United States. Understanding when and how these extremes occur is critical for forecasting and planning.

“This kind of insight is only possible because of long-term, place-based science,” says RMBL Executive Director Jeni Blacklock. “What we are seeing this year highlights both the value of these datasets and the urgency of continuing to invest in them.”

The findings were first presented during RMBL’s public Après Science talk series, which connects scientists and the public around emerging research in mountain ecosystems. A video of the talk, held on March 25, as well as supporting materials, will be released in the coming weeks. Sign up at rmbl.org/newsletter-sign-up to receive updates delivered via RMBL’s monthly e-newsletter.

Still image of the upper East River Valley from billy barr’s webcam, taken March 30, 2026, courtesy of Ian Breckheimer

About the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory
Founded in 1928, RMBL is among the oldest and most respected field stations in the United States. Located in Gothic, Colorado, RMBL supports more than 200 scientists and students each summer and hosts one of the most extensive collections of long-term ecological data in the world.

Media notes:

Media contact: Suzanne Ennis, RMBL communications manager. Email: suzanne@rmbl.org

Additional slides and data visuals available upon request

Video of presentation available soon

Interviews available with Ian Breckheimer and RMBL leadership

L to R: Jennifer Rudgers, Stephanie Kivlin, Aimée Classen, and Lara Souza at the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory site in Colorado. Photo provided

Uranium mining in the Chama Valley? Also: Public lands for affordable housing in Las Vegas; Images of the Big Fat Melt Off — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org)

Storefront, Tierra Amarilla, New Mexico, with slogans remembering the 1967 Tierra Amarilla Courthouse Raid by Reies Lopez Tijerina to protest the federal governments theft of Mexican land grants. Now a Canadian company is proposing to explore for uranium near Canjilon. Ian M. Thompson photo.

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

March 31, 2026

The so-called uranium mining renaissance mostly remains in the hype phase. There’s plenty of talk of acquisitions and exploratory drilling and purportedly spectacular finds, but — with a few exceptions — there’s very little action. Even existing mines that have been in “standby” mode for years, supposedly just waiting for market conditions to improve, still aren’t shipping any ore to the mill.

But that doesn’t dim the buzz any. Not only is it intensifying, but it’s spreading out geographically. Most of the drilling and speculative claim-staking is happening in the Lisbon Valley in southeastern Utah and surrounding areas, along with a handful of mining proposals in the Grants uranium belt in New Mexico. Now Gamma Resources is going a little further afield by collecting claims on U.S. Forest Service land in the Chama River watershed in northern New Mexico.

The Canadian firm’s 4,520-acre Mesa Arc Project lies about five miles south of the village of Canjilon. While this was never a uranium mining hot spot, the USGS mineral data system does include a uranium prospect here by the name of Horney Toad or Lucky Dog, though it doesn’t appear to have been a producer.

So far, the company has filed a notice of intent with the Carson National Forest proposing to drill 10 to 12 exploratory holes and construct drill pads and about 800 feet of new access road. But the forest has yet to formally launch the review process. Gamma also says it has hired SWCA Environmental Consultants to conduct an archaeological and cultural resources survey of the area.

Locals aren’t all that excited about the prospect of a uranium mine in their backyard. Source NM’s Patrick Lohmann reports that Moises Morales, a Rio Arriba County commissioner, Canjilon resident, and long-time land grant activist, is mobilizing opposition to the project.

It would behoove Gamma Resources to look into the history of the area to see what a formidable force they are up against. The Chama Valley is famous for its fierce resistance to outsiders trying to usurp their land — be it real estate developers, the federal government, or, I suppose, a mining company.

***

One company, Disa, is looking to produce uranium not by digging up ore, but by using something called high-pressure slurry ablation (HPSA) to extract the mineral from historic mine waste rock piles. Only it appears their attempts to get the novel technology off the ground is facing some hurdles.

In March, Aura Grit LLC filed an application with the BLM to use Disa’s HPSA process on the October pile, an abandoned mine located south of Gateway, Colorado, on a mesa above John Brown Canyon. But shortly after the agency began reviewing the proposal, Disa backed out, at least temporarily, and decided to make the technology’s debut at the smaller Mary Ann uranium mine waste pile in Montrose County. The plan of operations is not yet available.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s environmental review of the Disa’s proposal to remediate abandoned mine dumps with HPSA describes the technology as involving …“… mobile units that use high-pressure water streams to remove source material from the mine waste, resulting in coarse material and fines concentrates. Disa expects that the coarse material would meet NRC requirements for release and would be reintegrated into the mine site soils. The fines concentrates would be transported to licensed low-level radioactive waste or uranium recovery facilities for disposal or recycling.”

Because the process is separating uranium and thorium fines from ore, it is considered a form of milling, not mining. And that’s an important distinction, because when you mill uranium ore, you leave behind mill tailings, which must be disposed of according to NRC and Environmental Protection Agency standards. Instead, the “coarse material,” as the waste is described, would be reintegrated into the mine site — even though it may contain radioactive and other harmful materials.

In its plan of operations for the October pile, Aura Grit said the process would require trucking in about 5,000 gallons of water per day (or 108,000 gallons per month) from a commercial well near Gateway.

If you’re looking to find these locations on a map, check out the Land Desk’s Mining Monitor Map, which is updated frequently.

Also, for an interactive map of all kinds of uranium prospects, mines, and mills,there’s Land Desk’s Uranium Mining in the Four Corners Country map derived from USGS data.

The BLM is looking to sell a 19 acre parcel on Las Vegas’s southern fringe to the city of Henderson for affordable housing.

🌵 Public Lands 🌲

Over the last year or so, there have been some bad faith attempts — most orchestrated by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah — to take public lands out of the public hands and turn them over to developers. Amid all of the brouhaha over that, it can be easy to forget that a mechanism already exists for this sort of transfer, and it’s not always a terrible thing.

The Bureau of Land Management, for example, is looking to sell about 19 acres of land on the southern fringe of the Las Vegas metro area to the city of Henderson for affordable housing. The sale would occur under the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act, which Congress passed in 1998 to allow the feds to dispose of isolated, hard-to-manage tracts within the urban area, and to acquire private inholdings. The idea was to give Las Vegas more room to grow, while also protecting more remote, environmentally sensitive lands by transferring them into the public’s hands.

The process makes a lot of sense in southern Nevada, generally speaking, because there are so many disparate chunks of BLM land scattered throughout the city’s streetscape. While they do provide a sort of open space, they also can exacerbate “leapfrog” sprawl and essentially end up being vast vacant lots sandwiched between housing developments. And every city, including greater Las Vegas, is gripped by an affordable housing shortage.

That said, I’m curious about the choice of this particular parcel, more from an urban planning perspective than a public-land-transfer one. This is not one of those tracts surrounded by suburbia, but lies on the suburban fringe. It’s not in an existing neighborhood or even all that close to one and is beyond the reach of the bus line. It’s across the street from Combat Zone Paintball and a huge RV sales center and just up the road from Dig This Vegas, a “heavy equipment playground.”

It seems like it will not only encourage more physical sprawl, but will also amplify the disconnection and lack of community that sprawl fosters. Kids would have to walk at least two miles, across a pedestrian-unfriendly landscape, to get to the nearest school. Workers will have a long walk to the bus, or traffic-heavy driving commutes. And the only local neighborhood will be the housing complex, itself.

My take is that this sale should go forward and Henderson should build a multi-family, affordable complex here. But in the future I would hope that they’d focus on parcels that are actually within the city’s existing footprint. Because the last thing southern Nevada needs is more sprawl.

For more information and directions for commenting go here.

🗺️ Messing with Maps 🧭

Last week I did the NASA Worldview satellite snowpack comparison, this time it’s Copernicus. The big difference is that you can zoom out more with Worldview, and zoom in for higher resolution looks with Copernicus. So here I went and found imagery from the San Juan Mountains in late February of this year, which is when snowpack levels peaked in the Animas River watershed, and another one from late March, following the big fat melt out.

Ice Lake Basin (just below center) and the South Mineral Creek drainage west of Silverton (which is just off the right side of the image) on Feb. 27, 2026. This was the peak of this winter’s snowpack in the Animas River watershed, about five weeks ahead of — and less than 50% of — the normal peak.

In this view, from March 29, 2026, south facing slopes are nearly completely melted out, and even Ice Lake Basin has lost most of its snow.

📸 Parting Shot 🎞️

And for another mind-blowing look at just how little snow there is, Land Desk reader and snow-guy Andy Gleason sent in some shots from Animas Forks, at 11,185 feet in elevation. That is some thin snow for late March. Heck, it’s thin snow for late May.

There is a little bit of good news, though. First off, take a close look at the satellite images above and the photos below. Notice that the snow is pretty white, and there’s not much visible dust. Usually the spring melt reveals layer after layer of dust on the snow’s surface, that then decreases the albedo — or reflectivity — and hastens the snow melt. There appears to be less dust this year, so far, meaning maybe what’s left of the snow won’t melt quite as fast.

Oh, and also: Even though the snowpack is ultra-thin, at least it’s not gone at these high altitudes, providing a base for the snow that this week’s forecasted storm should bring. There may still be some powder skiing to be had this season after all! (Scroll down for a weather forecast).

Animas Forks, Colorado, March 30, 2026. Andy Gleason photo.

🚣🏽 Predict the Peak! 🌊

Don’t forget to submit your entry for the Predict the Peak spring runoff streamflow contest! The deadline for prize eligibility is April 3, so hurry up. Also, if you already submitted an entry, but you realized that your prediction might be thrown askew by this week’s snowy forecast? You have until April 3 to resubmit. Just keep in mind that only your most recent entry for each gauge will count.

Tell me about your yukigata and your runoff peak prediction! — Jonathan P. Thompson

As the West’s Scant #Snowpack Melts, Coloradans Brace for a Lean Water Year: Record-high spring temperatures are worrying skiers, ranchers and water managers — Annie MacKeigan (WaterDesk.org) #runoff

In early March 2026, bushes and vegetation stick out from under the snow under a lift at Arapahoe Basin. (Annie MacKeigan/The Water Desk)

Click the link to read the article on The Water Desk website (Annie MacKeigan):

March 24, 2026

Call it the winter that wasn’t.

Throughout Colorado a record-warm and dry winter has come to a close. Attention now pivots to spring and the potential for additional snow to allay increasing drought concerns. Though, there appears to be little relief in sight.

The Denver-metro area went months without measurable snowfall this winter. The city’s daytime temperatures often surpassed 60 degrees. Hikers and trail runners rejoiced over the warm weather while grumbling skiers lamented their underused season passes.

In the state’s Rocky Mountains snow accumulation was sluggish, as warmer than normal temperatures led to midseason snowmelt, and caused more precipitation to fall as rain instead of snow. A persistent mid-March heatwave kicked off rapid snowmelt. Colorado’s snowpack, and in the broader Colorado River basin, set new record lows throughout winter. T-shirt weather wasn’t just confined to lower elevations either. The high country too experienced balmy days and nights.

Spring snowmelt is underway near Red Mountain Pass in Colorado’s San Juan Mountains on March 14, 2026. (Mitch Tobin/The Water Desk)

The mild year has already led to lifestyle changes for Colorado residents, and threatens to do even more. Ski resorts are closing early, ranchers are worrying about the security of their irrigation supplies, and water managers are considering contingency plans if such conditions persist.

This year, powder days that rev the state’s ski economy were replaced with sunshine. Recreation is not the only industry under threat from rising temperatures and low snowpack. The state’s agricultural economy hinges on access to snowmelt.

Marsha and John “Doc” Daughenbaugh call the Rocking C Bar Ranch near Steamboat Springs home. Marsha is a third generation rancher in the area, and the couple have passed the business off to their two children. They still worry that if such dry conditions continue, it would “seriously affect our ability to keep going,” Marsha said.

Marsha and Doc Daughenbaugh of Rocking C Bar Ranch, west of Steamboat Springs, Colo., say dry winters call into question their ranch’s longterm viability. (Annie MacKeigan/The Water Desk)

A well-welcomed snow system worked its way through parts of the state in early March, providing the nearby Steamboat Ski Resort a self-reported 6 inches of new powder. But it quickly melted, and the Daughenbaughs were ankle deep in mud come midday.

Doc has long made a habit of measuring inches of snowpack in the ranch’s meadow each year on March 20, right around the spring equinox. Few of his recordings—which began in 1989—noted no snow.

The most sobering of Doc’s notations is also the most recent. During a visit in early March, the entry read, “all snow gone by Feb. 26.”

The Daughenbaughs have collected snow measurements on their ranch near Steamboat Springs since 1989. (Annie MacKeigan/The Water Desk)

The noticeably scant snow is not the only observation the Daughenbaughs have made this year. Robins, geese and sandhill cranes had already returned to the family’s ranch by early March, not usually due back until the first week of spring.

Marsha, who has lived in Steamboat since 1953, recalled “three-wire winters,” when snow would build up to the third wire on the barbed-wire fences that surrounded their property. “They were really a common thing,” she said.

Their main concern is that any snowpack that does accumulate this spring will travel down the mountains fast, due to warm temperatures and limited reserves, which means less water availability sooner in the year for high country ranchers like themselves.

South of the Daughenbaughs, skiers and snowboarders in Summit County are seeing their seasons cut short.

At its summit, Arapahoe Basin is one of the county’s highest ski resorts in elevation. But instead of the high elevation benefitting the mountain, it has become somewhat of a disadvantage. According to Doug Petrick, a skier from Erie, Colo. who frequents Arapahoe Basin, the back side of the mountain was extremely icy because of its exposure to this year’s unseasonably high winds.

In addition to Arapahoe Basin, Petrick also skis at Breckenridge, Keystone, Vail, Copper and Winter Park. Petrick has recorded 30 days of skiing this season which is on par for seasons past. However, the difference in conditions this year has been noticeable.

“There has been a lot of exposure of rock and dirt. The snow is not enough to cover the mountain,” he said. “My skis have taken more of a beating due to the exposed rock and dirt.”

While Arapahoe Basin benefits from high elevation terrain, other Colorado resorts struggled to stay viable. Powderhorn in Mesa County, Sunlight in Garfield County, and Ski Cooper near Leadville all shuttered before their scheduled closing days this spring.

Because skiing is his favorite winter activity, Petrick is holding out hope for more snowfall and a better next season. “But if next year is the same or worse,” he posed, he may start to worry.

Runners, hikers and bikers recreated in t-shirts and tank tops on Foothills South Trail in Boulder, Colo., on March 4, 2026. The month is typically Colorado’s snowiest. (Annie MacKeigan/The Water Desk)

Petrick is not the only one holding out hope for the future. Colorado’s cities too look seasons ahead to ensure they have enough water to meet their needs. Matt Fater, senior director of infrastructure engineering for the City of Fort Collins’ water utility, is hopeful for more spring snow. Without it, the city may have to tap into existing water storage.

“We’re not in a crisis mode yet,” Fater said. “We’re watching it closely. We do have short term and long range plans when it comes to drought planning.”

The long range planning includes a policy that requires the city to be prepared for a 1-in-50 year drought. In the case of a severe drought, the city pulls water from different storage reserves that accumulate during particularly wet years. Fater reinforced the need for additional storage in the city, to “make sure we can meet the demand of our community.”

Snowpack that supplies the Cache La Poudre River has lagged well below average this year. The river is a main water source for the city of Fort Collins. (Annie MacKeigan/The Water Desk)

Other cities aren’t waiting. Denver Water has already let its customers know they’ll be restricted on their outdoor summer watering this year. In Erie, residents who flouted the town’s voluntary outdoor watering restrictions now face the potential of being cut off completely, according to CBS Colorado. And planning for the potentially hot and dry summer ahead has led Governor Jared Polis to activate a statewide drought task force too.

Snowpack in the high country acts as a battery for water availability, Fater said. Without enough snowpack to “recharge” those additional storage sites, a future drought could result in limited water availability and potential restrictions in the city.

Ranchers, skiers and water users throughout the state were hopeful that March would bring a miracle, and the snowpack deficit would decrease after a few big storms. But with a warm winter transitioning to an even warmer spring, the hopes of a few high-powered snowstorms are fading.

This story was produced and distributed by The Water Desk at the University of Colorado Boulder’s Center for Environmental Journalism.

Westwide SNOTEL basin-filled map March 29, 2026.

Rethinking How the #UnitedStates and #Mexico Share the #ColoradoRiver — Eric Kuhn, Anne Castle, Carlos de la Parra, John Fleck, Jack Schmidt, Kathryn Sorensen, Katherine Tara #COriver #aridification

Click the link to read the paper on the Getches-Wilkinson Center website (Eric Kuhn, Anne Castle, Carlos de la Parra, John Fleck, Jack Schmidt, Kathryn Sorensen, Katherine Tara). Here’s the abstract:

March 26, 2026

Since 1945, the United States and Mexico have managed common interests on their two largest shared rivers systems, the Colorado and the Rio Bravo/Rio Grande, under the terms of the 1944 international treaty that was designed from the beginning with tools to adapt to changing hydrologic and societal conditions. A recent emergency agreement on the Rio Bravo/Rio Grande illustrates what is possible, and with old river management rules on the Colorado both within the United States and between the United States and Mexico about to expire, we are at a moment of opportunity for meaningful change. The core problem on the Colorado River, which we address in the analysis that follows, arose from decisions made in the first half of the 20th century to allocate fixed volumes of water. As usage patterns and hydrology change in the 21st century, fixed volumes no longer work. [ed. emphasis mine] A shift to a percentage-based split between the United States and Mexico on the Colorado River, based on the river’s actual natural flow, would provide a solid foundation for the two countries’ joint management of the Colorado in the decades to come.

Research paper: Anastomosis and Low Flows Sustain Resilient Groundwater Dependent Riparian Floodplains in an Agricultural River Valley, New Mexico — Ellen Soles, Martha Cooper, Laurel Saito (Wiley Online Library) #GilaRiver

Study reach in the Cliff-Gila Valley, showing the three study transect locations for this work: upstream perennial (UP), seasonally dewatered (SD) and downstream perennial (DP); major irrigation diversion sites and the approximate regions where the channel was seasonally dewatered by diversions in normal and extremely dry years. The dewatered region is magnified in the inset figure to show the position of the Fort West ditch overflow channel. USGS gaging station 09430500 is located at the upstream end of the valley. Gila River flows from north to south.

Click the link to access the research paper on the Wiley Online Library website (Ellen Soles, Martha Cooper, Laurel Saito). Here’s the abstract:

In arid regions with limited water supplies like the Colorado River basin of the southwestern United States, flow regimes and water availability are major controls on native riparian ecosystems resilience, persistence and function. In this paper, we share a case study that uses a long-term dataset of topographic, vegetation and groundwater data collected over water years 2011–2021 to demonstrate how secondary channels formed during high flow events enhance groundwater-dependent riparian ecosystem resilience, favouring native over non-native vegetation. In the Cliff-Gila Valley of southwestern New Mexico, channelization and levee construction between 1940 and 1980 profoundly altered the floodplain and channel of the Gila River, a Colorado River tributary. During subsequent large floods, river anastomosis (branching) left a network of secondary channels across the floodplain. Long-term data show that these channels improve vegetation access to groundwater, facilitating regeneration and expansion of diverse native groundwater-dependent vegetation. Data also show that even the lowest perennial flows (0.4–0.6 m³ s⁻¹) sustain rates of groundwater recession favourable to successful native riparian seedling recruitment in the topographic lows created by secondary channels. Alluvial groundwater recedes more sharply in a reach seasonally dewatered by irrigation diversions, but seepage through diversion structures and unlined ditches maintains shallow groundwater levels. This case study demonstrates that even in arid regions, robust native groundwater-dependent riparian areas can co-exist with human water demands when large floods can move across broad floodplains and create topographic complexity. [ed. emphasis mine] The study also highlights the importance of long-term datasets for documenting ecosystem resilience to floods, drought and ongoing climate change.

Gila River watershed. Graphic credit: Wikimedia

Impact of #drought on rivers and Western #Colorado — KJCT #snowpack #runoff #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

West Drought Monitor map March 24, 2026.

Click the link to read the article on the KJCT website (Matthew Kryger). Here’s an excerpt:

March 27, 2026

Warm and dry conditions in Western Colorado are speeding up runoff from an already below normal snowpack. And it is causing concern among communities. “There are smaller communities that have a single source of drinking water supply that are concerned about what their source is going to be producing as the summer goes on if the snow melts out too quickly,” said [Christina] Medved…Another concern is having enough water for irrigation.

“The green grass lawns, the big parks and fields, they take a lot of water to keep green. And so, we’ve already been hearing from communities that if they have to, they will stop watering those fields,” said Medved.

The dry season we have had also means concern for wildfire season. “If you have an early melt out and you’re able to dry out the landscape by June, June tends to be a drier month. And so that tends to be associated with some higher-than-normal fire danger,” said Goble.

What about this warm, wacky and very weird weather? Meteorologists say #Colorado’s record temperatures in March were “anomalous.” Will we shrug it off, like so much other evidence of #ClimateChange? — Allen Best (BigPivots.com) #snowpack #runoff

Colorado’s top-25 March heat waves since 1951, defined as 4-day averaged statewide temperatures. Colorado’s warmest heat wave (set last week, March 18-21) eclipsed its previous warmest heat wave (March 23-26, 2004) by nearly 5°F. Data from NCEI nclimgrid via the Colorado Climate Center

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

March 30, 2026

It was weird, it was wacky. This string of summer days in Colorado that arrived around the first day of spring was extraordinary. Will it change us in some fundamental way?

It’s not like 9/11, the day we saw people jumping from the skyscrapers in New York City to escape an even more cruel death by fire. We knew instantly that the world was different and in a very big way.

But doesn’t this anomaly deserve more than a shrug of the shoulders? As summer arrived in the last days of winter, I heard several people say, “Well, enjoy this nice weather” as you passed through their doors. A well-intentioned pleasantry but detached from a vital truth. Nice weather for Arizona maybe, but this was Colorado.

Winter had altogether been very, very warm. November was the third warmest November on record across Colorado. December the warmest. February also broke records.

Then came March. Alamosa, a town at 7,543 feet in elevation in Colorado’s San Luis Valley, notched 11 record highs during March going into the last weekend. This included nine in a row from March 18-26. Of special note was the record high of 83 degrees recorded on March 21. It broke the old record by 7 degrees. It also was a higher temperature than has ever been recorded in Alamosa in April.

Crested Butte had a high temperature of 68, a full 10 degrees higher than the old record for that date.

Dates of first 90°F or warmer day in Fort Collins from 1895-present. The blue dashed line shows the 1991-2020 mean 90°F or warmer day, which is June 9. Data from ACIS.

Fort Collins got to 91 degrees, also 10 degrees more than the old record for that date. It was the highest ever mark for March — but also higher than anything ever recorded in April, whose record remains 89 degrees. The average first day for 90 degrees in Fort Collins is June 15.

Allie Mazurek, of the Colorado Climate Center staff, posted a report on Thursday morning that defines in numbers what she calls an event “impossible to ignore.” Included in her presentation is the chart atop this essay that shows how anomalous this four-day streak of heat was compared to others in Colorado during March.

This heat was nearly uniform across Colorado. “There were far more stations in the state that broke all-time monthly high records for March than did not,” wrote Mazurek. “To see monthly records shattered by more than 5 degrees F across numerous stations is truly remarkable. The kind of heat that we saw last week across Colorado is more typical of June or even July.”

Remarkable about theheat in Colorado was not only its intensity but its longevity across four days (March 18-21). “Over that period, several locations set new monthly records every one of those days, with each day being warmer than the last.”

March maximum temperature records at various long-term weather stations throughout Colorado. Data from ACIS.

This heat comes at a particularly bad time. The thin snowpack was already melting. The deepest snowpack in Colorado’s mountains has traditionally occurred in early May, because of accumulations at higher elevations.

That assumes a normal of some sort — although it is questionable whether “normal” has any true meaning given how fast the climate is now changing. So take this for what it’s worth: the statewide snowpack this past week sat at 38% of the 1991-2020 median. And what must be noted here — as with the temperature records that were broken — is that we have had an exceptional increase of heat in Colorado in the last 25 years.

Notable in the lifetimes of baby boomers in Colorado were the winters of 1976-77 and 1980-81. This year’s meager runoff will almost certainly surpass those dry years. New is the heat.

High-pressure heat domes can be predicted but are notoriously challenging to forecast weeks or months in advance. They also remain rare, but the warming atmosphere makes them more likely.

“We do have high pressures every year across the West,” said Mark Wankowski, a meteorologist at the Pueblo office of the National Weather Service. “This one was extremely early.”

Writing from Colorado Springs last weekend in an essay in The Atlantic titled “There’s No Way the West Will Have a Normal Summer,” Rebecca Boyle explained that the heat wave was created by a “a bizarrely strong ridge of high pressure in Earth’s atmosphere.” This ridge suppressed cloud formation and brought in warmer air. “Such atmospheric ridges are more common in the summer, but this one would be unusually intense even for that season.

Kaitlyn Trudeau, a senior researcher at the science nonprofit Climate Central, told Boyle this was the strongest ridge ever observed in March. Climate Central has developed a prediction model that assesses how much a warming trend or record high can be attributed to human-caused climate change. According to this model, the western high temps were five times more likely because of elevated greenhouse gas emissions.

