For more than the last century, the flows of the Colorado River have been managed and dictated by the demands of a rapidly growing and changing West. There are founding legal documents, and then agreements stacked on those, often known as the โLaw of the River.โ These agreements are between states, between sovereign nations, including Tribal Nations and Mexico; between districts and companies and branches of the US Government. Itโs hard to find the appropriate metaphor for how all of these agreements work together (and at times against one another) to manage the Colorado River system. But even fraught metaphors are sometimes the only way to get through something so complicated.
Imagine the web of agreements and founding legal documents that guide the management of the Colorado River as a body. The 1922 Colorado River Compact would be the skeleton, the framework upon which all the other functions of the body are built. The limbs could be the communities, farms, Tribes, businesses, ecosystems, and economies that rely on the riverโs blood (Colorado River water). The agreements that build on the framework of the Compact, such as the 2007 Interim Guidelines or the 2019 Drought Contingency Plan (DCP), act as nerves that facilitate or trigger movement and action. Perhaps the brain is the network of decision makers โ the Bureau of Reclamation, the states, the Tribes, Mexico and others whose decisions and cooperation keep the system functioning, underscoring why coordination and consensus are so important: a body whose different parts are working at cross-purposes cannot function effectively. The blood then, of course, is the Colorado River water allocated to parts of the body.
Continuing the body metaphor for the contemporary management of the Colorado River system, additional agreements (or the nerves that trigger certain action) were added to the body.
Colorado River, Colorado | Trout Unlimited Joshua Duplechian
On Friday, August 24, the Bureau of Reclamation released three documents outlining a 10-year framework for how the Colorado River will be managed for the next two years and how management decisions for the subsequent 8 years will be made. You can read the Bureauโs summary doc here.
Theย Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS): evaluates the many proposed plans Reclamation considered for how the river should be managed going forward, and identifies a preferred alternative, a 10-year framework built on operating plans developed in at least two-year increments;
Theย Record of Decision (ROD): adopts the 10-year operating framework and sets the principles and guardrails for future operations including how water can be stored, shortage sharing, critical infrastructure protection, consultation, and the movement of water between Lake Powell and Lake Mead; and
The 2027-2028 guidelines:ย establish the specific operating approach for the first two years under the new framework.
While the two-year guidelines put real numbers and real movement on the table, the ultimate test is whether the guidelines, alongside the side agreements, investments, and management tools needed to support them, are put in place and function as intended โ and whether, together, they can keep the body upright.
Six months from now, the more consequential questions will be whether the new guidelines:
provide more certainty and transparency, including clear pathways for addressing disputes and disagreements when they arise;
supportย flexible and adaptive management toolsย that can respond to changing hydrology and conditions;
meaningfullyย include Tribal Nationsย in both decision-making and implementation;
reduce reliance on emergency operationsย and short-term crisis response; and
create aย workable path toward long-term resilienceย โ one that can withstand disagreement, including litigation, without bringing implementation and collaboration to a halt.
Colorado River flowing through the Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona. Photo credit: Nick Kelley
Finally, and critically, these new guidelines must recognize healthy rivers and watersheds as a core element of the Basinโs resilience infrastructure, because in the middle of all the agreements โ at the core of all the collaboration and controversy, the skeleton and nerves and muscles that move it, there is a river โ there is a heart; the whole reason blood moves through the system at all.
Healthy rivers and forests, connected floodplains, and intact watersheds are essential to the body, to the Basin. They support the reliability of our water supplies, reduce the risks and impacts of wildfire; they sustain fish and wildlife, support recreation, and strengthen the Basinโs ability to withstand drought and changing conditions. They are invaluable.
Which is to say, at the center of all the agreements and negotiations and collaboration and controversy, is the river. Has always been the river. And if we succeed at all in our management, if we have any hope of keeping this body upright, there will always be the river.
Colorado River “Beginnings”. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism
Ken Sleight may be most well known for something that he probably never did: kneeling on the bridge in front of the Glen Canyon Dam, his hands clasped and eyes closed, praying to the Almighty to produce a โprecision-type earthquakeโ that would free the Colorado River from its imprisonment in Lake Powell. The Sleight-inspired character Seldom Seen Smith acted out the scene in โThe Monkey Wrench Gang,โ Edward Abbeyโs 1975 cult classic of ecosabotage. But although the character was fictional,ย Sleightโs lifelong hatred of the damย was very real, as was his love of Glen Canyon, the area drowned by Lake Powell.ย
โIt was Glen Canyon that changed my whole life,โ Sleight told The Salt Lake Tribune in 2018. โIt made an environmentalist out of me.โ
(Photo by H. Bennett. Courtesy of Ken Sleight.) Ken Sleight making breakfast along the river in Glen Canyon before the dam, circa June 1960.
[…]
In 1957, Sleight purchased eight Army surplus rafts, quit the tire business, and opened a river guiding company that would soon take the name Ken Sleight Expeditions. For the next six years, Sleight led river trips through Glen Canyon on the Colorado River where he showed artists, environmentalists, reporters and curious members of the public the labyrinthine sandstone canyon country that would soon be flooded by Lake Powell…He found common cause with the writer Edward Abbey when the two met in 1967 at the Lees Ferry boat ramp. Sleight was launching on a Grand Canyon trip, and Abbey, who was working as a ranger for the National Park Service, helped Sleight rig his boats.
โ[We] sat on the edge of the raft talking and thinking, eating and drinking until the wee hours of the morning,โ Sleight would laterย write, โmaking creative commentary on how best to eliminate the Glen Canyon Dam.โ
The friendship lasted through Abbeyโs death in 1989, and Sleight never seemed to mind being immortalized as the anarchist Seldom Seen Smith. Sleight often said that Abbey was able to put into words his anger and sorrow over seeing Glen Canyon flooded and so many other wild places transformed by development…Even though Sleight took on numerous environmental and political fights, he never forgot about Glen Canyon, which he often used religious terms to describe.
โIโd still like to see the water from the reservoir โ what I call Lake Foul โ I think it all ought to be drained and the water be flushed downstream to be stored in Lake Mead,โ Sleight told The Tribune in 2021. โOne thing is for sure: Weโre still trying to resurrect Glen Canyon.โ
Ken Sleight the original Monkey Wrencher photo via Salon
Anyone can see that something is deeply wrong at Blue Mesa Reservoir on the Western Slope. Itโs historically been the biggest body of water in the state. But not anymore.ย The deep,ย long-lasting droughtย has shrunk it so much it lost that title to Lake Granby up north. Now it looks like someoneโs opened the drain on a gigantic, rocky bathtub, with only a bit of shiny blue water pooled at the bottom…For 60 years, Blue Mesa Reservoir has stored water that flows to communities and generates electricity. Itโs also a popular recreation spot, a 20-mile-long lake sandwiched between Montrose and Gunnison. Growing up on the edge of this vital water source, Riser has watched decades of visitors bobbing on their motorboats and jet skis, with their coolers and kids, dogs and music…Del Piccolo said heโs never seen algae โthat blue and vibrant.โ[…]The neon-blue algae is like a warning sign of just how bad things are at Blue Mesa. There are actual warning signs posted, too, saying the water is now dangerous to people and pets. Sonja Chavez, executive director of the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District, thinks itโs the worst Blue Mesa has ever looked…
Colorado SNOTEL basin-filled map May 31, 2026.
Blue Mesa is not a naturally occurring lake but instead is man-made, designed by the federal government to store water for downstream communities, farms and ranches. It also generates electricity and is federally mandated to release water that provides habitat for threatened and endangered fish, including the nativeย razorback suckerย andย humpback chub. Federal officials take all of that into consideration when they determine how much water to discharge. This year, they were faced with an abysmal snowpack โ that accumulation of snow that builds up throughout the winter. Chavez believes the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which controls how much, and when, water flows out of Blue Mesa, needs to adjust more quickly to lean water years like this one.
Chavez thinks the BoR was releasing too much water too early in the season, which drove Blue Mesa into crisis.ย In an email statement, the agency said it does work from 24-month forecasts of how much water will melt into reservoirs, but that it also adjusts water releases as conditions change.
โMoving forward, Reclamation is already working with our forecasting partners and water users on ways to improve modeling for dry year water use, enhance forecasting โฆ and review historic operations to identify opportunities for increased drought resiliency,โ said Bart Deming, BoR Western Colorado Area office manager.
Click the link to read the article on Ken’s Substack (Ken Neubecker):
September 16, 2026
Walter and I frequently walk along the Colorado River in Glenwood Springsโ Two Rivers Park, where the Roaring Fork joins in. The Colorado has been running reddish brown lately due to some intense rain and blowouts from small tributaries upstream, gullies that normally are dry. Not this summer. The Roaring Fork runs clear, creating a distinct division between the flows, a narrow ribbon of clear cold water that runs alongside the warmer and muddier stream for a long ways before they mix.
Both streams and most others are extremely low, even for late summer. Many of the USGS gauges have exclamation points next to them on the map, meaning โextremely below averageโ. There are rocks exposed to the air that Iโve never seen before. What little monsoon rain we had didnโt do anything, not even for the dry soils that will likely soak up much of the snow melt next spring before it can reach the rivers.
Years ago when Iโd go to water meetings and conferences, back when people referred to our current situation as an unusually long drought, there was some talk about the Colorado River Compactโs requirement that the Upper Basin not cause the river flow to drop below 75 million acre feet (maf) over a ten year running average. Oh, weโll see that train wreck coming with plenty of time to do something, they all said. That train wreck is now happening. The engine is sliding over the cliff as the States argue about the menu back in the dining car. All that really happened was serious can kicking along the tracks.
The first Upper Basin โtripwireโ of 82.5 maf, the 75 maf plus 7.5 maf for Mexico could come as soon as next month. Now the can being kicked is full of lawyers.
So, what does the 1922 Compact actually say? The meat is in Article III:
This is what each basin could expect every year.
This is where the additional 1.5 maf per year, split as 750,000 acre feet due from each basin comes in. There was no agreement on Mexicoโs share of the river in 1922, or in 1928 when the Compact was finally ratified. That came in 1944 with a formal treaty regarding Mexicoโs share in both the Colorado and Rio Grande Rivers. The Compact negotiators anticipated such an agreement, hence paragraph (c). What they didnโt anticipate were decades of no โsurplusโ. Thatโs another story.
The more serious tripwire comes next:
October 1, 2026, may well see the flow at Lee Ferry cross the first line in the sand of a dry riverbed if the ten year running average drops below 82.5 maf for the first time since Lake Powell began filling. Back then water was held in the new reservoir to fill it. Everyone was OK with that. The Colorado River flows upstream were still quite robust on average and Lake Mead had plenty to satisfy the Compact requirements for the Lower Basin and Mexico as Powell filled.
Not anymore. Powell is shrinking rapidly. As of this writing the reservoir is at just under 22% full, and only about 27 feet from the elevation where the dam can no longer run water through the power plants penstocks. And the outflow is still about twice the inflow.
The monsoon rains turning the river reddish brown in Glenwood wonโt help.
So what happens if that 82.5 maf tripwire is triggered and one or more states of the Lower Basin place a Compact Call?
Itโs complicated.
It would mean a lawsuit between the states, which would go straight to the US Supreme Court. No lower courts would be involved, and it could take years to resolve. The last time there was a lawsuit about Colorado River apportionment it was between Arizona and California. The case was filed in 1952. The Court appointed a Special Master to work it out and recommend a solution. That took ten years. The case was finally argued in the Court in 1963, with a final decision handed down in 1964. That decision finalized the legal structure for allocations in the Lower Basin, based on the 1928 Boulder Canyon Act.
Twelve years for a resolution. We donโt have that much time for any new case on the Colorado River, especially with how the Upper Basin might comply with Article III, paragraph (d), and Mexicoโs share thrown in.
In 2018 and 2019 the Colorado River Conservation District (River District) commissioned a risk study to look at how flows might augment storage in Lake Powell as well as what might happen should Lake Powell ever reach a level where Compact deliveries dropped to a point where the 82.5 maf over ten years wasnโt met, causing a Compact Call. It was, in light of todayโs situation and the worsening hydrology, a tad optimistic. The first point in the Executive Summaryโs Takeaway states:
The critical low level used for the analysis was 3525 feet, the Bureau of Reclamations critical low as well. Today, September 16, 2026, the elevation at Glen Canyon dam is just under 3517. It continues to drop every day, counting down to October 1.
If the Lower Basin states place a Compact Call it very well could be โcatastrophicโ for water users in the Upper Basin. But there are scenarios where it could be less so. At the very worst all diversions junior to November 24, 1922, or possibly June 25, 1929 when the Boulder Canyon Act was signed, would be curtailed, cut off, until the Compact deficiency is resolved. But that truly is a worst case scenario.
Curtailment would likely be based on what the flow deficit is at Lee Ferry when the call is placed and what increase through Upper Basin curtailment might make up the deficit. Diversions could be cut on a sliding scale, with the most junior taking the biggest hit, going back from today to that date in 1922 or 1929. We wouldnโt probably notice much at first as October 1, the start of the new water year, coincides pretty closely with the end of the irrigation season for most.
Colorado transmountain diversions via the State Engineer’s office
The River Districts study looked at various scenarios for Colorado, based on appropriation dates, river basins vs entire West Slope, and amounts of water that might be needed to satisfy the deficiency at Lee Ferry. The biggest hits would be in the Colorado River mainstem, especially with the large trans-mountain diversions taking water to Eastern Slope cities and farms. The Front Range cities, where most of Coloradoโs population resides and who rely on as much as 50% or more of their water supply coming from the Colorado River, along with the significant agricultural areas along the South Platte and Arkansas Rivers, could see some pretty significant cuts regardless.
The State, through the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) and Attorney Generalโs office did a Compact compliance study some years ago but is keeping that confidential. I canโt blame them. It could become a basis for court arguments and negotiations should a compact call become a reality. The River District study could be as well. Itโs worth a read if you are really interested in all this, and anyone who uses water in Colorado, East or West, to fill a tea pot from the faucet, flush a toilet or raise crops should be. They River District study can be found here or on their website.
Monsoonal moisture is still floating water laden clouds over us today, and some have dropped a good bit of rain. But that wonโt help much. We are facing a โsuper El Ninoโ this winter, which may or may not provide a healthy snowpack. Anything would be better than last winter, except a repeat of that dry season. In any case it will take many years of โnormalโ snowfall to begin to refill the reservoirs. Given the trend of aridity and climate warming that is not something we should be counting on.
Perhaps, hopefully, the most important part of the compact written at the beginning will be called upon:
Of course the rub here will be in how โequitable divisionโ is defined, and I imagine this could take much of the courts time in a Compact Call. In 1922 that meant an equal share of the rivers water for each basin. Now it could hinge on where the greater โvalueโ is, and what that means. Back in 1922 โbeneficial usesโ were pretty straight forward. Now there are many more uses of the river deemed โbeneficialโ.
The needs and values today are quite different from what they were 104 years ago. The Tribes, the environment, recreation, local economies and traditions. All were either excluded in 1922 or covered by broad undefined ambiguity. Climate change wasnโt heard of, even though some scientists at the time had warned about it.
Itโs a brave new world we are entering. Business as usual based on a 104 year old piece of paper and the other paper agreements founded on it wonโt help us adapt to that world, nor will wishful thinking and other optimistic dreams based on hope. As Brad Udall noted during a recent PBS Newshour Tipping Point presentation, we need to re-think the whole thing. It wonโt be easy, but as Udall pointed out it could be good. We need to rethink both what the river can provide and the reality of adapting to that. We also need to rethink the โvaluesโ we base our water needs on. Itโs not just about endless economic growth anymore. Throwing lawyers at each other only enriches lawyers while it impoverishes us.
Meanwhile Walter and I will continue our ramblings with the river. Weโll also stop by the River District offices to say hi to the many friends there, to add some stress relief and try to keep their heads from graying any faster than they already are.
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
La Jara Reservoir and its surrounding lands have been used by cattle grazers and outdoorsmen of all sorts โ fishermen, hunters, backpackers โ for generations. Credit: The Citizen
Anna Vargas noted it first. There was more water in La Jara Reservoir on Saturday than when she had been weeks earlier. That in itself was a blessing.
Then there was the discovery of a piece of volcanic glass obsidian by Loretta Mitson that excited the group, along with evidence of a habitation site lord knows how many thousands of years ago just above the thin reservoir.
La Jara Reservoir holds millions of years of archeology, shown by a rock with markings and a piece of volcanic obsidian. Credit: The Citizen
Anna Vargas, left, and Chris Canaly, center left, of the SLV Ecosystem Council. Credit: The Citizen
Vargas and Mitson were part of a caravan of conservationists, archeologists and public officials who took a field trip to mark National Public Lands Day in the La Jara Basin.
They had another purpose as well.
Back in November 2025, the Colorado State Land Board voted to transfer ownership of the La Jara Basin property to a trio of public agencies โ Colorado Parks & Wildlife, U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management โ through a $49.5 million transaction funded through federal tax appropriations, state tax dollars and money from agencies like Colorado Great Outdoors.
Vargas and her boss, Chris Canaly, executive director of San Luis Valley Ecosystem Council, organized the outing that brought along Mitson, one of the Valleyโs noted historians; Colorado State Sen. Cleave Simpson; Saguache County Commissioner Tom McCracken; and Mick Daniels and Estaban Salazar from San Luis Valley Great Outdoors, among others, to put attention back on the transaction. The expectation is that the thousands of pages of paperwork involved will be signed, money transferred, and the deal finalized by yearโs end.
โWe are setting the table for what is going to be happening, we hope soon,โ said Canaly, promising a grand event for next summer when all the paperwork is complete.
State Land Board office manager Jenny Minich told Alamosa Citizen that a more definitive update on the closure of the transaction should be available in the next couple of months.
โI think itโs going to be quite a wonderful gathering,โ said Canaly in anticipation of the finality of the deal and a celebration of the La Jara Basin to come.
Allen Law of the Western Rivers Conservancy talks about the history of the La Jara Reservoir land. Credit: The Citizen
How the La Jara Basin ended up in the hands of the state of Colorado is unique. Then how the state through its land board eventually came around to transferring ownership to federal partners and Colorado Parks & Wildlife rather than sell the land holdings to a private party is another tale.
โThis property is really unique within their ownership because when states would come into being, the federal government would deed them a certain amount of land in every township and they were supposed to use those lands to raise money for schools in the frontier states,โ said Allen Law of Western Rivers Conservancy, who joined the public lands day trip.
โAnd how La Jara came to be is, some of those sections that should have been state sections were already homesteaded or they were on reservation lands or treaty lands or things like that. So those sections werenโt available. The federal government instead gave the state land board a big block of, I think they call them in lieu of lands, and that is what the core of this place, La Jara, is. It was basically like the โOops, we already gave away a bunch of your land. Weโll make it up to you here.โโ
Cattle grazers and outdoorsmen of all sorts โ fishermen, hunters, backpackers โ have used the La Jara Basin for generations. The decision to move the property away from state land holdings was fraught with the idea that the state could sell the property into private hands to achieve the highest sale price.
But behind the scenes was Erin Minks, then-aide to Sen. Michael Bennet in the San Luis Valley. It was Minks who began to inform her colleagues of the importance of maintaining La Jara as public lands and that the senator needed to lead the charge.
What followed was a series of federal appropriations starting with fiscal year 2023 that saw the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management squirreling away dollars for the eventual purchase of the lands that surround the reservoir. The federal money, $43.5 million, is coming through the U.S. Department of Interiorโs Land and Water Conservation Fund, which is used to โsafeguard natural areas, water resources and cultural heritage.โ
โWe always get the question, โWhatโs going to change up here?โโ said Law of Western Rivers. โEverybodyโs vision is that what happens up here stays pretty much the same.
โThat has always been the goal, is we want the community use to continue. We want the grazing to continue. We want folks to be able to cut wood, hunt, fish, camp, all of those things. So really at the end of the day, if weโre successful, hopefully people wonโt notice any change at all and thatโs kind of the core of conservation.โ
The SLV Ecosystem Council organized an outing with this group to mark National Public Lands Day and to push for the finalization of the La Jara Basin land transfer. Credit: The Citizen
La Jara Reservoir. Credit: The Citizen
Once finalized, the U.S. Forest Service will take over 21,821 acres and BLM will manage 21,704 acres of the La Jara Basin. CPW, in turn, will manage the reservoir area.
Vargas read aloud a land acknowledgement as the group stood in a circle, acutely aware of their surroundings and the meaning of their Saturday journey to La Jara Reservoir.
โOn this day, we gratefully acknowledge the Indigenous peoples on whose ancestral homelands we gather,โ Vargas read. โWe acknowledge that our sustenance and prosperity is derived from the lands of our peoples and ancestors who have been caretakers of the San Luis Valley.โ
A bigger celebration to come.
A view across La Jara Reservoir from a hill between the reservoir’s two dams, back in the day. The reservoir is in Conejos County, Colorado. By Jeffrey Beall – Own work, CC BY 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=140180051
On August 29, monsoon storms sat over northern Arizona, pelting the north rim of the Grand Canyon. The rain unleashed flash floods that picked up momentum in the burn scar from the 2025 Dragon Bravo Fire. With burned trees, boulders and unanchored sediment in tow, the water pummeled down Bright Angel Creek, finding the fastest way to the Colorado River below. The floodwaters wiped out bridges, buildings and at least two human lives. It eliminated beaches and built new rapids.
This summer, and for the foreseeable future, the canyon is changing. In addition to increasingly catastrophic seasonal floods, a warming climate means the Grand Canyon will more often have too little water. The Glen Canyon Dam, which is located just above the canyon, is consistently releasing its lowest water levels in decades, and the Colorado Riverโs flows are projected to drop even lower. This is already impacting recreation, the riverโs ecology and local tribes.
Udall/Overpeck 4-panel Figure Colorado River temperature/precipitation/natural flows with trend. Lake Mead and Lake Powell storage. Updated through Water Year 2025. Note the tiny points on the annual data so that you can flyspeck the individual years. Credit: Brad Udall
The river flowing through the Grand Canyon โ arguably the most majestic and most managed in the country โ is bookended between two dams that hold back the biggest reservoirs in the United States. Those reservoirs, which provide water for 40 million people in the Southwestern U.S., have been declining for decades thanks to scant snowfall and the rising temperatures tied to climate change.
There is so little water today that the combined water stored in both reservoirs has shrunk to a level not seen since the 1950s, when there was only one reservoir, Lake Mead, and it was only half full, according to Jack Schmidt, the director of Utah State Universityโs Center for Colorado River Studies.
July inflows into the system this year were 12% of the historical average. And according to a Bureau of Reclamation study released in June, Lake Powell, the reservoir above the Grand Canyon, is projected to drop too low to create hydropower by January 2027, a situation that also threatens the structural integrity of Glen Canyon Dam.
In response, Reclamation has reduced the volume of water it releases from Powell each month: Itโs currently releasing 482,000 acre-feet per month and is projected to drop to 401,000 in October. Those shrinking water levels will affect the entire river basin and beyond, but the Grand Canyon itself will feel the changes first.
โThe Grand Canyon was used to low flows prior to the dam,โ said Jen Pelz, water advocacy director for the Grand Canyon Trust. โBut weโve altered the system so much in the last 60 years by using the dam that weโre not going back to what natural conditions might be if we just drop the water.โ The formerly high spring flows and low, warm summer ones are unlikely to return.
No one sees how much things have changed as clearly as the 11 tribes who have called the canyon home forever. โTribal relationship is a millennium longer than any scientist has been studying the Grand Canyon,โ said Kurt Dongoske, the Zuni tribal historic preservation officer and principal investigator for Zuni Cultural Resource Enterprise.
He said the Zuni believe the Grand Canyon is where they emerged into this world, and that thereโs a direct spiritual, cultural and geographic connection between the Canyon and the Pueblo of Zuni, where the Zuni River feeds into the Colorado. Dongoske has attended decades of Reclamation meetings and said that historically, the tribeโs perspective about the value of consistent ecosystem management hasnโt been considered. He expects the agency will pay even less attention to the tribeโs views about ecosystem connectivity as water levels drop.