I feel rattled by this heat. You may remember the high-pressure cooker that broiled the Pacific Northwest in June 2021. Temperatures spiked to 116 degrees in Portland. People in apartments that were not air conditioned died from the heat. In Multnomah County, the location of Portland, 72 deaths were attributed to heat. Farther north, in British Columbia, the town of Lytton went up in flames after several days of intense heat, including a temperature that reached 121 degrees Fahrenheit.

After that heat, the Colorado Public Utilities Commission asked Xcel to assess how well it could respond to somewhat similar heat in Colorado. The company concluded it had the resources.

But this week, in the wake of the intense spring heat, the PUC commissioners were clearly worried, part of a growing concern about “resource adequacy.” Will Xcel be able to meet critical electrical needs if another heat dome arrives in Colorado this summer? The commissioners asked Xcel to return with strategies for reducing demand from big industrial customers if demand for cooling spikes.

Colorado Drought Monitor map March 24, 2026.

Curious about an on-the-ground perspective from this heat and sparse snow, I called Paul Bonnifield in Yampa. A drought map colors that part of northwest Colorado mahogany, beyond extreme drought and in the realm of “exceptional.” What did exceptional drought look like to him?

Yampa lies at the headwaters of the Yampa River, between the Gore Range and the Flattops. It has a bucolic setting, a place of hay meadows and grazing cattle. Lying upstream are a couple of reservoirs on the edge of the Flattops.

It’s not uncommon for snow to remain on the ground at Yampa, elevation, 7,900 feet, in late March. Not this year. “The ground is hard, just dry, dry, dry,” said Bonnifield.

Bonnifield grew up a few miles away at Phippsburg, a railroad town, and he worked on the railroad himself in addition to spending time teaching and writing at a college in Oklahoma. He’s now in his late 80s and can put this year’s anomalous heat and drought into perspective.

“We are in serious trouble,” he said. “I’ve never seen it like this before.”

Less water will mean less hay production in Egeria Park, where this photo was taken about eight years ago. Photo/Allen Best

Unless a miracle arrives in the form of spring rain and snow, ranchers in Bonnifield’s area — called Egeria Park — will have to decide what to do with their cattle. There’s not enough water to grow grass. There will be wildfire smoke besotting the sky, dampening tourism. And as for river rafting downstream on the Yampa – not likely. Steamboat Spring has already imposed watering restrictions for lawns.

Denver Water this week adopted lawn-watering restrictions for its customers in Denver as well as those in surrounding jurisdictions. It has 1.5 million customers, directly and indirectly, in the metro area.

Nathan Elder, the utility’s manager of water supply, reported to board members on Wednesday that snowpack levels are at historic lows and melting earlier and more rapidly.

Denver Water diverts water from rivers and creeks on both sides of the Continental Divide. In Grand and Summit counties, at the headwaters of the Colorado River, the snowpack was 53% of normal and the lowest on record for the date, Elder said. The South Platte River has it even worse, just 40% of normal.

“These are really unprecedented snowpack conditions,” he said at the meeting on March 25. During the previous week — the week of the heat dome —Denver had lost 25% of its snowpack in the areas it collects water, he reported.

Denver Water is asking the 1.5 million households and businesses that get water from the utility to refrain from starting to irrigate lawns, including this one in southeast Denver, until mid-May. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots

Can it get worse? Well, yes, it could. “It’s well documented that, in part, due to climate change, the runoff generated from a given snowpack has declined when compared to the past,” said Elder. “So we can expect even less water from this already low snowpack.”

Might a miracle arrive? After the drought and heat of 2002, metro Denver was stressed. Then, on St. Patrick’s Day 2003, three feet of snow fell. In the San Luis Valley, monster rainfall last fall swelled the Rio Grande, leaving water in the soil that will help even now as farmers begin preparing their fields for early plantings.

NOAA projects continued likelihood of above normal temperatures and below-normal precipitation across Colorado, including Denver’s collection area, during April.

Denver aims to reduce water use 20% by its customers in Denver and in outlying suburbs. It will permit lawn watering two days per week and then after 6 p.m. or before 10 a.m. It is also urging customers to refrain from watering their lawns until mid-May. That’s not an easy ask when it feels like June in March. In April, Denver Water’s board members will be asked to approve “drought pricing.”

Russ Schumacher, the state climatologist in Colorado, is called upon frequently to give programs to water organizations and others. This past week he gave a presentation to the Fort Collins Chapter of the Colorado Renewable Energy Society.

“Wildfire certainly is top of mind,” he said while showing a time-lapse video of a wildfire called High Park Fire that occurred west of Fort Collins in 2012.

Dry and hot temperatures leave Russ Schumacher, the state climatologist, apprehensive about potential wildfires this year. Above photo is from the Longmont area in August 2020, a hot and smoky year when wildfires continued almost into November. Photo/Allen Best

Global warming is a simple proposition, he said.

“If you put a pot of water on your stove you’re not going to be able to predict all those individual bubbles or exactly when it’s going to start boiling,” he explained. “But you know that when you turn that heat on, the water’s going to get warmer and it’s going to continue to warm the more heat that you add. So the physics of climate change is actually rather similar in that regard.”

And, of course, adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere traps heat, which heats the planet. “When you add heat to something, then it warms.”

Colorado has had outliers of heat before. The Dust Bowl during the mid-1930s was a time of heat and drought. More hot and dry arrived in the 1950s.

This chart shows snowpack in Colorado. The heat dome caused rapid melting of snow. In the San Luis Valley, heavy rains of last October may allow farmers to survive better than during 2002.

Dry has not changed. The hot has changed. What used to be an extremely hot year in Colorado is now a fairly average year or just slightly-above-average year, said Schumacher.

Citing NOAA data, Schumacher showed a sharp rise of almost 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit since 1980. The heat has been most acute in the summer and fall — although, obviously, recent months spoil that easy narrative.

With a moderate rate of emissions, we can expect another 2.5 to 3 degrees of warming by around 2050. That expectation comes with a disclaimer about uncertainty. It’s a best guess.

Precipitation has been more complicated than temperature in Colorado. As for the future, it remains a puzzle. Could be more, could be less. Either way, it will be impacted by temperatures.

“If it’s warmer, if it‘s windier, it’s less humid, the air is thirstier for water from the soils, crops, forests, reservoirs, wherever.” Schumacher said. “As it gets warmer, that evaporative demand goes up. The air is thirstier for water, and this has big implications for drought and water supply and water resources.”

Might warming occur more slowly? That’s possible, and a possibility tied strongly to whether global emissions of greenhouse gases can be abated. Given the current political climate in the United States, a key player in world politics, this low-emissions scenario looks highly unlikely. More likely are the heat domes.

Like the pot of water on the stove that Schumacher described, we’re certain to see more heat bubbles. Hard to tell where and when they will be, but there will be more of them. That leaves me distinctly uncomfortable. In Colorado I have felt 104 degrees. I cannot fathom the 118 degrees of Portland.

Colorado statewide annual temperature anomaly (°F) with respect to the 1901-2000 average. Graphic credit: Colorado Climate Center

‘There is no good news’: Water users warned of dire irrigation season, the worst on record — The #Montrose Press #snowpack #runoff #UncompahgreRiver

Click the link to read the article on the Montrose Press website (Katharhynn Heidelberg). Here’s an excerpt:

March 28, 2026

With far less snowpack in the high country this year and an anemic runoff forecast, the Uncompahgre Valley is positioned for a terrible irrigation season. Water users association Manager Steve Pope did not mince words.

“This is the worst year on record so far for snowpack. Looking at the fact that it’s pushing 90 degrees outside in March, we aren’t going to be able to expect much of a runoff,” Pope said on Wednesday, one week before water deliveries begin on April 1, ” … There is no good news.”

The Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association will only be delivering allocations to shareholders of 50% to start, and, if water models remain consistent, will cut delivery to 40%. No pump contracts can be filled this year, although there will be credits for next year for paid accounts. Shareholders who pump directly from an association canal or lateral must register pumps and install meters and regulating valves for the deliveries. As well, people are being asked to reconsider lawns and large-scale landscaping to conserve every drop possible for agriculture…

Runoff projections within the Uncompahgre Basin are worrying. The Colorado River Basin Forecast Center operates SNOTEL sites that measure snowpack and snow water equivalent, the amount of water the snow holds. Ideally, there would be robust snowpack and SWE, as well as weather conditions conducive to slower melt, leading to prolonged runoff. That isn’t the case this year…2026 is on track to turn out even worse than 2002, the leanest water year this century — but even 2002 was bookended with decent water years before and after…Pope said the Colorado River Basin Forecast Center is projecting a 50% chance of the local watershed seeing about 53,000 acre feet of runoff…The water users association can’t really rely on natural flow from the Uncompahgre River this year, Pope said, but he does anticipate enough to fill Ridgway Reservoir. Beyond that, however, “it’s not very promising.” Overall weather conditions compound the problem of so-so snowfall during the winter: it’s been warmer far up in the high country, too. Pope said that at the 12,200-foot elevation Swamp Angel study site maintained by the Silverton-based Center for Snow and Avalanche Studies, it’s only been getting down to a few degrees below freezing at night. (This site had a measured snow water equivalent of 13.4 inches as of March 15.)

“If it’s not freezing at night, there’s nothing to slow the runoff down. They said the dust isn’t as bad this year. That is somewhat of a silver lining. We haven’t had the wind, so the dust isn’t quite as bad,” said Pope. Dust accelerates snowmelt.

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

Spring runoff flows reaching levels usually seen a month later: Tighter water-conservation rules, recreational river closures looming for summer — #SteamboatSprings Pilot & Today #YampaRiver

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

March 26, 2026

With the quicker snowmelt and earlier drying out of pasturelands, runoff volumes in creeks are hitting levels now that usually occur a month later in the spring, leading area ranchers to activate irrigation ditches weeks earlier than usual. Runoff flowing down Fish Creek, the primary water source for the city of Steamboat Springs, is almost one month ahead of the historical average. At 9 p.m. March 21, the flow displayed by the U.S. Geological Survey gauge on Fish Creek near the Fish Creek Water Plant east of Steamboat Springs showed 62 cubic feet per second. That volumetric flow rate is usually seen on April 18, according to gauge records from 1966 to 2025…“Over the last two years, it’s definitely running sooner than average,” said Frank Alfone, general manager at Mount Werner Water and Sanitation District. “It just means the possibility of having to release from Fish Creek Reservoir earlier in the season because there is less water in the creek.” The water gauge on Fish Creek historically records a peak seasonal flow of 464 cfs on June 8, but this summer the peak will occur much sooner than average. For waterfall fans, that also means highly visited Fish Creek Falls figures to be at peak flow three to four weeks sooner than its average early June date, Alfone noted…Fish Creek Reservoir on Tuesday was sitting at 47% of fill capacity, a normal level for this time of year, and that percentage continues to increase, Alfone noted. As a major year-round water source for the community, Fish Creek Reservoir water managers do not want that level to drop below 30%, Alfone said.

#Snowpack news March 30, 2026: “There is no historical analog to this” — Brad Udall (#Colorado Water Center)

Colorado SNOTEL basin-filled map March 29, 2026.

The water footprint of #Arizona’s copper mines: Agriculture guzzles more water, but mines are drying up springs and streams nonetheless — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org)

The Pinto Valley Mine, processing area, and tailings depositories in the Globe-Miami mining district. Pinto Creek is to the viewer’s left. Source: Google Earth.

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

March 24, 2026

⛏️ Mining Monitor ⛏️

Pinto Creek used to run year-round. Bubbling up from springs and occasional snowmelt in the Pinal Mountains of central Arizona, it nourished a riparian ribbon of green through the rocky, arid landscape, shaded by sycamores, willows, and alders, until it empties into Theodore Roosevelt Reservoir. Gila topminnow, longfin dace, and roundtail chub plied its waters. Even during drought years it reliably delivered at least 1,000 acre-feet of water at its Magma Weir gauge, and in wet times as much as 39,000 acre-feet annually might flow along its bed.

Then, a little over a decade ago, something odd happened. The flow volume plummeted from 4,147 acre-feet in 2013 to just 482 acre-feet in 2014, and ever since the once year-round stream has run only intermittently and at similarly diminished levels. Towering trees along its banks have died and toppled, and the green swath has lost much of its color. It’s possible that long-term aridification simply caught up with the little stream, as 2013 was a dry year. But there’s a more likely culprit: In October 2013 Capstone Copper Corporation acquired the nearby Pinto Valley Mine, a massive, open pit copper and molybdenum operation that had just emerged from several years of dormancy, and resumed heavy groundwater pumping from its Peak Well field.

While correlation is not causation, the Tonto National Forest saw enough evidence of a link to ask the Arizona Department of Water Resources to put the brakes on the mine’s groundwater pumping. Failing to do so would harm the Forest Service’s instream Pinto Creek water right — along with the downstream riparian ecosystem it supports. The state did nothing and the Forest Service dropped the complaint and approved the mine’s expansion in 2021.

The Land Desk has often looked at mining’s effects on water quality.¹ But the Pinto Valley case highlights the fact that mines can also affect water quantity — and vice versa, as water scarcity can limit mining operations. It warrants a closer look during these water-constrained times, when water consumption by everything from data centers to golf courses to alfalfa farms has attracted more scrutiny.

A mining operation goes through water in two ways. First, the mine itself, whether underground or open pit, can act like a well. Dig a hole into the earth, and groundwater will flow into it. While gravity can drain this flow in underground mines burrowed into the sides of mountains, the water must be pumped from open pit and underground shaft mines, a practice known as dewatering, which can take large amounts of water out of the aquifer. Capstone says it pumps about 400 gallons per minute from its pit.

Berkeley Pit and Yankee Doodle tailings pond: Butte, Montana. By NASA – http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_697.html, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=20856275

This draws down groundwater wells and can dry up springs and diminish streamflows. Without dewatering, you end up with something like the Berkeley Pit, which is now a 50-billion-gallon, acidic and contaminated lake that’s about 900 feet deep. Because this water is usually contaminated by acid mine drainage, it often can’t be reused without some treatment, and dumping it into a stream or back into the aquifer is also problematic.

A mining operation also requires significant amounts of water for dust control, mineral processing, slurrying, and other uses. Capstone’s 2024 sustainability report says its Pinto Valley Mine withdrew a total of 8,932 acre-feet — or 2.9 billion gallons — of groundwater and surface water.

The company has not released its 2025 data yet, but in financial filings reported that the Pinto Valley Mine had to slash mine production and mill throughput by about 37% in 2025 due to “unplanned downtime driven by water constraints due to the drought conditions in central Arizona.” The company is trying to address this by reducing per-ton water usage by 20%, but that may not be enough given the extreme drought conditions spreading across the Southwest.

A central clearing house or database of mine water use in Arizona does not exist, but various sources can help paint a picture of how much water the mining industry in the state uses (I’ll look at other states in a future dispatch).

Safford Mine Complex: Consumptive water use increased from 3,624 acre-feet per year to 6,099 af/yr following a 2020 expansion, according to the Arizona Department of Water Resources 2025 Safford supply and demand report. Municipal uses in the Safford Basin use about 6,000 acre-feet per year, while agriculture — primarily for cotton, pecans, pistachios, and alfalfa — consumes about 138,301 acre-feet annually.

Freeport-McMoran reported to the AZDWR that in 2023 it withdrew 22,490 acre-feet of groundwater for its Sierrita Mine south of Tucson. The cost? $3.50 per acre-foot. That’s about one penny for 1,000 gallons of water.

Freeport-McMoran’s Morenci Mine, one of the nation’s largest copper operations, uses about 14,000 acre-feet per year on average, according to the AZDWR. The mine imports much of its water from the Black River, a tributary to the Salt River, under a lease with the San Carlos Apache Tribe for a portion of its Central Arizona Project allocation.

The following chart is from an Arizona Department of Mines & Mineral Resources report from 2010 by Dr. Madan M. Singh. It’s a nice, comprehensive look at how much water the state’s major mines used in the preceding years. Current use is likely about the same, except that now there are additional mines (the Pinto Valley Mine was not operational in 2010, which is why it’s missing).

Source: Water Consumption at Copper Mines in Arizona, by Dr. Madan M. Singh, 2010.

So, according to Singh’s report, Arizona’s largest mines used a total of 55,659 acre-feet per year during the 2000s. Add the Pinto Valley Mine (8,932 af) and Safford Mine (6,099 af) and you get about 70,600 acre-feet per year, or 23 billion gallons annually.

That’s a lot of water, but it pales in comparison to many other uses. Arizona alfalfa, alone, probably uses more than 1.5 million acre-feet (based on 6 af water/acre over 280,000 planted acres, according to the USDA). “Turf facilities” guzzled some 157,000 af in 2024, according to the AZDWR, while power generation used 86,053 acre-feet. TSMC’s north Phoenix chip manufacturing facility is projected initially to use about 19,000 acre-feet of water annually.

In other words, when Arizona’s water cops come looking for the big water users, the mines probably won’t be at the top of their list. Since most mines rely on groundwater, Colorado River water shortages may not affect them too much, at least in the near future.

Still, some mines, including ASARCO’s Mission Mine, do pull some water from the Central Arizona Project, which could be hit hard by the Colorado River crisis as early as next year. And, as the Pinto Valley Mine situation last year demonstrated, continued aridification and relentless pumping could lead to groundwater shortages at the mines, forcing them to reduce production even as they work to become more water-efficient.

Prospective mines could face serious challenges, as well. Resolution Copper estimates its contentious Oak Flat mine would use between 15,700 acre-feet and 20,000 acre-feet per year. Others, however, say this is too low; one study says it would likely be closer to 50,000 acre-feet annually, based on the per-ton water consumption for copper at other Arizona mines. Resolution has said it would rely at least partly on Central Arizona Project water, the security of which grows shakier with each passing year. It’s hard to imagine that there will be any water available for new users by the time that mine is up and running if current climatic trends continue.

That may be what Faraday Copper had in mind when it signed a letter of intent to acquire the San Manuel copper mine in southern Arizona. While Faraday said it would be reopening the long-shuttered operation and combining it with its proposed Copper Creek venture nearby, it may also be eying the substantial water rights BHP Copper holds for the San Manuel Mine. Those could come in handy if and when the Copper Creek facility is developed.

Regardless, however, one thing is clear: Any new mine is going to rob the springs, the streams, and the wildlife and communities that rely on them of at least some of their precious water. [ed. emphasis mine]

1 In 1993, when the Pinto Valley Mine was operated by Magma Copper, a large rain event “overwhelmed the mine’s water management capabilities,” causing the reservoir to overflow the tailings pile, tear out a levee, and carry hundreds of tons of tailings and millions of gallons of contaminated water into Pinto Creek. The creek was found to have low pH (high acidity) and high concentrations of cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, and zinc, resulting in significant fish die off, specifically of desert or Gila Mountain suckers.

Pagosa Country sees more record-breaking heat — The #PagosaSprings Sun #SanJuanRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

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

March 26, 2026

It was warmer last week in Pagosa Country than any other time on record, as the area saw five consecutive days of record high temperatures set from March 18-22. According to forecasts posted by Shawn Prochazka with Pagosa Weather, a new record high for the month of March was set on Wednesday, March 18, at 74 degrees and again on Thursday, March 19, at 76 degrees. The previous record high for the month of March was set in 1907 and 1940 at 73 degrees. Record highs for the month continued on Friday, March 20, with temperatures reaching 79 degrees. The previous record for that date was 68 degrees, set in 1997. Prochazka also notes that record high temperatures were set on Saturday, March 21, at 77 degrees, and on Sunday, March 22, at 74 degrees…

Snowpack

According to data from the Natural Resource Conservation Services (NRCS), as of 11 a.m. on Wednesday, March 25, Wolf Creek Pass at 10,930 feet had a snow water equivalent of 12 inches, compared to that date’s median of 27.3 inches. That amount is 44 percent of that date’s median snow water equivalent. The San Miguel, Dolores, Animas and San Juan river basins as a whole are listed at 21 percent of its 30-year median snowpack. The Wolf Creek summit had the second highest current snow water equivalent in the San Miguel, Dolores, Animas and San Juan river basins, and the Upper Rio Grande basin, behind the Black Mesa site with 12.2 inches of snow water equivalent as of press time Wednesday…

Drought

According to the most recent map released by the U.S. Drought Monitor on Thursday, March 19, 100 percent of Archuleta County remains in moderate drought stage, with 22.04 percent of the county being in a severe drought stage. Areas that are in a severe drought stage lie along the eastern border of the county with Conejos County. Meanwhile, 12.88 percent of the state is in an extreme drought stage, and less than 1 percent of the state is in an exceptional drought stage. That includes portions of Pitkin, Eagle, Summit, Lake and Park counties…

River flows

According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), as of 11 a.m. on Wednesday, March 25, the San Juan River in downtown Pagosa Springs had a flow rate of 595 cubic feet per second (cfs). The record high flow for that date was recorded in 2004 at 860 cfs, while the record low was recorded in 1964 at 42 cfs. The median flow for that date is 165 cfs, and the mean flow is 239 cfs. The Piedra River near Arboles was flowing at a rate of 434 cfs as of 11 a.m Wednesday, March 24, according to the USGS. The median flow for that date is 339 cfs, and the mean flow is 457 cfs. The record high flow for that date was recorded in 1993 at 1,400 cfs, while the record low was recorded in 1964 at 45 cfs.

2026 Rio Grande State of the Basin Symposium recap #2026RioGrande #RioGrande

Rio Grande levy near Alamosa, November 2024. Photo credit: The Alamosa Citizen

The theme this year was “Where Water Connects Us: Past Meets Present in the San Luis Valley”. Paul Formisano and the staff and volunteers from the Salazar Rio Grande del Norte Center delivered a varied, timely and interesting agenda!

San Luis People’s Ditch March 17, 2018. Photo credit: Greg Hobbs

Ken Salazar set the stage for the sessions, reminding attendees that, “Early settlers knew the only way to bring prosperity to the valley was to do it collectively as the early acequias did.”

Upper Rio Grande snowpack March 29, 2026. Credit: NRCS

The first session was titled, “State of the Rio: The 2026 river outlook general basin and compact projections” and the general consensus from the speakers was, as Brad Udall recently said about the Upper Colorado River Basin, “There is no historical analog,” for these conditions. Snow drought is front and center in the San Luis Valley these days.

Upper Rio Grande accumulated precipitation March 29, 2026. Credit: NRCS

Precipitation in the basin started out the water year in great shape due to a big rain event in early October. Since then there have been modest accumulations but has flattened out since late February to date.

Colorado SNOTEL basin-filled snowpack map March 28, 2026. Credit: NRCS

Division Engineer Craig Cotten started off his presentation with the basin-filled snowpack map for Colorado. He joked that, “The good news is, the Rio Grande is not the worst in the state.” It is not a good year as far as #snowpack and many SNOTEL locations are already melted-out.

Projected streamflow is not looking good and the forecast will likely be worse when the April 1, 2026 numbers are released by the NRCS. However, streamflow right now is looking okay, there is a lot of water in the #RioGrande at this time for example. That means that the little snowpack in the basin is already coming off.

Reservoir storage is in good shape (as a percent of average) except Sanchez Reservoir which has been drawn down for maintenance and repairs.

Current compliance numbers for the Rio Grande Compact from Craig Cotten. Photo credit: Chris Lopez/Alamosa Citizen

Colorado’s Rio Grande Compact compliance numbers heading into the scary diversion season are a positive. There is no debt owed to New Mexico and Texas. With the early onset to runoff season the State Engineer allowed irrigation to start on March 23, 2026. Current estimated streamflow for the Rio Grande at Del Norte (the compact USGS gage used for the river) is 305,000 acre-feet which carries a compact obligation of 76,000 acre-feet to New Mexico and Texas. For the Conejos River the estimated upper index annual flow is 165,000 acre-feet and the downstream obligation is 27,500 acre-feet. However, water levels are going to drop in the unconfined aquifer significantly this year due to low flows in the river. The situation in the aquifer is bad and it is going to get worse.

Cotten updated the attendees about the Rio Grande Compact lawsuit status. It is mostly a fight between Texas and New Mexico and the latest stipulated agreement has been approved by the Special Master. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to approve the agreement.

Nathan Coombs, in keepting with the symposium theme said, “I believe we’re going to be alright this season we’re going to survive. People in the San Luis Valley are working together and we’re going to get through it.”

Heather Dutton gave an overview of reservoir operations for 2026. It is possible that all irrigation water will be released in April and May. She added, “If you’re going to fish the streams emphasize fishing in the morning and visit one of our valley breweries in the afternoon. It’s going to be tough year for all of us. Please keep the farmers in mind.”

Reclamation informed attendees about the current status of the Closed Basin Project. Project priorities are:

Colorado’s compact deliveries
Mitigation for construction and pumping
Eliminate Colorado’s Rio Grande Compact deficit
Other beneficial uses/irrigation

The session “Twenty years of subdistricts” illustrated how the well owners have been working together over the years to determine a solution to the declining unconfined aquifer. Because groundwater is not separate from surface water the lowered levels in the aquifer affect surface streamflow in the Rio Grande. Valley pumpers have formed several sub-districts fashioned around the different hydrology in areas of the aquifer and are retiring some wells and taking land out of production. Another strategy used has been o develop augmentation plans to offset pumping. All of the strategies involve fees to sub-district members. There is extensive coverage of the issue on Coyote Gulch if you are interested in taking a trip down memory lane.

The session “Flowing together: Agriculture, rivers, and communities in partnership” was an overview of collaboration between the City of Alamosa, the West Side Ditch, and Rio Grande Headwaters Restoration Project on the river at the east side of Alamosa. It included a new headgate for the ditch company and will include a new levy orientation and access to the river from Cole Park. The speakers emphasized that it would not have happened without collaboration and the emphasis on creating a win for all stakeholders. For example, Bill Schoen credited the Rio Grande Headwaters Restoration Project for finding funding for the new headgate which is often a problem for mutual ditch companies. Daniel Boyes of the Restoration Project said that the new headgate helps fish and safety for boaters.

Rio Grande, Colorado | National Park Service

The final session before the keynote was “Perspectives on valley recreation” where access to public lands and the value of building a recreation economy to bolster valley opportunities were discussed. While 39% of Colorado’s agricultural output is from the valley economic activity is seasonal. The discussion centered around bringing tourism to the valley to improve the outlook for employment and economic growth.

The keynote speaker was Ben Golfarb and it was a real treat. I never tire of learning about “Nature’s Engineers” and the amazing effect this keystone species has on hydrology and habitat. Trapped extensively by fur traders to enable the fashion industry in the 19th century the species was nearly extirpated from the North American West. Along with a torrent of information and photographs, Goldfarb informed attendees that the native tribes did not participate in trapping because of their understanding of beaver’s role in the arid lands.

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

Reclamation needs 1.7 million acre-feet to save #LakePowell this year — The #Aspen Daily News

Click the link to read the article on The Aspen Daily News website (Austin Corona). Here’s an excerpt:

March 25, 2026

River managers need to conserve around 1.7 million acre-feet in Lake Powell to keep the reservoir from dropping below hydropower turbines this year, according to federal government projections. The Bureau of Reclamation, a federal agency that manages dams on the Colorado River, has estimated that reservoir levels could fall below required elevations for hydropower production before August as record-low snowpack turns into pitiful flows in streams and rivers.

“The situation is dire, the stakes have never been higher, and the reservoirs have never been drier,” Estevan Lopez, New Mexico’s negotiator on interstate Colorado River matters, said during a meeting of the Upper Colorado River Commission on Tuesday [March 24, 2026].

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

If water levels fall below required levels for hydropower production, dam managers will be forced to release water through bypass tubes, which are not designed for sustained, high-volume flows. With too much use, the bypasses could fail, turning the dam into a massive plug in the river and shutting off downstream flows. To keep Powell above those critical levels, federal officials can either fill it with water from upstream reservoirs, including some in Colorado, or they can reduce the water it drains from Powell and sends to the Lower Basin (California, Arizona and New Mexico). States are already expressing their views on how those operations should work. Upper Colorado River basin states, including Colorado, want the federal government to achieve the conservation requirement by reducing water releases to downstream states, at least in part. Upper Basin states say upstream reservoirs aren’t enough to save Powell without cuts to Lower Basin water deliveries. Draining the upstream reservoirs could also leave the system without backup supplies in the event of another dry year…The three primary reservoirs that could prop up Powell are Flaming Gorge in Wyoming, Navajo Reservoir in New Mexico, and Blue Mesa Reservoir near Gunnison, Colorado. Of the three, only Flaming Gorge is large enough to contribute the entire 1.7 million acre-feet on its own, and that would require draining the reservoir to halfway full. Blue Mesa and Navajo already stand at around halfway full, and the two reservoirs likely could not provide the water to save Lake Powell even if both were entirely drained.

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

#ColoradoRiver Remains in Crisis with Continued Uncertainty on Water Supply and Operations — Jennifer Pitt (Audubon.org) #COriver #aridification

American White Pelican and Double-crested Cormorant at Bill Williams Wildlife Refuge along the Colorado River, Arizona. Photo: Gary Moore/Audubon Photography Awards

Click the link to read the article on the Audubon website (Jennifer Pitt):

March 20, 2026

Audubon and partners cut through the conflict with a unique, basinwide perspective, championing the river’s health for the people and birds that rely on it.

The winter of 2025-2026 has not been kind to the Colorado River. Record-warm temperatures day after day across the mountains that feed the river have led to record-low snow levels. All indications are that spring snowmelt feeding the river will be scant.

That is a huge problem, because Colorado River reservoirs, which historically held vast water reserves, are already depleted, with Lake Powell at 25% and Lake Mead at 34% of capacity. This is bad news for people and birds relying on water from the Colorado River. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), the federal agency managing the dams, projects that Lake Powell’s water levels could fall low enough to threaten Glen Canyon Dam’s infrastructure, downstream water delivery, hydropower, and native wildlife in the Grand Canyon including the California Condor and the Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo, among others.

As this crisis plays out, Reclamation has the difficult job of re-tooling systemwide, long-term dam operations on the Colorado River (often referred to as the “Post-2026 Guidelines”). Existing rules, first set nearly two decades ago and tweaked repeatedly to keep up with the declining Colorado River (the result of a warmer and drier climate), expire at the end of this year. As anticipated under this timeline, Reclamation issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS) in late January which laid out potential alternatives for federal management and solicited comments from stakeholders. This Draft EIS embraced uncertainty as a central planning condition as they tested different approaches under a broad range of hydrologic conditions. For a long time, the expectation was that the seven U.S. states sharing the river (Arizona, California, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah and Wyoming) would develop a consensus-based proposal for Reclamation, but that hasn’t happened and talk of litigation has increased.

Reclamation must now figure out next steps. The agency does have legal authorities, but those legal authorities were crafted long ago and do not necessarily spell out how to take meaningful action in this historic crisis. That threatens the water supply for more than 35 million people including the major cities of the American Southwest, Tribes, millions of acres of irrigated farms and ranches, as well as the Colorado River itself and every living thing that depends on its habitats, including hundreds of bird species like the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher, Yuma Ridgway’s Rail, and Summer Tanager.

This is a graph of snowpack above LakePowell using 104 snow measuring stations. It was 9 inches of water on March 7, now 6 inches. Other dry years shown.There is no historical analog to this — Brad Udall

Audubon submitted formal comments in response to the Draft EIS, joining conservation partners to weigh in on what comes next for Reclamation’s consideration (read our comment letter here). Dozens of comments were submitted by the Colorado River Basin states, water users, and other stakeholders making their case with Reclamation that their water uses need to be protected at the expense of others. In its comments Audubon emphasized the need to stabilize the Colorado River system from its headwaters to its delta—a unique, basinwide perspective that urges Reclamation to manage risks for people and nature rather than deferring hard decisions until emergency conditions force action. Our comment letter focused on constructive engagement noting the Draft EIS’s strengths in its analytical foundation while identifying and describing targeted refinements that would help ensure the Final EIS fully informs decision-makers about risks and real-world consequences. Specifically, Audubon calls for:

Clarity and predictability

Flexible, adaptive tools for conserving, storing, and managing water

Environmental stewardship embedded into operations

Meaningful and voluntary Tribal participation

Pathways for advancing in-basin mitigation and resilience-building opportunities

Pathways for advancing binational cooperation with Mexico

Over the next few months, Reclamation still has an opportunity to persuade the Colorado River Basin states into consensus. Whether or not they are successful (and we hope they are), sometime this summer we expect Reclamation to issue a Final EIS that includes refinements to the Draft as well as an indication of their preferred alternative for Colorado River operations. In the meantime, it is urgent Reclamation also prepare for the water supply emergency that is unfolding in 2026.

For much of the last century, Reclamation was a leader in developing the southwestern United States by harnessing the Colorado River and delivering its water across the land. Today, Reclamation must lead in a new way, helping everyone and everything that depends on the Colorado River live with the river we have in a warmer, drier world.

DOWNLOADABLE RESOURCES

CoalitionComment ColoradoRiverDraft EIS.pdf

Coalition Technical Comment Letter Responsive to Colorado River Draft EIS

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

An unprecedented spring heat wave — Allie Mazurek (#Colorado Climate Center) #snowpack #runoff

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Climate Center website (Allie Mazurek):

March 26, 2026

Last week’s heat wave was record-smashing, extraordinary, and impossible to ignore. Given that temperatures were more typical of what we’d expect in June, we’ll try not to judge you if you felt the need to turn on your A/C. 🙂

In this blog post, we’ll provide some climate context on last week’s mind-boggling temperatures and touch on the current drought and snowpack situation. And while we’ll focus on the heat from last week here, it’s worth noting that yesterday, March 25, featured yet another round of record-breaking temperatures across Colorado, including new March high temperature records in Denver (87°F) and Grand Junction (88°F).

Widespread, eye-popping warmth

For pretty much all of Colorado, last week brought the warmest March temperatures ever recorded. There were far more stations in the state that broke all-time monthly high records for March than did not. Here’s a look at the records that were set at some of our long-term climate sites:

From the [table] above, you’ll see that we didn’t just break previous monthly records by a small margin; new records were set by several degrees. It would be noteworthy to have new daily climate records were set by these kinds of margins, but to see monthly records shattered by more than 5°F across numerous stations is truly remarkable.

Another way of looking at this is by comparing the highest temperature observed this March (through the 22^nd) to the highest temperature observed in all Marches from 1951—2025 in a gridded temperature dataset (in this case, NOAA’s nClimGrid). Nearly the entire state is red, meaning this March broke the previous record over this time period. (The main exception is at the highest elevations, where it was slightly warmer in March 1987.) Furthermore, most of the state saw temperatures at least 5°F higher than had previously been seen in March. The all-time March record for Colorado of 96°F at Holly in 1907 was not broken, but was tied at numerous locations including La Junta, Burlington, Campo, and Walsh.

Warmest day in March 2026 (through March 22nd) compared to the warmest day in all Marches between 1951-2025. Data from NCEI nclimgrid.

To put an even bigger exclamation point on these incredible records, there were several places in Colorado that not only set new all-time records for March, but they also saw warmer temperatures than their all-time records for April. This includes places like Alamosa (new March record of 83°F; current April record is 80°F) and Fort Collins (new March record of 91°F; current April record is 89°F). Comparing last week’s temperatures to records since 1951, you’ll notice that most of the Front Range Urban Corridor, San Luis Valley, and lower elevations in southeastern Colorado saw warmer temperatures than any March or April day in the past 70+ years:

Same as the previous map, but the warmest March 2026 day is compared to the warmest April days in 1951-2025. Data from NCEI nclimgrid.

As you might expect, the kind of heat that we saw last week across Colorado is more typical of June or even July. In Fort Collins, the reading of 91°F on March 21 marked Fort Collins’s earliest 90°F or warmer day (the previous record was May 5, set back in 2000). On average, Fort Collins doesn’t see its first 90°F or warmer day until June 15:

Last week’s heat was not only remarkable in terms of intensity but also longevity. The most significant heat occurred across four days (March 18-21). Over that period, several locations set new monthly records every one of those days, with each day being warmer than the last. This was a common theme throughout much of the western US:

Number of March 2026 days that set or broke monthly March records. From Brian Brettschneider.

In Colorado, this long-lasting, remarkable heat was far beyond anything we’ve seen in March. Comparing last week’s heat to previous March “heat waves” (defined as days with the warmest 4-day averaged temperatures), it was a step far above the rest. Statewide averaged temperatures during March 18-21, 2026 period were nearly 5°F warmer than Colorado’s 2^nd-warmest March heatwave (March 23-26, 2004):

Snowpack is rapidly declining

One of the most concerning consequences of last week’s is the impact to our snowpack. If you’ve been following along throughout the winter, then you’re well-aware that Colorado has been seeing its worst snowpack in at least 45 years. And the very warm conditions over the past week have exacerbated an already bad situation.

Looking at the statewide water-year-to-date snowpack in the SNOTEL network, it’s clear that snow water equivalent has taken a massive nosedive over the past week or so. On average, Colorado’s peak snowpack date is April 7, meaning that we should still be seeing snowpack accumulate in late March. Instead, averaged over the state, snow water equivalent has declined by over 2.5 inches in the last week. We typically don’t see snowpack melt this quickly until May, so to observe this trend so early in the season is highly concerning.

Statewide snow water equivalent based on the SNOTEL network as of March 28. The black line shows statewide snow water equivalent for Water Year 2026. From NRCS.

Statewide snowpack currently sits at [29%] of the 1991-2020 median. Given the current conditions and forecasts, it’s very possible that many locations have already seen their peak snowpack. Every major river basin in the state is running way-below average, with 71 of the 92 active SNOTEL stations reporting their lowest values on record:

Percent of average (1991-2020) snow water equivalent in Colorado’s major river basins. From NRCS.

In a previous blog post, we discussed that a combination of SNOTEL data (dating back to the 1980s) and manual snow measurements (dating back to the 1930s) have been used to evaluate how this year’s snowpack stacks up against past winters. Throughout much of the winter, the story has been that this year’s snowpack is very bad, but it hasn’t been quite as bad as the winters of 1976-77 and 1980-81. However, with last week’s rapid early season melting, conditions have deteriorated further. We’ll wait for official confirmation from snow course data at the end of the month, but current data suggests that we’re now sitting at Colorado’s worst snowpack on record, surpassing the winters of 1976-77 and 1980-81.

Drought conditions are deteriorating

When discussing the drought landscape, all eyes have been on the major snow deficits in Colorado’s mountain areas, but that isn’t the only part of the state that’s been seeing worsening drought conditions. Most of Colorado’s lower elevations have also seen substantial precipitation deficits in recent months. As such, drought conditions throughout the state have worsened and expanded over the past few months.

Per the latest US Drought Monitor, approximately 91% of the state is experiencing at least abnormally dry conditions, and ~74% of Colorado is experiencing drought (D1 or worse). Those numbers have increased from 54% and 45%, respectively, since the start of the water year on October 1, 2025. The recent warmth brought particularly large changes to the drought monitor last week, as Colorado’s exceptional drought or worse area (D3 or higher) nearly doubled from ~13% last week to ~24% in the latest drought monitor.

Colorado Drought Monitor for March 24, 2026 (left) compared to September 30, 2025 (right).

Consequences from the low snowpack are growing

Impacts from this year’s low snowpack are increasing as governments agencies and industries that rely on it are beginning to respond and plan for additional effects. The expanding drought (in part due to the low snowpack) has prompted the Colorado Governor’s Office to activate the State Drought Task Force for the first time since 2020. Utility departments and water managers have begun to initiate drought response plans and implement water restrictions. And ski areas are planning to close earlier than expected due to poor conditions. Unfortunately, as we anticipate well-below average runoff this spring, impacts will likely expand further.

Colorado Basin River Forecast Center percent of average water supply modeled forecast (issued March 25), showing that widespread, well-below average conditions are expected. From the CBRFC.

The one piece of potential good news that we’ll end this post with is a pattern shift is likely in early April, which is expected to bring precipitation chances to Colorado. While the moisture won’t be nearly enough to make up for the major deficits we’ve seen accumulate over the last several months, I think we can all agree that we’ll take anything we can get.

Coyote Gulch’s excellent EV adventure: #RioGrande State of the Basin Symposium March 28, 2026 — Salazar Rio Grande del Norte Center

I’m heading out to Alamosa today for the Rio Grande State of the Basin Symposium organized by the Salazar Rio Grande del Norte Center.

#Colorado’s early snowmelt is a preview of a hotter future: Expect a longer wildfire season and major headaches for state water managers — The #Durango Herald

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

An unprecedented heat wave over the past few days has shattered temperature records across Colorado – and may have forced the state’s record-low snowpack to peak weeks ahead of schedule. In a normal year, the state’s snowpack reaches its highest levels in early April, according to data collected by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. After that, the water stored as mountain snow steadily drains away, with most of it gone by late June or early July. Colorado hasn’t stuck to the script this year. Anyone who’s visited the state’s high country has seen the snowless mountainsides, left bare by a season of warm weather and low precipitation. As of mid-March, the state faced its worst snowpack in the 41-year history of the USDA snow monitoring program, known as SNOTEL. Forecasts don’t predict a significant spring snowstorm within the next few weeks, either. That means as ski slopes and alpine drifts melt into slush, snow levels may have already hit a high-water mark March 9, about a month early.

“That really sets you up poorly for the year to come in terms of water supply,” said Peter Goble, Colorado’s assistant state climatologist at the Colorado Climate Center. “You not only have less water, but you have to stretch it out longer than if the weather had stayed colder longer.”

The early melt also likely offers a preview of Colorado’s hotter future. A 2024 report from the Colorado Climate Center found spring snowpack has shrunk in the past 75 years, but scientists only have modest confidence that the trend will continue. It’s a far better bet that snowpack will peak earlier, creating new challenges for the state’s water managers and its ecosystems…Part of the challenge is when the snow melts sooner, less liquid water makes it into streams and rivers. The dynamic occurs because of the cooler conditions and shorter days in the early spring. When snowpack melts more slowly, it has more time to absorb into the soil and evaporate rather than reaching waterways…Early runoff also lengthens the dry season in the spring and summer, opening the window for wildfires. While vegetation growth, rainfall and other factors play a role in fire risk, early runoff primes mountain landscapes for blazes, Molotch said…The situation has set the table for strict water usage limits in the months ahead. Gov. Jared Polis has activated the Colorado Drought Task Force, shifting the state toward an official drought declaration. Denver Water is also set to implement watering restrictions because of low snowpack starting March 25.

#Drought news March 26, 2026: Exceptional drought (D4) expanded in northwest #Colorado, while extreme drought (D3) grew across Colorado, southern #Wyoming, and southern #Nebraska

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

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

This Week’s Drought Summary

This week, extreme weather events across the United States painted a starkly contrasting picture of drought development and relief. In the West and Plains, a persistent heat dome drove temperatures 20 to 25 degrees above normal, shattering early-season records and significantly increasing evaporative demand. This intense heat, combined with high winds and pre-existing dryness, threatened to rapidly deplete topsoil moisture and fueled explosive, landscape-altering wildfires—most notably the historic Morrill Fire in Nebraska that consumed over 800,000 acres. Ultimately, the combination of soaring temperatures and below-normal precipitation resulted in the expansion of drought and abnormal dryness across portions of the West, Great Plains, and parts of the Southeast.

Conversely, other regions experienced abrupt and volatile moisture influxes that mitigated dry conditions but introduced localized to severe flooding. In the Pacific Northwest, an atmospheric river stalled over Washington, bringing heavy rain and significant snowmelt. Further east, a powerful winter storm delivered a massive precipitation boost in the form of a late-season blizzard, dropping over 50 inches of snow across parts of the Upper Midwest and Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. The most extreme precipitation of the week occurred over the Hawaiian Islands, where a stalled Kona low dumped unprecedented, historic rainfall, resulting in excessive flooding, widespread landslides, and infrastructure damage. Overall, above-normal precipitation resulted in improvements to drought and abnormal dryness across parts of the Midwest, Northeast, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico…

High Plains

Intense, unseasonable warmth gripped the High Plains, with temperatures soaring up to 25 degrees F above normal, peaking in parts of Wyoming and Colorado. Precipitation was nearly non-existent, particularly across the southern half of the region. This severe, persistent dryness, coupled with rapidly deteriorating drought indicators, forced widespread expansion and intensification of drought categories. Exceptional drought (D4) expanded in northwest Colorado, while extreme drought (D3) grew across Colorado, southern Wyoming, and southern Nebraska. Severe drought (D2) pushed further into central and northern Wyoming, western and southern Colorado, and advanced from Nebraska into South Dakota. Moderate drought (D1) and abnormal dryness (D0) also expanded broadly across Wyoming, Colorado, Nebraska, and Kansas. No drought improvements were made in the High Plains this week…

Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending March 24, 2026.

West

Anomalous warmth dominated the West, with nearly the much region seeing temperatures 15 to 25 degrees F above normal. Precipitation was largely absent, save for beneficial moisture in parts of Washington and Montana. This localized precipitation allowed for the reduction of severe drought (D2) in central Montana and abnormal dryness (D0) in western Washington. Elsewhere, the combination of soaring temperatures, lacking precipitation, and declining soil moisture and streamflow data resulted in broad drought degradation. Extreme drought (D3) expanded in southern Idaho, central and northeastern Utah, and northwest New Mexico. Severe drought (D2) increased in coverage across Oregon, southern Idaho, southern Montana, southern and eastern Utah, southern and eastern Arizona, and New Mexico. Finally, abnormal dryness (D0) expanded in eastern Oregon and central and southern California…

South

Hot and dry conditions dominated the South this week, driving widespread drought degradation. Temperatures soared 5 to 20 degrees F above normal across the vast majority of the region. This heat was coupled with persistent dryness, as month-to-date rainfall deficits grew to 1 to 3 inches below average (representing only 5% to 50% of normal). Deteriorating short- and long-term indicators justified the introduction and expansion of exceptional drought (D4) in southern Texas and northern Arkansas. Extreme drought (D3) was introduced in the Oklahoma Panhandle and expanded across central Oklahoma, northern Arkansas, southern Texas, and Louisiana. Additionally, severe drought (D2) worsened across parts of Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Tennessee, while moderate drought (D1) and abnormal dryness (D0) expanded in Texas, Mississippi, and southern Louisiana…

Looking Ahead

Over the next five days (March 24–28, 2026), the contiguous United States is forecast to experience another week of widespread, record-breaking warmth. A strong upper-level ridge will dominate the western and central U.S., pushing temperatures 20 to 40 degrees above average. This extreme heat, combined with dry conditions and gusty downsloping winds, will elevate fire weather risks across the High Plains on Tuesday and Wednesday. Meanwhile, a deepening low-pressure system will bring even stronger winds to the Northern Rockies. Concurrently, a potent mid-latitude cyclone will track from the Pacific Northwest toward the Canadian Maritimes. This system will initially drop moderate to heavy rain over the Northwest—potentially triggering isolated flooding—alongside high-elevation snow in the Olympics and Cascades. After weakening over the Central U.S., the system is expected to reinvigorate over the East by late next week, delivering a mix of rain to the south and snow to the north across the Great Lakes, Ohio Valley, and Northeast.

Further out, the Climate Prediction Center’s 6–10 day outlook (valid March 29–April 2, 2026) favors above-normal precipitation across much of the contiguous U.S. and Hawaii. Conversely, below-normal precipitation is favored for most of Alaska and along portions of the East Coast, stretching from southern New England to northern Florida. Probabilities for above-normal temperatures are increased across the vast majority of the lower 48 states and Hawaii, while below-normal temperatures are expected to persist across most of Alaska and much of the Northeast.

US Drought Monitor one week change map ending March 24, 2026.

Grim outlook: #Colorado faces limited water supply after record-low #snowpack — Russ Schumacher (Colorado Climate Center) #runoff

Lake Dillon, a reservoir in Colorado’s Summit County, is owned and managed by Denver Water and supplies water to people living in Metro Denver. It is Denver Water’s largest reservoir and provides about 40% of Metro Denver water. A 23-mile-long trans-basin diversion pipeline, called the Harold D. Roberts Tunnel, carries water from the reservoir under the Continental Divide to Denver. Photo credit: Colorado State University

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

March 25, 2026

Each day during the winter and spring, one of the first things I look at is the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s website that shows the current status of the snowpack in Colorado’s mountains.

Maybe that sounds like the strange habit of a state climatologist, but I’m far from the only one. Why? Because the snow that falls in our state’s mountains will, when it melts in the spring and summer, become a large portion of the water supply for tens of millions of people.

Those people aren’t only here in Colorado, but are in other states, Tribal nations, and Mexico, drawing their water from the rivers that originate in Colorado. Mountain snow is essential for our winter recreation industry, for farms and ranches that grow our food, for drinking water, for ecosystem health, and much more.

It hasn’t been a pretty sight when I have opened that USDA website each morning this winter. In an average year, our mountains get a lot of snow: In places like the Park Range, the West Elk Mountains or the San Juans, a typical year brings hundreds of inches of snow, carrying more than 40 inches of liquid water. This year, we struggled to get half that. Now, after an unprecedented heat wave in March, the snow is already disappearing quickly.

Figure 1: Map of annual average precipitation over 1991-2020 in Colorado, with color scale matching the colors in the state flag. Data from the PRISM Climate Group. Credit: Colorado Climate Center

As of March 25, averaged across 115 stations in Colorado’s mountains, the snow water equivalent was just 38% of the 1991-2020 average. (The snow water equivalent is the amount of water stored in the snowpack.) This represents the lowest snowpack in more than 40 years – and possibly ever – in Colorado’s mountains. Conditions haven’t been any better along the Front Range and Eastern Plains, which have also lagged far behind the average amount of snowfall.

Figure 2: Statewide snow water equivalent from the SNOTEL network, as of March 25, 2026. The median over 1991-2020 is shown with the green line, the historical range is shown from red (low) to blue (high), and this year is shown in the black line. From USDA/NRCS.