YOU CAN SEE THE CHANGES happening at the smallest scale, in tiny grains of sand: Glen Canyon Dam now blocks more than 90% of the sediment that previously flowed through the Grand Canyon. Pelz said that lack of sediment transport is one of the clearest impacts of low flows because sediment provides the canyonโs structural and ecological foundation, creating sandbars for fish habitat and beaches for rafters. Without sediment, vegetation canโt grow, destabilizing the banks and limiting forage and habitat for the wildlife and insects that are crucial to the food web.
Photo shows Lake Mead with a water elevation of 1078. Credit: USBR
Consistently low sediment-deprived flows erode the canyon little by little, pushing sand downstream into Lake Mead instead of keeping it in the canyonโs ecosystem. To counter that, since the late โ90s, Reclamation has typically released a big pulse of water annually in the spring or fall, known as a โhigh flow experiment,โ to carry sediment into the canyon from upstream. Reclamation neglected to do this in 2025, and even though there was enough sediment to require one in 2026, the agency opted not to because it was deemed politically unpopular.
โIf we lose those high flows, we lose all the sediment in the canyon,โ Pelz said. โI see that as one of the most significant impacts to the Grand Canyon.โ
WHEN THE RESERVOIR LEVEL DROPS and less water comes through the canyon, the waterโs temperature changes, too, because itโs being pulled from the sun-warmed top layer of Lake Powell. Temperatures typically range between 45 and 50 degrees Fahrenheit, but as the lake drops, theyโre now approaching 60. Schmidt explained that this causes algae blooms in the warm clear water near the dam, something that doesnโt happen when the water is rich with sediment.
Those changes also smother the blue-ribbon trout fishery just below the dam, because the fish canโt handle the heat. This alone has big local economic impacts: Recreation in the area is a $1 billion industry that supports thousands of jobs, from guiding to hospitality to public works.
That warm top layer carries another threat: smallmouth bass. These non-native fish thrive in warm water and are pulled down into the canyon through the damโs turbines as water levels drop. This changes the ecosystem, especially for threatened native fish like humpback chub, whose young they eat.
Some 85% of the humpback chub in the U.S. live in the Grand Canyon, thanks to a decades-long recovery program that brought them back from endangered status in 2021 and now supports a nursery at the confluence of the Little Colorado River. But that could soon end as smallmouth bass move through the river. โItโs an ecological, biological issue and a cultural one,โ Pelz said. โFish have been there with the tribes for time immemorial. When I think about the Grand Canyon without native fish, it just changes what it is.โ
At the same time, revenue from power generation at Glen Canyon Dam supports the native fish recovery program. When power generation drops, so does funding for the fish.
In past years, when temperatures in the river exceeded 60 degrees for three days in a row, Reclamation would release what it calls โcool mix flows,โ pulling colder water from lower in the lakeโs water column to discourage the smallmouth bass and algae and balance out the ecosystem. Now, with lower water levels, the agency has less flexibility to change how and when it releases water to reflect the canyonโs natural variability, even when long-term science and agreed-upon policy supports doing so.
The Grand Canyon Trust is monitoring a USGS gauge at mile 15 of the Colorado River to track temperature trends. As of September 10, the water there was 69.4 degrees Fahrenheit and had exceeded the temperature threshold at which a dam release with a cool-mix flow would normally be triggered for 87 consecutive days, since the end of June.
Dongoske, who has served as a representative to the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program since 1991, said thereโs another aspect of river management has been too long ignored: The Zuni not only regard the native fish as kin, they believe that all fish are valuable, and that itโs not the non-natives fault that they ended up in the canyon.
โAll life-forms deserve respect and their lives should be cherished, which is completely antithetical to how Reclamation treats non-natives,โ he said. โHistorically, they have not given Indigenous epistemologies equal consideration with Western science knowledge.โ
RECREATION, TOO, IS deeply entangled in the river flows and the ecosystemโs health, said Ben Reeder, a long-time guide for Colorado River and Trail Expeditions. Thatโs become increasingly clear as the river drops.
Each year, approximately 20,000 people take commercial river trips through the canyon, because itโs the only way to truly see the length and the heart of the Grand Canyon. Those trips can range from three-day motorboat trips to 18-day oar-powered raft trips.
Reeder, who runs 36-foot-long motorboats through the canyon, said that as river levels drop it becomes harder to get through rocky technical rapids like Hance and Horn Creek. โRunning low water, especially in a big boat, is what separates decent boatmen from really good boatmen,โ Reeder said. โItโs definitely more nerve-wracking.โ
He said that guides have had to adjust their routes, timing and scouting, and that some companies have already started running smaller boats to be able to get through the shrinking river channels. So far no one has been hurt, he said, but boats are getting stuck in the rapids.
Reeder, for his part, has changed the type of gear he travels with, bringing a slingshot to help get a rope to shore if his boat gets stuck. โItโs not just about river running, but what happens when things go wrong,โ he said.
โThe Grand Canyon is a living, breathing thing. When you spend a lot of time down there, you start to understand it,โ said Reeder, who is also the Grand Canyon River Guides representative to the Bureau of Reclamationโs Technical Workgroup. He said that guides are looking out for each other as they try to figure it out, but heโs worried about the impacts on the industry.
In this photo we have Claude Birdseye (right) – expedition leader and Chief Topographic Engineer of the USGS, and Roland Burchard (left) – expedition topographer. Photo credit: USGS
Trip bookings are reportedly down by about 25%, after a post-COVID high. Reeder is worried about what will happen in the future as the river drops lower, possibly preventing bigger boats from getting through the canyon at all and cutting off the entire motorized sector of the industry.
โThe history of Grand Canyon boatmen has always been this resiliency,โ he said. โIโm confident weโll have solutions, but Iโm not confident that Iโm necessarily going to be able to guide and run boats there the way I am now for the long term. We will have to adapt.โ
RIGHT NOW, releases from Lake Powell are fluctuating between 6,000 and 9,200 cubic feet per second, compared to the typical average summer flows of 13,000 cfs, according to Jennifer M. Erickson from the Department of the Interior Public Affairs. Such low flows make it impossible to do cool mix flows or high-flow experiments; the latter requires releasing between 31,500 and 45,000 cfs for one to four days.
Low flows also eliminate options like the steady-state releases called โbug flows,โ which the Grand Canyon Trustโs Pelz said aim to keep fluctuations at a minimum to give bugs the chance to hatch, supporting the food web, including bird populations farther downriver.
Dongoske said itโs also important to think about the cascade of impacts outside of the river corridor. โWhatever happens in the Grand Canyon will have impacts on the community of Zuni,โ he said. โThereโs a continuous spiritual connection.โ
On a grand scale, Pelz said, low water levels create a feeling of scarcity that inhibits creativity and flexibility. The recent flash flood also raises questions. โWe really need to rethink how weโre going to manage the river or how the infrastructure is going to work,โ she said.
This story was produced by High Country News in partnership with The Water Desk, an independent reporting initiative at the University of Colorado Boulderโs Center for Environmental Journalism.
A workgroup, of sorts, on the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon. Photo credit: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism
The Colorado River is on the brink of collapse because of climate change and overuse of water.
Reservoirs supplying water to tens of millions of people in the southwest reached record lows this summer. The nation is racing to refill them with conservation measures so they can still generate hydropower and reliably deliver water to users downstream.
Fish are struggling. Rafters are having trouble navigating low water.
Despite all this, the seven states sharing the water supply remain at a yearslong impasse over how to conserve the river.
โThe Colorado River is in as bad a shape as itโs ever been,โ said Doug Kenney, chairman of the Colorado River Research Group at CU Boulderโs Getches-Wilkinson Center.
The Interior Department announced Aug. 21 it will significantly cut back the amount of water that will flow to the lower basin states of California, Nevada and Arizona for at least the next two years.
โTo the people who really study this river, everything thatโs happening this year has been expected for decades,โ Kenney said. โThis is a classic, slow-moving crisis. Iโve equated it to driving a car off a cliff at 2 miles an hour. You can look out the windshield and see that cliff coming. And weโre now right at the edge.โ
Kenney spoke to CU Boulder Today about the latest efforts to conserve the river and what he thinks is coming next.
Are these cuts to the lower basin states enough to save the river?
Thereโs nothing in this plan that will save the river. It hasnโt made it to the ocean since the 1960s. Thatโs not going to change. What theyโre really trying to accomplish is to prevent the reservoirs from going even lower. Theyโre trying to avoid further disaster. And the cuts theyโre anticipating for the next two yearsโI donโt think are going to get us there.
If we have a good water year or two with heavy snowpack, we can maybe hold where weโre at. But by the time we get to year three and beyond, those cuts will probably have to be about twice as big as they are now.
Nevada is suing the federal government to stop the cuts. Whatโs at stake?
One of those stakes could be that the Bureau of Reclamation is told to go back and redo its plan to cut water to the lower basin states. That would be chaotic. The last thing water users want is chaos. They want to know how much water they can expect.
Doug Kenney at the Getches-Wilkinson Center 2026 Conference on the Colorado River June 5, 2026. Photo credit: Allen Best
With lawsuits starting, is there any hope left for states to agree on a plan?
There are two problems on the river. One is stopping the current trajectory of reservoirs dropping. And thatโs a heavy lift. But if you manage to do that, then thereโs the other problem of rebuilding those reservoirs. Which requires even further conservation and cuts.
We have to rebuild some storage in those reservoirs. At the moment, weโve decided letโs just deal with what we have to deal with immediatelyโthis short term crisisโand even thatโs proving to be a lift that the states canโt do themselves. And the federal government has had to step in.
Their plan doesnโt force water cuts for upper basin states like Colorado. Can we get out of this crisis without mandatory cuts in the upper basin?
The upper basin is tricky here in that it uses significantly less water than it was promised. And people in the upper basin will tell you, this is the deal they made a century ago in the 1922 Colorado River Compact.
So when you talk to the upper basin states about conserving water on any sort of permanent basis, thatโs the sticking point that youโre going to get is people saying โwe were promised this water.โ
The scientists will say this is a different river than 100 years ago. So you have that sort of impasse. If the upper basin could just cap what theyโre using today, long term, that would be tremendously helpful. And that might very well happen. But I donโt think the upper basin would want to commit to that in any sort of formal way.
Then how do we get out of this crisis?
A truly long-term sustainable solution has to look at the fact that weโre using 75 percent of the water in agriculture. And some of that agriculture I think is going to just have to go away. So the policy decision there is: Which agriculture goes away? And does it just go away through bankruptcies, and let the market do what the market does? Or do we do that in a structured and more humane manner, such as a federal program to buy out large amounts of it?ย
But when you start talking about retiring a lot of agriculture, thatโs not popular. Thereโs no easy way out of this. [ed. emphasis mine]
Is the fate of the river heading to the US Supreme Court?
I would guess we end up in interstate litigation. Iโm not sure of that, but I think the odds of that happening are greater than 50-50 in my mind. But you have to appreciate that no negotiation and no court fight creates water. The weather systems create water. And as long as the earth continues to heat, this basin figures to get drier and drier.
Twenty years from now, weโre gonna look back and say, โOh, those were the days when we got healthy snowpack,โ and โOh boy, we had it good back then.โ Thatโs the trajectory weโre on in terms of the climate part of this.
Is there anything that gives you hope for the riverโs future?
Hope comes from the fact that at some point, Mother Nature imposes cuts. At some point, the water just isnโt there and people have to be creative and do more with less or at least try to do the same with less. And thereโs a good track record of doing that.
The southwest is a great example. Las Vegas over the last 30 plus years has been the fastest growing big city in America. And during that period, they slashed their water use dramatically. Other cities have been on the same trajectory: Denver, Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoenix and Tucson have shown that they can use a lot less water. And thatโs really encouraging.
Itโs tougher to save water in agriculture. But there are some things we can do to adapt. Some of itโs technology. Some of itโs using different systems for irrigating crops. Itโs also changing to different crops. There are tools in the toolbox here.
But itโs really hard to get that sort of adaptation going as long as youโre still in the mindset that the other guy is the problem, and what I do is fine. That mindset stops a lot of good innovations from happening.
Native America in the Colorado River Basin. Credit: USBR
There are 30 tribal nations with a stake in this river as well. What can we learn from them?
They say, โWhy is there a table with seven chairs. Why is it only seven states negotiating? There should be at least 37 chairs.โ They should be involved in this process at every level. And by and large they arenโt.
The Colorado River Indian Tribes have dubbed their portion of the river as basically having personhood status. It is a living independent being. Itโs important, I think, to challenge the rest of the users in the basin to think about the obligation we have to the river itself. Because thatโs just not a viewpoint that comes up in these negotiations, but it really needs to.
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
Tropical disturbances have moved into the Four Corners Country in recent days, bringingย massive amounts of moisture, raising river levels, and causing flash flooding.ย The pattern โ and high danger of flooding โ is expected to continue this week [September 21, 2026], with the highest rainfall forecast for New Mexico.ย
Snow-nerd Andy Gleason reported that, as of Sept. 18, 3.5 inches of rain had already fallen in Silverton during the storm cycle. The National Weather Service also says the percentage of water in the atmosphere, or PWAT, in the area was 300% of normal, higher than they have ever recorded before.
Streamflows across the region shot up once again, with the San Juan River at Four Corners reaching 13,000 cubic feet per second on Sept. 19. That was enough to send it over its banks in some places in and around Shiprock, and Navajo Nation policeย evacuatedย residents near the San Juan Bridge, which high waters threatened.
The high flows sent a surge of water into Lake Powell, causing inflows to exceed releases and bringing the reservoirโs surface level up by a few inches. However it remains below 53,517 feet โ or a mere seven feet above the level the Bureau of Reclamation plans to โdefend.โ
Itโs increasingly likely that this series of September storms will bring total accumulated precipitation in Four Corners watersheds up to or above median levels by the 2026 water yearโs end on Sept. 30.
Notice how accumulated precipitation in the San Juan River watershed for the 2026 water year, indicated by the black line, was at record levels during its first weeks and didnโt drop below the median until February. The latest round of storms โ along with those to come โ could push the levels back up to or above the median before the water year ends Sept. 30. Source: USDA.
That may seem surprising given how dry last winter was, how severe the drought is in much of the West, and how low streamflows have been all summer. But big storms in the early part of the water year (last October) and now at the end of it have buoyed accumulated precipitation levels, which exceeded those in water year 2025. The problem this year was one of timing, with most of the moisture coming before snow-season, and of warmth: It is shaping up to be the warmest water year on record across most of the West.
๐ COLORADO RIVER CHRONICLES ๐ง
Tech giant Amazon plans to invest $20 million into Colorado River Basin water conservation projects as part of the newly formed Colorado River Basin Collaborative. Amazonโs first two funded projects include a leak-detection and repair effort in Orange County, California; and working with Arable on irrigation efficiency efforts on tribal farmland in Arizona.ย (Amazon News)
๐ REGULATORY CAPTURE RECORD ๐ฆ
Idaho investigators find thatย a 5,600-acre wildfire in 2024 was initially ignited on Trump appointee Michael Borenโs ranch by Borenโs brother, Steve,ย who did so without a permit. The fire cost approximately $950,000 to contain.ย (Public Domainย /ย High Country News)
๐ต PUBLIC LANDS ๐ฒ
U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (MAGA-Utah) moves toย use the Congressional Review Act to revoke the Bears Ears National Monument management planย and block the development of a substantially similar plan in the future. While this would not prevent a future administration from restoring the original national monument boundaries, it would hamper efforts to to create a new management plan for a restored monument and could throw the entire area โ even BLM lands removed from the monument โ into a sort of regulatory chaos.ย (news release,ย Wes Silerโs Newsletter)
Theย U.S. Forest Service considers turning over management of the Maroon Bells Scenic Area near Aspen, Colorado, to Pitkin County, saying it can no longer sustain the $300,000 annual loss at the site. The USFS plans to use a categorical exclusion to skirt the environmental review process, raising concerns about setting a dangerous precedent that would allow similar public lands transfers without analysis.ย (Westwise)
Theย Trump administrationโs ongoing dismantling of the National Park Service continues, as it funnels funds intended for repairs and maintenance in popular Western parks to President Donald Trumpโs vanity projects in Washington, D.C..ย (New York Times)
Confluence of the Little Colorado River and the Colorado River. Photo credit: DMY at Hebrew Wikipedia [Public domain]
SACRED LANDS
The Navajo Nation councilย formally recognizes as a sacred siteย Tooh Ahidiilรญnรญย โ the confluence of the Little Colorado River and the Colorado River,ย the Little Colorado River Gorge, and surrounding areas. The legislation provides additional protection against development such as the now defunct Escalade project or once-proposed pumped hydropower storage projects.ย (Grand Canyon Trust)
โ๏ธ Mining Monitor โ๏ธ
The Navajo Nation Environmental Protection Agency pushes back onย NuFuelsโ proposed Crownpoint Uranium Project in-situ-recovery facility, per the Dinรฉ Natural Resources Protection Act of 2005, which bans uranium mining and processing on the Navajo Nation. The facility would be located near the site of the 1979 Church Rock uranium tailings spill, the largest release of radioactive materials in U.S. history.ย (Navajo Times)
Laramide Resources said it isย moving ahead with its proposed La Jara Mesa uranium mining projectย on the Cibola National Forest west of Mt. Taylor in New Mexico, despite intense opposition and a federal permitting pause.ย (Santa Fe New Mexican)
๐ข๏ธ FOSSIL FUEL FOLLIES ๐
The Bureau of Land Management considersย opening the Ouray National Wildlife Refuge near Vernal, Utah, to oil and gas leasing.ย If developed, the leases would come with โno surface occupancyโ stipulations, meaning directional drilling would occur outside the refuge to reach the federal minerals underneath it.ย (news release,ย Times-Independent)
U.S. Sens. John Hickenlooper and Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) join the Southern Ute Indian Tribe inย opposition to the Bureau of Land Managementโs plan to auction oil and gas leases within the tribeโs reservationย in southwestern Colorado, saying they are in an โenvironmentally and culturally significantโ area.ย (news release)
Today (9/21) is the last day to submit comments to the Bureau of Land Management on 43 proposed oil and gas leases on almost 75,000 acres in Utah, including parcels near Hatch Point just outside the pre-shrinkage boundaries of Bears Ears National Monument.ย (BLM,ย SUWA)
The Bureau of Land Managementย receives no bids for offered oil and gas leases covering 20,600 acres in Nevada, triggering a replacement sale and making the parcels available for noncompetitive bidding.ย (Taxpayers for Common Sense)
Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordonย lauds Peabody Energyโs pilot shipment of Powder River Basin coal to Vietnamย via a newly opened Union Pacific rail line to Mexico export terminals.ย (Oil City News)
๐ค DATA CENTER DIGEST ๐พ
Bureau of Land Management documents showย multiple developers are proposing to build data centers on public landย in Arizona, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming, although most of the projects are still in the conceptual phase and have yet to begin the federal permitting process.ย (Washington Sun)
The Hualapai Tribal Council in Arizonaย passes a resolution opposing โthe irresponsible development of hyperscale data centers,ย saying they pose a โdirect and severe threat to the tribeโs sacred water, lands, environment, and way of life.โย (KJZZ)
A new studyย explores siting data centers on abandoned mine landsย and using the acid mine drainage to cool the facilities.ย (Science Direct)
New Mexico Democratic gubernatorial candidate Deb Haaland says if elected she wouldย implement a temporary moratorium on new large-scale data centersย to allow state lawmakers to develop regulations for the facilities.ย (Source NM)
Holy Cross Energy officials say theyย expect developers to propose data centers in Garfield County, Colorado, within the next five years, adding that the electric cooperative can accommodate the increased demand.ย (Aspen Daily News)
๐ENERGY TRANSITION ๐
Bannock County, Idahoโs commissionersย consider rescinding their 2024 ban on new utility-scale solar and wind energy installations, with supporters saying the projects could provide badly needed economic development and tax revenues.ย (Canary Media)
A federal judge rules that the Trump administrationย illegally terminated the $7 billion Solar for All programย aimed at bringing rooftop and community solar to low-income people, and revokes the cancellation.ย (Associated Press)
Despite recent rain, much of the Roaring Fork Watershed remains in โexceptionalโ drought as of the autumn equinox. Pitkin and Eagle counties are among the 15.2% in the state categorized in the highest ranking for drought, according to the United States Drought Monitor, alongside Lake and Alamosa counties. The majority of Garfield County is in either exceptional or โextremeโ drought, the next highest ranking.ย The dryness paired with above-average temperatures in 2026 made the January through August period the sixth-driest recorded in Colorado since 1895, with 3.78 fewer inches of rain than average. That decreased precipitation has shown in local watersheds and trickled into recreation management. By June, local angling guides were sharing anecdotes about adjusting trips to early hours of the morning to reduce stress on fish.ย
Colorado National Monument from the Colorado Riverfront Trail near Fruita September 18, 2026.
Click the link to read the article on The Aspen Times website (Ali Longwell). Here’s an excerpt:
September 24, 2026
The Colorado River Conservation Water Districtโs multi-year bidย to acquire the historic Shoshone water rights on the Colorado Riverย has required collaboration, strange bedfellows, bipartisan support and intense fellowship. While the River District wants this spirit of partnership to continue as the deal moves through Colorado Water Court, it wonโt compromise values โ nor those of the 17 Western Slope counties the district represents โ to do so, according to General Manager Andy Mueller.
โWe have a trial date set, weโre doing our best to get mediation going and try to solve that problem collaboratively among parties, but frankly, I want everybody here to understand that the west slope will not compromise our important values,โ Mueller said during his keynote address at the Colorado River Districtโs annual water seminar in Grand Junction on Friday, Sept. 22. โโฆWeโre gonna defend the west slopeโs interest on this.โ
[…]
After a decree from the water court, the River District will only need to get approval from the Colorado Public Utilities Commission and secure funding to seal the deal. Mueller said the district is currently $1.6 million shy of the $98.5 million needed, with contributions coming from the River Districtโs board, the Colorado Water Conservation board and over 40 Western Slope utilities, organizations and municipalities. The federal government is supplying around $40 million through a bucket of drought mitigation funding created by the Biden Administrationโs Inflation Reduction Act.ย Securing the funding was a bit of a rollercoasterย and took a combination of strange bedfellows, intense fellowship and bipartisan coordination, according to those involved…
โWhen you look at Shoshone and the coalition that came together behind that, you see strange bedfellows,โ said Zane Kessler, Colorado River District director of government relations. โItโs not every day that you have Pitkin County and Mesa County agreeing. Itโs not every day that you have the rec community and ag. vocally supportive of a project.โ
During Fridayโs seminar, Rep. Jeff Hurd, a Republican representing Coloradoโs 3rd District, and U.S. Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet joined Kessler to discuss just what it took to get this funding from the federal government. With Bennetโs help, the funding was initially awarded in the final days of Joe Bidenโs presidency and subsequently frozen on President Donald Trumpโs first day in office.
โWe were able to come up with the $40 million, Jeff and I, working two different administrations,โ Bennet said. โOne, the Democratic Biden administration and the other, the Trump administration. I give Jeff full credit for that. He landed on this plane, because it wasnโt like I was getting my calls returned from the Trump administration.โ
The twin turbines of Xcel Energyโs Shoshone hydroelectric power plant in Glenwood Canyon can generate 15 megawatts. Credit: Heather Sackett/Aspen Journalism
The effects of this yearโs historic drought are easy to see when standing on the barren, sandy shoreline exposed by low water levels at Denver Waterโs Cheesman Reservoir.
The reservoir was completed in 1905 and is Denver Waterโs oldest mountain reservoir. It straddles Douglas and Jefferson counties along the South Platte River in the foothills southwest of Denver.
Cheesmanโs history dates back to Denverโs early days, when city leaders knew that a stable, reliable water supply was critical to the future of the growing city.