There have been other major snow droughts in the past, notably the winters of 1976-1977 and 1980-1981, that threatened the ski industry and resulted in record-low streamflow on some of Colorado’s rivers. But this snow season has been unrivaled in its warmth. The first five months of the water year – from October through February – were Colorado’s warmest on record by a large margin. And it’s almost certain that we are in the midst of the warmest March on record as well.

The warmth has been remarkably persistent, as relentless ridges of high pressure have prevented the usual snowstorms from moving into the state. The Fort Collins weather station at Colorado State University recorded an astonishing 43 days with a high temperature of 60°F or above during climatological winter (December through February). The previous record, from records dating back to the late 19th century, was 22. Starting March 18, Fort Collins had temperatures higher than had ever been observed in March, four days in a row. This was capped by a high of 91°F on March 21; there had never previously been a 90-degree day in Fort Collins before May.

Figure 3: Number of winter days with high temperatures of 60°F or above at the official Fort Collins weather station on the CSU campus. Winter 2025-2026 had 43 days, far more than the previous record of 22 in 1980-1981. Credit: Colorado Climate Center

Records for March were smashed across the state and the western U.S., at both low and high elevations. One thing we do as state climatologists is put current conditions into historical context, as usually with some investigation, it’s possible to find a past analog to what we’re experiencing now. But the intense and prolonged heat has been unlike anything previously observed in March.

This, of course, is occurring in the context of a long-term trend toward warmer conditions, both globally and locally, largely attributable to increases in greenhouse gases. Per data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, nine of the 11 warmest years in Colorado records have occurred since 2012, and Colorado has now warmed by 3°F since the 1890s. Droughts come and go, and they have always been a challenge in Colorado and the West. But warming is making them more likely and more intense. In other words, climate change is water change.

When above-average temperatures and precipitation deficits stack up over the course of months, we start to see drought conditions develop or worsen. The impacts of drought are wide-ranging and include economic and agricultural repercussions. Farmers and ranchers may face lower crop yields and higher costs of feeding livestock. A snow drought like this winter’s can reduce outdoor recreation opportunities and hurt the state’s tourism industry. Drought years also tend to be years with more and larger wildfires.

Drought impacts can be felt a long distance from where the precipitation deficits occur. For example, southeastern Colorado received decent precipitation this winter, but low snow in the mountains hundreds of miles away near Leadville means less water on the Arkansas River, an important source for farmers in southeastern Colorado.

As each winter progresses, even if the mountain snowpack isn’t looking great, we can always look ahead to March and April as the time when big storms are possible and the deficits can be made up. Unfortunately, this year has been just the opposite: Instead of much-needed snowstorms, we’re in an unprecedented March heat wave that is accelerating the melting of what little snow is there. The chances of getting back into the range of average have dwindled away, and if the weather pattern doesn’t turn around in April, we may be headed for uncharted territory for Colorado water.

Colorado SNOTEL basin-filled map March 22, 2026.

2026’s historic snow #drought brings worries about water, wildfires and the future in the West — Alejandro N. Flores (TheConversation.com) #snowpack #runoff #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

The snow drought was evident in Park City, Utah, on Feb. 9, 2026. This golf course is normally used for cross-country skiing in winter. Mario Tama/Getty Images

Alejandro N. Flores, Boise State University

Across much of the Western United States, winter 2026 was the year the snow never came. Many ski resorts got by with snowmaking but shut down their winter operations early. Fire officials and water supply managers are worried about summer.

Where I live in Boise, Idaho, temperatures hit the low 80s Fahrenheit (high-20s Celsius) in mid-March. The same heat dome sent temperatures soaring to 105 F (40 C) in Phoenix.

Ordinarily, water managers and hydrologists like me who study the Western U.S. expect the mountain snowpacks to be at their fullest around April 1. Snowpacks are natural reservoirs of water that farms and communities depend on through the hot, dry summer. Their snow water equivalent, meaning the amount of liquid water in the snowpack, is seen as a bellwether for water supplies.

But the 2026 water year has been anything but ordinary. In fact, its snow drought has few historical analogs.

Data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service shows that out of approximately 70 river basins across the Western U.S., only five are at or above the 1991-2020 median snow water equivalent for this time of year. Most of those are clustered around the Yellowstone region of western Wyoming and eastern Idaho.

A map of river basins shows very few with normal snow-water equivalent, primarily near Yellowstone National Park. — The majority of river basins in the Western U.S. were at less than 50% of their 1991-2020 median snow water equivalent on March 23, 2026. Natural Resources Conservation Service National Water and Climate Center

By contrast, 11 basins have less than 25% of the 1991-2020 median, and more than half are below 50%. The headwaters of critically important rivers, including the Colorado, the Columbia and the Missouri, are peppered with basins that are far below historical averages.

Other important measures of snow water storage and ecosystem health, including which areas have snow cover in the Western U.S and how long it’s been there, also point toward snow reserves that are far below recent years.

How did we get here?

Just because the Western U.S. is in a snow drought doesn’t mean it isn’t getting precipitation. Temperatures have been high enough since the start of the water year in October that a lot of what normally would have fallen as snow fell as rain instead.

The West experienced a very warm December at all but the highest elevations, but strong storms also drenched large parts of the region. Washington state was swamped with rain that triggered flooding and melted the existing snowpack.

A chart shows very low snow cover all winter compared to the arc of most years. — The total area of the Western U.S. with snow cover has been exceptionally low compared to the years 2001 to 2025. National Snow and Ice Data Center

Temperatures in January were less extreme but still warmer than historical averages. However, precipitation in January was far below the 1991-2020 average throughout much of the region. February brought precipitation conditions closer to historical averages, but temperatures were much warmer than normal.

The Western U.S., therefore, got a triple whammy: Two of the three critical snow-accumulation months were too warm, and the third was too dry.

Water worries ahead

So what does this mean for water supplies and river flows?

A recent assessment of drought conditions from NOAA’s National Integrated Drought Information System suggests 2026 will be a tight year for water supplies.

Water managers in Wyoming and Washington are already signaling that some water rights holders – cities, irrigation districts, individual farms and industries can take limited amounts of water from rivers, canals and aquifers – can expect to receive less than their full allotment of water in 2026. It’s not unreasonable to expect other states to soon follow suit.

Throughout the Western U.S., water rights are administered according to the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation – those who hold the oldest legitimate claims to water from a river, reservoir or aquifer are entitled to receive their allotments first.

Junior water rights holders who may be at risk of receiving less than their full allotment of water likely have difficult decisions ahead related to the planting and management of their crops. The challenges are compounded by the likelihood of increases in fertilizer and transportation costs associated with the ongoing war in Iran.

In the Colorado River Basin, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s most probable forecast indicates water levels in Lake Powell falling below the minimum power pool elevation in December 2026. That’s bad news for power supplies, because below that level, the Glen Canyon Dam can’t produce hydroelectric power. The dam contributes power for millions of customers across seven states.

What the snow drought means for fire season

Another big concern is whether the historic snow drought is setting up the West for a bad fire season. That’s still an open question.

Rain has meant moisture is available now for plants to grow, but the lack of snowpack that normally keeps meltwater flowing through summer raises concerns about whether those plants will dry out, leaving them ready to burn.

Fire is a historically important feature of the forest and rangeland ecosystems of the West, and these ecosystems are to some degree adapted to large swings in conditions from year to year and season to season.

Because precipitation across much of the West is close to historical averages, there is snow in some of the highest-elevation mountains. And at lower elevations, some of the precipitation that fell as rain likely remains in the soils.

A skier next to open ground with a mountain in the background. — Snowmaking kept slopes skiable amid high temperatures in March 2026 in Breckenridge, Colo., but it wasn’t hard to find dry, exposed land nearby. Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images

Weather conditions in the late spring and summer – how much rain falls and how hot and dry conditions become – will play critical roles in determining the shape forests and rangelands will be in for fire season.

What this winter suggests about the future

The record-low snowpack may be a harbinger of what a warmer future will look like in the region. Many researchers have investigated how climate change will influence snowpacks and water supply throughout the Western U.S., but questions and critical challenges remain.

Among them: In years like this, with near-normal precipitation but low snowpack, are there difficult-to-observe stores of water in the deeper subsurface that can help buffer against loss of snow for periods of time? That’s one of several questions my colleagues and I have been working on.

This year’s snow drought presents a timely, albeit high-stakes, stress test for the West. Everyone will be watching.

Alejandro N. Flores, Professor of Geoscience, Boise State University

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

This is a graph of #snowpack above #LakePowell using 104 snow measuring stations. It was 9 inches of water on March 7, now 6 inches. Other dry years shown.There is no historical analog to this — Brad Udall #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Colorado River snowpack evolution since Oct 2025. Melt started about March 7. Down to 6
Inches now from 9 inches then. There is no historical analog.

Environmental Research Letter: #Snowpack decline kindles more severe fire in the western United States — Jared A. Balik, Jonathan D. Coop, and Sean A. Parks

Figure 1. Forested regions across western contiguous US with ⩾20 mm maximum snow water equivalent (SWEmax) over the 1985–2021 study period. Pixels are color-coded according to their respective Hydrologic Unit Code Level 2 (HUC2) regions. Solid black lines delineate extents of HUC2 regions, while dotted white lines denote state boundaries.

Click the link to access the research letter on the IOP Science website (Jared A. Balik, Jonathan D. Coop, and Sean A. Parks). Here’s the abstract:

Climate change is reducing winter snowpack and advancing spring snowmelt across the western United States, interacting with El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) teleconnections that drive spatially predictable interannual fluctuations that contribute to high- or low-snow winters. Early snowmelt extends the fire season, enhancing opportunities for ignition and increasing fuel dryness, both of which contribute to greater burned areas. However, relationships between snowpack on burn severity, a measure of forest loss and expected biogeochemical and hydrological impacts of fire, have not been examined. Here, using remotely sensed snow and fire data spanning 1985–2021, we examined how snowpack quantity and timing of spring snowmelt influence annual area burned and burn severity at the watershed scale. Early snowmelt was associated with earlier occurrences of fire ⩾400 ha and greater annual area burned, whereas low snowpack water content was associated with more severe burn outcomes including greater mean composite burn index (CBI) and larger proportions of high severity fire (CBI ⩾ 2.25). Thus, low-snow winters with early snowmelt may prime forested watersheds to dry, burn, and experience high severity fire. These outcomes are consistent with enhanced fuel dry-down: early snowmelt extends the dry-down window while low snowpack quantity portends greater fuel aridity during the dry period. Our findings also highlight how the ENSO interacts with directional warming: El Niño phases amplify trends of snowpack loss and increasing area burned severely in northwestern watersheds but dampen these trends in southwestern watersheds, while La Niña phases exert the opposite effect. Projected warming, potentially accompanied by greater ENSO variability and extremes, points toward a future of reduced snowpack, earlier snowmelt, and increased area burned at high severity in forests where snowpack historically buffered fire risk, with attendant losses in forest carbon storage and disrupted hydrological function of forested watersheds.

Navajo Dam Operations Meeting [Virtual] – April 21, 2026 1-3pm — Reclamation #SanJuanRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

The San Juan River near Navajo Dam, New Mexico, Aug. 23, 2015. Photo credit: Phil Slattery Wikimedia Commons

From email from Reclamation:

March 20, 2026

Reclamation conducts Public Operations Meetings three times per year to gather input for determining upcoming operations for Navajo Reservoir. Input from individuals, organizations, and agencies along with other factors such as weather, water rights, endangered species requirements, flood control, hydro power, recreation, fish and wildlife management, and reservoir levels, will be considered in the development of these reservoir operation plans. In addition, the meetings are used to coordinate activities and exchange information among agencies, water users, and other interested parties concerning the San Juan River and Navajo Reservoir. The next meeting will be held virtually on April 21st

Microsoft Teams

Join the meeting now

Meeting ID: 247 128 548 928 44

Passcode: Yn6ih2Q6

Dial in by phone

+1 202-640-1187,,923961898# United States, Washington

(833) 436-1163,,923961898# United States (Toll-free)

Find a local number

Phone conference ID: 923 961 898#

Join on a video conferencing device

Tenant key: teams@conferencing.doi.gov

Video ID: 114 427 248 3

More info

Mountain towns see record-breaking temps as #snowpack and ski season take a hit — Summit Daily

Westwide SNOTEL basin-filled map March 24, 2026.

Click the link to read the article on the Summit Daily website (Andrea Teres-Martinez). Here’s an excerpt:

March 23, 2026

With cooler weather finally in sight following a mid-March heat wave, Colorado’s snowpack is reporting an early meltdown

Several Western Slope mountain towns experienced record-breaking temperatures last week, with some towns logging the hottest day on record in up to 65 years. On average, most towns recorded temperatures between 20-30 degrees above normal, according to National Weather Service Meteorologist Brianna Bealo…Recent warm temperatures have meant early closures for some mountain resorts. Ski Cooper, Powderhorn Mountain and Sunlight Mountain resorts all closed for the season on March 22, with other resorts limiting terrain due to little natural snow. Other areas didn’t open at all, including Cranor Ski Area in Gunnison, Lee’s Ski Hill in Ouray and the Hesperus Ski Area. The addition of another week of warmer temperatures spells bad news for Colorado’s rapidly dwindling snowpack. As of March 23, snow water equivalent in Colorado is at 44% of median with 16 days left to go until the median peak. The snowpack’s state will likely only get worse throughout the week thanks to the warm and dry weather. Historically, the state’s snowpack reaches its peak in early April before the mountain snow drains away by June or July. A warm winter compared with early snowmelt, however, means the snowpack likely already reached its peak around March 10, Bealo said, and could melt out earlier in the spring.

“It looks like we’ve already reached peak, and we’re melting out pretty rapidly,” Bealo said. “Even though we’ve only really just started seeing melt-out occurring, if we continue at the same rate that we’re seeing, we’d probably be melted out somewhere towards the end of April, early May.”

#Arizona hires high-powered law firm, setting the stage for a legal battle over #ColoradoRiver water — Caitlin Sievers (AZMirror.com)

The sun rises over Lake Powell in Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, in Page, Arizona. Lake Powell, a critical Colorado River reservoir, is only at a third of its capacity as drought conditions in the Southwest worsen. CREDIT: ECOFLIGHT

Click the link to read the article on the AZMirror website (Caitlin Sievers):

March 23, 2026

Arizona is preparing for a legal battle over its rights to Colorado River water.

Following an extraordinarily dry winter along the river basin and what’s expected to be an exceptionally hot and dry spring across the West, where high temperatures in March have already blown past records, the pressure to maintain access to the state’s fair share of river water is growing.

The Colorado River is a vital source of drinking water for 40 million people in the seven basin states, Mexico and 30 Native American tribes, and provides water for farming operations and hydroelectricity.

Reaching a water usage agreement is imperative to the basin states as the river’s water supply continues to decline, as it has done for the past 25 years due to a persistent drought spurred on by climate change.

On Monday, the Arizona Governor’s Office announced that it had retained the law firm Sullivan & Cromwell to represent the state in possible litigation among the Colorado River Basin states and the federal government.

Sullivan & Cromwell is an international firm based in New York City that has represented big names like Microsoft, BP, Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase. The state is using some of the $3 million it put into its Colorado River legal defense fund last year to retain the law firm.

The Governor’s Office doesn’t expect to take any legal action until June at the earliest, but wants to be prepared for the possibility, especially if the dispute ends up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Lower Basin states — Arizona, Nevada and California — and the Upper Basin states — Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming — have been negotiating an updated water usage agreement for more than two years.

But so far the states have blown past two deadlines to do so — one in November and one in February — and are quickly approaching October, when the existing usage agreement expires.

If the states can’t reach an agreement before that, the federal government will implement one of its draft plans, all of which would place an outsized burden on the Grand Canyon State.

That’s because the Central Arizona Project, a series of canals that supplies Colorado River water to the Valley and the Tucson area, is one of the newest users of the river water, making it legally one of the first to be cut.

But so far, the Upper Basin states have refused to agree to any water usage cuts of their own, while the Lower Basin states insist that every state take their fair share.

Arizona has offered to reduce its Colorado River allocation by 27%, California by 10%, and Nevada by nearly 17%.

Negotiators for Arizona also insist that the Upper Basin states be held to the original 1922 Colorado River Compact that requires them to release a 10-year rolling average of at least 75 million acre-feet of water to the Lower Basin, in addition to one-half of the annual allotment owed to Mexico, for a total of about 80.2 million acre-feet.

An acre-foot of water represents enough to cover an acre of land to a depth of one foot, or about 325,851 gallons. That’s enough to provide three homes in Arizona a year of water, on average.

So far, the Upper Basin states have held to the original release agreement. But as water levels in the two major reservoirs on the river, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, continue to decline, it’s expected that the Upper Basin states will be unable to meet that requirement as early as 2027.

When the states entered into the original Colorado River Compact in 1922, they allocated 7.5 million acre-feet of water each year to be shared by the Upper Basin states and another 7.5 million to be used among the Lower Basin states.

Since then, the states have updated their water usage guidelines several times, even though the apportionments remain the same. But Lower Basin states face mandatory cuts during times of drought and Upper Basin states do not. In 2025, for the fifth year in a row, the federal government imposed drought-based cuts, and Arizona’s amounted to a loss of 512,000 acre-feet of water for the year.

Under current allocations, Arizona has rights to 2.8 million acre feet of water per year, and has implemented 800,000 acre feet in reductions per year. In contrast, Colorado has rights to 3.8 million acre feet a year, although it uses an average of 1.9 million acre feet, annually.

The amount of water that Colorado has access to can be unpredictable because it relies mostly on melted snowpack for its water, which varies from year to year. This year’s snowpack levels are historically low.

The Lower Basin states have undertaken significant conservation efforts for Colorado River water since 2014 and have reduced their consumption from 7.4 million acre-feet in 2015 to just over 6 million in 2024.

The Upper Basin states have increased their usage in the past five years, from 3.9 million acre-feet in 2021 to 4.4 million in 2024. The federal government’s draft plans allow for the Upper Basin states to use even more water.

Gov. Katie Hobbs’s proposed budget for this year would put another $1 million toward the Colorado River Legal Defense fund, and lawmakers earlier this month gave preliminary approval to doing just that.

Even as Arizona prepares for a legal battle, the state plans to continue attempting to reach an agreement with the other river basin states, according to the Governor’s Office.

“Governor Hobbs is committed to working with the federal government and other Colorado River states to deliver a negotiated settlement that protects Arizona’s fair share of water and stabilizes the system,” spokesman for Hobbs Christian Slater said. “However, it’s critical that Arizona be prepared to defend ourselves in court if an agreement cannot be reached or the Law of the River is violated.”

Water providers across Douglas County urge conservation this irrigation season — Town of #CastleRock

Water stored in Colorado’s Denver Basin aquifers, which extend from Greeley to Colorado Springs, and from Golden to the Eastern Plains near Limon, does not naturally recharge from rain and snow and is therefore carefully regulated. Courtesy U.S. Geological Survey.

Water providers across Douglas County urge conservation this irrigation season

Three water providers in Douglas County are urging residents to conserve as irrigation season approaches. Following a warm, dry winter and below-average snowpack across Colorado, Castle Rock Water,… pic.twitter.com/b6pje2sx8L
— Town of Castle Rock (@crgov) March 24, 2026

The #ColoradoRiver and the Tragedy of the Anti-Commons — John Fleck (InkStain.net) #COriver #aridification

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

March 18, 2026

Some notes on the current state of the Colorado River…

I’m preparing for a panel discussion this evening in Albuquerque. I promised – three-finger promise, Scout’s honor, which still means something to me – that I wouldn’t use any swear words., either in the blog post or the panel discussion.

The state of the water

Per the latest numbers from my colleague/collaborator/friend Jack Schmidt, Lake Powell currently holds 1.57 million acre feet of water above the protect-the-infrastructure no-go line of elevation 3,500.

Storage at this point in the year is similar to 2022, when we began a hair-about-to-be-on-fire drill as Interior raced to figure out how to protect Glen Canyon Dam because of newly understood (or newly publicly understood) risks of dropping below minimum power pool and using the dam’s outlook works. That constraint still holds.

The forecast this year is a catastrophe compared to 2022: 1.75 million acre feet for the 2026 runoff season, compared to 3.8 maf in the 2022 runoff season. [ed. emphasis mine]

The result, according to the most probable forecast from Reclamation, is that absent some sort of action (see governance below) Powell will drop below 3,500 in September, and stay that way until the spring runoff in 2027.

According to the min probable forecast, which is realistic given the looming heat-pocalypse, we hit 3,500 by July and stay there forever (by which I mean as far as the current 24-month forecast runs – as the late Jim Morison wrote, the future’s uncertain and the end is always near).

The state of the governance

The state of the governance nests two separate by closely linked problems: near term actions and long term rules.

Near term actions

Protecting Glen Canyon Dam from that 3,500 no-go line requires coming up with a least 2 million acre feet of water over the next two years – to get us past that spring 2027 problem described above. There are two ways to do this. The first is to release a bunch of water from upstream, primarily Flaming Gorge Reservoir. How much? Dunno. The second is to cut releases from Glen Canyon Dam, reducing flows through the Grand Canyon and into Lake Mead. How much? Dunno, though we may find out soon.

The current rules, adopted in response to the challenges of 2022-23, allows releases from Glen Canyon Dam to drop this year to 6 million acre feet, which effectively gets 1.5 million of the needed 2 million feet from Lake Mead by reducing releases thereto. Another 500,000 in releases from upstream reservoir gets you 2 million acre feet, with room to do more if the hydrology gets even worse – which it might.

Longer term actions

The longer term stuff is where, as a student of governance, this gets really interesting for me. As a citizen of the basin, I am inclined to swear words at the dysfunction that has left us with no long term plan beyond the end of this year. But I Scout’s honor promised, so shifting to the “student of governance” schtick gives me a view from nowhereway to approach this dispassionately, without the, y’know, words that would have made Mr. Vinatieri, my Scoutmaster, disappointed in me.

Others have chronicled the failure of the seven U.S. Colorado River Basin states to come to a consensus agreement on a set of river operating rules, we need not repeat that here, other than to note that what we have here is a classic case of what has been called the tragedy of the anticommons. This is a situation where many people or entities – in this case the states of the Colorado River Basin – each have the power to block a solution that might be to the benefit of the community as a whole. In this case, each of the seven states of the Colorado River Basin have blocking power over solutions that would prevent the reservoirs from crashing.

See above: the reservoirs are crashing and we have no plan to prevent it because any proposal that might prevent it has been blocked by one or more states that object.

The reason behind this is a set of rules written beginning in the 1920s governing the river – the Colorado River Compact and a series of ad hoc additions that followed – that attempted to lay out rules for managing the river but failed to include functional processes for modifying the rules when they proved inadequate to changing the situation. We’re now stuck with a system under which each of the seven basin states has blocking power over any attempt to change the rules.

This violates one of the fundamental institutional design principles identified by the late Elinor Ostrom, who taught us so much about how we succeed or fail in overcoming the tragedy of the commons: “How will the rules … be changed over time with changes in the performance of the resource system, the strategies of participants, and external opportunities and constraints?” We have to have rules about how we rewrite the rules. We lack that.

Despite this, we have succeeded in the past, in a series of rule-writing exercises that began in the late 1990s, by depending on principled actors at the state level recognizing that they needed to balance their need to protect their own community’s water supplies against the need to solve problems at the scale of the basin as a whole.

My personal values on this question are both instrumental (things that I think are in the best interests of myself and my community) and deontological (things that I think are fundamental moral principles). The second first: I think we have ethical obligations to those upstream and downstream of us in shared river basins. This is, for me, fundamental. The second is instrumental – I think compromise is in the best interests of my community’s water supply and therefore its future, because if we end up in litigation and the system crashes, we stand to lose a lot more than if we compromise, are willing to act on our obligations to our downstream neighbors by using less ourselves.

The last two years of increasingly hostile negotiations among the states make clear that behavior that recognizes those principles is gone, replaced by interpersonal bickering and a game of chicken driving the basin toward litigation (effectively hoping to manage the basin by convincing a judge of our preferred interpretation of ambiguous rules written a century ago) and reservoir collapse.

Thar be dragons.

The (new) water year of our discontent: The record low #snowpack is likely to lead to record low streamflows — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org) #runoff

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

March 20, 2026

It was early June, and we sat out in the shade in our backyard in Silverton, Colorado, wearing short-sleeves and shorts and drinking cold beverages under a cloudless blue sky. That, in itself, made the day memorable. Blizzards are as likely on Memorial Day as barbecues in this mountain town, elevation 9,318 feet, and sweater-free days usually don’t come along until July.

The winter of 2001-2002 had been unusually mild and a warm April and May had melted what little snow had fallen; the Animas River’s spring runoff had peaked at historically low levels a couple weeks earlier. I, for one, wasn’t too worried. By then it was understood that the climate was warming, and that it could wreak havoc on the planet, but the idea of rising sea levels and devastating heat waves felt pretty abstract in the Colorado high country. Besides, as an amateur historian, I had read accounts of similarly dry and warm winters from the San Juan Mountains’ past: In 1879, the snow was all melted from the highest peaks by May (giving way to the Lime Creek Burn that summer); sleighing was impossible” on Silverton’s streets during the 1890-91 winter; and the newspaper ran a photo of a water wagon suppressing dust on Greene Street on New Year’s Day, 1918, during “one of the most delightful winters ever experienced.”