Cheesman Reservoir was down 35 feet as of Sept. 15, 2026. The reservoir is expected to continue falling until the 2027 spring runoff due to customer demand. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Today, Cheesman Reservoir is a critical part of Denver Waterโs system that collects, stores, cleans and delivers water to 1.5 million people across the Denver metro area.
As of mid-September, the reservoir was at 65% of capacity, when normal for this time of year is 88% full. The water is down due to last winterโs record-low snowpack and the need to meet customer demands for water during the ongoing hot and dry conditions this summer.
Watch a video showing reservoir conditions in September 2026:
Water levels in Cheesman will continue dropping this fall and through the winter. The reservoir is forecast to be at about 60% of capacity or lower by April 1, 2027, before the start of next yearโs spring runoff.
During the drought of 2002-2003, Cheesman dwindled to merely 29% full, less than one-third of its capacity.
Cheesman Reservoir dropped to 29% of capacity during the drought of 2002-2003. Photo credit: Denver Water.
While the water is low at Cheesman, it shows the vision of Denverโs pioneers in the late 1800s who had the foresight to prepare the infrastructure needed to get through times of drought that continue more than a century later.
Cheesman Dam carries the name of Walter S. Cheesman, an early Denver businessman, railroad developer and real estate magnate. He was president of the Denver Union Water Company, which built the dam and was a precursor to Denver Water.
Early Denver businessmen (from left) David Moffat (his name is on the Moffat Tunnel that carries water under the Continental Divide), William Robinson and Walter Cheesman pose for a photo in 1905. The three were instrumental in building critical water infrastructure in the late 1800s and early 1900s to serve the growing city. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Cheesman and other water and city leaders knew that Denver lacked the annual precipitation needed to support the young, bustling community. In order to grow, the city would need a reliable source of water. Thatโs because the South Platte, Denverโs primary water supply at the time, would nearly dry up in the months after the spring runoff.
In the 1890s, scouting parties began looking for locations to build a dam and reservoir on the South Platte River west of the city.
On whatโs described as a surveying and fishing trip in 1893, a group that included C.P. Allen, chief engineer of two early water companies, identified a deep, narrow canyon on the South Platte River, about 48 miles southwest of Denver, the perfect location for what would become the site of Cheesman Dam.
Engineers walk on the frozen South Platte River in the winter of 1896 at the site of the future Cheesman Dam. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Construction of Cheesman Dam in the early 1900s. The dam was built using nearby granite stones carved by Italian craftsmen. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Cheesman Reservoir, then and now, captures melting snow from the spring runoff. The water it stores is used to stretch the annual spring rush of water down mountain streams and rivers and make it last year-round.
Learn about the history of Cheesman Reservoir in this video:
The reservoirโs water levels fluctuate every year depending on snowpack, weather conditions and customer demand. When full, Cheesman can hold 79,064 acre-feet of water. In wet years, excess water flows over the damโs spillway in spectacular fashion.
Water flows over Cheesman Damโs spillway during the spring of 2014. Water flows over the spillway when the reservoir reaches capacity in years with high snowpack. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Part of Cheesmanโs value stems from the age of its water rights.
Water rights associated with Cheesman Reservoir date to June 27, 1889, which means Denver Water has relatively senior rights to capture and store water from the river โ even in times of drought when river flows are low.
The reservoir is also in a favorable location for water storage.
โCheesman Reservoir was built in a deep, narrow canyon, which means it has a relatively small surface area, which limits evaporation,โ said Nathan Elder, water supply manager at Denver Water. โReducing water loss is important all the time, but critical during droughts.โ
The reservoirโs attributes came into play this summer when Denver Water moved water from the shallow Antero Reservoir upstream on the South Platte into Cheesman to reduce evaporation.
โDenver Water is fortunate to have had the visionaries of the past who prepared us for the water challenges we face today,โ Elder said. โThe reservoir they built serves as the workhorse of Denver Waterโs South Platte collection system.โ
Cheesman Dam and Reservoir on Sept. 3, 2026. The reservoir has water rights dating back to 1889, which are critical because they make it easier to fill the reservoir each year. Photo credit: Denver Water.
As for when Cheesman will fill again, Elder says thatโs hard to predict, although the reservoir will likely need more than one winter with above-normal snowpack to fully recover.
โWeโre not sure what the coming winter will deliver in terms of snowpack. Thatโs why itโs important for our customers to do their part and look at ways to conserve water at home.โ
Elder reminds customers that Denver Water has banned lawn watering and spray irrigation as of Oct. 1. The move is expected to save an estimated 5,000 acre-feet of water this fall, which will help stretch our water supplies in Cheesman and other Denver Water reservoirs.
In the last post here, I argued that, water-wise, the Colorado River region is no longer in a โwater crisisโ โ a term implying a situation where some changes and adjustments need to be made โto get back to normal.โ No. We will never get back to the 20th century Colorado River โnormalโ โ the seemingly successful operation of our vast water storage-and-distribution system we experienced from the 1970s through the 1990s, providing some or all of the water and food and power for 30, 35, 40 million people.
Instead, I suggested we should take seriously a United Nations University study declaring that the whole planet is in state of Global Water Bankruptcy: Living Beyond our Hydrological Means in the Post-Crisis Era. The scientist-authors used the current Colorado River situation as one of their examples of โglobal water bankruptcy.โ This water bankruptcy, here as everywhere else on the planet, is due to two โuniversalโ factors:
โ One factor is the extent to which we humans have become a swarming species on the planet, overwhelming the planetโs capacity to supply our expanding needs along with the rest of the planetโs โlife project.โ Our more sophisticated water โneedsโ exacerbate our physical numbers in creating the bankruptcy. (See cartoon above)
โ The other factor is a planet growing steadily warmer for the foreseeable future, resulting in a general โdrying outโ and diminished water supply in the tropical and so-called temperate zones where most of the planetโs life and food production happen.
The current systems for water management and operation around the world cannot โ repeat: cannot โ continue to pretend to meet the relentlessly increasing demand with the relentlessly shrinking water supply.
Those are therefore bankrupt systems, in their current state. That does not mean the systems must be terminated, but it does mean there will have to be major changes in the systems if they are ever again going to sustainably meet the needs of the people.
The first stage of bankruptcy management is the formalization of old cowboy wisdom; if youโve dug yourself into a hole, the first thing to do is to stop digging. On the global level, this would mean stop having so many babies that survive infancy to become eating, drinking, coupling adults โ or more the case today, perhaps, lifelong vaguely angry adolescents (eating, drinking and coupling). The most developed nations have in fact made inroads on this challenge, achieving (with no formal program) zero or even negative birth-to-death ratios; their population increases are mostly through immigration.
But thatโs global, the first and oldest species-level problem, the trauma of success weโve been grappling with for 6,000 years plus or minus: how to organize the swarming population for something other than the ultimate decline and fall into following some Ozymandias or Trump off a cliff.
For now, letโs just bring it home to the Colorado River region. (โRegionโ here, remember, means the natural river basin plus all of the out-of-basin extensions who depend on Colorado River diversions โ the South Platte and Arkansas River Basins, the Salt Lake basin, Southern California out to the Pacific coast.)
The Bureau of Reclamation has, as discussed in the last post, taken the lead in โstopping diggingโ by essentially ignoring the antiquated Colorado River Compact and mapping out an โadaptive managementโ agenda of a ten-year plan broken into five reviewable and alterable two-year periods. [ed. emphasis mine]
The Bureauโs chief goal in this ten-year plan is not delivering an easy and comfortable desert lifestyle for the 40 million or so people who depend on the river for some or all of their water, food,ย ย energy and water-based entertainments. Their chief goal for the next decade is to save the system of water storage and distribution that has been stretched to the breaking point through enabling that lifestyle for a possibly unsustainable number of people, and the people will have to pay for that effort to save the system over the coming decade โ and quite probably live with reasonably diminished expectations on into the future, for so long as we continue shrinking the river through pumping ever more heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere.
How will we pay? Tiered water bills will probably make it unaffordable for most of us to maintain a desert-defying green lawn. Unavoidable major cuts to agricultural water will introduce change and some chaos in the food supply systems, guaranteeing continued high or higher prices at the supermarket. It may make 50-plus percent of ag water going to animal food production (hay and corn) economically unsustainable; meat may eventually go back to being a special Sunday treat. The need to increase storage in reasonably good water years will mean cheap hydropower production will continue to be replaced by more expensive alternatives โ wind and solar as they develop, but when necessary a fallback on fossil fuels (meaning more planet-warming gases into the atmosphere). The need to increase storage in good years will also mean marginal flows in all the โrecreational canyonsโ below the major dams, now a significant element in the basin economy. (This year the recreational economy took a big hit as many streams dropped below the level for safe boating or fishing.)
The Bureau wants consumptive use of Colorado River water to have been permanently cut by 3 million acre-feet (maf) not later than the end of the 10-year planning period (2036), on the valid assumption that ever lower snowpacks and runoffs are the shape of the future; that reduction in use will, they believe, allow them to build up some storage in the good years for sustainability through the bad years โ the basic idea of storage.
The cuts to go in effect October 1 (beginning of the 2027-28 first two-year Bureau plan) will achieve between a third and half of the 3 maf through mandatory cuts totaling 1.25 maf for the three Lower Basin states below the big federal reservoirs (California, Arizona and Nevada), and a program of voluntary paid reductions in Upper Basin use, paid from a $100 million fedeal fund. Users can expect that the other half of the consumptive use reduction will be worked in to the two-year reviews and subsequent modified plans for the next two years.
The reaction to this plan has โ as one might expect โ not been positive. The state of Nevada has sued the Bureau/Interior for the depth of the current cuts and the promise of deeper. The Central Arizona Project governing board has also decided to sue, because the CAP will take the deepest cuts, due to the junior status of its water rights.
The state of Arizona also threatened to sue in a letter to the Bureau; they castigated the Bureauโs plan for seeming to pay no obeisance to the Colorado River Compact, and are essentially demanding that the Bureau continue to release 8.23 maf on average from Powell to meet the Upper Basin Compact obligation, even if it means Upper Basin users having to cut their uses to accumulate that hydrologically antiquated quantity. They have created a multi-million dollar war chest and have hired a law firm to defend their state of denial.
California has been mostly quiet; they will only stir from their den if someone suggests that the cuts should be divided among the three states equitably according to each stateโs usage of the waters, rather than distributed through appropriations priorities.
The lack of mandatory Upper Basin cuts in the plan is a very sore point with the Lower Basin users. The Upper Basin states answer by saying that nature already imposed major reductions on their use โ reductions that are not really quantified, however. It is important to acknowledge a major distinction between the two Basins: nearly all the lower Basin water users are below the big federal storage reservoirs, while many, maybe most of the Upper Basin water users are above the larger federal storage reservoirs. Living and working above a dam versus below a dam develops different perspectives on things like predictability, sustainability and freedom to act.
There is actually not a great quantity of private consumptive use in the Upper Basin that is โcontrolledโ by federal reservoirs, which can impose cuts by simply not releasing water from the reservoirs โ how the Bureau will be enforcing its mandatory cuts in the Lower Basin. Also the upstream Upper Basin federal reservoirs like Green Mountain and Taylor are all on the small side (less than 150,000 acre-feet). Many of the Upper Basin agricultural diversions are also small, with numerous single-ranch headgates โ too much to cover for overworked water commissioners with too-large sectors; they have to accept that a lot of the recording of use will be done by the farmers and ranchers themselves, an honor system that does not always insure accuracy.
Even the paid voluntary cuts face a challenge; to get the water saved by upstream users down to Powell Reservoir, it must be โshepherdedโ past downstream users who are free to take the water to meet their own allotments, and no one knows how this shepherding can be done. A legal system based on โfirst come, first servedโ does not automatically encourage a sharing attitude.
So that is where it stands today. I think it has to be acknowledged that the Bureau of Reclamation is trying to instill a โbankruptcy awarenessโ over a region of heavily invested consumptive water users that are steeped in denial over a water situation they seem to feel they cannot afford to acknowledge.
That the Bureau of Reclamation was a moving force pushing the over-development of the river system through the first three quarters of the 20thcentury cannot be denied; if โarroganceโ can be defined as large actions taken in a state of ignorance about outcomes (suggesting that smaller trial runs would have been wiser), then the Bureau has been arrogant, culminating probably in Glen Canyon Dam. Basically 20th-century America became arrogant after World War II; the Bureau was just another running dog.
America right now is insufferably arrogant in its behavior globally, trying to make ongoing ignorance mandatory in the face of sadder-but-wiser awareness (โwokenessโ), in order to try to perpetrate large actions done stupidly; make America grate again. But the Bureau, viewing the imminent reduction of its massive Colorado River achievement to a dead-pool joke, has more humbly come around to a ten-year flexible and resilient plan to reduce water use in the Basin (plus extensions) to fit the Colorado River we now have, not the river we thought we had when we drafted a compact dividing the river among the seven states supposedly united by the river.
This is the Bureauโs attempt to move to bankruptcy management, and it has resulted to date in a flurry of lawsuits and threats, which must presumably be dealt with before what needs to be done can be done. History suggests that this could take up to a decade once it is submerged in the courts, and the Bureau managers are convinced that a prolonged period of โno actionโ (the first alternative in all EIS-driven decisions) will inevitably result in dead-pool episodes in Powell and Mead Reservoirs. Recent history, on the other hand, suggests that the Supremes (to whom interstates disagreements go) are no longer interested in careful constitutionally-based jurisprudence if it doesnโt suit their politics, so they might let the Bureau go ahead with its escalating cuts to the Lower Basin while a water master thrashes through the legal thicket.
Weโll see. Meanwhile, next time I want to start looking at some ideas that might help lead out of our current bankruptcyโฆ.
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
Blue Mesa reservoir seen in August 2026 at about 21% full. Under a new state-run conservation program, saved water could be stored in Blue Mesa. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM
The state water board has given the green light to a one-year, state-run water conservation program.
On Wednesday [September 16, 2026], the Colorado Water Conservation Board unanimously approved the application review process and criteria for what state officials are calling Coloradoโs near-term contribution program for 2027. The move came at the boardโs regular September meeting at Copper Mountain.
Board member and Colorado River mainstem representative Taylor Hawes reminded the board that their unenviable position was due to a historic drought.
โNone of us want to be in this situation where we are dealing with these kinds of impacts from climate-change-driven drought,โ Hawes said. โWeโre doing this in response to whatโs being thrown at us in terms of decreased supply.โ
The contribution program aims to use $100 million in funding from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to pay water users in the Upper Basin states (Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming) to voluntarily cut back. According to the criteria approved Wednesday, projects in Colorado are required to avoid negative impacts; avoid speculators; comply with the rules of local ditch companies; and consult with tribes and local water conservation districts about proposed projects within their boundaries. The program will also give weight to projects that see participation statewide, across water sectors and by tribal nations; build drought resiliency; and have environmental benefits.
The approval comes at a pivotal moment, as the federal government has taken over operations for the Colorado River and the nationโs biggest reservoirs after the seven states that share the river failed to find agreement after years of negotiations. The federal plan calls for cuts only for the Lower Basin states (California, Arizona and Nevada). But with the region wracked by historic drought, the Upper Basin states can no longer escape scrutiny over their water use and are expected to contribute in some way.
โWeโre not doing this for fun,โ Hawes said. โWeโre doing this because our situation requires it. โฆ Itโs a step toward just being able to live within the riverโs means.โ
THay bales seen on a ranch outside Carbondale in July 2024. The state water board approved a contribution program on Wednesday that could pay agricultural water users to cut back. Credit: Heather Sackett/Aspen Journalism
Full fallowing not favored
The Upper Basin has experimented with these types of paid conservation programs before, including in the System Conservation Pilot Program (SCPP), which ran in 2023 and 2024. And Colorado conducted its own exploration of a demand-management program from 2019 to 2021.
But these programs remain controversial and go against the main philosophy of Western water law: to maximize the use of water. Farmers and ranchers often feel unfairly targeted for water savings because they use the majority of Colorado River water. And some worry about the potential for impacts to rural agricultural communities if water is taken off the land.
Although, in theory, all water-use sectors were allowed to participate in SCPP, in Colorado only agricultural water users in participated in the pilot program. Removing water from the Western Slopeโs hay and alfalfa fields for an entire growing season โ known as full-season fallowing โ has been the most common way to find water savings in the past and is one of the easiest ways to calculate water savings. But early studies have shown that removing water from forage crops for the whole season can have negative impacts on fields that last for several years.
Troy Waters, a fifth-generation Mesa County farmer who sits on the board of Grand Valley Water Users Association and Grand Valley municipal water provider Ute Water, said during the public comment portion of Wednesdayโs meeting that fallowing fields will just lead to โbuy and dry,โ where water is removed permanently, resulting in negative economic impacts to communities. Instead, Waters said he would like to see the funding from Reclamation go toward upgrades to aging infrastructure, such as lining ditches, which could have long-term water savings.
โThis fallowing ground is causing nothing but a can of worms with farmers,โ Waters said. โIโve seen the fights; Iโve sat in on the board meetings. Itโs not a solution. Letโs take this money and find a better solution.โ
Some board members agreed. After some discussion, the board amended the criteria to add that multiyear fallowing projects should be disincentivized.
โThe intent of making that suggestion is I donโt want to push people toward fallowing,โ said CWCB Arkansas Basin representative Alan Ward. โI want that to be the exception.โ
State officials have said they want to broaden the types of projects funded for next year, which is part of the reason why they are calling this a โcontributionโ program and not strictly a conservation program. A goal is to encourage participation from cities and industrial water users by offering more money to these sectors, where water is more valuable.
Becky Mitchell, Coloradoโs representative to the Upper Colorado River Commission (UCRC) and a negotiator on Colorado River issues, said she heard loud and clear that there is not an appetite for multiyear fallowing projects.
โI think it is my responsibility to take that back to the Bureau of Reclamation and Department of the Interior and say these are the kinds of things we can do in Colorado and fallowing is not the only answer; the impacts of that might be too great,โ Mitchell said.
State officials announced in July they would be creating a contribution program using federal money and have been taking feedback from water users and stakeholders since then. At Wednesdayโs meeting, Emily Zmak, deputy interstate section chief at the CWCB, presented the findings from public comments, surveys and input, which helped officials craft the project criteria.
โAlmost universally, weโve heard support for a program,โ Zmak said. โI would say 99% of the input either supported a program outright or supported a program with certain sideboards. Water users have been very invested in shaping the direction of a contribution program.โ
The top criteria that respondents said they wanted to see in a program were protection of water rights; drought resilience; community impacts; and credit from Reclamation for the saved water. Respondents did not support having a minimum acreage for participation.
Sprinklers irrigate a ranch outside of Carbondale on Highway 133. Some water users and state water board members are hoping fallowing projects wonโt become the backbone of a new state conservation program. CREDIT: CLAIRE DE L’ARBRE/ASPEN JOURNALISM
Approval process
Water-saving projects would have to go through several rigorous steps for approval, said Amy Ostdiek, interstate section chief with CWCB. First, there would be a review by the Colorado Division of Water Resources. CWCB staff would also consult with tribal nations for projects on their land and with local conservation and conservancy districts for projects within their boundaries. Then in January, the CWCB would decide which projects to advance to the UCRC for approval, before going to Reclamation for its approval.
โWe would be seeking robust public input and review of these applications,โ Ostdiek said.
CWCBโs approval Wednesday is conditioned on an agreement between federal officials and the Upper Basin states that says the states can get credit for and have control over the saved water.
Under the Upper Basinโs contribution program, saved water would have to be moved and stored in either Lake Powell or Blue Mesa, Flaming Gorge and Navajo reservoirs (known as the Upstream Initial Units) in order to get credit from Reclamation for the stored water. One of the criticisms of past pilot conservation programs was that the water was neither tracked to Lake Powell nor measured to see how much ended up there.
On Sept. 11, the UCRC sent a letter to federal officials saying that water saved through the program should be stored in one of the Upstream Initial Units and should be operationally neutral, meaning the pools of saved water would not be factored into federal reservoir operations or releases.
โWithout these elements, participation in an Upper Basin Program may be significantly limited,โ the letter reads. โAccordingly, we intend to work with you so that contributions generated by the Program and stored at Lake Powell or the Upstream Initial Units will be credited and regarded as operationally neutral.โ
A portion of the city of Aspenโs water allocation in Ruedi Reservoir will be utilized to support regional drought response efforts, according to an informational memo sent to the Aspen City Council last week.ย The city will make up to 350 acre-feet of its annual water allocation from Ruedi available to support drought response efforts. It has access to 400 acre-feet annually. The water will be used to assist the Colorado River Water Conservation Districtโs emergency substitute water supply plan, which provides supplemental water supplies for municipal and domestic historic user pool beneficiaries and other eligible water users whose supplies may not otherwise be fully available during current drought conditions.
โBy making a portion of the cityโs available contract water supply available for release, Aspen is helping maintain water supplies used to support municipal and domestic water users affected by the current drought conditions and administration associated with the Cameo call,โ the memo states.
The Cameo call consists of a series of water rights on the Colorado River. It keeps water instream until it reaches the Grand Junction area, and can mean upstream diversions may need to shut down or release additional water into the river to meet the needs of the Cameo call.ย The release of the water also provides benefits to streamflows, aquatic habitats, fisheries and riparian resources within the Roaring Fork and Colorado rivers, according to the memo.
The proposed purchase of the Shoshone Power Plantโs water rights took center stage at the Colorado River Districtโs Annual Water Seminar held at Colorado Mesa University on Friday, Sept. 18. While much of the annual meeting covered the historic drought that threatened the Western Slope and the rest of the Colorado River Basin, the Shoshone effort was held up as an example of how to manage water rights. Colorado River District General Manager Andy Mueller devoted a section of his keynote speech to the effort to purchase the power plant and its senior water rights for $99 million.
โItโs been going on since this district was formed in the 1930s,โ Mueller said. โWe have been trying to gain control and ensure permanency of the water rights that command the river related to this little power plant in Glenwood Canyon.โ
There has been positive progress on the purchase, Mueller said, including raising more than $97 million from local, state and federal partners. The district also got a positive decision from the Colorado Water Conservation Board [8-0 vote on instream flow application]. However, there is still more negotiations underway, he said…On the funding side, Mueller credited Sen. Michael Bennet and Rep. Jeff Hurd for helping to secure and get released $40 million in federal funding for the purchase. Bennet and Hurd sat down for an โarmchair conversationโ about Shoshone at the seminar Friday afternoon…After lunch, Hurd and Bennet sat down and gave each other credit for the bipartisan effort to get the $40 million in federal funding for the Shoshone purchase. Bennet insisted on its inclusion in the Inflation Reduction Act during the Biden administration…When the Trump administration came in, it funded tens of millions of dollars in funding approved through that legislation. Hurd said he worked behind the scenes to convince the administration to release the funding.
โGive Jeff full credit for that,โ Bennet said. โHe landed this plane because I wasnโt getting my calls returned from the Trump administration and he was. He told them it was his number one priority.โ
A map showing the boundaries of the Colorado River District, and its 15 member counties
The Colorado River Districtโs Annual Water Seminar held at Colorado Mesa University on Friday, Sept. 18, naturally focused on this yearโs historic heat and drought that left many on the Western Slope facing water shortages, but it also looked toward the future and the positive steps taken to address this yearโs challenges…
โUnprecedented. Worst ever. Miserable. Warmest ever. Hottest ever,โ [Andy] Mueller said. โYou can keep going, but I want to also say that this was a year of extremely collaborative creativity in western Colorado. It is really important to recognize that, applaud that and make sure we grow that, because it is how we get through tough times. Itโs how weโre going to survive and thrive in the future.โ
[…]
Mueller highlighted the collaboration between communities, irrigation companies and water users throughout the district. He said there were many efforts that helped extend the irrigation season…
Blue Mesa Reservoir on the Gunnison River, seen Aug. 30, 2026 at about 21% full. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM
There were also areas, especially in the North Fork Valley and the Gunnison River, that have seen severe impacts from the drought. Coloradoโs largest reservoir, Blue Mesa, is also in a dire condition, he said.