Vallecito Reservoir during Missionary Ridge Fire via George Weber Environmental.

This, it seemed, was just another one of those occasional weird years, so we figured we might as well enjoy it. Then someone noticed what looked like puffy cumulonimbus cloud rising up in the gap formed by the Animas River gorge. It wasn’t a cloud at all, but a billowing tower of smoke from the Missionary Ridge Fire, ignited that afternoon on a slope about 35 miles south of where we sat. Over the coming weeks, the blaze would eat through 73,000 acres of parched scrub oak and aspen and conifer forest, along with 83 structures. It eclipsed the 26,000-acre Lime Creek Burn as the state’s largest wildfire on record, but lost the title to the Hayman Fire (138,114 acres) that was burning at the same time across the state.

Aerial view from the south of Hayman Fire June 30, 2002. Road traversing from left to right is U.S. Highway 24. Town of Manitou Springs is in lower part of photo, Colorado Springs to the right. Garden of the Gods park defined by three upright orange rock formations in right center just below smoke line. Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.

And it was then that we realized this was no normal abnormality, and that 2002 would go down as the Water Year of our Discontent: dry, smoky, and catastrophic for irrigators and river rafters alike.

This year is shaping up to be even more dire. Indeed, with temperatures in Silverton climbing into the 60s this week, I’m sure a few people have shed some layers and soaked up the sun — in March. Now, however, we know that this is no anomaly, but part of a long-term trend toward aridification, most likely caused or at least exacerbated by climate change. Call it the “new normal” if you’d like, but just remember the words of Bruce Cockburn: “The trouble with normal is it always gets worse.”

I wanted to wait until April to give this assessment, on the off chance that the weather might shift radically in the last days of March in a way that might give us all some hope. While anything’s still possible, I’ve seen enough to bet that, unfortunately, we may already have seen peak snowpack in many places, making this the driest water year on record by far. And besides, I wanted to get the spring runoff “predict the peak” streamflow contest going before, well, the streamflows actually peaked.

A crappy snow year does not necessarily lead to a nasty fire season, since so many other factors come into play. The same can sort of be true about the peak of the spring runoff. That’s more about timing: A fast melt after a dry winter can result in a bigger, albeit short-lived, peak, than a slow melt of a relatively abundant snowpack. The river’s average flows across the entire water year are much more closely tied to snowpack, but those can also be affected by a big monsoon season.

Still, looking back at similar years in the past can help with predicting flows this year. I’m going to focus on the Animas River in Durango, because it’s my home river, it is unimpeded by dams or major upstream diversions, and it is a good proxy for a lot of other Southwestern rivers, since its headwaters are located in the same mountain range as those of the Rio Grande, the Gunnison, the Dolores, the San Miguel, the San Juan, and the Uncompahgre rivers. If the runoff is weak in the Animas, it is also likely to be weak in all of those other rivers.

The snowpack graph shows that the current heat wave has really taken a toll, and probably launched the spring runoff.

Here’s the temperature graph for the Animas watershed. You can see that it reached a record high for the date of 42.8° F. That doesn’t seem too warm until you consider that the median temperature for March 18 is about 25° F. Probably more significant than this one little blip is the fact that daily temperatures have far exceeded “normal” on dozens of days this winter. Also note the contrast with 2002 (the darker green line).

When you talk to Colorado climate folks and old-timers with good memories, you’ll often hear that the 1977 water year was even drier than 2002. Unfortunately, SNOTEL records typically go back only to the early 1980s, so it’s difficult to make a good apples-to-apples comparison. But by looking at the “natural flow” of the Colorado River, which is the calculated estimate of how much the river would carry without any human intervention, it appears that 1977 was, indeed, the driest winter across the Upper Colorado River Basin since at least 1900.

However, historic Animas River flow data suggest that 2002 was actually drier in southwestern Colorado.

Here’s the average annual daily flow for the Animas. Note that there are several years missing between 1898 and 1911; apparently the USGS did not record flows during those years.

Average stream flows on the Animas River have trended downward over the last century and some, but the river has struggled through extreme dry years in the past. Source: USGS.

Because that graph isn’t so easy to read, here’s a table showing the eleven lowest average daily flow water years. Note that in 1927 they only had 92 records, potentially skewing the results. The 2002 and 2018 water years were lower than in 1977. If snowpack levels correlate with annual average flows, then we could expect this year’s to be around 200 cfs, which is pretty damned dismal.

When I took a look at the peak streamflows for the Animas, I was a bit taken aback to see that in 2002 it topped out above 1,000 cfs, which is more than I would have expected.

Then I saw the date: It peaked in September, after the monsoon arrived, not in the spring. The 2002 spring runoff actually topped out on May 21 at 880 cfs, which was far lower than the 1977 spring peak.

Based on all of that, my Animas River peak streamflow prediction is a bit wacky, but I’m standing by it: It will top out at 700 cfs on April 15.

The rest of the Land Desk community will have a chance to predict the peak starting next week, when I’ll announce the terms, the river gauges in the contest, and the prizes for the winner(s). Most likely it will only be open to paid subscribers, so the time to upgrade is now!

We might as well get even more depressed. Here’s the snowpack graph for the Upper Colorado River Basin, showing 2026, 2002, and 2018 — i.e. the dismal years. Note that the spring melt has begun in earnest. If it continues at this rate, runoff will be over by early May.

And here’s the natural flow graph for Lees Ferry on the Colorado River. Natural flow is the calculation of how much water would be in the river at that point if there were no human diversions or consumptive use upstream. If you compare this to the historic streamflows on the Animas River, you’ll notice that there is a correlation, but it’s not direct. For example, 1977 was the driest year on record for the Colorado River as a whole, with a total volume of just 5.4 million acre-feet, which is about half what the Lower Basin alone was using throughout the 1990s.

The ten lowest years on record are:

1977: 5.4 MAF

2002: 5.9 MAF

1934: 6.6 MAF

2021: 7.2 MAF

1954: 8.3 MAF

2012: 8.4 MAF

2018: 8.5 MAF

2025: 8.5 MAF (provisional)

1981: 8.6 MAF

1931: 8.9 MAF

It looks like we could be in that 5.4 MAF territory once again. That wasn’t a huge deal in 1977, since it was an anomaly. It is a big deal now.

And just so you know, it’s not just the Colorado River watershed that’s in trouble. Even California, which got pummeled by atmospheric rivers, is losing its snow rapidly.

📖 Reading (and watching) Room 🧐

The Upper Basin and Lower Basin may not have come up with a deal yet on how to save the Colorado River’s massive plumbing system, but they are looking for solutions. One of them is creating an Upper Basin conservation pool. Like a lot of issues related to the rivers, it’s a slightly complicated one. But Heather Sackett of Aspen Journalism gives a really great rundown. She’s always a must-read for those looking to understand what’s going on with the Colorado.

🗺️ Messing with Maps 🧭

The current heat wave is breaking records across the West. Here’s a little sampling:

If you want a quick and comprehensive look where those records were broken during the last day, week, or month, check out coolwx.com/record. In the side panel you can click on the United States and the time period you wish to see and it will show an animation of all of the records. It looks kind of like this:

#Snowpack news March 23, 2026

Update: I’ve replaced all the graphics that I published early this morning. I hope they are now accurate. All major basins are showing a big drop which was expected with the record heat the past few days.

Westwide SNOTEL basin-filled map March 22, 2026.

Global copper demand outstrips supply, threatening electrification and industrial growth

Capstone Copper’s Pinto Valley Mine in Miami, Arizona. Jim West/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Morgan Bazilian, Colorado School of Mines and Adam Charles Simon, University of Michigan

Demand for copper is surging because of demand from new technologies, but suppliers are struggling to keep up, and they are likely to fall further behind in the coming years, resulting in shortfalls globally. Even though copper prices are at historically high levels, the financial risk involved in mining means that prices will need to go much higher before mining companies see profit in addressing the supply shortage.

Those are the key findings from our March 2026 analysis of the global copper market.

Copper is an essential material that is used in generating and distributing electrical power; cables, wires, motor windings, transformers and cooling equipment in data centers; and advanced manufacturing of consumer and defense products.

It’s so important that in 2025, the U.S. Geological Survey designated copper as a mineral “vital to the U.S. economy and national security.”

Copper is abundant in the ground, but there’s not enough being extracted to be able to meet the demand. That’s because investors want higher and more reliable returns than copper mines currently offer, and the industry faces complex permitting processes and can’t find enough workers. Our analysis found that for new technologies to continue to develop, and for the global economy to continue to grow, even higher prices are ahead.

Few options other than mining

In the United States, the increased effort to build data centers for artificial intelligence systems has created a massive need for copper. Car manufacturers require some copper for internal combustion vehicles and four to five times more for the batteries and other parts of electric vehicles. In addition, as global temperatures increase, demand for power-hungry air conditioning in many emerging and developing economies has been growing, too, requiring copper inside the equipment and more wiring to power them.

Recycling existing copper could help reduce the amount needed from new mines, but it would not be enough to meet the rising demand. Even under generous assumptions, we found that recycling might provide 35% of the global copper supply by 2050, with mining producing the remaining 65%.

Substituting another material for copper won’t really work either – at least in the short-to-medium term. Copper has an unmatched combination of physical properties such as electrical conductivity, durability and flexibility – which is why it became popular for so many purposes in the first place.

Aluminum could replace it in some cases, but not all – and that would amount to only about 2% of total copper use.

Fiber optics can also replace copper at times. Their glass fibers can carry more data more quickly than copper wires, but they can’t also carry power. New copper substitutes, like ultra-conductive aluminum, carbon nanotubes, and niobium phosphide, are promising but still in their infancy.

Complicated circumstances

The only other way to get more copper is to mine more of it. But building a new mine can take 20 to 30 years – a period during which investors are spending money but not yet getting returns, and a time when costs can rise significantly from preliminary estimates.

If industrial and economic growth is to stay on track in the 2030s, new mines would need to be in the financing and permitting processes right now. But they aren’t.

Even Resolution Copper, which started decades ago trying to develop a mine in Arizona outside Phoenix, has more work to do before being able to start mining. Since 1995, the project’s developers have spent several billion dollars on planning, permitting and legal cases.

Once in place, it could meet as much as 25% of U.S. copper demand from a high-concentration body of ore located near existing truck and rail lines.

Evaluating the environmental and community effects of proposed mining projects is essential, but in many countries there are overlapping levels of review that have different, and variable, timelines. And many parts of the process can be appealed to courts by opponents or supporters. That increases costs and imposes time delays for mine developers – and means consumers will have to wait longer, and pay more, for copper-intensive products and services.

Yet even though copper prices are near historic highs – over US$13,000 per ton on the London Metals Exchange – the profit margins are still too low and price swings are too volatile for companies to forecast reliable returns on the risky investment of building new mines.

Two large metal frames sit in a rocky landscape. — Metal structures on the site of Resolution Copper’s proposed underground copper mine in Arizona, in a place that has been sacred to Native American people for thousands of years. Jim West/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Global inequalities

Copper is produced in a handful of countries but used widely around the world.

That leaves copper vulnerable to national policies about imports and exports, leading to trade disruptions and price shocks.

Countries with low and middle per-capita income are likely to require substantial amounts of copper to grow their economies. Right now, wealthy countries like the U.S. and members of the European Union have about 440 pounds (200 kilograms) per person in existing physical infrastructure – electrical wiring, plumbing systems, architectural elements and transportation. But that figure is 20 pounds (9 kilograms) per person in Africa and less than 2 pounds (1 kilogram) per capita. in India.

A large metal structure sits near a pile of rock. — A copper mine in Miami, Ariz. Jim West/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Shortages are likely

To get a picture of what might be possible if there were a significant global effort to increase copper availability, we evaluated several optimistic scenarios. We looked at faster permitting for new mines, higher recycling rates and smoother mining processes than those currently in place. But even then, economic development drove demand to grow far faster than the available supply.

Existing mines will have decreasing amounts of ore available and will produce less copper in 2050 than they do in 2025. Yet even if all known copper deposits with known mine-opening dates go into production as scheduled copper supplies will not keep up with demand.

Our best-case scenario has global mine production at about 30 million metric tons of copper a year by 2050. But to keep pace with global economic development, the world will need 37 million metric tons of mined copper a year by then.

To meet that additional need, more mines will need to be opened, and extra production developed – including extracting residual copper from old mine debris that was previously viewed as having too little copper to be worth processing.

An aerial view of a large industrial operation with a water pit and gravel roads. — The open-pit Cobre Panama copper mine in Donoso, Panama. AP Photo/Matias Delacroix

A role for government

We found that more copper could be made available more quickly if permitting were streamlined in ways that preserve environmental standards but offer companies proposing new mines some predictability for regulatory approval.

If society wants more copper, faster, then people must accept that higher, more stable prices are part of the solution. Speculative trading contributes to price volatility, which complicates financial projections that are central to deal-making and makes it more expensive to invest in the large, long-term and irreversible expenses that new mines require.

Higher copper prices will ripple through the economy, raising costs for construction, energy and technology. But pretending those costs can be avoided doesn’t make them disappear. Underinvestment across the supply chain from mines to processing today shows up as bottlenecks tomorrow, including delayed grid upgrades and constrained digital growth.

Morgan Bazilian, Professor of Public Policy and Director of the Payne Institute, Colorado School of Mines and Adam Charles Simon, Arthur F. Thurnau Professor of Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of Michigan

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

#ColoradoRiver negotiations resume with focus on stopgap measure in face of worsening hydrology — Scott Franz (KUNC.org) #COriver #aridification

Sunlight glimmers on the Colorado River near Page, Arizona on Nov. 2, 2022. Alex Hager/KUNC

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

March 20, 2026

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

Critical negotiations about the future of the Colorado River took a two week hiatus last month after the seven states in the basin missed a key Valentine’s Day deadline for striking a deal, New Mexico’s water negotiator said Thursday.

Estevan López said talks resumed March 2, and the upper and lower basin states are using a short-term pitch from Nevada as a starting point.

“Right now, we’re in discussions with the lower basin about a potential short-term agreement,” Lopez told New Mexico’s Interstate Stream Commission.

Nevada is proposing to increase water releases from upper basin reservoirs like Flaming Gorge by at least 500,000 acre feet to help prevent Lake Powell from dropping too low.

The latest forecasts predict that Powell could drop enough to stop producing hydropower by December.

In return, lower basin states would agree to cut their water use by 1.25 million acre feet “until system conditions have meaningfully improved.”

López said upper basin states had a counter proposal and talks about it were scheduled on Thursday afternoon.

“The hydrology right now is incredibly dire,” López said. “So we’re beginning for this year, for the remainder of this water year, we’re suggesting that there needs to be a release from the upper initial units, most likely Flaming Gorge, since that’s the reservoir that’s largest and has the most water. And we are anticipating that there will be a release of half a million acre feet from Flaming Gorge to prop up Lake Powell.”

Meanwhile, the Interior Department is reviewing thousands of comments it received on a range of options for how to manage the vital waterway.

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

And after the states missed two deadlines to reach an agreement, it’s becoming increasingly likely the federal government will try to piece together its own plan before the current guidelines expire in the fall.

Water negotiators are also facing a worsening water supply forecast with record low snowpack across the West.

A map shows how much water is predicted to arrive at certain locations in the Colorado River basin as of a March 1 forecast.

Cody Moser with the federal Colorado Basin River Forecast Center said last week just 2.3 million acre feet of Colorado River water is expected to reach Lake Powell through July. That’s about a third of what’s considered normal.

“You’ll notice it’s not a pretty picture here with lots of reds,” he said as he presented a color coded map of how much water is expected to reach certain locations in the river basin. “That’s 50 to 70% of normal April through July runoff. Those maroon colors are 30 to 50% and we even have some of those pinks, which indicates less than 30% normal seasonal spring runoff.”

An attorney for New Mexico’s Interstate Stream Commission said Thursday the state expects the Interior Department to identify a preferred option for managing the dwindling river by July. The current operating guidelines for Lake Powell and Lake Mead expire in the fall.

#Montrose #wastewater treatment plant begins $40 million upgrade — KJCT.com

Click the link to read the article on the KJCT website (Spence Breed). Here’s an excerpt:

March 17, 2026

The city of Montrose held a groundbreaking Monday marking the start of a major upgradereaking Monday marking the start of a major upgrade to its wastewater treatment plant, a facility that has operated with much of its original equipment since it was built in the 1980s. The project will replace outdated equipment and install new infrastructure to meet current and future water quality standards set by state and federal regulators. Mayor Dave Frank said the plant’s equipment has become difficult to maintain.

“The equipment in our wastewater treatment plant is original to the building of the wastewater treatment plant,” Frank said. “So when something breaks, they’re having to find parts in museums and junkyards in order to repair the equipment that we currently have.”

[…]

The plant treats sanitary sewage in accordance with federal and state standards, releasing treated water back into the Uncompahgre River. The project will replace existing equipment with newer versions and install a tank for biological phosphorus removal. Wastewater Treatment Plant Superintendent Hyrum Webb said the phosphorus removal addition is a proactive step.

“We want to get ahead of the curve on removing phosphorus out of the water before we’re required to by the state,” Webb said. “It gives us some incentive points to help out with future permitting, and it’ll be cheaper now than when the state mandates us to do so.”

Frank said water quality going back into the river is a priority…The project is expected to take approximately 18 months to complete. The total cost is estimated at $40 million, which will be funded through bonds and reserve funds.

Eagle County water officials are urging property owners to scale back usage, go native — The #Vail Daily #EagleRiver

An example of lawn space free of non-native turf grass and filled with native plants that consumer far less water. Courtesy photo

Click the link to read the article on The Vail Daily website (David O. Williams). Here’s an excerpt:

March 15, 2026

Eagle County water officials are urging property owners to voluntarily scale back water usage in a big way this spring and summer, reducing outdoor watering of landscaping in order to avoid fines and to keep water providers from having to declare a water shortage. The idea is to keep people in tiers one and two for outdoor water use – 95% of which does not return to local streams and rivers — and that one of the best ways to do so is water-wise landscaping, or basically tearing up non-native turf grass and going with native plants that require far less outdoor watering…The Eagle County Conservation District runs a program called Beyond Lawn that will assess your yard, give you some ideas on how to minimize turf, how to go with water-wise native plants, reconfigure your irrigation system, find like-minded landscapers, and make sure fines and surcharges from your water provider aren’t part of your future this summer. Beyond Lawn’s wait list is available to join online. There is also a do-it-yourself workshop being held in conjunction with Walking Mountains and the Climate Action Collaborative at 5:30 p.m., Thursday, April 16…

If not exactly a turf war, water officials’ war on turf could gain significant new teeth as Eagle County reworks its land-use codes, according to Snyder, which currently allow for anywhere between 3,000 and 6,500 square feet of irrigated turf for new homes.

“We think that’s excessive,” Snyder said. “(So we’re) putting forward recommendations to narrow that down to 500 square feet, which is still a nice backyard. The hope would be that with new builds, the county and others would pursue land-use code changes that actually would say, ‘this is reasonable.’ And then it gets really hard to overwater 500 square feet.”

Old land-use codes that allowed up to 12,000 square feet of non-native turf have led to people using 60,000 gallons a month (extreme tier five). That kind of water use reduces the shared supply for everything from drinking water to fighting wildfires, and district officials say massively overwatered yards are not any more fire-resistant.

Map of the Eagle River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69310517

Area sees record heat, Governor Polis stands up #Drought Task Force — The #PagosaSprings Sun #SanJuanRiver

Colorado Drought Monitor map March 17, 2026.

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

March 19, 2026

Shawn Prochazka is also predicting more record high temperatures to have been set Wednes- day, March 18 (the high temperature reached was not available by press time that day); today, Thursday, March 19; and tomorrow, Friday, March 20. Prochazka predicted temperatures being 25 degrees above normal. Prochazka also notes that the record high for the month of March is 73 degrees, which was set March 19, 1907, and March 23 and 25, 1940. Warm and dry weather is expected to stick around throughout the weekend and into next week, with Prochazka indicating the next chance for precipitation possibly starting around March 25…Temperatures are expected to stay above freezing throughout the weekend in Pagosa Springs as a high of 82 degrees is forecast for Friday, March 20, with a low of 37 degrees and clear skies in the evening…

The drought conditions in the area have also worsened, with the U.S. Drought Monitor showing that 100 percent of Archuleta County was in moderate drought as of March 10, up from 47.89 percent of the county being in moderate drought and 100 percent of the county being abnormally dry the previous week…Snowpack also continues to fall below median levels in the region and across the state. As of Wednesday, the San Miguel, Dolores, Animas and San Juan river basins sat at 45 percent of the March 18 median. The Wolf Creek summit SNOTEL site, which sits at an elevation of 10,930 feet, was at 56 percent of the day’s median, while the Upper San Juan site, which sits at 10,140 feet, was at 49 percent of the day’s median.

On Tuesday, due to the recordbreaking warm temperatures and low snowpack across Colorado, Governor Jared Polis activated the state’s Drought Task Force and Phase 2 of Colorado’s Drought Response Plan. Acting on recommendations from the state’s Water Conditions Monitoring Committee and partner agencies, the task force will help the state bet- ter understand and elevate the local, regional and sector-specific impacts of worsening drought conditions, a press release from the state explains.

“Colorado is experiencing thewarmest year so far in our 131-year record, and one of the driest,” Polis said. “Activating the Drought Task Force will help ensure we are protecting one of our most precious resources by closely tracking impacts, supporting communities and coordinating better as we prepare for the year ahead.”

The Drought Task Force, last activated in 2020, brings together senior leadership from key state agencies, including the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Colorado Department of Agriculture, Department of Local Affairs, and the Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, according to the press release. It further explains that the group assesses drought conditions statewide, elevates local impacts to state leadership, and can convene regional or sector-specific workgroups to gather information and share resources…

As of noon on Wednesday, March 18, the San Juan River at Pagosa Springs was running at a flow of 286 cubic feet per second (cfs), above the median flow for March 18 The median flow for March 18 sits at 121.5 cfs, with a historical low for the date being 39 cfs and the historical high being 1,040 cfs.

San Juan River Basin. Graphic credit Wikipedia.

Why Colorado River negotiations stalled, and how they could resume with the possibility of agreement — Karen Schlatter and Sharon B. Megdal (TheConversation.com)

The reservoir behind the Glen Canyon Dam is extremely low. Jim West/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Karen Schlatter, Colorado State University and Sharon B. Megdal, University of Arizona

The seven U.S. states that make up the Colorado River basin are struggling to agree on how best to manage the river’s water as its supply dwindles due to climate change and a period of prolonged drought. Their negotiations, which are not open to the public, missed a Feb. 14, 2026, deadline the federal government had established, after which federal officials said they would impose their own plan.

The federal government has not yet done so, but the prospect of such an action is not good news for the nearly 40 million people who depend on the Colorado River for water, energy, agriculture and recreation, nor for the estimated US$1.4 trillion in economic activity the river supports.

We have led or participated in complex water management discussions from the river’s headwaters in Colorado to its delta in Mexico and elsewhere in the arid Southwest and around the world. Even on less contentious issues, the keys to success involve learning together, understanding one another’s interests, working through conflict and developing inclusive solutions for diverse participants. And that works best with an outside facilitator.

The five most common sources of conflict between people are values, data, relationships, interests and structure. The current Colorado River negotiations include all five. We believe a process designed and facilitated by negotiation experts could help break the logjam.

We recognize it can be very hard to reach an agreement when what’s at stake are countless lives, massive amounts of money, enormous quantities of hydroelectric power and not nearly enough water.

But compromise on Colorado River management is possible and, in fact, was achieved to curb California’s water use in the 2000s, to negotiate an interim agreement to coordinate operations at the Lake Mead and Lake Powell reservoirs in 2007, and to enact contingency plans to manage drought in 2019. But this time around, circumstances are different.

Previous negotiations

The negotiations leading up to those agreements were often facilitated by officials from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation who focused on reaching broad agreements on general principles and concepts before delving into details. Federal staff also actively guided key agreements and provided the science and computer models to make well-informed decisions. And the states’ negotiators knew the Department of Interior would act unilaterally to make damaging cuts to water supply if states couldn’t come to their own agreement.

The negotiators for the states had long-standing relationships and built trust by frequently communicating outside formal meetings and seeking to listen to and understand other states’ perspectives, even if they didn’t agree.

The states also agreed to use the bureau’s computer model for analyzing scenarios of climate change and management decisions. That meant all the negotiators were looking at the same data when delving into possible options. And the political and social environment was less polarized than today.

The current situation

In this round of negotiations, federal leadership has been lagging. The Department of the Interior has not made clear what the consequences might be for the states if they fail to agree. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has been without a permanent commissioner since President Donald Trump retook office in January 2025.

And federal staff have only recently begun helping to facilitate the discussions.

The states are fractured into subgroups, according to whether they are in the river’s Upper Basin – Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico – or the Lower Basin, which includes Arizona, Nevada and California. Each basin group holds strong positions and has generally been unwilling to shift.