โOn the Gunnison, thereโs a train wreck that is accelerating at Blue Mesa,โ Mueller said. โWe are working with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Uncompahgre Valley Water Users and the Upper Gunnison Water Conservancy District to try to figure out solutions. But that reservoir, if anybody hasnโt seen it recently, is not just one reservoir anymore. Itโs a bunch of little pools. It has dried up.โ
[…]
Facing the challenges the future presents wonโt be easy, Mueller said, but the next generations will depend on work done now.
โWhen I talk to my daughters who are in their 20s, they and their friends are absolutely scared for their future,โ Mueller said. โThey are extremely intelligent, theyโre paying attention, but they look at this tremendous uncertainty that we have created in our society and in our globe. They need our help, helping them see the future. That is our job to do that.โ
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
#ColoradoRiver 24 month for mid September – Mead is losing standard turbines around Nov – consultation on Mead Run of the River at 1010โ mid 2027 – if these projections are still based on 1991-2020, they are optimistic – on min 6 MAF release Powell loses turbines Aug 2027 pic.twitter.com/WiS70KgjWp
Seminar day did not include an EV element. I ride my bicycle from Fruita to Grand Junction along the Colorado Riverfront Trail. The 14 mile ride has great views of the Colorado National Monument, Grand Mesa, and Mt. Sentinel.
Colorado National Monument from the Colorado Riverfront Trail near Fruita September 18, 2026.
Of course the Colorado River is front and center and it was so gratifying to see the river running with sediment.
Colorado River running muddy September 18, 2026.
It had been rainy all week in western Colorado and you could tell, it was enough to get near average streamflow at the Utah line.
My main takeaway from the seminar was that West Slope water users shared supplies to get through these rough times. Collaboration was mentioned several times as was, “We didn’t call anyone out.”
Check out my live-posts from seminar on my BlueSky feed or the seminar hash tag (click on the “Latest” tab).
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
Denver Water can finish its Gross Dam expansion and fill the controversial reservoir in western Boulder County, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday, lifting an injunction by a lower court judge and confirming the damโs permits as sound.
The appeals court said the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had acted responsibly in issuing construction permits for the $600 million expansion, which is largely complete and will be filled using water rights Denver holds in the Colorado River basin on the western side of the Continental Divide.
โWe do not think the Corpsโs choice of cost methodology was arbitrary or capricious,โ the appeals court ruling said. The plaintiffs, including nonprofit Save the Colorado, argued the Corps rejected clear evidence of climate change, but the appeals court ruled the Corps gave the research fair consideration.
โThe Corps considered โ and rejected โ the reliability of that and similar studies, one of which showed that in the Colorado River Basin, โno consistent trends in annual precipitation have been detected over the last 100 years,โโ the appeals court said.
โIn the end, the environmental groups ask us to substitute our judgment for the Corpsโs. They point out scientific studies that, in their view, rebut the Corpsโs reading of the scientific literature and ask us to opine on what the scientific research establishes,โ the appellate ruling said. โBut our job is not to second-guess the Corpsโs assessment as long as it rests on a reasoned basis.โ
โWeโre pleased to see the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals confirm that the Gross Reservoir Expansion Project was lawfully permitted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and that Denver Water can proceed with the final stages of this critical project to ensure a safe, secure water supply for the 1.5 million people we serve,โ according to a statement from spokesperson Todd Hartman. โWith this decision, Denver Water can move forward with completion of construction, site preparation and eventual filling of the expanded reservoir. An expanded Gross Reservoir is vital to the future of the Denver region.โ
Itโs nonsensical to be putting more straws in, and further draining, the Colorado River at this point in history,โ Wockner said. โThat the law allows it to happen doesnโt make it right, it just makes it legal. I saw something wrong, I stood up, spoke out and took action. It was the right thing to do and I would do it all over again.โ
Wockner said Tuesday the plaintiffs would not be appealing the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Gross Reservoir Dam backs up South Boulder Creek, while also taking in water through the Moffat Tunnel under the divide, from the Fraser and Williams Fork rivers in the Colorado River basin. Denver Water has said the expansion is needed to balance its water storage system currently heavily concentrated on the southern end of the metro area.
Welcome to the first edition of the Land Deskโs Newswire, a human-curated summary (we are a non-AI shop, FYI) of some of the weekโs biggest headlines that concern land, water, and other Western issues. Iโm still working out the timing of this, and how it will meld with the weekโs other dispatches, so expect some adjustments in coming weeks. Please give it a gander and, as always, I appreciate your feedback.
๐ฃ๐ฝ WATER WATCH ๐
New Mexico officialsย release about 2,000 acre-feet of water from Abiquiu Dam to provide a temporary un-drying of the Rio Grandeโs desiccated riverbedย through Albuquerque in an attempt to nourish stressed vegetation, recharge the aquifer, and to study the effects of such pulses. Audubon Southwest leased about 300 acre-feet of the water from various users, the Middle Rio Grande Conservation District contributed 300 acre-feet more, and the Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority provided the remaining 1,400 acre-feet from its share of river imported from the Colorado River Basin via the San Juan-Chama Project.ย (Inkstain,ย Laura Paskus,ย KUNM)
Aurora Water โ a municipal utility on Coloradoโs Front Range โ looksย to buy Lower Arkansas Valley farmersโ water rightsย to feed the cityโs future growth, sparking concerns about negative impacts of โbuy and dryโ deals. But officials say it would be a โbuy and (only partially) dryโ deal that keeps some of the water in agriculture.ย (Colorado Sun)
๐ต PUBLIC LANDS ๐ฒ
A new study finds federal land management agenciesย spent $1 billion lessย on vendors in Western states in 2025 compared to 2024, acutely affecting the small business sector. Some of the largest cuts were to wildland fire management investments, particularly on-the-ground suppression work as spending was shifted to aerial firefighting.ย (news release)
Conservation groups file a lawsuitย challenging oil and gas leasing on hundreds of thousands of acres of public landย in big-game migration corridors and wilderness quality lands in Wyoming and Colorado, saying the BLM violated federal law by skirting environmental protections.ย (news release)
The Bureau of Land Managementย seeks public input on 38 proposed oil and gas leases on 66,221 acresย in northwestern Colorado that would be auctioned off in March 2027. The bulk of the parcels are under the jurisdiction of the BLMโs Kremmling and Little Snake River field offices, with one in the Royal Gorge office.ย (news release)
๐ฆซ WILDLIFE WATCH ๐ฆ
Colorado Parks and Wildlife officersย euthanize a lethargic and unresponsive 300-pound male bear in Durango, finding that its stomach and intestines were completely blocked with trash. โWeโve all heard the oft-repeated phrase โgarbage kills bearsโ for years,โ said Bryan Peterson of Bear Smart Durango. โAnd many have asked how in the world does trash get bears killed? Well, in many ways, but sometimes literally. Our communityโs tepid approach to trash management got a bear killed. Thankfully, its pain and suffering was ended.โย (news release)
Colorado Parks and Wildlife officersย โlethally remove,โ i.e. kill, two male yearling wolvesย from two separate packs after the animals were linked to attacks on sheep and cattle in Rio Blanco and Pitkin counties.ย (news release,ย Summit Daily)
๐ฎ GRAZING GAZETTE ๐ฅฉ
A Wyoming advocate shows how the stateโsย agriculture industryโs resource footprint โ in terms of water use for irrigation and land-use for livestock grazing โ significantly dwarfs its statewide economic footprint, and that should be considered before giving ranchers outsized political influence.ย (WyoFile)
๐ข๏ธHYDROCARBON HOEDOWN๐
A pair of peer-reviewed studiesย link Permian Basin oil and gas operations to radioactive plumes and high ozone pollutionย in Loving, New Mexico, and other nearby communities, potentially increasing lung cancer and other health risks.ย (Capital & Main)
The Bureau of Land Management and Southern Ute Indian Tribe launch a planning process toย guide and analyze oil and gas developmentย on 110,000 acres of tribal trust land within the tribeโs land in southwestern Colorado.ย (news release)
โ๏ธ WACKY WEATHER WATCHโก๏ธ
Aย massive sinkhole emerges in actor Nicolas Cageโs oceanfront houseโs drivewayin Malibu, prompting city officials to declare and emergency, evacuate nearby homes, and shut off gas service in the gated community. Officials worry the situation could be worsened by forecasted high tides and rain and long-term weather disturbances resulting from the coming super El Niรฑo.ย (Los Angeles Times)
๐ REGULATORY CAPTURE CHRONICLES ๐ฆ
Radical right-wing U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) and fellow House Republicansย launch an investigation of nineteen conservation groups, accusing the entities of profiting at the expense of taxpayers via statutory fee-shifting provisions, which can reimburse the organizations for legal costs when they win in court.ย (AFP,ย news release)
๐ค DATA CENTERS ๐พ
Pinal County, Arizonaโs board of supervisors vote toย reject Vermalandโs proposed data center complexย following widespread local opposition, even though the developer scaled back the original proposal. The scaled-back proposed facility, spread across 3,300 acres, would have included 11 buildings and a gas-fired power plant.ย (AZ Family)
Tribal nations and Indigenous advocatesย push back on data center developmentin Arizona, Oklahoma, Nevada, and beyond.ย (Washington State Standard)
Oracle seeks proposals for the development ofย 2 gigawatts of new solar, wind, geothermal, or other renewable energy technologiesย to provide โcarbon-free energy matchingโ for its Project Jupiter data center complex under development in southern New Mexico, which is expected to be powered by gas-fired fuel cells. The firm is also offering $1 million to support carbon capture and sequestration at the facility.ย (news release,ย KRQE)
Creekstone Energy, the developer of the massive Delta Gigasite data center in central Utah, looks toย use untested technology to โcreateโ more waterย than it uses by capturing condensation from natural gas combustion at the plant dedicated to powering the facility.ย (Salt Lake Tribune)
Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs (D)ย opposes Attorney General Kris Mayesโ call for a pause on new data centersย to get a better handle on their water and energy use, acknowledging the concerns are valid but saying a statewide moratorium is the wrong approach.ย (AZ Family)
A peer-reviewed study finds that data centers, which typically combine large capital investments with little local labor demand, canย strain a communityโs public infrastructure without generating widespread economic gains.ย (SSRN)
๐ENERGY TRANSITION ๐
Officials and residents of the Coalmine Canyon Chapter of the Navajo Nation push back against 750-megawatt solar-plus-storage installationย in northern Arizona, saying the developers have been less than transparent and the power will not go to local homes, many of which are off the grid.ย (High Country News)
Accelergen Energyย proposes a 125-megawatt solar-plus-storage installationย on about 900 acres east of Cortez, Colorado. (Durango Herald)
A new study findsย small-scale, front-of-the-meter solar-plus-battery installationscould serve about 32% of Californiaโs largest utilitiesโ peak summer electricity demand; analysts say developing this asset would improve reliability and preserve affordability without significant transmission upgrades.ย (Utility Dive)
๐ DATAVIZ OF THE DAY ๐
The stats for August are in and, well, it was a warm one. This August was the hottest August on record for the contiguous United States, as well as for many counties in the Southwest. It was also the hottest month on record globally, barely edging out July 2023 for the dubious honors.
In the struggling Colorado River basin, where water is scarce, the White House has signaled its priorities for how to use the remaining gallons.
Even as scientifically-determined thresholds have been met for releasing water from Glen Canyon Dam for ecological and recreational benefits in Grand Canyon, the Trump administration has decided against those actions in this record-hot year โ deciding not to release cold water from deep in Lake Powell to aid the humpback chub, a threatened fish species, and not to authorize a high-volume release of water to rebuild Grand Canyonโs eroded beaches, which are in terrible condition, according to federal monitoring.
These environmental releases would not change the total volume of water flowing out of Lake Powell over the year, just the timing.
Because the releases bypass the damโs turbines and reduce hydropower generation, which is part of the administrationโs โenergy dominanceโ agenda, the Bureau of Reclamation, the federal agency that manages Glen Canyon Dam, will not be doing them.
โAfter evaluating management alternatives and considering all authorized purposes, the decision was made based on significant hydropower generation concerns under already strained system conditions,โ Reclamation said in a statement in August.
The administrationโs decisions foreshadow more difficult choices ahead. Due to climate change and overuse, the Colorado River is shrinking and warming. Its dams were built and river management goals were laid out during an era that anticipated healthy reservoirs. That is no longer the case. Because Lake Powell and Lake Mead are about a quarter of their capacity or less, the hydrological assumptions that inform current management strategies are outdated, said Jack Schmidt, a scientist who has spent his four-decade career studying the Colorado River.
โEverything needs to be revisited because the driving factors of the Colorado River ecosystem in Grand Canyon are now completely changed and probably forever changed,โ said Schmidt of Utah State Universityโs Center for Colorado River Studies. โEverything was developed in a world of full reservoirs. And now the reservoirs are empty.โ
Tradeoffs Plague Water Managers
Even in the best of times, managing a large dam on a major river is not easy. Dams alter the riverโs natural patterns of flow and temperature. Operators must weigh one set of benefits against another group of costs.
Glen Canyon Dam is one of the thorniest management conundrums. Located near the Arizona-Utah border, the 63-year-old structure has emerged as the most significant water-supply choke point in the Colorado River basin and it is the focus of clamorous debate about water and power infrastructure in a drier climate.
The Colorado River strikes a bright jade color as it flows through Marble Canyon, in northern Arizona, a few miles downstream of the Paria River, a significant source of sand for the Grand Canyon. Photo ยฉ Brett Walton/Circle of Blue
As managers grapple with how much water to release, Glen Canyon Dam is also choking the river of its natural supply of sediment. Without new inputs, sand bars and beaches in Grand Canyon are at risk of disappearing. These features provide habitat, give boaters a place to camp during river trips, and protect archaeological sites.
Most of the riverโs sediment now comes from the Paria River and Little Colorado River, downstream of Glen Canyon. Periodic high-flow water releases from the dam mimic the thunderous floods of the past that carried sediment through Grand Canyon to fortify eroding beaches.
There is enough sediment in the Colorado River below Glen Canyon today to warrant a high-flow release. Yet Reclamation has not done one since 2023. Experts agree that Reclamation is highly unlikely to conduct one this fall either. A final decision will be made in the next few weeks.
The need for a high-flow release is mounting. In August, David Topping, a research hydrologist at the U.S. Geological Surveyโs Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center, presented data showing the ill health of Grand Canyon beaches. A typical sand bar is smaller now than in 2016, when the current management plan that established the high-flow triggers was finalized.
The lack of high-flow releases has deprived researchers of crucial data on how the size and duration of these mini-floods, usually one to four days in length, aid beach-building.
Before and after photos of results of the high flow experiment in 2008 via USGS
โWhat can we do if the administration isnโt willing to allow us to use the bypass tubes for high-flow experiments, if thatโs going to be off the table, at least for a while?โ said Wayne Pullan, Reclamationโs Upper Colorado Region director, at a Glen Canyon management meeting in August, asking attendees to consider management options under political constraints.
โWeโre in a pinch point,โ Pullan added. โA real pinch point.โ
Degraded beaches result in a degraded river experience, said David Brown of the Grand Canyon River Guides, a recreation advocacy group. Rafting groups have to compete for limited real estate in what is generally regarded as one of the worldโs premier river corridors.
โWhen thereโs less campable area, that means everyoneโs kind of getting squished together or your toilet is next to where people are sleeping,โ Brown said.
Non-Native Species Thrive in Warm Water
In addition to sediment, water temperature is the other blinking red environmental indicator.
Raft trip on the Colorado River through Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona, in 2019. Photo ยฉTed Wood/The Water Desk
Smallmouth bass were introduced as a sport fish in the upper Colorado River basin in the late 1960s. Voracious feeders, smallmouth bass view other fish as the sport, happily preying on threatened native species like the humpback chub, an eighteen-inch fish in Grand Canyon with a distinctive smooshed silhouette.
Listed as endangered in 1967, the humpback chub has now bounced back thanks to tens of millions of dollars of conservation investment. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service upgraded the humpback chub to โthreatenedโ status in 2018.
Diagram showing critical reservoir levels at Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Powell. Land Desk diagram with data from the Bureau of Reclamation.
Smallmouth bass live in Lake Powell, preferring the layer of warm water closest to the surface. As the lake shrinks, that warm layer has now reached the level of the penstocks, which pull water into Glen Canyon Damโs turbines for hydropower generation before being released downstream.
In these low-water conditions, the fear is that more smallmouth bass will be delivered into the Colorado River below Glen Canyon.
Once there, they will find a habitable environment. Smallmouth bass spawn when water temperatures exceed 60 degrees Fahrenheit. This year, that mark was breached in June. Today, the river at Lees Ferry, about 16 miles downstream of Glen Canyon Dam, is about 70 F.
These conditions โ when the river temperature is above 60 F for three consecutive days โ are supposed to trigger a release of cold water from deep in Lake Powell. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service says that this โcool mixโ is the โonly conservation measure proven to limit smallmouth bass reproduction.โ Evidence from cool mix releases in 2024 and 2025, which knocked down smallmouth bass numbers, supports that conclusion.
Cool mix, however, will not happen in 2026 due to the Trump administrationโs desire to generate hydropower.
The last cool mix flow, in 2025, cost the Western Area Power Administration, which markets federal hydropower, $6.1 million to replace that electricity for its contractors.
Instead of cool mix, Reclamation says it is focusing on other options to keep smallmouth bass from establishing downstream of Glen Canyon and to preserve the humpback chubโs hard-won conservation gains. In the short term that means stunning the bass with electric-shock tools and physically removing them from the water.
In the longer term, Reclamation is considering installing infrastructure to regulate the temperature of the water that passes through Glen Canyon. The agency calls this one of its โdurable structural solutions.โ
An Uncertain Future
Cool mix and high-flow releases are an attempt to rebalance an ecosystem that the dams destabilized. Congress passed the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992, which orders Reclamation to operate Glen Canyon Dam in a manner that protects and reduces harm to the โnatural and cultural resources and visitor use.โ That is, fish, tribal archaeological sites, and rafting.
The act required an environmental impact statement for Glen Canyon Dam that would analyze the actions required to achieve the broad environmental-protection goals set by Congress.
It was a โcompromise to really put all the resources on the same playing field,โ said Jen Pelz of the Grand Canyon Trust. In her view, decisions this year tilt in one direction โ hydropower. โI donโt feel like theyโre being balanced right now.โ
Because the river guides were instrumental in lobbying for Grand Canyon protections, the present-day failures to uphold the actโs goals are all the more galling, Brown said. โItโs very hard to watch it get ignored.โ
Glen Canyon Damโs powerhouse holds the electricity-generating turbines. Photo ยฉ Brett Walton/Circle of Blue
The administration is prioritizing hydropower when hydropower is at a pivot point.
Generation at Glen Canyon is down more than 40% from when Lake Powell was full. Utilities are turning to solar and wind to cover some of the generation losses, while utility-scale batteries are helping to replace the capacity and grid-regulating functions that a large dam provides.
The decision to favor hydropower over ecology reflects bigger problems with the Colorado Riverโs infrastructure. Glen Canyon Dam is not designed for the river as it exists today. Reclamation wants to keep Lake Powell high enough to generate hydropower because the damโs other outlets to deliver water downstream are untested over long periods and were damaged in a previous high-flow release.
Lower basin states and tribes, including Arizona, California, Nevada, and the Gila River Indian Community, have asked the federal government to update Glen Canyonโs infrastructure for water delivery and power generation. Reclamation is assessing three options and expects that study to be released in early 2027. Any additional action will require congressional approval and funding.
Along with the infrastructure problems, man-made climate change is sapping the river and heating up its water. Ecologists consider the Grand Canyon a โnovel ecosystem,โ meaning its native species and natural processes have been disrupted and rearranged by human meddling.
To Schmidt, the former chief of the U.S. Geological Surveyโs Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center, this suggests a wholesale rethinking not just of the riverโs infrastructure but also of our ecological goals for the Colorado River.
โWe as a society get to play God in deciding what attributes of that ecosystem we value, which ones we want to work hard to preserve and which ones we donโt,โ he said. โThe answer is not an obvious one.โ
This story was produced by Circle of Blue, in partnership withThe Water Deskat the University of Colorado Boulderโs Center for Environmental Journalism.
Just days after President Donald Trump angered U.S. ranchers by waiving tariffs on 300,000 metric tons of foreign beef (and whatever other meat-adjacent-material may pass as beef), he threw the livestock industry a bone by ordering a โreviewโ of federal Endangered Species Act protections for gray and Mexican wolves. The order also instructs the Interior Department to push states into removing any state-specific protections and to โrevise their standards for lethal takings of gray wolves and Mexican wolves to assist ranchers in combating predation.โ
In other words, Trump wants to revive the late 19th and early 20th century campaign to exterminate wild predators to benefit ranchers. Will this please a handful of public lands livestock operators who are ideologically inclined to hate wolves, whether they affect their operations or not? Sure. Will it save the American rancher, or even offset the influx of foreign beef? Nope.
Wolves do kill cattle if they are not adequately protected (and the rancher is compensated for the lost livestock), and they can have other impacts on ranching operations in wild areas. But study after study has shown that other factors โ from weather and climate, to sickness and disease โ account for a far greater share of cattle and calf mortalities.
This is the administrationโs latest ploy in its quest to boost the number of cattle on public lands. It is also peddling vacated grazing allotments and easing the already decidedly lax regulations on grazing.
Federal staffing rosters show the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has lost 36% of its staff under the Trump administration, dripping from 9,957 staffers to 6,333 between 2024 and 2026, likely exacerbating a backlog of Endangered Species Act listing decisions.ย (news release)
Milkweed and sweet peas along the Farmers Ditch in the North Fork Valley (and a reminder that irrigation ditches support more than just crops). Jonathan P. Thompson photo.
๐ย COLORADO RIVER CHRONICLESย ๐ง
The irrigation canals, laterals, and ditches are going dry in the Colorado Riverโs Upper Basin weeks before the growing season comes to an end, forcing farmers to rely on September rains or their own storage to get their crops to harvest time. It goes to show that even without mandatory cuts, many Upper Basin water users experience water shortages during dry years.
The biggest and latest user to get cut off by low river flows was the Grand Valley Water Users Association, which began drawing down its Government Highline Canal as โthe river flows drop to undeliverable levels.โ Flows in that canal fell from almost 1,500 cfs at the end of August to about 725 cfs early this week. The more senior Orchard Mesa Irrigation District and Grand Valley Irrigation Company continued to pull water from the river and deliver it to irrigators.
In the North Fork Valley, all but the most senior ditches were shut off weeks ago, after Paonia Reservoir hit dead pool. And on the Dolores River, even the most senior water rights holders โ the Montezuma Valley Irrigation District โ lost their water at the beginning of this month. Usually it holds out for at least another couple of weeks. (Other water users received dramatically curtailed amounts throughout the irrigating season).
In the Grand Valley, the canalโs loss was the riverโs gain: The Colorado River near Palisade, after running as low as 42 cfs this summer, bounced back to around 300 cfs at the end of August. A corresponding increase in flow can be seen at the USGS gage1 near Cisco. This little boost, combined with a few intense, but patchy storms, and a slight increase in releases from Flaming Gorge Reservoir, have brought up inflows into Lake Powell, somewhat slowing the drop in surface levels.
Dolores River watershed
The Dolores River, on the other hand, remains virtually dry downstream of McPhee Dam, and McPhee Reservoirโs surface level is currently about 12 feet lower than it was a year ago.
A tale of water inequality in the West — Jonathan P. Thompson, “I wrote the essay [click the link]โabout my parentsโ farmโs ditch in the North Fork Valley of Western Coloradoโin 2018, which was one of the regionโs driest years on record. The essay is every bit as pertinent today, an equally dry time for most of the Western Slope, even if some details have changed: My sister owns the farm nowโalong with the robust water rightsโโฆ”
The Central Arizona Projectโs board of directorsย authorizes its attorneys to take legal action โif necessaryโ to protect its allotment of Colorado River against the Bureau of Reclamationโs plans for operating the riverโs infrastructure in the coming decade. The CAP stands to lose the most water under a shortage, as Arizona agreed to junior water rights in exchange for federal funding for the vast plumbing project that delivers river water to the central and southern parts of the state. Nevada already sued the federal government over potential cuts to its share of water.ย (Arizona Republic)
Western Colorado anglers and boatersย call on the Bureau of Reclamation to increase water releases from Blue Mesa, Morrow Point, and Crystal Reservoirs to preserve streamflows in the Gunnison River in the Black Canyon, the Gunnison Gorge, and further downstream, saying the decision to reduce releases to protect reservoir levels has โexerted a toll on a vital and cherished natural resource.โย (Aspen Journalism)
๐คย DATA CENTER WATCHย ๐พ
The Big Data Center Buildup drives up electricity demandย in Wyoming and spurs a wave of proposed gas plants, some of which would serve the grid and others dedicated to powering server farm facilities.ย (WyoFile)
โ๏ธย MINING MONITORย โ๏ธ
The Southern Ute Indian Tribe says it will pull out all of the stops to block potential mining projectsย in the La Plata Mountains in southwestern Colorado, adding to the list of entities opposing Metallic Mineralsโย exploratory drilling projectย on the western side of the range.ย (Durango Herald)
New Mexico Land Commissioner Stephanie Garcia Richardย puts state trust lands off-limits to new uranium mining leases, and orders her office to instead focus on cleaning up the more than 1,000 former uranium mining-related sites in the state. The order does not affect private or federal lands.ย (news release)
Anfield Energy looks to raise at least $50 millionย to finance its plan to refurbish and reopen the Shootaring uranium mill โ which has been idle since 1982 โ near Ticaboo, Utah. Anfield is the firm behind the Velvet-Wood uranium mine in the Lisbon Valley and has designs on mining near Slick Rock, Colorado.ย (Northern Miner)
๐ตย PUBLIC LANDSย ๐ฒ
A federal judge temporarily blocks the Trump administrationโs effortย to evict bison from public lands in Montana, finding that the Bureau of Land Managementโs decision to kick the animals off American Prairie-held grazing leases was likely โarbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and otherwise not in accordance with the law.โย (Public Domain)
The U.S. Department of Agriculture releases its final Forest Service reorganization plan, which includes moving the headquarters to Salt Lake City and shuttering 23 facilities nationwide, including four in California, one in New Mexico, and one in Oregon, with the remainder being in non-Western states. The USDA says โless than 200โ of the agencyโs 30,000 employees are expected to need to relocate, mostly from Washington, D.C. to Fort Collins, Salt Lake City, or a newly established center.ย (news release,ย OPB)
The Center for Western Priorities fact-checks Interior Secretary Doug Burgumโs numerous erroneous statements about the administrationโs dramatic reduction of Grand Staircase-Escalante and Bears Ears National Monuments, finding that on this topic (and others) the cabinet member is a serial liar.ย (Westwise)
๐ ย RANDOM REAL ESTATE ROOMย ๐ค
Anita Verma-Lallian, a real estate investor who made her name buying and selling multi-million-dollar Phoenix-area properties for data centers, unveils a plan for a massive development in Tonopah, Arizona. Tentative plans for the $6 billion to $10 billion development include a movie studio, amusement park, hotels, retail, and a data center complex. The property is adjacent to one where Bill Gatesโ investment firm is planning a โfuturistic smart city.โย (Phoenix Business Journal via KTAR)
๐ปย TRANSPORTATIONย ๐
The Utah Department of Transportation completes the $152 million Energy Corridorย highway improvement project on State Routes 162 and 262 in San Juan County. The routes pass through the Aneth Oil Field and could potentially be used for uranium ore haul trucks traveling from New Mexico mines to the White Mesa Mill near Blanding.ย (ABC4)
๐คฏย ANNALS OF INANITYย ๐คก
When will it stop!?!ย Amid a flurry of inane, bizarre, and cognitively-impaired social media posts, President Donald Trump on Sunday suggested New Mexicoโs name should be changed to โNew America.โย ย (CNN)
๐ย TODAYโs DATAVIZย ๐
Are coal and electricity consumption getting back together? For the latter half of the 20th century, U.S. coal consumption climbed in tandem with electricity demand: As Americans used more power, more coal was burned to generate that power, and vice versa. In 2008, electricity demand plummeted due to the financial crisis, dragging coal consumption down with it.
While electricity demand rebounded along with the economy, and then plateaued, coal-burning continued dropping precipitously; the two phenomena had been decoupled from one another. But over the last three years electricity demand has shot back up, in large part due to data centersโ guzzling up a lot of power, but also because of electrification of transportation and buildings, and an increasing need for air-conditioning to fend off rising temperatures. And last year the electric power sectorโs coal consumption shot back up as well. Is the decoupling being undone? Or is this just a minor blip? Only time will tell.
Dataviz by the Land Desk using stats from the Energy Information Administration.
๐ธ PARTING SHOT ๐๏ธ
Continuing with the opening theme โฆ Sign near Bowie, Colorado. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.
1 Yes, I use the archaic โgageโ instead of โgaugeโ when referring to USGS streamflow monitors, not just because Iโm archaic, but because thatโsย what the USGS does.
Black Canyon of the Gunnison. Photo credit: NPS/Kris Toy
From email from Reclamation (Andrew Limbach):
On Monday, September 14th at 8:00 AM (MDT), the UVWUA will begin ramping down tunnel diversions to 675-700 cfs. In coordination with that effort, Crystal releases will decrease to 875-900 cfs from 1240 cfs, and flows through the Black Canyon will be between 200-225 cfs. Tunnel diversions are anticipated to be at 700 cfs through October 31.
The Crystal outlet works typically experiences increased levels of cavitation between 900 and 1200 cfs. Therefore, Crystal releases may need to be adjusted as needed to find an optimal operating zone. Recreators and boaters in the Black Canyon should expect fluctuations of river flows until the final releases and diversions are set. Another notification will be sent out once the releases are finalized.
Green Mountain Reservoir August 17, 2026. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots
Click the link to read the article on the Big Pivots website (Allen Best):
September 7, 2026
No place in Colorado that I have visited offers such blunt testimony to the warming, drying climate than Green Mountain Reservoir. It also poses a question to those politicians whose answer to non-winters and ever-hotter summers is more dams and reservoirs.
The reservoir between Silverthorne and Kremmling was 14% full during Labor Day weekend, according to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the operator. Put another way, it was 86% empty.
Thatโs worse even than the roughly 78% empty at Lake Powell, the reservoir located roughly 700 river miles downstream from Green Mountain.
Green Mountain was part of Coloradoโs mission begun in the 19th century to put water to โbeneficial use,โ a central axiom of state water law. Pioneer settlers did an admirable job of this, in the beginning using nothing more than horses, oxen and human labor.
In 1902, the federal government became a partner, creating the Bureau of Reclamation. Over the next roughly 90 years, the federal treasury was visited repeatedly to prevent โwasteโ of any portion of the Colorado River flowing into the Pacific Ocean.
Green Mountain Reservoir, back in the day. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Construction of Green Mountain Dam was part of that work. During the hot, dry 1930s, farmers in the Fort Collins-Longmont-Greeley area wanted to import water from the Colorado River headwaters near Grand Lake. Western Slope irrigators objected. Farms in the Grand Junction area would lose late-season water needed to get their crops and orchards across the finish line.
Green Mountain was the compromise. And it has worked out well. A pool of 66,000 acre-feet of water was reserved for down-stream irrigators in the Grand Junction area. Deliveries in this canal usually continue through October, sometimes later.
This year was different. For the first time in 110-plus years, deliveries ended in late August.
DeBeque Canyon has changed somewhat since this photo of the Roller Dam was taken in 1916. Most notably, now the canyon has an interstate highway. Photo/U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. For a more complete history, see the Palisade Historical Society page.
In April, the Glenwood Springs-based Colorado River Water Conservation District issued a warning. Green Mountain was the lowest it had been since filling during World War II. This jeopardized the late-summer flows to irrigators who took delivery of water from the Government Highline Canal. The canal diverts water from the Colorado River at the Roller Dam, a short distance upstream from Palisade. It then distributes water to farms and orchards for 55 miles, nearly to the Utah border.
Wolford Mountain Reservoir back in the day. An aerial view of Wolford Reservoir, formed by Ritschard Dam.
This year, in a testament to cooperation, the Colorado River District and Colorado Water Conservation Board ponied up more than $1 million to buy use of water. Water was tapped from headwaters reservoirs, most notably Wolford and Williams Fork, near Kremmling, and Ruedi, near Basalt. Others, including Front Range diverters, helped.
Williams Fork Reservoir back in the day. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism
Irrigators got only 50% of their normal water. In response, many switched crops to varieties of plants that could survive with less water.
Even so, by late August, the water was running out. The Grand Valley Water Users Association, operator of the canal, stopped deliveries on September 3. Maybe monsoon rains will deliver water to resume operations, but thatโs the story for now.
Once again, the idea that we just need to store more is entirely too simplistic. Yes, saving for a rainy day is always good, but this idea that we can build our way to more water defies ample evidence about the warming, drying climate.
We can have droughts, yes. They come and go. But the science clearly shows that these hot, dry years of the 21st century will not be ephemeral. They have been driven by a warming climate caused by accumulating greenhouse gas emissions.
Udall/Overpeck 4-panel Figure Colorado River temperature/precipitation/natural flows with trend. Lake Mead and Lake Powell storage. Updated through Water Year 2025. Note the tiny points on the annual data so that you can flyspeck the individual years. Credit: Brad Udall
In the 20th century, the Colorado River delivered about 15.2 million acre-feet. In this century, the annual flows have declined to 12.2 million acre-feet. Since 2020, average flows have declined even more, to 10 million acre-feet. And this recent span included a very, very big snow year, in 2022-23, a three-wire winter like those of old. But the spring was like those of the 21st century, early and uncommonly warm.
The pitiful storage in Green Mountain, whose shoreline is seen in the above photograph I took on Aug. 17, testifies to this warming, drying climate. So does the canal near Grand Junction where deliveries were cut off last week for the first time in 110 years. And then we have near doubling of 95 degree-plus days in Denver during last 30 years as compared to the three decades before as reported by KUSA.
Might we figure out better infrastructure? Maybe. The idea of storing water underground, as Greeley began doing several years ago, intrigues. It requires more energy but greatly reduces evaporative loss.
The federal government in its documents has excised climate change. So have many politicians in Colorado speaking on the stump, hewing to the recent version of political correctness.
If there are ideas for storing water that donโt assume a return to the climate of the 20th century, Iโm all for hearing them. But to think this is just another drought defies tons of evidence.
Communities across the West have been anxiously waiting for a plan to manage the Colorado River. The states that share the river have been unable to reach an agreement over how to manage it, forcing the federal government to move forward without one.
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation recently published a management framework for the next 10 years.
This is not the long-term agreement many had hoped for, but it does leave room for collaborative solutions.
Communities across the West have been anxiously waiting for a plan to manage their water supply from the Colorado River. They watched as the states that share the river talked in circles behind closed doors. They attended conferences where state negotiators repeated the same tired arguments, did not present together, or were entirely absent.
Outside the conference rooms, conditions on the ground were deteriorating. The Colorado River Basin experienced its warmest winter on record. The meager snowpack in the mountains was sucked into parched soils, rivers dwindled, and the Basinโs two major reservoirs hit record lows.
And the situation continues to worsen.
While negotiators were struggling to find consensus, farmers were fallowing fields, raft guides were staring down an uncertain season, neighbors were reporting each other for overwatering, families were discovering that their favorite fishing spots had closed, and municipalities were on the hunt for alternative water supplies.
Three years ago, the U.S Bureau of Reclamation set out to work with the Basin states, Tribes, and stakeholders on a 20-year management plan for the Colorado River. But the states never reached a long-term agreement, forcing the federal government to move forward without one.
On Aug. 21, Reclamation published a framework for managing the river over the next 10 years. While it is not the long-term agreement many had hoped for, it does leave room for collaborative solutions.
What happens next will shape the river for generations.
What Is the Record of Decision?
A Decision-Making Framework
The record of decision lays out a 10-year framework for managing the river.
Under this framework, the Bureau of Reclamation will issue preliminary guidelines every two years for operating the riverโs reservoirs and distributing shortages. Those guidelines will inform Reclamationโs annual plan for the river, which will be released every summer. Reclamation can adjust that plan each April depending on the winterโs snowpack and current reservoir levels. It is a tedious process, but one that allows the agency to modify operations as river conditions change.
State officials have raised concerns that the two-year framework will result in never-ending negotiations while making it difficult to plan ahead and finance solutions. These are valid concerns, but there is an off-ramp. If the states collaborate, they could replace the framework with a long-term deal that provides more certainty to their constituents and removes the need for prolonged negotiations.
Rafting the Colorado River. Photo credit: Western Resource Advocates
A Plan for Managing Water Shortages
In addition to the record of decision, Reclamation issued operating guidelines for 2027 and 2028. These guidelines outline Lake Powell and Lake Mead operations and include shortages the Lower Basin offered earlier this year. Under the guidelines, the Lower Basin will reduce its use of the Colorado River by 1.25 million acre-feet in both 2027 and 2028. It will also pursue 700,000 acre-feet in additional conservation by 2028.
The record of decision allows Reclamation to impose even deeper cuts on the Lower Basin โ up to 3 million acre-feet per year โ if Lake Mead starts to approach the minimum levels needed to produce hydropower and to avoid hitting deadpool.
Reclamation is not mandating cuts in the Upper Basin because its authority to do so is less clear. But that doesnโt mean conservation isnโt urgently needed in the Upper Basin. In the record of decision, Reclamation includes up to 200,000 acre-feet of voluntary conservation each year collectively by Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming.
While this conservation is considered voluntary, it is in the Upper Basinโs best interest to be part of the solution. Flows on the Colorado River have declined by over 30% since 2020. The river will continue to be on a knifeโs edge unless everyone contributes.
By saving water now, the Upper Basin can help keep things from getting worse and reduce the need for emergency releases from upstream reservoirs to prop up Lake Powell. This can help rebuild storage and support the outdoor recreation economy in places like Flaming Gorge in Utah and Blue Mesa in Colorado.
Conservation in the Upper Basin can also help avoid expensive and risky legal battles over the river. The 1922 Colorado River Compact says that the Upper Basin will not cause the flow of the river to be depleted below a certain amount over a 10-year period. The Upper Basin argues that this volume is 75 million acre-feet. The Lower Basin says the amount includes water deliveries for Mexico and is set at 82.5 million acre-feet. We could hit the 82.5 trip wire as soon as this fall, potentially triggering litigation from the Lower Basin. Such a dispute would likely cost taxpayers millions of dollars, take years to resolve, and leave the riverโs future in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court. If the Lower Basin prevails, water users in the Upper Basin could see drastic cuts to their supply and little time to implement solutions or secure funding to ease the pain.
The four Upper Basin states are at various stages of developing programs to pay water users to decrease their consumption. WRA is advocating for long-term programs that prioritize projects that keep rivers healthy.
Credit: Western Resource Advocates
Is the Latest Plan Enough?
Reclamationโs models show that the reductions planned for the next two years will just barely allow the Basin to scrape by. In the worst-case scenario, the Basin could drain its accessible water savings in Lake Powell. The only water left would be what flows in the river, and that is nowhere near enough to meet current demands.
Whatโs Next?
Implementing Solutions or Handing the Reins to the Supreme Court
The Basin states have an important decision before them โ implement the new guidelines and work toward a long-term deal or take their chances in court.
Nevada was the first to take the plunge. Three days after Reclamation released the record of decision, Nevada filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of the Interior and Bureau of Reclamation. The state claims that the plan and the potential cuts to Nevadaโs water supply violate federal law and seeks to halt its implementation.
Nevadaโs lawsuit underscores the need for a deal that all seven states can agree to, rather than a plan imposed by the federal government. There is still an opportunity to reach such an agreement โ the Nevada case does not preclude the seven states from continuing to negotiate or from entering into agreements to stabilize the river.
The states must not let this one case spiral out of control. Litigation between all seven Basin states over the Colorado River Compact would make things much worse.
History shows that multistate water disputes can take at least a decade to be resolved and often have unintended consequences.ย Arizona v. California, a dispute over Colorado River allocations in the Lower Basin, began in 1952 and was not resolved until 1963. The court settled the disagreement over water allocations and ruled that the Secretary of the Interior has broad authority to act as watermaster in the Lower Basin โ giving the federal government greater control over Lower Basin water deliveries.ย Texas v. New Mexico, a dispute over the Rio Grande, went on for 13 years before reaching a resolution last spring. And a dispute between Kansas and Colorado over the Arkansas River was on-again, off-again forย more than a century. The court ruled that Colorado was overusing water and awarded both water and monetary damages to Kansas. And these cases all involved two states โ not seven.
The Colorado River does not have decades. Researchers predict that it will only take one more dry winter to drain the Basinโs accessible water savings.
On top of lost time, state litigation over the 1922 Compact would cost millions of dollars โ money that is better spent implementing conservation programs, restoring watersheds, and increasing water efficiency. And litigation would leave decisions with the Supreme Court, not the communities that depend on the river and know it best.
Nevadaโs lawsuit against the federal government does not change the fact that we have a river to manage. New guidelines are still needed by Oct. 1. The decision-making process must continue and the Basin states must act now to prevent a seven-state legal brawl.
In the coming months WRA will be advocating for:
Protections for the river:ย Protecting river health and our communities are two sides of the same coin. The day-to-day operations of the riverโs reservoirs affect everything from fish habitat to hydropower production to local water supplies and outdoor recreation. Operating guidelines must consider the full range of impacts and incorporate policies that maximize benefits for both our communities and the environment.
Transparent decision making:ย The record of decision includes a plan for issuing new operating guidelines every two years. Those guidelines will affect 35 million people and must not be developed behind closed doors. A clear public process is needed to incorporate input from the Basin states, Tribes, Mexico, water users, communities, scientists, and conservation organizations.
Sustained federal funding:ย Federal funding will be critical to implementing the changes that are needed to secure the Westโs future, including restoring watershed health and incentivizing water use reductions. The river that supplies water to 1 in 10 Americans is worthy of federal investment.
Equitable water access and Tribal inclusion:ย The 30 federally recognized Tribes in the Colorado River Basin have long been excluded from key decisions and denied their fair share of the riverโs water. The new guidelines and programs must uphold Tribal water rights and provide clear pathways for Tribal collaboration.
State collaboration:ย The states have been talking past each other for the last three years and itโs resulted in a federal management plan that few decision makers are happy with, and one state has already filed a lawsuit on. It is time to try a new approach before things get worse. The states must enlist the help of a professional mediator who can facilitate more productive negotiations. And the states must finalize and sign implementation plans โ like the Lower Basinโs proposal to reduce its water use by 1.25 million-acre feet in 2027 and 2028 โ as soon as possible.
Basinwide collaboration:ย Many of the riverโs most successful programs โ including those that restored hundreds of miles of fish habitat and put tens of millions of dollars toward water conservation โ were the result of collaborations between states, federal agencies, Tribal nations, water users, conservation organizations, and others. The challenges the river faces are growing. We must accelerate our efforts, build new partnerships, launch new programs, increase investment, and expand on successful initiatives.
The record of decision has set the stage, now it is time for the riverโs next act.
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
Tens of millions of people across the West depend on the Colorado River for drinking water, food, power and their livelihoods. But years of drought, rising temperatures and declining reservoirs have put that lifeline under extraordinary strain. The newly released Record of Decision and federal Operating Guidelines for the river provide a framework for operations, but they cannot resolve the region’s underlying challenges on their own. The work that happens next will determine the future of the river and the communities that rely on it.
2026 marks one of the worst water years on record for the Colorado River Basin and throughout the American West, as river flows dwindle and megafires consume landscape after landscape. Water in Lake Mead, the largest reservoir in the U.S., has dropped to its lowest level since it was filled more than 90 years ago. Long-term planning and investment is critical to stabilize the river while protecting communities from increasingly severe fire, floods and drought.
Reclamation announces 2026 operating conditions for Lake Powell and Lake Mead. Hoover Dam. Photo credit: USBR
The release of the guidelines is a milestone, not the finish line. A document canโt ensure safe water supplies or combat the impacts of severe drought and wildfires. Significant federal, state and local funding needs to be directed towards strategies that make the health of rivers, forests and wetlands a priority. Without it, the Basin will remain at risk of chronic shortages, food supply disruption, energy grid vulnerability and rising economic instability that breed disruption and conflict for the entire region.
It is critical that we take this opportunity to invest in work that focuses on ensuring healthy watersheds, sustainable water use and collaboration between Colorado River Basin states and Tribal Nations.
Nature-based solutionsโincluding river and forest management and wetland restorationโare a crucial part of the Basinโs infrastructure. They enable dependable water supplies, reduce threats from wildfires and flooding, sustain fish and wildlife and support local communities and economies. With so much attention focused on water allocations, reservoir levels and operational decisions, the role of these natural systems cannot get lost in the mix.
Fortunately there are projects throughout the Colorado River Basin that offer a blueprint for how to work with the power of nature to create a more sustainable path forward.
Projects designed to better manage forests and restore wetlands can improve water quality and create natural firebreaks. Regenerative agriculture practices like growing crops that use less water, and limiting the disruption of soil, can help create healthier farmland that better absorbs and retains water so farmers can use less. These approaches are an important part of a broader portfolio of tools that help communities conserve water, reduce risk and strengthen watersheds.
As the Colorado River endures one of its worst water years on record, long-term planning and investment is critical to stabilize water supplies while protecting communities from increasingly severe fire, floods and drought. Grand Canyon and Colorado River by Brian Richter
Transparency and collaboration between the federal government, Basin state leaders, Tribal Nations and Mexico is essential. We know that those closest to the problem are closest to the solution and that we will be more effective when we draw on the collective expertise of everyone who relies on the river. Basin states have not yet been able to negotiate a long-term management plan but that cannot stand in the way of continued work to create a more reliable and resilient Colorado River system.
Philanthropy also has a vital role to play in the future of the Colorado River. We are continuing to collaborate with our grantees to advance innovative, nature-based solutions for the region. Philanthropic investment can help test and scale approaches, fill gaps, build partnerships and demonstrate what is possible in complement to the much-needed federal, state, Tribal and local investments. Together we can help make sure the river can continue to provide for the next generation.
The U.S. Forest Service-owned parcel known as Janeway is adjacent to the Crystal River. A potential nature-based aquifer recharge project could reconnect the historic floodplain to the river and retime spring flows as part of a water supply replacement plan. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM
A windrower cuts alfalfa for drying prior to baling in the Imperial Valley of California in June 2007. Photo by Timothy Hearsum/AgStock
Click the link to read the article on the Big Pivots website (Daniel M. Frey):
August 30, 2026
Forty million people depend on the Colorado River. Some of its largest cities are facing real shortages. Yet nearly half of the water put to human use in the basin goes to growing feed crops such as alfalfa, hay and silage for cattle, with a meaningful share exported overseas.
This is not a hydrology problem. It is a political one.
The misuse of water
Growing alfalfa and hay to feed livestock consumes roughly 46% of all the water put to human use in the basinโmore than every city and industry combined, and more than any other single use of the river. In the Imperial Valley, a material portion of alfalfa is exported. Foreign agribusinesses, including Saudi Arabiaโs Fondomonte and the UAEโs Al Dahra, have leased Southwestern land to grow water-intensive feed and ship it home to countries that have banned the same crop domestically to protect their own water. Arizonaโs governor already canceled state land leases with one of these companies over exactly this issue. We are draining a river that 40 million Americans depend on to grow low-value cattle feed.