Each basin group is using a different set of assumptions for the bureau’s computer model to explore options. And the discussion often gets stuck on details, which prevents progress toward broader agreements.

In addition, the political context has shifted significantly, with increased polarization and politicization of the issues, creating barriers to effective dialogue and deliberation. Today, compromise can seem unattainable.

But those relatively new challenges to Colorado River compromise are not an excuse for failure.

A group of people sit around a table in a formal meeting room. — Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, center between flags, meets with governors and representatives of the seven Colorado River basin states in January 2026. U.S. Department of the Interior via X

A way forward?

The current negotiations have all been done behind closed doors. From talking with people involved in the negotiations, we understand the negotiators have been left to set their own agendas and meeting plans and conduct their own communications and follow-up, with no formal facilitators.

It’s reasonable to expect the negotiators to be ready to represent their states’ interests, working through an incredibly complicated landscape of hydrology, climate and management scenario modeling, water law and administration, and politics. But we believe it’s unreasonable – and unrealistic and unfair – to expect them to also be experts at designing and facilitating an effective process for sorting out their differences.

Federal officials are not necessarily the best people to run the process either. And if the agency that ultimately needs to approve any deal is the one leading the process, real or perceived biases about the states or key issues in the agreement could further complicate the discussions.

We believe that agreement between the seven states is still possible. It may be less effective to bring in a third-party facilitator at this stage in the negotiation process, though, because of the degraded trust, hardened positions and shortage of time.

One possible outcome is that the Bureau of Reclamation will select and enforce one of the five management alternatives it outlined in January 2026. But that could lead to decades of litigation going up to the Supreme Court. No one wins in this scenario.

A more hopeful possibility is that the bureau adopts short-term rules that would give the states another chance to negotiate a longer-term deal – ideally with an unbiased third-party facilitator for support.

A collaborative and consensus-based planning process in the Yakima River Basin in Washington state in the early 2010s is evidence that while nobody gets everything they want in a negotiated agreement, “if they can (all) get something, that’s really the basis of the plan,” as a Washington state official told The New York Times.

Karen Schlatter, Director, Colorado Water Center, Colorado State University and Sharon B. Megdal, Professor of Environmental Science and Director, Water Resources Research Center, University of Arizona

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

#ColoradoRiver faces a day of reckoning — Jonathan P. Thompson (WritersOnTheRange.org) #COriver #aridification

Glen Canyon Dam, Photo by Luca Bravo, courtesy Unsplash

Click the link to read the article on the Writers on the Range website (Jonathan P. Thompson):

March 16, 2026

We are two and a half decades into the Southwest’s most severe drought of the last 1,200 years, and this winter’s snow dearth is one of the most extreme on record.

Without an April-May miracle, human-caused climate change likely will finally catch up with the Colorado River—and the 40 million people who rely on it—in the form of a full-blown crisis later this year.

“Drought” may be too hopeful a word, since it implies an eventual end. Most climate scientists refer to the phenomenon as “long-term aridification,” caused by a lack of rain and snow and warming temperatures.

The West has just experienced its warmest winter since record-keeping began in 1895. The average October-through-December temperature in some parts of the region has been more than 8° F warmer than the 20th-century mean. This is a huge anomaly.

In Gunnison County, Colorado, one of the colder places in the nation, the average minimum temperature for that four-month stretch was about 19° F. That doesn’t seem so bad until you realize that back in 1990, another dry, warm winter, the corresponding measure was 13.6° F. For the Upper Colorado River Basin, the average minimum temperature for that four-month stretch was about 26° F, the warmest on record.

The warmer temperatures tinker with the health of the watershed.

This water year, which began Oct. 1, started out with record-high precipitation in some areas, most of which fell as rain. That helped fend off severe drought conditions. But what really counts is the mountain snowpack, which serves as a giant natural reservoir that supplies at least 70% of the Colorado River’s water each year. Warm temperatures have left some areas snow-free even in parts of Wyoming, where the white stuff normally would be piled high in March.

The diminishing snow has, in turn, shrunk the Colorado River. The “natural” flow—or an estimate of how much water the river would carry without upstream diversions or human consumption—has been below 15 million acre-feet (MAF) at Lees Ferry during 20 of the last 26 years, with an average flow of 12.25 MAF during that time.

This matters, because when the Colorado River Compact of 1922 parceled out the river’s waters, the river was assumed to carry an average annual flow of at least 16.5 MAF. Demand has significantly exceeded supply for the last 26 years, forcing the drawdown of the watershed’s big savings accounts, Lake Powell and Lake Mead, to about one-third of their capacity.

Meanwhile, to comply with the Colorado River Compact of 1922—the document that serves as the Ten Commandments for the management of the river’s waters—the Upper Basin States must release, on average, at least 7.5 MAF from Glen Canyon Dam each year.

Given that the Upper Basin states need a bunch of water to keep their cities and farms from drying up, and that an additional 800,000 acre-feet evaporates or seeps into the underlying rocks at Lake Powell each year, you can see how the warming climate wreaks havoc on the math of the Colorado River.

The entire river system now teeters on the brink, and this year’s snow drought may be what pushes it over the edge.

The Bureau of Reclamation’s latest forecast says Lake Powell’s surface level is likely to drop below the minimum level needed for power production later this year. This so-called “deadpool” would not only mean the end of hydropower production, it would also force all of the dam’s releases to go through the river’s 8-foot-wide, steel outlet tubes, which were not made for sustained use. This could compromise the tubes and the dam itself.

It’s possible that the dam would even be shifted to a run-of-the-river operation, in which releases equal the amount of water flowing into the reservoir, minus evaporation and seepage. That would almost certainly result in water shortages downstream, at the very least for the Central Arizona Project, which serves the Phoenix metro area.

This quandary didn’t sneak up on us.

The seven Colorado River states and the federal water managers can’t agree on who should make what cuts in consumption. The feds, meanwhile, haven’t gotten around to re-engineering Glen Canyon Dam or creating a bypass around it that would enable the water to keep flowing. It’s almost as if they’ve been paralyzed by the belief that dry winters were just a minor glitch.

Now, as the spring runoff gets underway, it has become clear that nature won’t save us: We have no choice but to live within increasingly meager limits.

Jonathan Thompson is a contributor to Writers on the Range, writersontherange.org, an independent nonprofit dedicated to spurring lively conversation about the West. He is a longtime journalist and author about the West.

Spring Outlook 2026: Drought forecasted to expand in U.S. West, parts of Plains — NOAA

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

March 20, 2026

Drought conditions are forecast to worsen or develop for many areas in the West and south-central Plains, according to NOAA’s Spring Outlook released today for April through June. Forecasters from NOAA’s National Weather Service also predict above-normal temperatures for the majority of the U.S.

“Factors influencing NOAA’s Spring Outlook include the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO), low snowpack in the West and soil moisture content throughout the lower 48 states,” said Ken Graham, director of NOAA’s National Weather Service. “This spring will also feature a transition from La Niña to ENSO-neutral conditions, meaning neither El Niño nor La Niña.”

This map depicts where drought persistence, development or improvement is the most likely outcome based on short- and long-range statistical and dynamical forecasts from March 19 through June 30, 2026. (Image credit: NOAA) Download Image

As of mid-March, moderate to exceptional drought conditions exist across 55% of the continental United States.
“Drought conditions worsened or developed for much of the Great Plains, Lower Mississippi Valley, and Southeast U.S. due to warmer and drier than normal conditions this winter,” said Jon Gottschalck, chief of the Operational Prediction Branch, NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center. “Drought is likely to persist across much of the West while developing in parts of the Pacific Northwest, Great Basin, central Rockies and Southwest. Dry conditions are expected to improve for some areas in the Midwest and Atlantic seaboard.”
Temperature and precipitation outlooks
The temperature outlook for April through June shows above-normal temperatures are favored across the majority of the western U.S. eastward to include much of the Plains, the lower and middle Mississippi Valley, the Ohio Valley, the Tennessee Valley, the Southeast and the southern Mid-Atlantic. The highest likelihood of enhanced warmth ranges from the Southwest to the Inter-Mountain West. Below-normal temperatures are forecast for east central Alaska.The precipitation outlook favors below-average precipitation for the Pacific Northwest, parts of the Great Basin, Southwest, central High Plains and most of the Rockies. The greatest likelihood of below-average precipitation is forecast from the Pacific Northwest to the central Rockies. While above-normal precipitation is forecast for western Alaska, the eastern Great Lakes, mid-Atlantic and parts of the Southeast.

Spring flood risk

This map depicts the locations where there is a greater than 50% chance of minor, moderate or major flooding from April through June, 2026.(Image credit: NOAA) Download Image

NOAA’s National Hydrologic Assessment, issued by NOAA’s National Water Center, evaluates a number of factors, including current conditions of snowpack, drought, soil saturation levels, frost depth, streamflow and precipitation.

The overall flood risk across most of the continental U.S. for Spring 2026 is currently assessed as normal to below normal. This risk determination was made primarily because of a dry and warm winter that resulted in dry soils over much of the eastern U.S., mitigating the threat of rainfall-driven flooding. Additionally, a well-below-normal snowpack across most of the country will reduce the risk of snowmelt-driven flooding.

However, the Red River of the North and the lower Ohio Valley typically experience flooding annually; therefore, flooding is anticipated in these basins this year as well.

“We anticipate typical spring flooding this year over portions of the Greater Mississippi River Basin, but the risk for widespread significant flooding is low,” said Ed Clark, director of NOAA’s National Water Center. “However, it is crucial to remember that heavy rainfall has the potential to lead to a major flooding event.”

Flooding can occur rapidly from intense rainfall, even in regions with a generally low risk. Rainfall intensity and location can only be accurately forecast days in the future, and flood risk can change rapidly. Stay current on flood risks in your area with the latest official watches and warnings at weather.gov. For detailed hydrologic conditions and forecasts, please visit water.noaa.gov.

#ColoradoRiver Upper Basin states test methods to fill #LakePowell pool: States say automatically turning to agriculture isn’t always reliable — Heather Sackett (AspenJournalism.org) #COriver #aridification

Lake Powell, on the Colorado River, is seen from the air in 2019. The Upper Basin states are planning how to potentially fill a dedicated pool in the nation’s second largest reservoir. CREDIT: ECOFLIGHT

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

March 19, 2026

With a Lake Powell conservation pool nearly guaranteed for the future of Colorado River management, the four Upper Basin states are exploring and refining the ways they could fill it.

Conservation by those states (Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming) could be one of the keys to reaching a deal among the seven states that share the Colorado River and an important part of the framework for managing the drought-stricken river after this year. The water saved by the Upper Basin states could be stored in Lake Powell as a means of maintaining higher water levels and as an insurance policy against drastic cuts.

This type of pool isn’t yet being used in Lake Powell; it would have to be established by an agreement among the seven states. An agreement in the 2019 Drought Contingency Plan allowed for a 500,000 acre-foot Upper Basin storage pool in Lake Powell, but so far, the states have not utilized this and the agreement expires this year.

The Upper Basin and Lower Basin (California, Arizona and Nevada) have been at an impasse for more than two years about how the nation’s two largest reservoirs — Lake Powell and Lake Mead — will be managed and shortages shared in the future. The situation has never been more dire: The current guidelines for river management expire at the end of the year, while record-low snowpack is expected to push reservoir levels below critical thresholds. The seven states have blown past two deadlines to come up with a plan, and the federal government is gearing up for emergency actions to manage reservoirs.

The crux of the disagreement between the two basins has been over who should take shortages in drought years. The Lower Basin has committed to 1.5 million acre-feet of reductions annually and wants cuts beyond that to be shared by the Upper Basin. The Upper Basin says its water users already take cuts in some years because streams run dry by midsummer and any contributions they make must be voluntary.

TThe main boat ramp at Wahweap Marina was unusable due to low water levels in Lake Powell in December 2021. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is projecting that the reservoir will fall below critical thresholds later this year. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Contribution not conservation

Some Upper Basin officials have made a slight shift in the way they now talk about a pool in Lake Powell. No longer referred to as a conservation pool, it is called a “contribution” pool, reflecting the different methods — not only conservation of agricultural water — of contributing water to a Lake Powell pool.

Traditionally, the Colorado River basin states have turned to programs that pay irrigators to voluntarily leave fields dry for a season or two as the primary way to cut water use. With agriculture representing the majority of water use in the Upper Basin, it’s often the low-hanging fruit when it comes to water savings.

But at least two Upper Basin states are turning to other methods to contribute water to a Lake Powell pool.

For example, New Mexico can contribute water from Navajo Reservoir that it leases from a tribe. In Colorado, the method is less straightforward, but officials say the state is prioritizing and expanding existing programs and projects that save water.

“When you talk about things like turf removal, water-loss prevention, watershed restoration, forest-health efforts that are happening on the ground, those are benefits not only to Colorado but to the entire system,” said Becky Mitchell, Colorado’s lead negotiator in talks among the seven states that share the Colorado River. “So we’re trying to figure out: How do we acknowledge all of that work?”

Raymond Langstaff, a rancher and president of the Bookcliff Conservation District, irrigates a parcel north of Rifle. The state of Colorado explored the feasibility of a demand management program that would pay irrigators to cut back, but did not implement one. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Utah touts pragmatic approach

Over its run in 2023 and 2024, the federally funded System Conservation Pilot Programdoled out $45 million to Upper Basin irrigators to cut their use by about 100,000 acre-feet. Utah water users received about $15 million of that in exchange for temporarily forgoing about 37,000 acre-feet of Colorado River water. The state put lessons learned with SCPP to use and is now in the second year of its own demand management pilot program, funded by $5 million from the state legislature and run by the Colorado River Authority of Utah.

The pilot program lets water users temporarily participate in a conservation program, and pays them $390 an acre-foot of water to do it. In 2025, Utah sent about 8,000 acre-feet downstream to Lake Powell under this pilot program, according to Marc Stilson, deputy director and principal engineer of the authority. There are a couple industrial water users and one municipal water user among the participants, but the majority are agricultural, he said.

“The pilot program is trying to iron out all these issues so that if we end up with some type of post-2026 commitment to do these types of voluntary conservation programs, we’re ready to do it,” Stilson said. “There is a very pragmatic approach in Utah looking at the big picture, and I think generally there is a sense that we have to adapt to changing conditions.”

Whether the program will continue after this year is unclear and could depend on whether the states reach a deal.

“We were anticipating that we’d have an agreement and that these types of programs would be part of that agreement,” Stilson said. “I think we just have to take a wait-and-see approach.”

Wyoming is also looking to traditional programs: State lawmakers are establishing a voluntary water conservation program. Wyoming state engineer and lead negotiator Brandon Gebhart did not respond to phone calls, emails or a list of questions from Aspen Journalism.

Boater on the San Juan River in May 2023. New Mexico officials say they can contribute water to a pool in Lake Powell through releasing water they lease in Navajo Reservoir. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

New Mexico seeks ‘more diverse’ ways to contribute water

The state of New Mexico plans to contribute to a Powell pool mostly through 20,000 acre-feet of Navajo Reservoir water, which it leases from the Jicarilla Apache Nation and can be released down the San Juan River. Along the way to Lake Powell, it boosts flows for endangered fish. Officials say because they can control when they release the water, it can be tracked with certainty to the reservoir.

“We all need to focus on more diverse ways of contributions, not just the classic conserved consumptive use,” said Ali Effati, Colorado River basin bureau chief for the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission.

Water managers say that automatically turning to agricultural water isn’t always reliable because as climate change continues to rob rivers of flows, even if senior water users want to participate in these types of conservation programs, they may not have any water to spare in dry years.

“That doesn’t mean that we have shied away from those sorts of activities, but to the extent that we can do our part without having to ask our agricultural community to cut water where they already take significant cuts almost annually, that’s just a preferable perspective,” said Estevan Lopez, lead negotiator for New Mexico.

Lopez said the likelihood of seeing a future Upper Basin contribution pool in Lake Powell is nearly 100% and that New Mexico will be ready, willing and able to contribute its share of water when the time comes.

“We have our percentage easily covered, plus a significant amount more,” he said.“We have our percentage easily covered, plus a significant amount more,” he said.

TThese hay bales stand ready to be collected on a ranch outside of Carbondale in July 2024. Upper Basin states have traditionally looked to agricultural to conserve water, but some are now turning to other ways to contribute water. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Colorado points to programs already in place

Colorado water users participated in both years of SCPP, but the state has been reluctant to take the leap into setting up its own program, despite being an early leader of the conservation conversation among the Upper Basin states.

In 2019, Colorado convened nine workgroups to explore the feasibility of a demand management program. The process included Colorado River water users from across the state and in multiple water-use sectors, who looked at how to set up a temporary, voluntary, compensated state program. But in 2022, the state water board shelved the studies without implementing a program, in favor of focusing on drought-resiliency initiatives.

Mitchell said the demand management feasibility investigation was an incredibly valuable exercise, but that there are still a number of open questions. Inaction on a demand management program doesn’t mean inaction on conservation overall, she said.

“The CWCB board voted to pause that investigation until there was clarity about whether any such program would be achievable, worthwhile and advisable and until there’s evidence that a demand management-esque program would benefit Colorado,” Mitchell said.

In 2023, Colorado lawmakers created a task force to again examine how the state could implement demand reduction and conservation programs. Water managers punted the issue again, failing to make recommendations to lawmakers on this topic, with some members saying conservation programs were “premature.”

The state still does not seem to have the policies in place to implement a large-scale, traditional conservation program in the near future. Mitchell said Colorado’s plan to contribute water to a Lake Powell pool is through the programs and projects already in place, many of which are funded through the state’s Water Plan grants.

At its March meeting, the CWCB approved more than $13 million for 38 projects across the state, according to a press release. They include things like urban turf replacement, creek and wetland restoration, outdoor water budgeting and wildfire ready action plans.

“Our strategy is to continue on with the programs that are already in existence, continue to fund conservation efforts that benefit all Coloradans as well as the entire system, continue to live within the means of the river and adapt our uses to align with available supply,” Mitchell said. “Because of all those programs already set up, we believe we have the majority of the structure in place.”

But Mitchell would not put a number on the amount of water that Colorado could contribute.

“We want to be a part of the solution when and how we are able to, but no, I’m not going to say we can do 100,000 acre-feet in a year like this,” she said.

Colorado River watchers may soon get some clarity around exactly how — and how much — Upper Basin states plan to contribute to a Lake Powell pool. On March 24, the Upper Colorado River Commission plans to consider projects to include in a “provisional accounting” memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, according to UCRC Director Chuck Cullom.

Some Upper Basin projects that are not traditional agricultural conservation programs may be counted under the MOU, allowing the states to “get credit” for the water they save through unconventional means. Cullom said the UCRC and Bureau of Reclamation will also soon have an accounting report of water-saving activities undertaken in 2025.

Mitchell said Colorado is still committed to a seven-state consensus agreement and wants to avoid litigation. But acknowledgement of what the Upper Basin is already doing to cut back on water use will be important.

“The MOU is one component where we would like to see some sort of real acknowledgement of what is occurring in terms of the way that we live within the means of the river and what our strict administration is doing,” Mitchell said. “As long as we are not acknowledged in what’s happening on the ground, I think we’re going to have struggles.”

#Denver Water #snowpack and water supply update: March 16, 2026, snowpack update for Denver Water’s collection area — News on Tap #SouthPlatteRiver #ColoradoRiver

Click the link to read the article on the Denver Water website:

March 16, 2026

Esta historia está disponible en español a continuación.

Denver Water depends on mountain snowpack for 90% of its water supply, which serves 1.5 million people in Denver and surrounding suburbs.

Snowpack as of March 16, 2026, was at or near record lows: The Colorado River Basin within Denver Water’s collection system was at 71% of normal. The South Platte River Basin within Denver Water’s collection area was 54% of normal. In Denver Water’s decades of records for its watershed collection areas, as of March 16, Colorado River snowpack ranked the third-worst on record, and the South Platte River snowpack remains ranked at the worst.

No matter what, Denver Water’s annual summer watering rules will always be in place during the irrigation season. And, it is likely that we will need to implement additional drought response measures this year. Denver Water’s response to drought conditions uses a layered approach, including the potential for additional watering restrictions, in order to preserve water supplies. Denver Water is developing recommendations on a potential drought response for the Board of Water Commissioners to consider over the next several weeks.

Since 2000, Denver Water’s response to dry conditions in previous years included issuing a Drought Watch (voluntary restrictions) in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2012 and 2013. In some of those years (2002, 2003, 2004, 2013), Denver Water levied additional drought restrictions as part of declaring a Stage 1 level response, which required mandatory reductions in outdoor water use.

Denver Water snowpack update for March 16, 2026

Conditions remain highly concerning. Poor snowfall combined with warm temperatures have left us roughly 3 feet to 4 feet of snow short of where we’d prefer to be in the Denver Water collection area at this time. To reach the normal spring snowpack peak, which typically occurs in April, we need to see an additional 7 feet to 7.5 feet of snow this spring.

Reservoir storage conditions are below average, but in reasonably good shape: as of March 16, 2026, the reservoirs were 80% full versus an average of 85% full for this time. Those levels are also temporarily affected by the need to keep Gross Reservoir low during construction to raise the dam, a project designed to increase the storage capacity of the reservoir.

Denver Water has been here several times over roughly 50 years of reliable records. On the positive side, we have experienced years that started dry and conditions dramatically improved in March, April and May. This year, however, we are running out of time to build the snowpack.

We’re reminding customers to do their part by making water-efficient upgrades, inside and outside, including rethinking their yards. These steps preserve water supplies and create more adaptable and drought-resilient landscapes that fit naturally into our climate.

No matter what, Denver Water’s annual summer watering rules will always be in place during the irrigation season. Additional drought restrictions, voluntary or mandatory, will depend in part on how the rest of the snow season shapes up and will be aimed at preserving water supplies in case this unusually dry stretch deepens into a multiyear drought.

Comment from Greg Fisher, Denver Water’s manager of demand planning:

“Another weekend snowstorm was welcome, though it mainly benefited lower elevations along the Front Range. Unfortunately, mountain regions didn’t receive significant snow. The good news is that moisture we get in the Denver region should give our yards and landscapes a good dose of moisture, limiting the need for any watering this week,” said Greg Fisher, Denver Water’s manager of demand planning.

“Overall, we’ve had an extremely dry winter, and that continues this week — the last week of winter — with unusually warm temperatures expected across the region. That could lead to snow melt even at high elevations and highlights the need to conserve water and limit the pull on our reservoir storage. We continue to emphasize the need to keep irrigation systems off until mid-to-late May at the earliest, and to be prepared for outdoor watering restrictions this spring.

“It’s a good time to consider landscape changes to your yard, with plants and grasses that require far less water and are far more adapted to Colorado’s dry stretches. Such landscapes, once established, can get through dry stretches like this far easier, and with far less water, and still give your yard a colorful and vibrant look.”

Denver Water has many resources for homeowners looking for inspiration and information about landscapes that fit naturally into our dry climate. Click here for conservation and efficiency tips for outdoor irrigation and to get more details on ways to ColoradoScape your property, including through rebates for turf removal and a DIY guide for landscape changes, among many other potential water-saving steps.

This chart shows the cumulative snowpack on March 16, 2026, in the area of the Colorado River Basin where Denver Water captures its water supply. The snowpack is 71% of normal, which ranks third-lowest on record for March 16. Image credit: Denver Water.

This chart shows the cumulative snowpack on March 16, 2026, in the area of the South Platte River Basin where Denver Water captures its water supply. The snowpack is 54% of normal, which ranks as the lowest on record for March 16. Image credit: Denver Water.

To learn more about the work Denver Water employees do to monitor the snowpack, read this TAP story about Denver Water employees snowshoeing into the forest near the top of Vail Pass in late February 2026 to conduct a monthly “snow survey.”

Additional information on Denver Water’s drought planning can be found here. Additional information on Denver Water reservoir levels, customer water use and snowpack can be found in the Water Watch Report, which is updated regularly during winter, spring and summer.

Novedades de Denver Water sobre el deshielo de la montaña y el suministro de agua

Novedades sobre el deshielo de la montaña del 16 de marzo de 2026 para el área de recolección de agua de Denver Water.

16 de marzo de 2026 | Escrito por: Personal de TAP

Denver Water depende del deshielo de la montaña para el 90 % de su suministro de agua, el cual da servicio a 1.5 millones de personas en Denver y en los suburbios de alrededor.

En 16 de marzo de 2026, el deshielo de la montaña se encontraba cerca de niveles históricamente bajos: La cuenca del río Colorado dentro del sistema de recolección de Denver Water estaba al 71 % de lo normal. La cuenca del río South Platte dentro del área de recolección de agua de Denver Water estaba al 54 % de lo normal. En las décadas de registros de Denver Water sobre sus cuencas hidrográficas de recolección, al 16 de marzo el deshielo de la montaña en la cuenca del río Colorado ocupaba el tercer peor lugar y el deshielo de la montaña en la cuenca del río South Platte ocupaba el peor de todos.