This is not even a true market outcome. Between 2017 and 2023, the federal Crop Insurance Program paid $5.6 billion to farmers in the seven Colorado River states for drought-related losses, including more than $2 billion to alfalfa and hay growers alone. Separately, the federal government has committed $1.2 billion over three years under the 2023 Lower Basin conservation agreement to pay some of those same farmers to leave water in the river instead โ and under โuse it or lose itโ water law, that money does not necessarily translate into lasting reduced consumption once the payments end. We are subsidizing the least essential, most water-intensive use of the river while barely funding a lasting transition away from it. These policies ignore urgent human needs and support the continued subsidized irrigation of low-value crops.
Because so much of this crop is exported, converting these acres would not meaningfully affect the U.S. or global food supply. Foreign and domestic buyers would simply source feed from places where water is not scarce. What we would lose is a low-value export that is consuming precious water.
Nobody needs Southwestern agriculture to disappear. Israel farms one of the driest landscapes on Earth and still exports produce because it rebuilt its water use around efficiency instead of volume.
Drip irrigation, which Israel pioneered in the 1960s, delivers water at 70% to 90% efficiency, compared with roughly 40% to 60% for the flood irrigation still common in the Colorado River Basin.
Israel recycles 85% to 90% of its municipal wastewater, supplying more than half its total agricultural demand. Israeli farming also shifted deliberately from low-value, high-water fodder crops to higher-value, lower-water produce such as tomatoes, peppers, dates and avocados. None of this is exotic or new.
Why the status quo persists
So why has nothing changed here? Under prior appropriation law, the oldest agricultural water rights, some dating to the 1800s, are legally senior to every city built afterward, including Phoenix, Las Vegas and Los Angeles. That seniority is the leverage in every negotiation.
The Imperial Irrigation District alone holds senior rights to roughly 3.1 million acre-feet a year โ nearly a fifth of the riverโs average flow, and on its own equal to Arizonaโs and Nevadaโs entire combined state allocations. That gives a handful of districts a permanent seat at every basin-wide deal because the law guarantees it. When $4 billion in federal conservation funding was distributed through the Inflation Reduction Act, much of it paid agricultural districts to conserve water they were under no legal obligation to relinquish, thanks to their senior water rights.
This is organized and specific, not a vague farm lobby. The Family Farm Alliance, representing irrigated agriculture across 16 Western states, has testified before Congress repeatedly over the past two decades and led a 2025 push for at least $2 billion in near-term drought funding to sustain current agricultural use, not reduce it.
What should change
None of this is an argument against private property or against farmers and ranchers as people. Water rights in the West are real property, built into land value, farm equity and family inheritance. Any transition worth pursuing must compensate people fairly for what the law actually gave them. Conservation is not agricultureโs job alone. Cities owe real cuts too, through tiered pricing, continued investment in water reuse, limits on ornamental turf and honest accounting of growth in already stressed areas.
But fairness among water users does not mean treating every use as equally necessary. Water for peopleโfor drinking, sanitation and foodโcomes before subsidized hay exports. That ranking is not radical. It is what โbeneficial useโ was always supposed to mean before the term became a shield for the status quo.
The technical plan is not the missing piece; versions of it have circulated for years. What is missing is the political will to say, plainly and before the next crisis, that human need outranks irrigated hay, even when the institutions built to avoid that choice are loud, organized and well funded. The reservoirs will not wait for a more comfortable moment. Neither should we.
The 40 million people who depend on the Colorado River should demand that political and business leaders protect their most precious, life-sustaining resource.
Daniel Frey is a Boulder resident, non-practicing CPA and Certified Energy Manager (CEM). He researches and writes on energy and sustainability issues.
Top ten Western counties for acreage planted in alfalfa. Data Source: USDA NASS.
Map of the San Juan River, a tributary of the Colorado River, in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah, USA. Made using USGS National Map data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=47456307
At recent meetings, the San Juan Water Conservancy District (SJWCD) and the Pagosa Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD) boards of directors approved applications for findings of reasonable diligence for several water rights held by the districts…At an Aug. 13 meeting, the PAWSD Board of Directors unanimously approved applications for findings of reasonable diligence for three sets of water rights, including rights for the San Juan River intake, a group of rights associated with the Dry Gulch Reservoir project that the SJWCD leads development on, and a second enlargement on a water right in Dutton Ditch. The Dry Gulch and Dutton Ditch water rights are held by both PAWSD and the SJWCD, while the San Juan right is exclusive to PAWSD. PAWSD board member Bill Hudson pointed out that these water rights are not rights PAWSD is currently using, but are rights that could be developed in the future if the district needs them…At an Aug. 17 meeting, the SJWCD Board of Directors also unanimously approved diligence filings for the Dry Gulch and Dutton Ditch water rights. SJWCD legal counsel Jeffrey Kane explained to the board that he would file the joint application for the Dry Gulch water rights, while PAWSDโs legal counsel would file the application for the Dutton Ditch water rights.
Reductions in Lower Basin water use during the last four years, including forecast use in 2026, are similar to the initial targets for Lower Basin shortages described in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Post-2026 Operational Guidelines and Strategies for Lake Powell and Lake Mead (FEIS) and the accompanying Record of Decision (ROD). 6ย Lower Basin consumptive use in 2023, 2024, and 2025, and forecast for 2026 has been the smallest for the entire 2010-2026 period. These four years of smallest use are between 1.4 and 1.7 million acre feet/year (maf/yr) less than the 7.50 maf/yr amount generally recognized as the Lower Basinโs mainstem allocation.
Reductions in Lower Basin use have been achieved by large reductions implemented by Central Arizona Project (CAP) contractors and subcontractors, the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), and non-CAP water users in Arizona. The reductions in use in the IID have been in summer water use and have not a๏ฌected consumptive use in winter when garden crops, such ass lettuce, onions, carrots, and broccoli, are grown.
There is no historical analogy for implementing Lower Basin shortages of 3 maf/yr that would reduce annual consumptive water use to 4.5 maf/yr. We identified the lowest use in each month between 2010 and 2026 in each Lower Basin state and summed those monthly values, even when those months did not occur in the same year. The annual total of the summed lowest monthly uses yielded a minimum total Lower Basin use of 5.03 maf/yr. Thus, implementation of 3 maf/yr shortages would require reductions in monthly use greater than the sum of the smallest monthly uses during the past 17 years.
INTRODUCTION
This paper is part of a series, The Colorado River Water Supply Crisis in a Few Graphs, whose goal is to provide readers with summary information about the natural water supply, reservoir storage, and consumptive uses and losses in the Basin so that readers can better understand and consider the current water crisis. The long-term fate of the water supply provided by the Colorado River depends on many complex and interconnected factors: the natural flow of the river, the amount of water stored in the Basinโs reservoirs, the consumptive uses of that water, the losses caused by reservoir evaporation, and the losses associated with water flowing through natural channels (i.e., transmission losses).
In 2024, approximately 60% of all uses and losses of Colorado River water in the United States occurred in the Lower Basin (Table 1).โท In this paper, we summarize water use in the Lower Basin since 2010, primarily focusing on consumption by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), the largest user in the entire Colorado River Basin, and on the aggregate consumption by Arizona users not served by the Central Arizona Project (CAP). We focus on these agricultural users, because agriculture makes up approximately 60% of consumptive uses in the Lower Basin,โธ and the agricultural sector will play a significant role in future reductions in water use in the Lower Basin.
Table 1. Consumptive uses and losses in the United States part of the Colorado River Basin in 2024.9
This paper provides historical context in which to consider the magnitude of recent reductions in Lower Basin water use by comparing current water use with typical rates of use since 2010. We also provide historical context for the shortage goals described in the recently released ROD and Operating Guidelines for 2027 and 2028. 10 The ROD lists a potential maximum Lower Basin reduction of 3.0 maf/yr but also includes language that seems to allow for even greater reductions, after consultation, in extraordinary circumstances.
We analyze the Lower Basin water use data summarized by the Bureau of Reclamation in annual decree accounting reports formally titled Colorado River Accounting and Water Use Report: Arizona, California, and Nevada.ยนยน These reports are issued each May and summarize monthly water use by every Lower Basin user. Reclamation also provides monthly provisional data on the current yearโs water use, and the agency provides forecasts of annual use for the current year.ยนยฒ Similarly extensive and precise data describing Upper Basin use are not readily available.
Lake Mead and Lake Powell are the largest reservoirs in the United States and essentially are one gigantic reservoir separated into two parts by the Grand Canyon.ยนยณ Inflow to this gigantic reservoir primarily is snowmelt from the Rocky Mountains, and a significant amount of that runoff is put to beneficial use by Upper Basin users before it reaches Lake Powell. A small amount of additional inflow occurs within the Grand Canyon, and there are occasional inflows to Lake Mead from the Virgin River. Southern Nevada Water Authority directly withdraws water from Lake Mead, and other Lower Basin users divert stream flow after it is released from Lake Mead.
RECENT LOWER BASIN WATER USE
In 2025, total consumptive use in the three Lower Basin states was 5.755 maf, the smallest annual total use since at least 2010 (Fig. 1) and 17% less than the average for 2010-2025.14 This small amount resulted from the lowest annual use in California (3.647 maf) since at least 2010 and the second lowest annual use since 2010 in Arizona (1.911 maf). Lower Basin use in 2026, 5.961 maf, is forecast to be slightly more than in 2025.15
Figure 1. Consumptive use in the Lower Basin since 2010. Estimated use in 2026 based on forecast of September 1, 2026.
Water use in California since 2023, including forecast use in 2026, has been 13% less than between 2010 and 2022.16 Decreased use in California in those years has been primarily due to reductions in use by IID (Fig. 2). IIDโs consumptive use of 2.187 maf in 2025 was the lowest since 2010 and forecast use in 2026 of 2.242 maf is also very low. Average use by IID between 2023 and 2026 will be 12% less than average use between 2010 and 2022.17 Annual consumptive use by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) between 2023 and 2026 will be 13% less than between 2010 and 2022, although the savings are not as great because MWD uses less water than does IID.18
Figure 2. Consumptive use in California since 2010. Estimated use in 2026 based on forecast of September 1, 2026.
The proportionate reductions in water use in Arizona have been much larger than in California. Average statewide water use between 2023 and 2026 will be 25% less than between 2010 and 2022.19 CAP has reduced its uses by 40% between those two time periods, while non-CAP users have reduced consumption by 6%. The smallest use by Arizona was 1.890 maf in 2023 (Fig. 3). Use in 2025 by non-CAP customers, 1.004 maf, was the lowest since at least 2010. Non-CAP use has exceeded CAP use since 2022.
Figure 3. Consumptive use in Arizona since 2010. Estimated use in 2026 based on forecast of September 1, 2026.
LOWER BASIN AGRICULTURAL WATER USE
Imperial Irrigation District
IID is the largest individual user of mainstem Colorado River water in the Colorado River Basin, exceeding use by any state in the Basin except California itself. Much of Californiaโs ongoing reductions in use are due to decreased use by IID resulting from various compensated agreements. Future reductions by IID have the potential to significantly affect the Basinโs effort to balance consumptive use with declining supply.
In comparison to typical annual use since 2010, IIDโs use in 2024 and 2025, as well as forecast use in 2026, has been notably reduced, as represented in a box-and-whisker plot (Fig. 4).20 The box in Figure 4 encloses 50% of the years since 2010, and the length of this box is called the Inter Quartile Range (IQR), bounded by the 25th and 75th percentile of the 17 years of data, including forecast use in 2026. The line through the middle of the box is the median value for this period. Lines extending up and down from the box (i.e., whiskers) extend from the box to values within an acceptable range. Values that are greater than 1.5 times the IQR above the 75th percentile or below the 25th percentile are beyond the acceptable range and are outliers and individually plotted. Thus, 2024, 2025, and forecast use in 2026 are outliers, indicating that use in those years has been significantly less that typical use during the entire period since 2010.
Figure 4. Box-and-whisker plot showing distribution of annual use by IID since 2010. The box is the Inter Quartile Range, defined by the 25th and 75th percentile of the years of annual use data. The line inside the box is the median. Whiskers extend from the box to an acceptable range, and outliers are circles that are labeled. The three most recent years are outliers of low water use. Estimated use in 2026 based on forecast of September 1, 2026. See text for explanation of a box-and-whisker plot.
The largest proportion of irrigated land in IID is devoted to field crop production, the largest proportion of which is devoted to alfalfa (Fig. 5).ยฒยน The area devoted to alfalfa production changes little from year to year and during the year and was approximately 150,000 acres in 2025.ยฒยฒ In 2025, other significant field crops were Bermuda grass and kleingrass, whose average irrigated area was 80,000 and 20,000 acres, respectively. The area devoted to garden crop production changes greatly throughout the year and is largest between November and March. Little land area is devoted to garden crop production in the heat of summer. The most significant garden crops are lettuce, onions, carrots, and broccoli.
Figure 5. Area of IID irrigated for di๏ฌerent categories of crops in 2025. Field crops include alfalfa that is also plotted separately.
Water use by IID is typically lowest between November and February when garden crops are grown (Fig. 6). Water use increases greatly in March and remains high through October when field crops are the primary focus of production (see Appendix).
Figure 6. Box-and-whisker plots of total monthly consumptive use by the IID between 2010 and 2026. Each box is the Inter Quartile Range, defined by the 25th and 75th percentile of the years of data for that month. These boxes represent the typical monthly use pattern since 2010. Red dots are the average use in each month between 2024 and 2026. See text for additional explanation of a box-and-whisker plot.
Reductions in consumption during the past few years have been accomplished primarily by reduced water use between June and September when alfalfa and grass hay are the primary crops. These reductions are reflected in Figure 5 where red dots are the average monthly water use since 2024. Red dots plot below the grey boxes of the IQR in June, July, August, and September, demonstrating that recent water use in these months has been significantly less than typical since 2010. In contrast, recent water use between December and May has been within or slightly less than the IQR.
Agricultural use of mainstem Colorado River water in Arizona
We estimated agricultural use of mainstem Colorado River water in Arizona by subtracting the total diverted by the CAP from the total use in Arizona. This remainder includes all the agricultural uses along the Colorado River as well as a small amount used by the City of Yuma, other towns along the river, and military bases.ยฒยณ
The monthly pattern of water use is similar to the monthly pattern by the IID. The smallest uses are between November and February (Fig. 7). Consumptive use increases in March and is highest between April and August.
Reductions in water use by these Arizona growers have been more modest than by IID. Recent average use has been somewhat less than the typical range between April and July and has been within the typical range in other months, except for November when there was significant precipitation near Yuma in 2025.
Figure 7. Box-and-whisker plots of total monthly consumptive use in Arizona by users of mainstem Colorado River not served by the CAP between 2010 and 2026. Each box is the Inter Quartile Range, defined by the 25th and 75th percentile of the years of data for that month. These boxes represent the typical monthly use pattern since 2010. Red dots are the average use in each month between 2024 and 2026. See text for additional explanation of a box-and-whisker plot.
Management and Policy Implications
Consumptive water use of mainstem water in the Lower Basin has been less than 7.5 maf/yr in every year but one since 2010. Since 2023 including forecast use in 2026, this reduction ranged between 1.4 and 1.7 maf/yr. The Lower Basin states have reduced water use comparable to the initial targets for Lower Basin shortages described in the recently released ROD24 and Operating Guidelines for 2027 and 2028.25 Thus, the good news is that the initial shortage goals of the FEIS have been achieved in recent years.
These savings have been achieved by large reductions in use by the CAP (Fig. 3) and by reduced agricultural water use in summer by IID (Fig. 6) and non-CAP water users in Arizona (Fig. 7). These reductions in agricultural water use have not resulted in changes of the amount of water consumed in winter when garden crops are grown.
The ROD allows for potentially large Lower Basin shortages of up to 3 maf/yr and potentially more in the event that Basin runoff continues to be low and reservoir live storage drops to critical levels. We placed these potential shortages in perspective by summing the smallest monthly use in each Lower Basin state since 2010 even though these months of smallest use did not occur in the same year. In some cases, the smallest water use was not due to significant water conservation but to unusually rainy conditions when demand for supplemental irrigation water was low, such as in November 2025. In other words, there is no historical experience with implementing the annual sum of these smallest monthly uses, because the smallest monthly uses did not occur in the same year.
Nevertheless, summing the lowest monthly use in each state provides perspective to the magnitude of the proposed 3 maf/yr shortages. The summed value of smallest monthly uses yields a potential minimum annual Lower Basin use of 5.03 maf/yr for the three Lower Basin states (Table 2). Although many of the months of smallest use occurred between 2022 and 2026, some were unique months of very low use in the 2010s. There is no historical analogy for imposition of the largest Lower Basin shortages envisioned by the recently released ROD and 2027-28 Operating Guidelines. [ed. emphasis mine]
Table 2. Smallest monthly consumptive use in each Lower Basin state since 2010.
CONCLUSION
The analyses summarized in this paper demonstrate that agricultural water use that supports winter garden crop production has not changed despite recent reductions in annual water use by IID or by non-CAP water users in Arizona. To date, water use by IID and by non-CAP water users in Arizona has been reduced in summer when garden crops are not grown. In times of acute water shortage, it is likely that continued and additional water savings can be achieved by reductions in irrigation of field crops in summer, without causing shortages to garden crop irrigation in the winter.
It is notable, however, that summing the lowest monthly water use in each state since 2010 results in a theoretical reduction from the Lower Basin allocation of 7.5 maf/yr of approximately 2.5 maf/yr, less than the maximum potential Lower Basin shortage envisioned in the recently released ROD. Our calculation of a theoretical shortage is based on summing the smallest use in each month between 2010 and 2026, and these months are not all in the same year. In some cases, the lowest use resulted from unusually large precipitation that reduced irrigation demand, rather than explicit conservation efforts.
The Priority Shortage Allocation Model utilized in the FEIS distributes shortages among the Lower Basin states in a much different manner than the way shortages have been achieved in the past.26 Tabulating the historical minimum monthly uses demonstrates that achieving the 3 maf/yr reductions described in the FEIS and ROD would be very difficult and is without historical precedent. Implementation of such large shortages would likely require new management policies, including compensated fallowing, permanent retirement of irrigated acreage and corresponding water rights, and unprecedented investment in increased irrigation efficiency.
We recognize that our theoretical comparison of minimum monthly uses since 2010 in no way captures the economic dislocation and secondary impacts that might result from implementing such shortages now. A full economic analysis of the impacts of the largest potential Lower Basin reductions described in the FEIS and the ROD is critical for understanding the consequences of significant reductions in water use in the Lower Basin. That type of analysis is beyond our expertise. Nevertheless, we recognize the importance of such an analysis, and we recognize the real-world distress that such large reductions of use might cause.
1ย Center for Colorado River Studies, Utah State University, former Chief, Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center.
2ย Getches-Wilkinson Center, Univ. of Colorado Law School, former US Commissioner, Upper Colorado River Commission, former Assistant Secretary for Water and Science, US Dept. of the Interior.
3ย Retired General Manager, Colorado River Water Conservation District.
4ย Kyl Center for Water Policy, Arizona State University, former Director, Phoenix Water Services.
5ย Sta๏ฌ Attorney, Utton Transboundary Resources Center, University of New Mexico.
7ย All annual data in this paper are calendar year. 2024 is the most recent year that consumptive uses and losses data are available for the entire Basin.
8ย Richter et al., 2024, New water accounting reveals why the Colorado River no longer reaches the sea. Communications Earth & Environment 5:134. available at https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-024-01291
โน Upper Basin state uses in Table 1 do not include state reservoir evaporation. Total major and minor state reservoir evaporation is listed separately in Table 1. Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP) reservoir evaporation is evaporation from Blue Mesa, Morrow Point, Flaming Gorge, and Lake Powell reservoirs. Source of Upper Basin data: J. Prairie, Upper Colorado Basin Research and Modeling Group Chief, Bureau of Reclamation. Source of Lower Basin state uses: Reclamation. 2025. Water use report: Arizona, California, Nevada, calendar year 2024. Source of mainstem reservoir evaporation (Mead, Mohave, Havasu) data: S. Tighi, Hydrologist, Reclamation, Lower Colorado Region. Evaporation at Senator Wash and diversion dams estimated at 28,000 af.
10 Department of the Interior, August 2026, Operating Guidelines: Colorado River Guidelines for Coordinated Operations of Lake Powell and Lake Mead, Operating Years 2027 and 2028 (2027-28 Operating Guidelines), available atย https://www.usbr.gov/ColoradoRiverBasin/post2026/decision-doc/2027-2028OperatingGuidelines_Final.pdf. We note that these Operating Guidelines provide for 1.25 maf/yr of shortage, allocated among the Lower Basin states as previously proposed: 760,000 af/yr in Arizona, 440,000 af/yr in California, and 50,000 af/yr in Nevada, The distribution of shortages greater than 1.25 maf/yr is not specified but would presumably be subject to consultation. See 2027-28 Operating Guidelines at 5.3.A. The ROD allows for the development of different methods of shortage allocation. See ROD at 5.
ยนยฒ Lower Colorado River Water Accounting – Actual Water Use and Official Water Use Forecast, both available at https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/g4000/wtracct.html. Throughout this paper, we refer to the forecast for 2026 that was made on September 1, 2026. The forecast is frequently revised.
ยนยณ There is no significant water use in the Grand Canyon.
14 Average Lower Basin consumptive use between 2010 and 2025 was 6.880 maf/yr.
16 Average use between 2010 and 2022 was 4.326 maf/yr. Average use between 2023 and (forecasted) 2026 will be 3.764 maf/yr.
17 Average use between 2010 and 2022 was 2.600 maf/yr. Average use between 2023 and (forecasted) 2026 will be 2.290 maf/yr.
18 Average use between 2010 and 2022 was 925,000 af/yr. Average use between 2023 and (forecasted) 2026 will be 804,000 af/yr.
19ย Average use between 2010 and 2022 was 2.590 maf/yr. Average use between 2023 and (forecasted) 2026 will be 1.930 maf/yr.
20ย IID used 2.187 maf in 2025, 2.312 maf in 2024, and is forecast to use 2.242 maf in 2026. Median use between 2010 and 2026 was 2.546 and use in 50% of the years of that period was between 2.481 and 2.558 maf/yr.
22ย Total net area of crops in 2025 was approximately 350,000 acres.
23ย Forecast use in 2026 for Bullhead City, Lake Havasu City, Parker, Yuma, U.S. Army Yuma Proving Grounds, and the U.S. Marine Corps Air Station Yuma is 35,000 af.
25ย Department of the Interior, August 2026, Operating Guidelines: Colorado River Guidelines for Coordinated Operations of Lake Powell and Lake Mead, Operating Years 2027 and 2028 (2027-28 Operating Guidelines), available atย https://www.usbr.gov/ColoradoRiverBasin/post2026/decision-doc/2027-2028OperatingGuidelines_Final.pdf. We note that these Operating Guidelines provide for 1.25 maf of shortage in each year, allocated among the Lower Basin states as previously proposed: 760,000 af in Arizona, 440,000 af in California, and 50,000 af in Nevada. The distribution of shortage greater than 1.25 maf/yr is not specified but would presumably be the subject of consultation. See 2027-28 Operating Guidelines at 5.3.A. The ROD allows for the development of di๏ฌerent methods of shortage allocation. See ROD at 5.
26ย See FEIS Appendix C, Shortage Allocation Model and Alternative Distribution Model Documentation, at C.4.2. However, the ROD specifies that other methods of shortage allocation may be developed. ROD at 5.
Colorado River “Beginnings”. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism
Click the link to read the article on the Grist website (Austin Corona):
August 28, 2026
Nevada officials have long presented themselves as a voice for compromise and conservation in debates over the Colorado River. The Las Vegas area, home to two-thirds of the stateโs population and most of its economy, has become a model of urban water conservation. As the river has declined from overuse and a decades-long drought exacerbated by climate change, southern Nevada water planners built extensive water reuse facilities and implemented tight restrictions on new turf and fountains, dropping the regionโs per capita water use by 58 percent in roughly 20 years. Meanwhile, in interstate negotiations over the management of the Colorado River, state representatives have positioned themselves as bridge-builders, sometimes referring to themselves as the โmiddle basinโ between the riverโs divided upper and lower basin states.
When the federal governmentโs new management plan for the river was announced earlier this month, most observers thought Arizona, which stands to take the largest immediate cuts, would launch the first lawsuit over the planโs implications for its water supplies. So it came as a surprise to many Colorado River experts when Nevada became the first to sue the federal government over the plan this week.
โI expected that there would be litigation, but it was surprising to me that Nevada fired the first shot,โ said Anne Castle, former chair of the Upper Colorado River Commission.
The natural flow flow at Lees Ferry, which is a calculation of what the Colorado Riverโs flow would be without any upstream dams, diversions, or human consumption. Land Desk graph using Bureau of Reclamation data.
Nevadaโs lawsuit comes after more than two years of negotiations among the seven Colorado River states and the federal government over how to reduce water use on the declining river. The states failed to reach a long-term agreement before the riverโs current management procedures expire in October, leaving the Interior Department to impose its own plan. The federal governmentโs plan largely relies on cuts to water use among the Lower Basin states โ Arizona, Nevada, and California โ to prop up water levels in the riverโs largest reservoirs. Those reservoirs have been draining so quickly that the dwindling water depth could threaten hydropower and dam operations within months without intervention.
Nevada argues that the federal governmentโs plan illegally forces it to take too much of those cuts. In a worst-case scenario, the plan could allow for a 71 percent cut to the Las Vegas areaโs water supply, the state argued, calling it an unacceptable risk to the stateโs largest population center and economic hub. Nevada believes this outcome results from a misreading of the law and also claims the government didnโt consider important alternatives to such drastic cuts.
This worst-case scenario, which experts say is an interpretation of the planโs implications by Nevada, would become possible if reservoir levels continue to drop and if Nevada couldnโt reach an agreement with Arizona and California to help it absorb more of those cuts. Those three states already have such an agreement, which is incorporated into the federal plan and meant to last through 2028, at which point the plan allows the states to update the operations with a new agreement. Without an agreement, the federal government will implement cuts based on preexisting water rights and agreements, cutting the most from Arizona and leaning increasingly on Nevada and California as potential shortages increase. The plan was created through a decision-making process required under the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, which mandates that federal agencies gather public input and consider environmental and socioeconomic impacts of major decisions.
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
The Government Highline Canal, courtesy ofย Wikipedia.
Click the link to read the article on the Big Pivots website (Allen Best):
September 3, 2026
Farmers served by the Government Highline Canal as of today will get no water, a result of last winterโs dismal snowpack and low levels in Green Mountain Reservoir
The Government Highline Canal has delivered water to farms in Coloradoโs Grand Valley during irrigation season for more than 110 years.
Thursday will be a first in that long history. No water will be available in that canal to farmers, even though the growing season has not ended.
โThis will be the first time since around 1914 the Government Highline Canal has been at undeliverable levels during the irrigation season, which usually runs until Nov. 1 (and sometimes later),โ said Tina Bergonzini, general manager of the Grand Valley Water Users Association.
Water supplied by reservoirs upstream in the Colorado River headwaters has essentially run out.
The predicament on the Colorado River had become apparent by April. Record-breaking heat of March made it extremely likely that runoff would be anemic. It got a bit better in May, but not much.
This was clearly evident at Green Mountain Reservoir, between Silverthorne and Kremmling. The dam had been built between 1938 and 1943, as part of a quid pro quo. Farmers in northeastern Colorado, particularly in the Fort Collins-Longmont-Greeley triangle, wanted to divert water from the Colorado River headwaters.
Western Slope representatives objected. They worried that they would lose irrigation water they needed after spring runoff subsided in June and July. The federally financed dam was the answer. It can hold nearly 154,745 acre-feet of water. Of that, 66,000 is marked for delivery to downstream irrigators, most in the Grand Junction area.
Green Mountain was the quid for the quo of the Colorado Big-Thompson Project annual diversion of between 200,000 and 230,000 acre-feet through the Continental Divide.
It worked โ until this year.
In April, the low levels in the reservoir made it clear that the farmers would not get the full amount of water they had come to expect. The Glenwood Springs-based Colorado River District created a plan to ease the shortage.
The district โ which had been created to look out after Western Slope interests in the 1930s โ looked into how it could tap various pools of water, getting a thimbleful here, a cupful there. Irrigators wouldnโt become whole, but they would get help, said Andy Mueller, the general manager of the River District at the boardโs April meeting.
DeBeque Canyon has changed somewhat since this photo of the Roller Dam was taken in 1916. Most notably, now the canyon has an interstate highway. Photo/U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. For a more complete history, see the Palisade Historical Society page.
Water for the Grand Valley Canal is diverted from the Colorado River at what is called the Roller Dam on the Colorado River just east of Palisade. It continues 55 miles down the valley, mostly north of I-70, ending near Mack, 10 miles from the Utah border.
The canal is called the โgovernmentโ for a good reason. It was built with federal money via the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, an agency created in 1902 to help turn arid places like the Grand Valley into gardens and orchards. Accounts vary about when the water began flowing in the canal. Some say 1913, others 1914 or 1915. Regardless, the water has always flowed since before the United States entered World War I.
Until this year.
Early in the irrigation season, irrigators benefitting from the canal agreed to curtail their water use in exchange for getting water from reservoirs near the Colorado River headwaters later in the season.
That sounds simple enough. The mechanics are complicated. Crucial to understand is the seniority of the โCameo callโ at the Roller Dam, where water is diverted. Upstream users have to honor that very senior call.
The call is for 1,950 cubic feet per second. Grand Valleyโs Bergonzini said her district lowered the target by 300 cfs and then another 200 cfs, or 1,450 cfs. That left a little more water in Green Mountain. Altogether, the reduced water diverted from the Colorado โ combined with the two storms during May โ brought the amount of water available in Green Mountain up to 50% of the allotment for the Grand Valley farmers.
This story has endless details. The essential story is that those with rights to water on the Colorado River within Colorado โ including a transmountain diverter, Northern Water โ have worked with the irrigation district to ensure the farmers in the Grand Valley had some water during the growing days of summer. Water officials stress what Bergonzini calls โteamwork and collaboration between entities.โ
Upstream reservoirs tapped included Wolford and Wiliams Fork, both near Kremmling, and Ruedi, near Basalt. An additional 5,000 came from Granby Reservoir late in the season.
Helping out were appropriations of $450,000 from the River District in April and then, in May, $585,000 from the Colorado Water Conservation Board.
Still, farmers dependent upon the ditch only got 50% of the water they normally would from Green Mountain.
Some of the teamwork involves Orchard Mesa Irrigation District. The Grand Valley and Orchard Mesa districts have an agreement to share shortages.
A short distance east of Palisade, water from the Colorado River is pumped up to Orchard Mesa. Photo/Allen Best
Orchard Mesa pumps water uphill from near Palisade to the mesa, site of many of the peaches for which Palisade is famous. Farther down on the Government Highline Canal, other farms grow alfalfa, wheat, and usually corn. This year, however, little corn was grown, yielding to Sudan grass, triticale, and barley, as they are shorter season and can be grown with less water, said Grand Valleyโs Bergonzini.
Both peach and grape orchards on Orchard Mesa have done quite well, said Rob Talbott, president of the irrigation districtโs board of directors.
The fundamental story, he said, is that โeverybody is doing whatever they can to share their water.โ
The sharing continues. The peach orchards need water now if they will be productive next year.
โThe peach trees (primarily on Orchard Mesa) need water right now to get ready for hibernation whereas my growers (served by Government Highline Canal) can wait for a bit to water in winter wheat and hay. They crop switched earlier this year to shorter season crops, so we have different needs,โ explained Bergonzini.
The canal is designed for flows of 730 cfs, not for the 100 cfs now available. As such, she said, itโs better to let the peach trees have the water now.
โThen, IF THE RIVER HAS RISEN SOME,โ said Bergonzini, using all-caps for emphasis in her e-mail, Grand Valley will take Orchard Mesaโs irrigation water and augment it with what is available in the river to get some crops watered along the 55-mile canal.
That could happen at the end of September.
โWe are planning on running late โ perhaps the middle of November if the weather allows without freezing, to assure our growers get good moisture on their fall crops,โ she said.
From its start as a pure snowflake in the Rocky Mountains of Montana to its clouded, churning confluence with the Mississippi River in St. Louis, the โBig Muddyโ has for centuries been incrediby impactful to the communities that call it home. Native Americans were first to recognize the importance of the Missouri River, with twenty-nine Tribal Nations recognized to hold cultural, economic, or water rights to this current day. Followed by Lewis and Clark on their historic โCorps of Discovery Expeditionโ, the river opened up a new horizon for the newly established United States of America to expand.
As time moved on, the Missouri and its floodplain became more developed, heavily farmed, tightly constricted, and eventually dammed. The Pick-Sloan Flood Control Act of 1944 changed the wild and free Big Muddy like never before; building massive dams and reservoirs, and thousands of miles of levees to facilitate flood control, farm irrigation, commercial navigation, and hydropower generation. While it can be debated as to the successes of Pick-Sloan, one thing is certain, a new wave of threats to the health and function of the river itself was set in motion and continues to grow today.
Confluence of the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers, Missouri | Mitch Paine Photography
One of the first major rivers that was a focus of conservation efforts by American Rivers, we pushed for the endangered species listing of the pallid sturgeon, piping plover, and interior least tern. Changes in the river connectivity, historic hydrology, and natural sandbar creation severely impacted these speciesโ ability to survive.ย We were also a primary advocate in the subsequent actions for the Congressional creation of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineersโ (USACE)ย Missouri River Recovery Programย (MRRP).ย
Pallid sturgeon
The MRRP is focused on:
(1) avoiding actions that jeopardize federally listed species, andย
While advances have been made, including the de-listing of the interior least tern and the slow completion of levee-setbacks to establish floodplain re-connection, there is still over halfway to go to complete the total 166,750 acres of Missouri River floodplains that were approved to be acquired and restored as part of the BSNP.
Coyote Gulch and daughter at the confluence of the Missouri River and Mississippi November 25, 2022. The Mississippi is to the left and the Missouri is to the right. Note the huge gaging station on the far bank.
It was among the first to see its lower-priority water eliminated in the 2019 Drought Contingency Plan.
The Eloy irrigation district secured state and federal aid to resume pumping groundwater, but those wells only produce a fraction of the water that the Central Arizona Project once delivered.
In a gravity-fed system like CAIDDโs, less water in canals means less momentum to push water to every customer.
โSome laterals are better than others,โ said district president Dan Shedd, who irrigated 2,200 acres when Colorado River water was still flowing.
Thatโs down to about 600 acres now.
โMy neighbor canโt farm as much as I can because of where the wells are situated. Most of us are less than 50%.โ
Farms need extra in summer
Farmers across the district have adapted to this new reality.
Most have fallowed land. Some have sold or leased parcels to solar projects to help make ends meet.
Many remaining fields have been reconfigured into smaller plots, so lower-pressure water can move uniformly across them.
And farmers are diversifying what they grow.
โNormally, Iโd have 1,600 acres in cotton,โ Shedd, an Arizona Farm Bureau member, said.
โBut now Iโm growing wheat and garbanzo beans in the winter when thereโs more water. Itโs just a break-even deal.โ
Summer is a different story.
Though more profitable alfalfa, cotton, corn and Bermuda grass can be grown then, it can be a struggle to pump enough water when the heatโs on and everyone needs irrigation at once.
In past years, the irrigation district has secured extra supplies from nearby providers to supplement when needs are highest.
But that water is growing scarce as others across Arizona now face cuts.
CAIDD knows it needs to do more.
Cadiz has groundwater to sell
Meanwhile, a California company called Cadiz is looking for interested parties to sell its groundwater, which it says would otherwise be lost to evaporation in a dry lakebed.
The water and land management company has secured rights to pump up to 75,000 acre-feet of water a year from an aquifer roughly the size of Lake Mead.
Its Mojave Groundwater Bank, located about two hours west of Lake Havasu City in Arizona, is neither new nor universally welcomed in California.
Opponents have tried to stop the project multiple times over 30 years.
But Cadiz recently secured the last federal permit it needs to begin converting a natural gas line to transport its water north and west.
The idea, at least initially, is to exchange that water with users who receive supplies from the State Water Project.
That water would flow to Los Angeles, in an agreement that has yet to be cemented, where users there would agree to conserve a commensurate amount of Colorado River water.
Central Arizona Project map via Mountain Town News
And then, in other agreements that still must be negotiated, 10,000 acre-feet of that water would flow to CAIDD through the Central Arizona Project canal.
Effort now is to lower the price
If this sounds complicated, it is.
Finalizing complex agreements to move water every year for at least five decades is one thing.
Lowering the price for CAIDD to officially bite on this deal is another.
โWe canโt pass the cost onto food,โ Cadiz CEO Susan Kennedy said, particularly when farmers already operate on slim margins.
Kennedy โ a long-time California political operative โ is rustling the bushes for private investment and an 80% federal funding match.
She is also working with the Bureau of Reclamation to develop a model exchange agreement that could be used to expedite other interstate water transfers.
This could change the narrative
Ten thousand acre-feet is a drop in the bucket for CAIDD, which even at diminished capacity delivered about 160,000 acre-feet last year.
Itโs not enough water to restore fields that have been taken out of production.
But it is enough to provide more long-term certainty for those that remain.
If the deal comes together, it could prove to other irrigation districts that new supplies arenโt necessarily out of reach, and that agriculture has a more secure future in Arizona, despite its current water challenges.
And even if it doesnโt, district leaders contend, the conversation could open doors to other ideas and opportunities.
โThis could bring water to Arizona, whether or not we can utilize it,โ said Ron McEachern, CAIDDโs former general manager.
The Berthoud Pass Ditch is now owned by the City of Northglenn. Photo credit: Clear Creek County
Click the link to read the article on The Denver Post website (Elise Schmelzer). Here’s an excerpt:
August 28, 2026
The Colorado Attorney Generalโs Office and the 14th District Attorneyโs Office this week charged Fabrizio Lorenzin, 65, with four felonies in connection with repeated sabotage of theย Berthoud Pass Watershed Ditchย and its security cameras over several years. The remote ditch system begins at 11,200 feet high on its namesake pass in the mountains and helps funnel water to Northglenn and Golden. Theย ditchโs water is stored…in Standley Lake in Adams County. Lorenzin allegedly forced open headgates on the systemโs ditches, damaging the infrastructure and diverting millions of dollarsโ worth of drinking water from its intended destination downstream. Prosecutors allege that he also stole cameras meant to watch the districtโs property…
Law enforcement first began investigating the possible tampering with the headgates in August 2019, according to an arrest affidavit documenting the investigation. Thatโs when four of the gates that control the direction of the flow of water were vandalized, diverting water worth approximately $1.3 million, the affidavit says…Headgates were damaged again in 2022, diverting $4.3 million in water, the affidavit says. Trail cameras again photographed the same man with the same backpack. Another headgate was damaged in 2023 when it was forced open and propped up with rocks. This time, the trail cameras were also stolen. In 2024, the affidavit says, federal investigators with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency installed three cameras with Apple AirTags attached. More images from the area showed the same man with the same backpack. In August 2024, the AirTags on the stolen cameras pinged from inside Lorenzinโs home, the affidavit says, and investigators searched it on two occasions, finding the disassembled EPA cameras and a laptop that contained images from other stolen cameras. A review of the search history on the laptop found multiple searches for information related to sabotage on the Berthoud Pass system as well as information about trail cameras and headgates, the documents says.
This ditch in the Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association flows past an unplanted field. The River District is concerned that legal tools the state plans to use for its new conservation program could favor certain regions, like the Uncompahgre Valley. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM
Colorado could most easily wring water from Grand, Uncompahgre, Upper Gunnison valleys
Western Slope water managers are raising concerns that the legal tools used under Coloradoโs new conservation program could cause negative impacts to local communities and the stateโs agricultural industry.
In a letter to the state water board, the Glenwood Springs-based Colorado River Water Conservation District said it is concerned that the legal mechanisms state officials plan to use to move conserved water into downstream reservoirs may mean certain geographic areas are more likely to give up water. The River District also says the programโs framework should be set by lawmakers โ with a significant stakeholder process โ during the 2027 session, instead of by the Colorado Water Conservation Board and state Division of Water Resources officials.
At its July meeting, River District staff presented a map of the river basins in its 15-county region, showing which areas were most likely to participate in a conservation program. The Uncompahgre River basin; Dolores River basin; Colorado River in the Grand Valley; White River near Rangely; and Green River, Little Snake; and the Yampa in the Maybell/ Lily Park area were the most likely regions to see participation in a new state conservation program.
โWhat it shows is the potential for the disparate impacts,โ River District General Manager Andy Mueller said at the July board meeting. โAnd because itโs so easy to pay someone in the Grand Valley for a full [growing] season, thatโs going to be the inclination. Thatโs the easy thing.โ
In July, officials from the CWCB and Division of Water Resources unveiled what they are calling a โnear-term contribution program,โ designed to pay water users in the Upper Colorado River Basin (Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming) to voluntarily cut back for the next two years. The state of Colorado will run its own program, alongside similar programs in Utah and Wyoming, using $100 million in promised funding from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
โWe have this federal funding available to us and to bring those funds into Colorado, we need to hit the ground running and start the application window,โ Amy Ostdiek, interstate section chief at the CWCB, said in an interview with Aspen Journalism. โSo we are looking at doing this with the tools we have available under the law as it exists today. And thatโs just kind of the reality of the timing of it.โ
Shepherding vs. existing authorities
One of the complications of setting up a contribution program are the legal tools used to move water saved upstream to either Lake Powell or Blue Mesa Reservoir, where the state can then get credit from Reclamation for the stored water. One of the criticisms of past pilot conservation programs was that the water was not tracked to Lake Powell nor measured to see how much ended up there.
State lawmakers would need to pass a law to ensure that conserved water is protected as it moves through the river system so that it reaches a specified downstream reservoir without being taken by other water users along the way, a process known as โshepherding.โ State officials believe they have the legal authority to shepherd water across the state line only in the case of a call from the Lower Basin states (California, Arizona and Nevada). And so far, the Lower Basin has never placed a compact call.
That means the most straightforward places to wring water from the state are the Grand Valley, the Uncompahgre Valley and the Upper Gunnison Valley. The irrigation districts of the Grand and Uncompahgre valleys are close to the state line and the Upper Gunnison Valley is just above Blue Mesa, so the majority of water conserved in these locations will get to where it needs to go without the state Division of Water Resources having to actively shepherd it.
The River District has long warned that these types of programs, if not done carefully, could cause negative economic impacts by removing water from the Western Slopeโs rural agricultural communities.
โWithout shepherding, you end up with the potential that there are certain areas that are targeted and can produce water in this program and other areas that cannot,โ Mueller said. โTherefore, you end up with these disproportionate impacts that weโve been concerned about.โ
Sonia Chavez is the general manager of the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District, one of the areas that could be singled out. The 59,000 irrigated acres of agricultural land in the district produces mostly hay and is above the stateโs largest reservoir, Blue Mesa, where state officials plan to store water conserved under the program.
โThat has not been lost on us that we are the only community sitting above a federal reservoir in the state of Colorado,โ Chavez said.
State officials say they intend to use their โexisting authoritiesโ for this new program, without the change in state law needed to allow shepherding. But the precise definition of existing authorities is still unclear. Officials said it could include loans of conserved water to the stateโs instream flow program or releasing water from Blue Mesa Reservoir at times of year when downstream users wonโt pick it up, so the water is nearly guaranteed to get to the state line.
The River Districtโs letter asks the CWCB for more clarity on the definition of existing authorities and how they would be used as part of a contribution program.
From left, Interstate Section Chief at the CWCB Amy Ostdiek, Colorado representative to the Upper Colorado River Commission Becky Mitchell and State Engineer Jason Ullmann, speak on a panel at Colorado Water Congress on August 20, 2026 in Steamboat Springs. State officials are rolling out a water conservation program that would pay water users to temporarily cut back. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM
Lawmaker involvement
The creation of a conservation program for Colorado comes at a critical time for the basin, which remains locked in the grip of a historic drought, combined with a management crisis. With the seven states that share the river still unable to find agreement on a new framework after more than two years of failed negotiations, the federal government has stepped in with its own two-year operating plan. That plan, which was released last week and includes cuts to water use in the Lower Basin, immediately triggered a lawsuit from the state of Nevada.
While the Lower Basin states are subject to mandatory cuts under the federal plan, the Upper Basin is not. But the four Upper Basin states have offered to voluntarily contribute 100,000 acre-feet of water over the next two years, when conditions allow, which would be set forth in a parallel agreement with Reclamation separate from the federal management plan. Coloradoโs conservation program is an effort to make good on that promise.
โWeโre in the post-2026 world, and I think that acting now and doing what we can with the authorities that we have shows Coloradoโs commitment and demonstrates that we are at the table in a meaningful way,โ Ostdiek said. โWe think itโs important, for various reasons, to move forward with this now.โ
In its letter, the River District also asks for the state to limit the criteria it uses to approve participation to a one-year, temporary program so lawmakers can use the 2027 session to use a stakeholder process to come up with a framework for a future program beginning in 2028.
โThe Colorado River District has long advocated that any government action that facilitates a Colorado River conserved consumptive use program inside the State of Colorado โ or directs the Colorado State Engineer to shepherd conserved water to the state line, whether done under existing authorities or otherwise โ must only be done through legislation enacted by the Colorado General Assembly,โ the River Districtโs letter reads.
At a June hearing of the stateโs Water Resources and Agriculture Review Committee, lawmakers told state officials that the legislature should be involved in the creation of a conservation program.
But putting the conservation issue โ which remains controversial โ before stakeholders and lawmakers hasnโt yielded results in the past. In 2023, a 17-member, state-wide drought task force, was supposed to make recommendations to lawmakers about what a conservation program should look like. The group could not agree and did not advance any recommendations on that topic, with some members saying a state conservation program was premature.
And at an August 2025 meeting of the Water Resources and Agricultural Review Committee, some Delta County ranchers asked lawmakers to consider a bill to allow shepherding during the 2026 session. They did not.
State officials held a workshop to get feedback about a water conservation program at Colorado Water Congress Aug. 19 in Steamboat Springs. Water users have for years expressed concerns about equity and protecting water rights in programs like this. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM
CWCB taking feedback
CWCB officials are currently taking comments and feedback on the contribution program. They held a well-attended workshop for water users on August 19, 2026 at Colorado Water Congress in Steamboat Springs. Attendees had many of the same lingering concerns that haveย been voiced for years, including how to protect water rights and how to encourage participation across the state.ย
State officials plan to offer different amounts of compensation to participating water users to account for the difference in the value of relatively cheap water on the Western Slope versus more expensive water on the Front Range. So far, in previous pilot conservation programs, every participant has been a Western Slope water user.
Western Slope agricultural water users have long said that if they donโt see comparable cuts being taken by Front Range municipalities, which collectively draw about 500,000 acre-feet from the headwaters of the Colorado River each year, that they wonโt want to participate. They donโt want Front Range urban growth to be fueled by water cuts west of the Continental Divide.
At the workshop, Northern Waterโs Director of Engineering Kyle Whitaker tried to put that fear to rest, saying the water provider, which supplies water to farms and communities on the Front Range like Fort Collins, Boulder and Longmont through its Colorado-Big Thompson project, would participate in future conservation programs.
โAs transmountain diverters to the east, I only speak for Northern Water, and we will participate from here going forward,โ Whitaker said. โWeโve been working on things to be a part of this for a number of years now, and those are finally in place.โ
The CWCB is set to consider the criteria for program participation at its September meeting.
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
We have met briefly at at least one Colorado water conference (but it’s been a while). I was the Water Resources Analyst at Northglenn for a while, and now am the Water Resources Manager at Consolidated Mutual. But, on my own time, I’ve built something for Colorado water records that may be useful to you or your readers, and I’d rather you see it early. I would appreciate feedback and hopefully some exposure from your organization.