Pase lo que pase, las reglas anuales de riego en verano de Denver Water siempre estarán vigentes durante la temporada de riego. Además, es probable que este año sea necesario implementar medidas adicionales de respuesta ante una sequía. La respuesta de Denver Water a condiciones de sequía utiliza un enfoque por niveles, que incluye la posibilidad de aplicar restricciones adicionales de riego para preservar el suministro de agua.

Denver Water está preparando recomendaciones para la Junta de Comisionados del Agua de Denver sobre una posible respuesta a la sequía en las siguientes semanas.

Desde 2000, la respuesta de Denver Water a condiciones secas en años anteriores incluyó la emisión de una alerta de sequía (restricciones voluntarias) en 2002, 2003, 2004, 2012 y 2013. En algunos de esos años (2002, 2003, 2004 y 2013), Denver Water impuso restricciones adicionales por sequía como parte de la declaración de una respuesta de Nivel 1, la cual exigía reducciones obligatorias en el uso de agua en exteriores.

Novedades sobre el deshielo de la montaña de Denver Water al 16 de marzo de 2026

Las condiciones siguen siendo motivo de gran preocupación. Las escasas nevadas, combinadas con temperaturas cálidas, han dejado aproximadamente entre 3 y 4 pies de nieve por debajo de lo que sería deseable en el área de recolección de Denver Water para esta época. Para alcanzar el pico normal de deshielo de la montaña en primavera, que por lo general se produce en abril, necesitamos ver entre 7 y 7.5 pies adicionales de nieve esta primavera.

Las condiciones de almacenamiento en los embalses están por debajo del promedio, pero razonablemente en buen estado: al 16 de marzo de 2026, los embalses estaban llenos al 80 %, frente a un promedio del 85 % para esta época. Estos niveles también se ven afectados temporalmente por la necesidad de mantener bajo el nivel del embalse Gross durante la construcción para elevar la presa, un proyecto diseñado para aumentar la capacidad de almacenamiento del embalse. 

Recordamos a los clientes que también pueden colaborar realizando mejoras para un uso eficiente del agua, tanto dentro como fuera del hogar, incluyendo replantear el diseño del patio. Estas medidas ayudan a preservar el suministro de agua y crean paisajes más adaptables y resilientes frente a la sequía, que se integran de forma natural en nuestro clima. 

Pase lo que pase, las reglas anuales de riego en verano de Denver Water siempre estarán vigentes durante la temporada de riego. Las restricciones adicionales por sequía, voluntarias u obligatorias, dependerán en parte de cómo evolucione el resto de la temporada de nieve y estarán orientadas a preservar el suministro de agua en caso de que este período inusualmente seco se convierta en una sequía de varios años.

Comentario de Greg Fisher, gerente de planificación de la demanda de Denver Water:

“Le dimos la bienvenida a otra tormenta invernal este pasado fin de semana, aunque solo beneficiaron áreas con elevación bajas en el Front Range. Desafortunadamente, las regiones montañosas no recibieron cantidades de nieve significativas. Las buenas noticias es que la humedad que recibimos en la región de Denver le dio a nuestros jardines y paisajismos una buena dosis de humedad y así limitar el riego esta semana.

“Hemos tenido un invierno muy seco y estas condiciones continuaran esta semana, la última semana de invierno, con temperaturas inusualmente altas anticipadas a través de la región. Continuamos enfatizando la importancia de mantener sus sistemas de riego apagados hasta mediados o finales de mayo y estar preparados para posibles restricciones de riego esta primavera.”

Denver Water cuenta con muchos recursos para propietarios de viviendas que buscan inspiración e información sobre paisajes que se integren de forma natural en nuestro clima seco. Haga clic aquí para obtener consejos de conservación y eficiencia para el riego exterior y conocer más detalles sobre maneras de aplicar ColoradoScapes en su propiedad, lo que incluye reembolsos por la eliminación de césped y una guía para realizar cambios en el paisajismo por cuenta propia, entre muchas otras medidas para ahorrar agua.

Puede encontrar información adicional sobre la planificación ante sequías de Denver Water aquí (en inglés). Puede encontrar información adicional sobre los niveles de los embalses de Denver Water, el uso de agua de los clientes y el deshielo de la montaña en el informe Water Watch Report (en inglés), que se actualiza con regularidad durante el invierno, la primavera y el verano.

Denver Water’s entire collection system. Image credit: Denver Water.

#Drought cueing #Aurora water restrictions in April, possibly dire limits this summer: “This is not a good situation this year at all,” Marshall Brown said — Aurora Sentinel #SouthPlatteRiver #ColoradoRiver #ArkansasRiver

West Drought Monitor map March 17, 2026.

Click the link to read the article on the Aurora Sentinel website. Here’s an excerpt:

March 19, 2026

City water officials are sounding increasingly urgent alarms about Aurora’s water supply, warning that worsening drought conditions and poor snowpack could force early and potentially escalating restrictions this year. Aurora Water General Manager Marshall Brown told city leaders yesterday that the situation has deteriorated enough that staff will likely recommend a formal Stage 1 drought declaration as early as April 6, nearly a month ahead of the city’s typical seasonal watering restrictions. If approved by the City Council, new limits on water use would take effect April 7, officials said.

“Our water supply situation is actually bleak enough that, if things don’t improve, and we don’t get a community response that we need during a Stage 1 restriction, the forecast indicates we may be in a Stage 2 restriction by the end of the year,” Brown said. “That would be really dramatic.”

Aurora breaks water supply and restrictions into four categories:

Normal: Current permanent rules limit landscape irrigation from 10 a.m. – 6 p.m. for a maximum of three days per week.

Stage I: Considered when reservoir levels are lower, often reducing outdoor irrigation to two days per week.

Stage II: More stringent, potentially reducing irrigation to one day per week.

Stage III: Emergency conditions with severe restrictions, including no landscape irrigation.

The warning marks a notable shift from just weeks ago, when city leaders said conditions were concerning but not yet dire. Now, officials say a combination of record warmth, minimal precipitation and dwindling snowpack has pushed the system closer to critical thresholds. According to the latest Aurora Water report, conditions across Colorado remain deeply dry. More than 75% of the state is classified as abnormally dry, with over half in moderate drought and significant portions in severe to extreme drought. February and March so far have offered little relief, statewide water officials reported. Those trends are expected to continue. Long-range forecasts from federal agencies indicate warmer and drier-than-normal conditions through the spring, further reducing the likelihood of meaningful runoff to replenish reservoirs.

The latest Seasonal Outlooks through June 30, 2026 are hot off the presses from the #Climate Prediction Center: Ruh-Roh!

Resolution Copper to start drilling at Oak Flat after court decision — AZCentral.com

Henry Muñoz, a former miner and resident of Superior, Arizona, overlooks a portion of Oak Flat—part of Tonto National Forest and a sacred site for the San Carlos Apache. Credit: Wyatt Myskow/Inside Climate News

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

March 16, 2026

Key Points

A U.S. Court of Appeals denied a request to halt a land exchange at Oak Flat, clearing the way for mining work to begin.

Resolution Copper now owns the land, which is sacred to the Apache people, and plans to begin exploratory drilling.

Opponents, including the San Carlos Apache Tribe, have appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, citing religious freedom.

Resolution Copper told the U.S. Supreme Court it would begin exploratory drilling in the Oak Flat area on March 16 after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals turned down a bid from a coalition of environmentalists, the San Carlos Apache Tribe and a group of Apache women to halt a contentious land exchange. The three-judge panel issued its decision late Friday, March 13. Resolution relayed documents to the high court affirming the land exchange occurred shortly after the court rendered its decision. Resolution now owns Oak Flat, a location sacred to the Apaches and other Native people. The Forest Service issued the final record of decision March 16 finalizing the land exchange.

“The national security of America depends on our ability to harness the abundant natural resources we are blessed with in this country,” said Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins in a statement. “The Resolution Copper project is a prime example of bureaucratic and legal chokeholds preventing our rural communities, supply chains, and defense industry from producing the minerals we need right here in America.”

The appeals court denied an injunction in three cases, blocking a legal move that could have halted progress on the handover of the 2,200-acre site and another 211 acres currently within Tonto National Forest to Resolution, the British-Australian mining company, while the lawsuits continue to make their way through the court system. Miles Coleman, one of the attorneys representing the Brown-Lopez family and other Apache women, said the firm filed an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court over the weekend.

“The transfer and destruction of Oak Flat would be a tragic departure from our nation’s founding promise of religious freedom,” Coleman told The Arizona Republic. He said the emergency application with the Supreme Court asked to preserve the status quo and protect Oak Flat.

The ruling came more than two months after the judges heard the three cases on Jan. 8. The judges turned the three down because they said the cases were “unlikely to succeed on the merits.”

A shrinking #ColoradoRiver is forcing farms to change: From low-flow nozzles to baling hay at night, see how farmers are adapting to less water — Caitlin Ochs (High Country News) #COriver #aridification

Lamar Fields, a tribal member, gathers blue corn to sample. With increasingly unreliable access to water, flexible crops like corn have become integral to the farm’s survival. To increase revenue, the farm built a mill to process crops like blue corn. Caitlin Ochs

Click the link to read the article on the High Country News website (Caitlin Ochs):

March 12, 2026

For a century, the Colorado River has been managed in pieces. Legally and politically, it’s divided into two basins, with each state and community focused on securing its respective water supply. But that is not how a river functions. The Colorado River is an interconnected system, sustained by Rocky Mountain snowpack, rainfall and groundwater.

It is fragile, and under increasing stress. Two and a half decades into this century, the river that built the modern West has 20% less water flowing through it than it did on average in the last century. As heat and drought intensify, so do the stakes: Failure to recognize the severity of changing conditions, managing the river in parts without considering needs of the whole and inadequate planning for long-term shortages put the future of all the basin at risk.

For the last five years, I have documented how the Colorado River Basin’s farmers are navigating water shortages and uncertainty amid deep political divisions about the river’s future. This project, called American Adaptation, examines three agricultural communities whose survival is threatened by a shrinking river, examining what happens to people when policies and water management struggle to keep pace with a changing climate.

In one of the river’s northern watersheds, the Ute Mountain Farm and Ranch Enterprise is adapting its management as the water it relies on becomes less dependable. In central Arizona, farmers have returned to well water after becoming the first communities to have their supply cut off completely due to the basin-wide shortage. And in California’s Imperial Valley, the farms that receive the river’s largest water allocation are under growing pressure to share the burden of shortage.

Together, their stories illustrate the stakes — and rising tensions — of the current negotiations over the river’s future management. States, tribal nations and the federal government are reckoning with 100 years of developing water infrastructure based on assumptions of continuing abundance and expansion. These ideas — and the legal frameworks built around them — are colliding with the reality of a river with much less water than expected, raising complex questions about what the Colorado can sustain, how its water should be used and who will shoulder the necessary cuts.

The Dolores Project, located in the Dolores and San Juan River Basins in southwestern Colorado, develops water from the Dolores River for irrigation, municipal and industrial users, recreation, fish and wildlife, and hydroelectric power. It also provides vital water to the Dove Creek area, central Montezuma Valley area, and to the Towaoc area on the Ute Mountain Ute Indian Reservation. McPhee Dam and Reservoir is the principle storage feature of the Dolores Project which includes a system of canals, tunnels, and laterals to deliver water to over 61,000 acres of land. Photo credit: Kenny Browning/Flickr

When Water is Uncertain

On 7,600 acres painstakingly carved out of desert brush, the Ute Mountain Farm and Ranch, a tribally run enterprise of the Ute Mountain Ute nation, produces cattle, alfalfa, corn and wheat. Its operations are led by Simon Martinez, Eric Whyte and Michael Vicente, who have deep personal connections to the enterprise. Martinez helped build the dam for the reservoir that provides the farm’s water, while Whyte cleared desert brush and mapped where the fields would go. Vicente, as the lead irrigator, can account for every drop of water that’s used.

In good years, the farm’s circular fields flourish in brilliant green bursts. But the past decade has brought increasingly erratic access to water. Each spring, the local irrigation district announces potential cuts after assessing snowpack runoff and the available water stored in nearby McPhee Reservoir. In 2021, the farm received just 10% of its water allocation and was forced to leave 6,000 acres unplanted. In 2022, 30% of the water came in, and last year, 34%, which the farm was able to increase to 50% after leasing shares from other water users.

To survive, they adapted. Every year, the farm’s leadership creates numerous plans for different water scenarios. They have applied for grants, implemented low-flow nozzles in the irrigation system, installed small-scale hydropower generators. They joined a Land Institute pilot program to test crops that use less water.

On a day in late May [2022] when wildfire smoke obscured the throat of an ancient volcano called Shiprock in the distance, I visited the Ute Mountain Ute farming and ranching operation in the southwestern corner of Colorado. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots

“We still haven’t thrown the towel in,” said Simon Martinez. “Nobody ever thought, when the reservoir was built, that there wouldn’t be enough water to supply the farms that have been put out here. It’s not only us; it’s happening all through southwestern Colorado.”

Low-water years leave their mark. Brush and scrub quickly reclaim unplanted fields. Employees laid off during dry years are hard to replace. During consecutive years of heat and drought, farms that rely on the basin’s many smaller reservoirs become even more vulnerable. As the number of dry years grows, it is increasingly uncertain how much shortage the Ute Mountain Farm and Ranch Enterprise can sustain in the long term, despite the farmers’ determination to adapt.

“We still haven’t thrown the towel in,” said Simon Martinez. “Nobody ever thought, when the reservoir was built, that there wouldn’t be enough water to supply the farms that have been put out here. It’s not only us; it’s happening all through southwestern Colorado.”

Low-water years leave their mark. Brush and scrub quickly reclaim unplanted fields. Employees laid off during dry years are hard to replace. During consecutive years of heat and drought, farms that rely on the basin’s many smaller reservoirs become even more vulnerable. As the number of dry years grows, it is increasingly uncertain how much shortage the Ute Mountain Farm and Ranch Enterprise can sustain in the long term, despite the farmers’ determination to adapt.

When Water Disappears

Hundreds of miles south, Will Clemens manages his uncle’s 2,100-acre farm, cultivating cotton, alfalfa and Bermuda grass. Farmers in this region operate with a year-round growing season punctuated by dust storms and summer monsoons.

In this intense environment, wells were the only water source before Colorado River water became available. Until the 1980s, farmers drew their water from deep underground, contributing to fissures, land subsidence and drying wells. The completion of the Central Arizona Project alleviated the pressure, delivering farmers cheap imported river water that was classified as lower priority and the first to be cut during shortages. Deliveries continued until 2022, when low water levels at Lake Mead triggered federal cuts, and central Arizona farms lost access. In response, Clemens’ local irrigation district drilled a dozen new wells.

Without the river, Clemens and his neighbors have seen the canals’ water drop. At times, their irrigation district will cut off water before a field is fully irrigated, or struggle to keep up with the farmers’ water orders. More pressure on groundwater raises questions about what is sustainable in the future. Large parts of Arizona have no legal limits on pumping water from the ground. Even areas with legally protected groundwater have failed to meet a safe yield goal set in the 1980s to balance groundwater taken each year with naturally replenished water by 2025.

Some central Arizona farmers are selling or leasing their farmland to solar developers, as water dwindles and energy demands grow. Miles up the road from where Clemens farms, sleek black grids of solar panels gleam next to green alfalfa. For years, Arnold Burruel, Clemens’ uncle, has been in talks with a solar developer about selling the land.

“I’ve been asking myself: Does America really need to be in the agriculture industry?” Burruel said. “America is not totally enamored with agriculture when it comes to pesticides, herbicides, groundwater, GMOs — all of the above. We are at a crossroads. Are we going to continue to farm the way we are farming and heavily subsidize growers that can’t make ends meet? Society has to come up with an answer.”

California uses the most water of any state in the Colorado River Basin, partly for its cities along the Pacific Coast but a substantial amount for agriculture in the Imperial Valley. Photo December 2015/Allen Best

When Water is Abundant

From above, the All American Canal forms a stark blue line, slicing through the Algodones Dunes. One of the world’s largest canals, it is fed by the Imperial Dam, which diverts up to 6.8 million gallons of water each minute from the Colorado River.

This is the only water source for 500,000 acres of Imperial Valley farmland. Farms here are protected by senior rights at low risk of cuts and receive regular releases from Lake Mead, the largest reservoir in the United States. During summer months, the sun looms over the valley’s dusty, flat horizon, and temperatures often climb above 100 degrees. Despite decades of drought and growing water shortage, water has flowed uninterrupted to the Imperial Valley.

Fourth-generation family farmer Jack Vessey, who oversees a 10,000-acre produce operation, knows the canal system well. Growing up, he searched for places to swim on hot summer days.

“We take water seriously,” said Vessey, who added sprinkler systems, which are more efficient than flood irrigation. In recent years, the Imperial Irrigation District joined other communities throughout the basin in voluntarily cutting water through 2026 in exchange for federal funds. The district’s compensation was several hundred dollars more per acre-foot than other participants. But as funding set aside for Western water by the Biden administration is drawn down, it is unclear how much will be available to pay for future voluntary cuts.

Vessey is aware of the growing pressure on the river and the valley’s farms, but he emphasizes that the community has helped with shortages and is protective of its water.

“I have a responsibility for the people who work here to make sure we survive,” he said. “I have to be a little selfish at some point and say, ‘Keep giving us the water we need.’ I know we’ve got to do our part, but I can look in the mirror and say we are not wasting water, we are growing food people need.

“If it wasn’t for that canal coming off the Colorado River, this would just turn to desert.”

This project was supported by the National Geographic Society’s World Freshwater Initiative.

We welcome reader letters. Email High Country News at editor@hcn.org or submit a letter to the editor. See our letters to the editor policy.

This article appeared in the March 2026 print edition of the magazine with the headline “The Shrinking River.”

#Colorado Water Conservation Board Invests in Critical Water Projects as Demand for Funding Remains High

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

March 19, 2026

Yesterday, at its March Board Meeting, the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) approved more than $13 million in funding for 48 water projects across the state through its Water Plan Grant and Water Supply Reserve Fund programs, bringing the totals for the fiscal year to more than $40 million for 136 locally-driven projects across the state. These advance critical efforts to help communities be more prepared for drought and wildfires, improve water resilience, and secure Colorado’s water future.

“Organizations across the state are implementing these projects to do their part in moving Colorado’s Water Plan Partner Actions forward,” said CWCB Director Lauren Ris. “These locally driven efforts—from agricultural producers to municipalities to watershed groups—demonstrate a collective commitment to building a resilient, and water-wise future. The importance of this work is underscored by worsening drought conditions. We are putting efforts to protect water resources front and center.”

The funding reflects both the urgency of Colorado’s current water challenges and the overwhelming demand for resources. Funding requests far exceeded available dollars, highlighting the volume of high-impact projects ready for implementation across the state.

These investments are made possible through sports betting taxes in Colorado, a funding stream that continues to play a critical role in advancing Colorado’s water priorities.

“This level of demand for our Water Plan Grants shows just how much water users across Colorado rely on these investments,” said Colorado Department of Natural Resources Executive Director Dan Gibbs. “It also speaks to the incredible work happening on the ground to conserve water and build more resilient systems that will serve communities and our water resources for generations to come.”

Funded projects reflect key priorities of the Colorado Water Plan, including water conservation, wildfire resilience, and water storage. This includes projects focused on conserving water and improving efficiency, such as funding for new Water Efficiency Plans—an essential tool for long-term water supply planning—as well as initiatives like urban turf replacement, resilient school landscapes with smart irrigation, and comprehensive outdoor water budgeting.

The CWCB also continues to invest in projects that help communities prepare for wildfire impacts through watershed restoration and implementation of Wildfire Ready Action Plans, helping protect critical water resources from post-fire risks.

And in Colorado’s current warm, low-snowpack water year, investments in water storage are critical. Funding this grant cycle supports projects that increase or evaluate storage capacity—an essential strategy for capturing and managing water when supplies are limited. These efforts include feasibility studies and improvements to reservoirs and dams in communities across the state.

Finally, the Water Supply Reserve Fund grant investments this grant cycle includes projects such as post-fire diversion infrastructure improvements in Rio Blanco County and enhanced groundwater monitoring efforts in the South Platte Basin—both of which strengthen local water resilience and inform long-term water management.

#Drought news March 19, 2026: The Sangre de Cristo Mountains and portions of the San Juan Mountains in southern #Colorado and northern #NewMexico saw widespread worsening conditions this week

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

This week, a powerful storm system crossed from the Great Plains into the Great Lakes, bringing widespread rain and thunderstorms to parts of the Midwest, and a historic blizzard to portions of the Upper Midwest, especially in northern Wisconsin and Michigan near Lake Superior. Total precipitation amounts exceeded 2 inches in a large area of the western Great Lakes, while lighter amounts, mostly 0.5-3 inches of precipitation, fell across parts of the southern and eastern Contiguous U.S. Improvements to ongoing drought and dryness occurred across large portions of the Midwest, parts of the lower Mississippi River Valley, and in the Northeast outside of northern New England. Heavy rain and, in some areas, mountain snow, fell across parts of the Northwest, locally improving drought conditions. However, significant deficits in snow still exist in many parts of the West, including the Pacific Northwest, which limited the longer-term benefits of the precipitation that fell. Much of the Southwest, and the central and southern Great Plains, missed out on precipitation, and instead dealt with a dry, warm and windy week. Precipitation deficits, and lack of snowpack in the mountains, continued to worsen amid high evaporative demand, leading to widespread worsening of abnormal dryness and drought, especially in South Dakota and Nebraska, southwest Kansas, southern Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and parts of Oregon that missed out on precipitation. A kona low delivered heavy precipitation to all of Hawaii this week, leading to widespread 1- and local 2-category improvements to ongoing drought conditions from Molokai eastward…

High Plains

In the southern half of the High Plains region, warmer-than-normal weather continued this week amid mainly dry and frequently windy conditions. Degradation in drought conditions was widespread across Nebraska and southern parts of South Dakota. A deadly wildfire in western Nebraska, the Morrill Fire, has burned a record amount of land for Nebraska wildfires. This fire, and others across Nebraska, occurred amid weather conditions favorable for fire growth and a background of worsening drought conditions. The Great Plains of southwest Kansas and southeast Colorado also saw worsening drought and abnormal dryness this week, as precipitation deficits continued to mount along with warmer-than-normal temperatures this winter and early spring. Large precipitation deficits and above-normal evaporative demand over the last several months led to extreme drought development in parts of the Black Hills in southwest South Dakota. Colder temperatures and some precipitation kept conditions unchanged (and mostly free of drought or abnormal dryness) in North Dakota and northern South Dakota…

Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending March 17, 2026.

West

Current drought conditions in the West continued to be headlined by snow drought this week. The Sangre de Cristo Mountains and portions of the San Juan Mountains in southern Colorado and northern New Mexico saw widespread worsening conditions this week. Overall dry and warm conditions worsened both precipitation deficits and snowpack conditions in these areas. Some snow-water monitoring sites in the region have seen near-full or full melting of snowpack. Degradations to ongoing drought and dryness were also widespread in Arizona this week, where warmer-than-normal temperatures combined with dry weather to worsen short-term precipitation deficits, increase evaporative demand and support low streamflow levels. High-elevation parts of Arizona that usually have snow on the ground in mid-March are also suffering from snow drought. This combination of drier- and warmer-than-normal weather and snow drought may set the state for drought conditions to worsen in the coming weeks if weather conditions remain warm and dry. Warmer-than-normal and dry weather occurred this week in Nevada, worsening conditions in some areas, especially in the north, where impacts are being reported as a result of unusually warm and dry weather over the last several months and meagre mountain snow. Due to locally heavy precipitation or lack thereof, a mix of small-scale improvements and degradations occurred in Oregon. Amid the snow drought, localized degradations occurred in southwest Idaho, while heavier mountain snows improved snowpack in some mountain ranges in parts of western Montana, leading to localized improvements. The effectiveness of this locally renewed snowpack in improving soil moisture will be analyzed further in the weeks ahead…

South

This week, parts of east Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee benefitted from localized rains of at least 2 inches. Elsewhere, deep south Texas, western Texas, and northern and western Oklahoma were mostly dry this week. Temperatures across the region were warmer than normal, with readings varying widely from a degree or two above normal to 9-12 degrees above normal. Soil moisture levels improved and precipitation shortfalls lessened in parts of east-central Texas, Louisiana and southeast Arkansas, leading to localized improvements to drought conditions in these areas. Despite heavier rains, a small area of extreme drought shifted northeast in southeast Tennessee due to very large precipitation deficits that continued this week. Growing short-term precipitation deficits led to the development of severe drought in a small area of northwest Tennessee. Heavy rain in Dallas improved local conditions. Warm, dry and windy conditions were the rule elsewhere in the southern Great Plains and deep south Texas, leading to localized degradations in central and northern Texas, deep south Texas, south-central and northwest Oklahoma, and the Oklahoma and Texas panhandles…

Looking Ahead

Through the evening of Monday, March 23, the National Weather Service Weather Prediction Center’s forecast depicts mostly dry weather across a large swath of the Contiguous U.S. Precipitation totaling 0.5-1 inch may fall from West Virginia into New York, and in spots in New England. Similar precipitation amounts are forecast in parts of northwest Montana and the Idaho Panhandle. Western Washington is forecast to receive widespread precipitation amounts of at least 1 inch, with some favored mountainous areas forecast to receive 2.5-5 inches of precipitation (or locally more). Elsewhere, the forecast calls for precipitation amounts to remain at or below 0.5 inches, with most of the Great Plains, Mississippi and Lower Ohio River Valleys, and the Gulf Coast states likely to remain completely dry.

Looking ahead from March 24-28, the National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center forecast strongly favors warmer-than-normal temperatures in most of the West, especially in the Southwest, and across much of the Great Plains and South. Near- or below-normal temperatures are favored from northern North Dakota eastward through the Great Lakes into much of the Northeast. Above-normal precipitation is favored in Washington, northern Oregon, the Idaho Panhandle and northwest Montana, and from northern Michigan eastward across the northern half of the Northeast. Wetter-than-normal weather is also forecast in central and southern Florida. Elsewhere in the contiguous United States, below-normal precipitation is more likely, especially from the Great Plains to Utah, Nevada, the Desert Southwest and California.

US Drought Monitor one week change map ending March 17, 2026.

Data Dump: Oak Flat land swap finalized: Plus — The Monster March Melt is upon us — Jonathan P. Thompson (LandDesk.org)

Mining mural on a wall in Superior, Arizona, the proposed site of Resolution Copper’s massive mine. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.

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

March 17, 2026

⛏️ Mining Monitor ⛏️

The U.S. Forest Service late last week completed the transfer of 2,422 acres of emory oak-studded and boulder strewn public land in central Arizona to Resolution Copper, a subsidiary of global mining corporations BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto. The newly privatized land includes Chíchʼil Bił Dagoteel, or Oak Flat, a 760-acre parcel that President Dwight D. Eisenhower withdrew from mineral entry in 1955. The land transfer removes one of the biggest regulatory obstacles blocking the company’s bid to mine a massive copper deposit that lies about one mile below the surface of Oak Flat.

Some conservation groups initially withheld opposition to the land swap because of the ecological value of the land Resolution was giving up, some of which lies along the San Pedro River, an important corridor for migratory birds. In 2015 Congress passed a bill, with bipartisan support, allowing the swap to proceed. But the company and its politician enablers failed to recognize the significance of Oak Flat to the San Carlos Apache and other tribes in the region—and underestimated the fierceness of their resistance.

Over the ensuing decade, completion of the land exchange has been held up by legal challenges and widespread opposition from Indigenous and environmental groups. Apache Stronghold, a non-profit devoted to protecting sacred sites, took its case up the legal ladder, calling on federal courts to halt the land exchange on the grounds that privatizing and destroying Oak Flat with mining and resulting subsidence would violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Ultimately the Supreme Court refused to take up the case, and other legal challenges also were shot down by the courts.

The fight is not over, however. Shortly after the transfer was announced, a group of Apache women appealed to Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan to intervene and block the exchange. Even if that fails, Resolution will still need to obtain numerous permits before it can proceed. The land exchange removes most of the project from USFS jurisdiction, leaving it in the hands of state regulators.

Because of the depth of the deposit, the mine would be underground rather than open pit, and would use the cave panel method. This may make it less visible initially, but the magnitude of the endeavor will ultimately have significant impacts on a large swath of public and private lands. As material is removed from underground, the surface will sink, or subside, creating a huge crater and destroying Chíchʼil Bił Dagoteel. Dewatering the mine workings will affect the region’s hydrology, diminishing or drying up springs and “groundwater dependent ecosystems.” And the tailings pile is expected to cover thousands of acres in Dripping Springs Wash, basically filling a desert waterway with a mountain of acid-generating, metal-laden waste.

Mining, ore processing, and slurrying operations would require large amounts of additional water. The company plans to acquire at least some of that from the Central Arizona Project, which is currently facing potentially significant cutbacks due to Colorado River water shortages.

Map showing the locations of the mine and associated facilities, along with the tailings depository (the teal and gray blob on the right side, which will totally fill in the Dripping Springs Wash valley. Source: USFS EIS.

Here are some data from the Environmental Impact Statement for Alternative 6, which was chosen in the record of decision:

1.8 billion metric tons: Estimated size of the copper ore deposit under Oak Flat, one of the world’s largest.

The subsidence crater at Oak Flat will eventually be about 1.8 miles across and between 800 and 1,115 feet deep.

1.37 billion tons: Estimated volume of tailings produced over the life of the mine

20 miles: Length of slurry pipeline that would carry tailings from the ore processing facility to the Dripping Springs Wash tailings depository.

4,002 acres; 490 feet: Area and height of the proposed tailings depository.

9,900 to 17,000: acres of soil and vegetation expected to be disturbed. The analysis notes: “… impacts to soil health and productivity may last centuries to millennia … ”

377: Number of National Register of Historic Places-eligible sites directly affected by the project.

The project would result in the reduction of 13,781 acres of livestock grazing leases and 2,797 animal unit months over 9 allotments, and 14 grazing-related facilities (water sources) would be lost along with infrastructure at the Slash S headquarters.

87,000 acre-feet: Estimated volume of water that would be pumped from the mine (dewatering) over the project’s life. (Some hydrologists have questioned this estimate, saying it is too low).

Dewatering would affect 18 to 20 groundwater dependent ecosystems, i.e. springs.

540,000 acre-feet: Estimated amount of water that would be pumped from the Desert Wellfield in the East Salt River valley for mining and processing operations over the life of the project.

1,400; $149 million: Estimated number of full-time workers at the peak of the project and total annual employee compensation.

On a related note, I’m looking into water use at existing Arizona mines for a future Land Desk dispatch. Stay tuned. And in the meantime, if y’all have any good, reliable sources for this sort of information, I’d appreciate you sending it along to me.

🥵 Aridification Watch 🐫

Typically I wouldn’t depress you all with any snowpack/water news until early April, when mountain snowpacks typically peak, and when we should have a fairly clear picture of what we’re facing as far as spring runoff. But the Bureau of Reclamation released their projections for Lake Powell on Friday, and the heat wave that’s bearing down on the Southwest is threatening to melt whatever snow is still remaining. Without some cooler weather combined with big snows, a lot of areas may have already seen their peak snowpack, which would mean spring runoff is beginning now.

Yikes!

First, the Lake Powell projections. Notice that the probable minimum inflow (the red line) reaches 3,500 feet in July. Dam engineers really don’t want it going below that level (3,510 feet would be safer). And even the green line, or the most probable inflow, would drop to that point in September. Keep in mind that these projections are often over-estimates, meaning we could hit that critical level even earlier — especially given this friggin’ heat wave. And yet, the general public still has no idea how the Bureau of Reclamation might handle the situation.

One thing you can probably bet on: The Bureau will try to buoy Lake Powell’s levels by drawing down the Upper Basin reservoirs that are in the Colorado River Storage Project. That would be Flaming Gorge on the Green River, Navajo Reservoir on the San Juan, and the Wayne Aspinall Unit (Blue Mesa, Crystal, and Morrow Point) on the Gunnison. This will, of course, affect recreation on those reservoirs as well as downstream irrigators.

And on to the heat wave. Here are some forecasts for the next few days.

The earliest 100°F day on record in Phoenix was on March 26. That record will fall this week, along with many others, I’m sure. I mean, extreme heat warnings in March? Come on!

Then there’s the far-less blistering, but equally concerning temperatures in the mountains. Silverton, at 9,318 feet in elevation and near the headwaters of both Colorado River and Rio Grande tributaries, is looking to have a full-on March thaw — even at night. Look at those lows for Wednesday through Friday: All above freezing. No bueno.

Oak Flat, Arizona features groves of Emory oak trees, canyons, and springs. This is sacred land for the San Carlos Apache tribe. Resolution Copper (Rio Tinto subsidiary) lobbied politicians to deliver this National Forest land to the company with the intent to build a destructive copper mine. By SinaguaWiki – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=98967960

Romancing the River: The Era of Conquest Part 2 — George Sibley (SibleysRivers.com) #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification #ClimateChange

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

March 18, 2026

The hard news about the Colorado River since my last post here is not good; we had a storm that dropped around two feet of snow above the 8,000-foot elevation – well, maybe the 9,000-foot elevation. But that was followed by a couple weeks of ridiculously warm weather for February and early March, with more 50-degree weather forecast into the near future, and overnight lows often in the 20s, rather than down around zero. Forecasts for the runoff this year range around a third of the ‘historic normal,’ which is an increasingly meaningless number – and dangerous too, MAGA-thinking, keeping alive the hope that eventually the Colorado River will be great again if we just wait it out, or close our eyes and wish real hard, with real violence toward realists….

The Bureau bases its ‘averages’ on the recent 30-year average going by decades – so now the ‘long-term average’ is based on 1991-2020. Back as recently as 2019, it was based on the average from 1981-2010, which was more than a million acre-feet per year higher than the current 30-year average. God help us when we’re figuring in the decade of the 2020s into a 2001-2030 average – the new average would probably make this years runoff look better than it looks by the 1991-2020 average, but there’s certainly an element of delusion in that.

The ‘soft news’ about the Colorado River recently has been a declaration of ‘personhood’ for the river by the Colorado River Indian Tribes (CRIT). This is a lovely gesture by people who have been struggling for ‘personhood’ themselves for 150 years in the river’s region, and still are not quite at the table in negotiating over the river’s future, even though they have ‘used’ the river, often in fairly ‘civilized’ ways, for many hundreds if not thousands of years more than the white masters of the river.

But it seemed naive (or maybe just cynical) for the ‘lamestream media’ to ask if this declaration of personhood was going to ‘help save the river.’ We probably need to face the fact that, until we get serious about slowing down the warming of the planet, we can do nothing by way of nomenclatter to ‘help save the river’ – and even then, the best we could do would be to maintain the river where it is now, or at least not a whole lot worse – which is what’s going to happen if every year we continue to put more new greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than we did the year before. I do not see how considering the river a ‘person’ is going to change that much.

I think we should also consider that granting ‘personhood’ to another set of living ecosystems might be kind of anthropocentric. I can barely contemplate what goes into ‘riverhood,’ for example, but watching a stream one sees a system very much engaged in interaction with its whole neighborhood – giving water to the surrounding land when the land’s water table is low, and taking on water the land can’t hold when it is wet. ‘Riverhood,’ I infer, has aspects of sharing, giving and receiving, that might have things to teach us about improving ‘personhood,’ rather than operating on the assumption that all life on the planet would love to be reduced to ‘personhood’…. Just thinking out loud, sorry.

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

Our real question today is whether we can ‘save the river system’ – the structure for storage and distribution we have laid over the river – a question with which we need to actually spend some constructive time. And that kind of leads into the second part of my second ‘era’ in updating Fred Dellenbaugh’s 1903 Romance of the Colorado River: the ‘Era of Conquest.’ (First, remember, was the ‘Era of Exploration and Discovery.’)

World War II, where I left the story last post, is a natural break in the Era of Conquering the Colorado River. Prior to World War II, we saw the Bureau do its greatest work: overseeing the construction of Hoover Dam, Imperial Dam and the All-American Canal under the Boulder Canyon Project, as well as Parker Dam to back up water for the 250-mile Colorado River Aqueduct to the West Coast cities. It is hard not to call it a masterpiece of regional urban-industrial development. In our six or eight thousand-year history of humans trying to create ‘civilizations’ to constructively deal with exploding populations, the Boulder Canyon Act stands tall as a public work, fitting for a state struggling to become a mass-society democracy (possible?) rather than putting people to work on massive tombs for the self-proclaimed ‘God of the Sun’ or maybe ‘The Son of God.’

Advocates for private-sector industry will be quick to say it could not have been done without the private contractors, ‘the Six Companies’ and most notably Henry J. Kaiser. Critics of private-sector industry will be as quick to say that the private sector has not produced very many large-scale industrial organizers like Henry J – who demonstrated than you can do big work and also take good care of the people doing it. He did not rest on his laurels but capitalized on that regional system with his Fontana steel and aluminum plants and Liberty Shipyards up the West Coast.

Green Mountain Reservoir, on the Blue River between Kremmling and and Silverthorne, was built for Western Slope interests. Photo/Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District via The Mountain Town News.

The war effort cut off most domestic development – but the Bureau of Reclamation did complete two dams on the Colorado River during the war years. One was the Green Mountain Dam and Powerplant on the Blue River high in the river’s headwaters, part of the equally massive Colorado-Big Thompson Project. More about this in the next post.

The other was a modest diversion dam below Parker Dam on the Lower Colorado: Headgate Rock Dam – for the Colorado River Indian Tribes! With all the tribes in the Colorado Basin feeling – righteously – left out of river development, one might think the Bureau would make a bit of a big deal about the fact that their first Colorado River project completed after the Boulder Canyon Project was a diversion dam for irrigating Indian agriculture. Yet I can find none of the usual historical and statistic evidence in the Bureau websites about the Headgate Rock Dam, like they have for all of the other Colorado River projects, each getting its own website. Possibly this is because the operation of the dam was turned over to the Bureau of Indian Affairs Office after construction was finished.

It is, however, an interesting story. The tribes along the river were farming like Nile Valley Egyptians, planting in the new layer of silt laid down annually by the snowmelt floods, crops that needed little further irrigation. That worked until the federal Indian agents started moving Hopi and Navajo bands onto their reservation in the 1860s – the reservations truly were ‘concentration camps,’ forcing the move to ‘civilized’ agriculture. This had moved the Indian agents to acquire some pumps round the turn of the century, to water land beyond the riparian floodplain. But when the gates on Hoover Dam were closed in the mid-1930s, that ended the annual snowmelt floods, also ending the traditional agricultural economy.

So the Bureau plotted out a gravity-flow diversion dam and canal in 1938, and began construction. But construction did not really accelerate until 1941, when in one of America’s most shamefully hysteric events 17,000 Japanese-Americans were ‘relocated’ to the Colorado River Indian Tribes (CRIT) reservation – undeniably a concentration camp at that point, if only for the concentration of people. But that added not just a lot of hungry mouths, but a proven workforce that joined the First People in working on the Headgate Rock Diversion Dam and the canal works to carry the water.

It would be both insensitive and naive to speak of a ‘happy ending,’ but as the interred Japanese did in many of the desert places they were sent to, their concentration camp became a very livable village system; some stayed on after the war, and today there is a memorial monument and periodic celebration commemorating the positive relationship that developed between two ‘unwanted peoples’ – the uprooted Japanese and the Indians who forcibly shared their homeland. A story that, for some reason, the Bureau is not interested in telling….

Meanwhile, however, the Bureau was not lying dormant. Immediately after the war’s end, the Bureau released what amounted to a smorgasbord of opportunities, under the title The Colorado River: A Natural Menace Becomes a National Resource. This proposed 134 possible projects for the development of the entire river basin for human uses – cautioning that there was not enough water in the river to build them all, thereby intruding the good old all-American element of interstate competition. Fifty-eight of those proposed projects were for the Lower Basin states, but the other 88 were for the Upper Basin states. If the pre-war Colorado River development had all been about the Compact’s Lower Basin states, the post-war development would begin with controlling the ‘natural menace’ in the Upper Basin states and putting the water to work.

The 1946 Bureau report divided the Upper Basin into three different divisions, based on the River’s three main tributaries above the canyons: there were 33 projects for the Green River Division out of Wyoming and Colorado but flowing mostly (but not entirely) through eastern Utah; 35 projects for the ‘Grand Division’ (the Upper Colorado-Gunnison Rivers, originating in Colorado but flowing into Utah (using the older name for the Upper Colorado); and 20 projects for the San Juan Division, most of whose tributary waters flowed out of Colorado’s San Juan Mountains but the river itself flowed mostly through northern New Mexico and southern Utah.

The Little Snake River is about to join the Yampa River on Oct. 8, 2020. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots

An obvious challenge lay in the absence of any coordination between those natural divisions of the Upper Basin and the geographically-irrelevant state boundaries. Every major tributary except for the Gunnison River crossed at least one state boundary. The Little Snake River in the Yampa River Basin is the extreme example, crossing the Colorado-Wyoming border seven times.

Grand River Ditch in Rocky Mountain National Park. Photo credit: Greg Hobbs

Nonetheless, the first task for the Upper Basin, before the Bureau could go to work, was to divide the use of the waters among the states in an Upper Colorado River Basin Compact. This task was made the more difficult because the state boundaries bundled the relatively water-rich Upper Colorado River Basin with other drier river basins – the Platte, Arkansas and Rio Grande rivers in Colorado, Wyoming and New Mexico; and the Great Basin in Utah. And water law – plus fervent belief in big-project technology – accommodated the notion of moving water from one river basin to another. The Grand Ditch from high on Colorado’s West Slope to the Poudre River on the East Slope was already being dug by the turn of the century. Unlike water for either agricultural or municipal uses within a basin, nothing flows back into the basin of origin from a transmountain diversion – a total depletion.

The task of dividing the use of the Upper Basin waters was also complicated by vague writing in the Colorado River Compact – Article III(d), stating that ‘the States of the Upper Division will note (sic) cause the flow of the river at Lee Ferry to be depleted below an aggregate of 75,000,000 acre feet for any period of ten consecutive years.’ Was this a caution to the Upper Basin states to make sure their uses did not start cutting into the Lower Basin’s shares? Or was it a mandate to those states to deliver that much water even if it meant cutting their own uses – essentially turning the Compact into a ‘senior water right’ to the Lower Basin?

This was not really foreseen as an issue in 1922, with a river that early 20th-century optimism assumed would run at around 18 million acre-feet (maf) forever. But after the drought of the 1930s and the middling flows of early 40s, plus the mid-war treaty with Mexico to deliver 1.5 maf across that border every year, it was evident to the Upper Basin state negotiators, who gathered in 1946 to work on an Upper Basin Compact, that the river might not always produce the 7.5 maf the Compact promised to them. Their preferred interpretation of the Compact’s Article III(d) would obviously be the ‘cautionary’ interpretation – don’t be the cause of the river flow declining. But they also knew that California and Arizona would interpret it as a ‘mandate’ – and since Congress would have to ratify their Compact, they chose to not ‘waken the bear,’ as California’s current governor would put it.

So rather than dividing the use of the Upper River’s hoped-for allotment of 7.5 maf in four set figures, like the Lower Basin has, they chose to divide it into percentages: 51.75% for Colorado (which provides around 70% of the river’s water), 23% for Utah, 13% for Wyoming, and 11.25% for New Mexico. They also chose to calculate their usage by their depletions of a stream’s flow rather than adding up consumptive uses, as the Lower Basin does. I will not pretend to know exactly how this works – except to note that a measure of depletions by users also includes evaporation and transpiration, while the Lower Basin’s measures allows such considerations to get lost in their calculations of usage. (The Bureau calculates Lower Basin evaporation and transpiration on a separate spreadsheet from recorded uses.)

Meanwhile, however -… Don’t you just love it when a writer intrudes ‘Meanwhile, however’ into an already complicated mess? This is my secondmeanwhile in this post, so it is probably time to give you a break, with only a teaser about the next step in this growing ganglia of complexity.

While the still somewhat beloved Bureau of Reclamation, creator of Hoover Dam and the New West, was just cranking up the mill for the development of the rest of the Colorado River Basin waters, the Upper Basin states had already been working out their separate peace over the transmountain diversion issue between the wet Colorado River basins of origin with low populations, and drier basins of destination with large populations across the mountains. This is a story that goes back to the 1930s, with the ‘New Deal’ federal government putting out large amounts of funding for public projects in all the states – but with the caveat that for any state to tap into that funding, the whole state had to want the project…. Stay tuned for the next thrilling episode in The West’s Romance with Conquest.

Colorado transmountain diversions via the State Engineer’s office

#Colorado’s dust-free snow is a bright spot in an otherwise poor winter — Shannon Mullane (Fresh Water News) #snowpack #runoff

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

March 12, 2026

An otherwise dismal snow year in Colorado has one clear upside: At least the snow that has fallen on the state isn’t dusty.

Each year, storms pick up dust from across the Southwest and drop it on Colorado’s mountain snowpack, where it can hasten melting. Earlier snowmelt has ripple effects on water supplies, forecasts, irrigators and ecosystems. But this year, the snow is white and clean all the way through, at least at the test locations observed by Jeff Derry’s team at the Center for Snow and Avalanche Studies.

What gives? Derry chuckled. It’s storms that bring dust — and snow, he said.

“We haven’t had the dust because we haven’t had the storms,” Derry said. “They kind of come hand in hand.”

Since mid-January, Colorado has experienced its lowest snowpack since 1987. The winter storms that have dumped snow on the mountains have been quickly followed by warm temperatures, leaving a relatively shallow layer of snow at higher elevations. The snowpack is scarce, if present at all, at lower elevations.

Derry, executive director of the center’s Dust-on-Snow Program, spent early March traveling around the state, digging pits in the snow, and looking for rusty, brownish layers of dust.

The program’s snow monitoring sites are close to other data collection sites that are part of the federal snow telemetry, or SNOTEL, network. These stations, basically sheds outfitted with antennae and an array of scientific instruments, help track precipitation, temperature and other climate information across the West.

“This tour so far, after doing three sites, has been easy on my back,” he said. “SNOTEL stations aren’t lying. It’s a skimpy snowpack.”

The dust that typically mars Colorado’s snowpack is dropped by winter storms, which carry it from arid regions in Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. Some of that dust was loosened by human actions, like overgrazing and developing land.

Dark dust layers on the snow’s surface absorb more solar radiation, which causes the snow to melt faster and earlier in the season. When that happens, it changes how plants use water. They send more moisture into the air, which reduces the amount of water entering streams and rivers, according to researchers.

In some years since 2003, these dust events, as scientists call them, have blown over Colorado as early as October or November. Scientists observed 12 dust events in 2009 and in 2012, the most per year since 2003

But what Derry saw on his tour this year — from Rabbit Ears Pass near Steamboat Springs to Red Mountain Pass in southwestern Colorado — was a layer of white, even after a storm Friday cast a new layer of snow over much of Colorado.

Derry hoped the recent storm will help keep the snowpack from melting too early. Or, this year could offer something new, he said: A dust-free, albeit “skimpy,” snowpack.

But after 20 years of tracking dust-on-snow events, researchers have found that there are no seasons without dust. Derry will be watching out in March, April and May when about 80% of dust events typically happen, he said.

“Even though things might be looking good now. It just takes one nasty storm to change everything. With the shallow snowpack, we’ll see early melt anyway,” he said. “Add some dust and it could make it even worse.”

An early spring melt

Derry’s team started checking their snow monitoring sites seven to 10 days earlier than usual. They’re expecting an early spring melt, Derry said.

Colorado’s statewide snowpack typically reaches its peak around April 8, although the peaks typically occur earlier or later, depending on the watershed.

The melt starts soon after. Reservoirs help pace the flow of water as it rushes out of the mountains, storing water that becomes vital to farmers and ranchers later in the summer.

Colorado’s 2026 snowpack, depicted by the black line, continues to be the lowest on record since 1987, according to federal data. The snowpack normally peaks around April 8 as marked by the green “x.” It is measured as the snow-water equivalent, or the amount of liquid water in snow. (Natural Resources Conservation Service, Contributed)

Dust can accelerate that melt by two to four weeks or 50 days in more extreme years. (Scientists are still trying to understand what factors cause extreme years and whether dust events can be better predicted.)

So can warmer temperatures, like the exceptional heat wave in the forecast for Colorado starting March 16. Some areas are pushing 20 degrees above normal this week and next week, according to the National Weather Service in Grand Junction.

“This heatwave may be the final nail in the coffin for any hope of snowpack recovery this season in Colorado’s Rockies and elsewhere across the West,” Bouldercast Weather, a team of Denver and Boulder weather experts, said on social media Monday.

A weekend storm could bring up to 6 inches of snow to the northern Rockies in Colorado, said David Byers, a meteorologist for the weather service in Grand Junction.

The water that runs out of Colorado’s mountains serves communities in 19 states before it eventually reaches the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific Ocean.

Not much snow translates into very little water, Derry said. That could affect fire season, forest health and water resources for everyone in all the basins that Colorado serves.

When there are too many low-snow years in a row, reservoirs can struggle to keep up their water storage. Between 2020 and 2025, Colorado has had three below-average winters, two average winters and one above-average winter, according to federal data from SNOTEL stations.

Colorado is heading into this year’s spring runoff with about 87% of its usual reservoir storage, according to federal data.

“It’s great not to see any dust of course,” Derry said. “But it’s pretty scary to see the skimpy snowpack around the state.”

More by Shannon Mullane

This Week’s Drought Summary

Looking Ahead

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

🗺️ Messing with Maps 🧭

📸 Parting Shot 🎞️

🚣🏽 Predict the Peak! 🌊

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

⛏️ Mining Monitor ⛏️

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Widespread, eye-popping warmth

Snowpack is rapidly declining

Drought conditions are deteriorating

Consequences from the low snowpack are growing

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

This Week’s Drought Summary

Looking Ahead

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

How did we get here?

Water worries ahead

What the snow drought means for fire season

What this winter suggests about the future

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

The state of the water

The state of the governance

Near term actions

Longer term actions

Share this:

Like this:

📖 Reading (and watching) Room 🧐

🗺️ Messing with Maps 🧭