It’s the whole state in one place: all 177,301 decreed structures, 2,271 stream gages, diversion records, water court history, and the calls that administer them, across all seven divisions. Type an address and it shows you the ditches and rights around it. Open any ditch and you get its decrees, what it actually diverted year by year, and where it sits in line. Open a district and you get a straight-line diagram of who takes what, and where.
The piece I’m proudest of went live this week: for any structure, on any day, how much of its decree was actually in priority. Not whether a call was on โ how many cfs of that particular ditch’s decree was in priority, counted by the hour, running back through the call record to 1950. I don’t know of anywhere else you can get that without building it yourself.
And it shows its work. Where DWR publishes its own day-by-day out-of-priority analysis, the page scores itself against DWR live, on the page: 98.7% agreement across about 86,000 structure-days, and it lands on DWR’s exact percent-of-day 90.9% of the time. Every page also states plainly what it can’t tell you. I’d rather your readers see the error bars than trust me.
A few things a reader could do with it in five minutes: find out whose ditch runs behind their house; see how many days their ditch was out of priority in the 2002 and 2012 droughts; or watch a senior downstream call reach up a tributary and shut off juniors sixty miles away.
I’d genuinely value your eye on it, and if you think it’s worth a mention to your readers, that would mean a lot. Happy to give you a walkthrough, or to run a specific question against the data if it would make a better post.
โ John Crawford
(Water Resources Manager, Consolidated Mutual Water Company), but working independently on this project hydrohistorian.com.
Milkweed, sweet peas, and a plethora of other flora billow from Farmerโs Ditch in the North Fork Valley of western Colorado. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.
Click the link to read the article on the InkStain website (Karl Flessa):
August 20, 2026
In the classic Monty Python sketch, a customer returns to the pet shop where, just 30 minutes ago, he purchased a parrot. He complains that the parrot is dead. The shopkeeper tries to convince the customer the parrot is only resting or is stunned.
In the ensuing argument, the customer uses no fewer than eighteen euphemisms: โThis parrot is definitely deceasedโฆdemisedโฆpassed onโฆno moreโฆceased to beโฆexpiredโฆgone to meet his makerโฆa stiffโฆbereft of lifeโฆrests in peaceโฆpushing up the daisiesโฆmetabolic processes are now historyโฆoff the twigโฆkicked the bucketโฆshuffled off his mortal coilโฆrun down the curtainโฆjoined the bleedinโ choir invisible.โ
Indeed, the parrot was nailed to its perch, already dead when the customer bought it.
The Compact and its subsequent agreements are as dead as that parrot.
The Compact is dead because it is founded on a false premise: a river that can produce the prescribed amount of water.
The Compact is dead because it is unjust: neither the Tribes nor nature participate in negotiations.
The Compact is dead because it doesnโt work.ย The Basin States are locked in battle; the Federal government tinkers and dithers.
In the longer version of the sketch, the shopkeeper goes to the back in search of a live replacement, returning to report โโฆweโre right out of parrots.โ
So are we.
We need a new Compact.
Proposals are not lacking: proportional allocations, Tribal standing, a whole-basin approach, adjustments based on actual flows, a basin authority, natureโs fair share, interstate tradingโฆ .
Whatโs lacking is the courage to change. [ed. emphasis mine]
The Compact is a dead parrot.
Delph Carpenter’s original map showing a reservoir at Glen Canyon and one at Black Canyon via Greg Hobbs
At its Aug. 17 meeting, the San Juan Water Conservancy District (SJWCD) Board of Directors moved forward with contracting engineering firm RJH Consultants to perform a water demand study for the districtโs reservoir project. SJWCD board president Randy Cooper opened discussion of the study by summarizing the history of the study, which the board delayed approving at its last meeting since board treasurer Joe Tedder was not at the meeting and had not had an opportunity to review the contract. He explained that the $147,400 cost of the study would be split between 2026 and 2027, which RJH had agreed to. In response to a question from Tedder, Cooper stated that RJH would be ready to start work on the study immediately upon board approval…The board agreed that RJH should provide monthly updates on the project to ensure that the project adapts to any changing circumstances or barriers the district encounters, which Jones raised concerns about.
I drove to the bluff overlooking the โGunnyโ to process the sad news โ news that hasnโt yet been made official โ that by October a big portion of the lower Gunnison River in western Colorado will be dry. The official term is โfully dewatered.โ
Monsoons were supposed to be heavy this year. As I looked down at the river in late August, clouds in the distance appeared almost monsoonal. Wisps of rain streamed out, but they evaporated before reaching the parched ground. It just about made me cry.
Below me, the North Fork of the Gunnison unceremoniously trickled into the Gunnison River at a place known as Pleasure Park, a weather-beaten outpost of civilization thatโs one of the last best-kept secrets in Colorado.
The Gunnison River starts high in the Elk Mountains and flows into Coloradoโs largest body of water, Blue Mesa reservoir, though currently it is only the second largest because of drought. Then it flows free through Black Canyon National Park, but only after most of its water gets diverted to irrigate farmland surrounding the towns of Delta and Montrose. The park is a gem, albeit one of the least visited in the nation. From above thereโs not much to do except walk to outlooks to stare at sheer, colorful rock walls on the other side and the thin ribbon of river 2,000 feet below.
The โGunnyโ then flows through the remote yet accessible Gunnison Gorge Wilderness. In this thin crack of the earth, Iโve spent the past 12 summers working as a wilderness fly-fishing river guide.
Accessible is a relative term. The hearty few that run this remote wild river get to the water by hiking a rough 1.2-mile-long mule trail that drops steeply for almost 600 vertical feet. Even getting to the trailhead takes an hour and a half from the nearest town, and itโs on a four-wheel-drive road thatโs been the death knell of many a low-clearance vehicle. Rocky on a good day, it can become impassable when wet.
For those with the dough, a mule packer can be hired to transport boat and gear to the river. Those with the youth, knees, and determination can backpack down rafts, frames, oars, fishing and camping gear. Even elite guests, including former presidents who book fly-fishing trips with commercial guide services, carry their personal gear down to the river.
World-class fishing is why anybody makes the effort, 14 miles of wilderness Gold Medal water, the action peaking in June when large hungry trout key in on an epic salmon-fly hatch.
This stretch of river may be navigable, but it features 18 named technical rapids, and any one of them can humble experienced river runners. Rapids called โImprovise,โ โBoulder Garden,โ and โSqueezeโ can feel more like rock than water, and almost every rapid has ruined a trip at some point. The river is littered with rocks that also earned names because they have strong personalities: โQueen of Hearts,โ โThe Table and Tombstone,โ and โDicky Do.โ Others carry the monikers of unlucky guides.
All these barriers have kept crowds at bay though now thereโs a new constraint โ 90-to-100-degree temperatures for days on end. The Gorge can remain runnable in 14-foot rafts down to about 300 cubic feet per second, but even then itโs tight. Today itโs running well below that, and the water is too warm for the fish. Most commercial trips have been canceled.
Jacob Richards. Photo credit: Writers on the Range
Looking upriver into the Gorge, I donโt see any boats fishing their way out of the wilderness, and it doesnโt take much to imagine the riverbed โ a sad meander of dry cobbles bleached white, punctuated by stagnant pools full of belly-up trout.
This place, with its rugged remoteness, wild rapids and world-class trout fishing, has carved its way into my soul. I mourn for future generations who will probably know a much different river.
I feel bad for the salty guides out both trips and tips. I mourn too for the bugs that fattened the fish that paid my bills, for the mergansers, ring-tail cats and desert bighorn sheep. All need a river thatโs wet.
Jacob Richards is a contributor to Writers on the Range, an independent nonprofit dedicated to spurring lively conversation about the West. He is a writer about Western environmental issues and sometime outdoor guide. He lives in Fruita in western Colorado.
Nixon Rock, in the Gunnison Gorge. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism
Denver Waterโs collection and service areas continue to face severe drought conditions, with historically high temperatures, low streamflows and reservoir storage far below normal. As a result, at its meeting today, the Denver Board of Water Commissioners amended its Stage 1 drought resolution to prohibit lawn watering as of Oct. 1.
Until that time, Denver Water customers are still required to followย mandatory watering restrictionsย of two assigned days per week through Sept. 30, per the current Stage 1 drought restrictions that remain in place.
A group of visitors walks down the boat ramp at Williams Fork Reservoir on July 20. The ramp was closed this summer due to low water levels caused by drought. Photo credit: Denver Water.
โThe drought afflicting the Denver region and its water supply system has only worsened over the course of the summer, making it clear that we need to take additional steps in response,โ said Tyrone Gant, president of the Denver Board of Water Commissioners. โFormally ending lawn watering Oct. 1 will help stretch our supplies, as we will be entering next spring with storage levels far below normal.โ
While the boardโs Stage 1 drought declaration set a target for system-wide reduction of 20% below the five-year average in water consumption, prolonged hot and dry conditions have led to many customers using more water during their permitted irrigation days to keep trees, shrubs and landscapes alive, making the conservation target difficult to achieve. With drought conditions ongoing, Denver Water staff project storage supplies could drop to 60% before the 2027 runoff season.
โDespite the blistering conditions, customers overall have reduced their water use this summer. But with a lack of precipitation and the hottest first seven months in the Denver region weโve recorded, we must take this additional step,โ said Denver Water CEO/Manager Alan Salazar. โItโs critical that our customers turn sprinklers off Oct. 1, so that we can extend our water supply.โ
Lawn watering and all spray irrigation must stop after Sept. 30, 2026, as part of an amendment to the Stage 1 drought declaration originally approved March 25. Trees, plants and gardens may be watered any day by hand if needed. Photo credit: Denver Water.
The resolution includes additional details outlining the kind of watering still permitted after the shutdown date.
High-traffic, active-use grass areas, such as parks and school fields, may only be watered after Sept. 30, under a Denver Water-approved water budget or variance. Additionally, recycled water users can continue to irrigate any day of the week, following the standard watering rules, as they are relying on reused water supply.
Trees, shrubs and perennials may be watered any day with a hand-held hose with a shutoff nozzle or low-volume, non-spray irrigation (such as a drip system). They may not be watered by spray irrigation.
Annuals and vegetables may be watered any day with a hand-held hose with a shutoff nozzle or low-volume, non-spray irrigation, until the first frost. They may not be watered by spray irrigation.
Grass establishment is not allowed after Sept. 30, except under special circumstances outlined under an approved variance.
An irrigation system may be operated for installation, repair or reasonable maintenance, so long as the system is attended throughout the period of operation and water waste does not occur.ย
Placing a soaker hose around the tree along the drip line is an effective way to water trees without wasting water. Reminder: Don’t water established trees too close to the trunk. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Conditions in Denver Waterโs service and collection areas continue to worsen. The amended resolution outlines specific factors driving the additional board action.
Denver Waterโs water collection system watersheds remain in various levels of drought as defined by the U.S. Drought Monitor.
Natural streamflow in the areas that flow into Denver Waterโs storage reservoirs for the period of April to July was 95,000 acre-feet, which is 22% of normal and marks the lowest level observed since recordkeeping began 110 years ago.
The Denver metro area is experiencing the hottest year on record (through July) with average daily high temperatures five degrees above normal and four inches below normal precipitation.
As of Aug. 24, 2026, storage in Denver Waterโs supply reservoirs is at 72% full, which is significantly lower than the historic median of 94% full for this time of year.
โIf you are the only one on your block with a lush green lawn, you might want to revisit your watering practices, as your overuse is compounding the impacts of this historic drought on our water storage supplies,โ said Greg Fisher, Denver Waterโs manager of demand planning.
โWeโre asking everyone to care more and water less, so we donโt have to take more drastic steps in the future, which could create more damaging impacts to our landscapes.โ
With reservoir levels continuing to drop, Denver Water is asking customers to Use Only What You Need. Every drop saved, both indoors and outdoors, makes a difference. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Watering season typically runs from May 1 to Oct.1, during which Denver Waterโs annual watering rules are in place. In a non-drought year, the start and end dates are general guidance for customers to turn on and off their irrigation systems. With this amendment to its March 25 drought resolution, the board has made the Oct. 1 date mandatory this year, prohibiting lawn watering as of that date.
In addition, the lawn watering ban remains in effect until the board determines how and when lawn watering can resume. That means sprinklers need to remain off in spring of 2027, pending an official resolution from the Board of Water Commissioners. [ed. emphasis mine]
The Yampa River at Deerlodge Park July 24, 2021 downstream from the confluence with the Little Snake River. There was a ditch running in Maybell above this location. Irrigated hay looked good. Dryland hay not so much.
A rare call has been placed on the main stem of the Yampa River as historic drought conditions continue to strain water supplies across Northwest Colorado, potentially curtailing more than 300 upstream diversions and prompting water managers to urge residents to conserve wherever possible. The call was placed Aug. 19 at the Lily Park Ditch No. 1, Pump Station No. 1, near the confluence of the Little Snake and Yampa rivers.ย The agricultural water right carries a priority date of May 28, 1923…Holly Kirkpatrick, public affairs manager for the Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District, said the call is only the fifth to occur on the main stem of the Yampa River below Stagecoach Reservoir…Kirkpatrick said well over 300 diversions upstream of the calling point could be subject to curtailment if they have priority dates junior to May 28, 1923. The call also applies to tributaries upstream of the Little Snake and Yampa river confluence. Some of those tributaries, however, may already have little or no natural streamflow available because of the severity of this yearโs drought, she said. The Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District reported Aug. 20 that baseflows in tributaries across the basin remained below the 10th percentile, an indication of unusually low water levels. The districtโs report showed the Yampa River below Craig flowing at 94 cubic feet per second, compared with a historical mean of 156 cfs for the date. In Steamboat Springs, the river was flowing at 58 cfs compared with a historical mean of 96 cfs. Reservoir releases are now supplying much of the water moving through the Yampa River, Kirkpatrick said.
Central Arizona Project map via Mountain Town News
Click the link to read the article on the KTAR website (Heidi Hommel). Here’s an excerpt:
August 26, 2026
The Upper Basin is on the verge of violating the Colorado River Compact for the first time in the agreementโs 104-year history, failing to send enough water downstream to the Lower Basin, Central Arizona Project President Terry Goddard toldย KTAR News 92.3 FMย on Monday…Goddard said the new framework from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation that will guide operations through 2036 could make it worse…
โWe have a violation of the compact either today or within the next month,โ Goddard said.
The compact requires the Upper Basin to deliver 75 million acre-feet to the Lower Basin over any rolling 10-year period, averaging 7.5 million acre-feet a year. Goddard said the Upper Basin is falling short of that obligation for the first time in the compactโs history, releasing only 6 million acre-feet this year and running right at the 10-year threshold. [ed. As Ed Millard says, the action is not from the Upper Basin but from Reclamation]
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
A moisture index satellite image of Las Vegas, Nevada. Southern Nevada stands to lose as much as 71% of its Colorado River allotment under the Department of Interiorโs operating guidelines for the river and its two largest reservoirs. Source: Copernicus Browser.
THE NEWS:The U.S. Interior Department on Friday handed down the operating guidelines for the Colorado River for the next two years, while also finalizing the 10-year decision framework that will guide these plans. And on Monday, Nevada filed a lawsuit challenging both the framework and operating plan, saying that potential shortages required by the plan could cause โcause devastating environmental, socioeconomic, and health and human safety impacts to southern Nevada and its citizens.โ
THE CONTEXT: Interior, i.e. the Bureau of Reclamation, did two things. The first was to hand down a record of decision on the framework that will guide operating plans for the next decade, which I wrote about here, so Iโll skip the details this time.
They also released a more specific plan for the 2027 and 2028 operating years. In the new plan, the feds affirm their commitment to โdefendingโ minimum power pool in Lake Powell, or a reservoir surface elevation of 3,490 feet. When the water falls below this level, water can no longer be released via the penstocks and hydropower turbines, so it must all go through the lower river outlet works, which werenโt designed for sustained use.
Notably, Reclamation plans to do this by โinitially seeking to maintain a minimum elevation of 3,510 feet. This provides an operational buffer and provides additional flexibility in recognition of the operational risks associated with sustained operations below elevation 3,490 feet โฆ .โ
The current elevation is 3,518 feet, meaning it could reach that upper buffer zone of 3,510 feet in October if current levels of decline continue.
To prevent it from falling any further, Reclamation would cut back releases from Glen Canyon Dam, which in turn would cut flows through the Grand Canyon and into Lake Mead, which would pull down Meadโs levels and trigger mandatory cuts for the Lower Basin users. Under the new operating plan so far, these cuts arenโt as onerous as many feared, and actually match up with what the Lower Basin had proposed to do voluntarily. The deets:
The Lower Basin would receive 6.25 million acre-feet from the Colorado River, or 1.25 MAF below the Colorado River Compactโs allotment of 7.5 MAF.
Arizona would receive 2.04 MAF; California 3.96 MAF; and Nevada 250,000 AF.
This means Arizona would take a 760,000 AF cut; Nevada a 50,000 AF cut; and California a 440,000 AF cut.
Arizona takes the largest cut by percentage and volume because the Central Arizona Project, which delivers most of the stateโs Colorado River water, has junior water rights to other big users on the river.
But if reservoir levels continue to drop, then Reclamation could impose further cuts on the Lower Basin, potentially slashing Nevadaโs water deliveries by as much as 213,556 acre-feet, or about 71% of its total entitlement of 300,000 acre-feet. This would be truly disastrous for the Las Vegas metro area, which relies on the Colorado River for about 90% of its water. And itโs not like there are a bunch of alfalfa fields the city could โbuy and dryโ for the water rights.
The Southern Nevada Water Authority has managed to cut overall water consumptionover the last three decades, even as the population has soared, through system-wide efficiencies, incentives, tearing up ornamental grass, water recycling, and extra fees for water gluttons. Las Vegas still has room to conserve, but as Western water scholar John Fleck put it, there โis an absurdity to a plan that would require Las Vegas to cut 71%. Thatโs existential.โ
Even more astonishing than the fact that the federal government is considering virtually drying up one of the Southwestโs major metropolises is their justification for doing so: To protect Glen Canyon Dam and keep it producing hydropower, even at greatly diminished levels, and โ though itโs not stated โ to keep lake-based recreation somewhat viable.
You have to remember that when the feds vow to defend the 3,500-foot level at Lake Powell, and when they refuse to even consider re-engineering Glen Canyon Dam to allow for releases at lower levels, either by rebuilding the outlet tubes or tunneling a bypass around the dam, they are also saying they are going to trap more than 4 million acre-feet of water behind the dam that could otherwise flow downstream into the Grand Canyon and Lake Mead. Thatโs enough water to fill Nevadaโs entire allotment for more than 13 years that, instead, will be sitting in the reservoir and slowly evaporating.
Nevadaโs lawsuit โ which is against the federal government, not the Upper Basin states โ alleges that the fedsโ plan violates the Law of the River. It slams the plan for not explicitly calling for releasing more water from Upper Basin reservoirs to prop up Powell, does not require Upper Basin states to make any cuts, and fails to consider a long-term alternative or engineered solution alternative to address Glen Canyonโs infrastructure limitations. The plan also does not account for its potential impacts on hydropower production at Hoover Dam, which drops off steeply as reservoir levels decline (meaning that preserving power output at Glen Canyon could lead to a net reduction in combined output from the two dams).
Save the Colorado, a river advocacy group, came out in support of Nevadaโs lawsuit in a written statement. “Las Vegas has one of the best water conservation programs in the entire U.S.,โ said Gary Wockner, the groupโs executive director. โPenalizing Las Vegas for water use is like penalizing an obese person who lost a lot of weight taking GLP1s.โ
Rough Times at the national parks these days. In Bryce Canyon, a sudden thunderstorm left visitors stranded on trails and requiring rescue, with two of them transported to a hospital for hypothermia. It also unleashed some serious flash flooding. In Zion National Park, a rockslide narrowly missed a shuttle bus and forced the closure of a portion of the Zion Canyon Scenic Drive. And in Canyonlands, officials were searching for a missing individual in Horseshoe Canyon, a remote area north of the parkโs Maze district. Temperatures in the area were in the 90s. In Death Valley, a French tourist died after his car got stuck in the mud on a remote road in 116ยฐ F heat.
The video below shows flooding near Tropic, Utah, downstream from Bryce Canyon National Park. Source: Garfield County Sheriff.
In May, I wrote about how climate change and aridification and a shrinking Lake Powell were coming for the Bullfrog Marina, on the northwest side of the reservoir. The water was simply getting too low for the marina to remain viable, so they were planning on moving it across the reservoir to Halls Crossing Marina.
At the time, it was not yet clear how lower water levels and the marinaโs removal might affect visitation to the remote area. Now preliminary numbers are in:
67,277:ย Total recreation visitors to the Bullfrog District of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, January through July 2025
44,206: Total recreation visitors to the Bullfrog District, January through July 2026.
Thatโs a decrease of over 23,000 visits, or a 34% drop. Even more dramatic is the drop in overnight stays in July, from over 47,000 in 2025 to just 17,000 in 2026. Then did folks make the long drive over to Halls Crossing, instead? It appears that some of them may have once the marina was moved, but overall this year visitation is also down on the northeast side of the reservoir.
18,023:ย Total recreation visitors to the Halls Crossing District of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, January through July 2025.ย
15,099: Total recreation visitors to the Halls Crossing District, January through July 2026.
Thatโs a decrease of 2,944 visits, or a 19% drop. This may not all be related directly to the dropping lake levels. Horseshoe Bend, which is in Glen Canyon National Recreation Area but downstream from the reservoir, has also seen a significant drop off in visitors this spring and summer. In a future dispatch Iโll take a closer look at tourism numbers in general to get a better sense of how widespread the declines are.
And now for the images showing Bullfrog with the marina, and without. The first image is from August 2024, when the reservoirโs surface elevation was at about 3,580 feet. The marina was still there, and the boat ramps still made it all the way to the water. The second image is from August 2026, with a surface level of just over 3,518 feet. Look closely and youโll see the marina is gone, and the ramps are high and dry.
Bullfrog Bay and Marina, August 2024. Source: Copernicus.
Bullfrog Bay and no marina, August 2026. Source: Copernicus.
Colorado River “Beginnings”. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism
Click the link to read the article on the KUNC website (Stephanie Daniel):
August 24, 2026
This story was produced by the Mountain West News Bureau, a collaboration between Boise State Public Radio, Wyoming Public Media, Nevada Public Radio, KUNR in Nevada, KUNC in Northern Colorado, KANW in New Mexico, Colorado Public Radio and KJZZ in Arizona as well as NPR, with support from affiliate newsrooms across the region. Funding for the Mountain West News Bureau is provided in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and Eric and Wendy Schmidt.
Three states are being required to cut their water use under a final plan for managing the Colorado River over the next two years, while the four upstream states are being asked to voluntarily conserve water.
The U.S. Department of the Interior released the Record of Decision for managing the river over the next decade and laying out more specific rules for the next two years. The plan is intended to protect Lake Powell and Lake Mead, which have fallen to historically low levels after years of drought.
Arizona, California and Nevada will have to collectively reduce their water use by 1.25 million acre-feet per year over the next two years, with additional restrictions possible if conditions worsen, according to the plan.
Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming are not subject to mandatory reductions; instead, those states are setting up programs to voluntarily conserve water.
โUnder the proposed plan issued by the Department of the Interior, southern Nevada could lose more than 70 percent of its already meager Colorado River allocation while the Upper Basin states of Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Wyoming are not required to contribute a drop,โ Nevada Governor Joe Lombardo said in a news release on Monday.
Upper Basin officials say their water users already face reductions when drought leaves less water available and that the federal government doesnโt have authority to impose mandatory cuts in their states. But they say the Upper Basin is willing to contribute voluntarily.
โNot because we have to, or that we feel like we legally have to,โ Coloradoโs river negotiator Becky Mitchell said at a conference last week in Steamboat Springs, โbut because the importance of this system and the survival of this system is a responsibility for everyone.โ
The federal framework envisions up to 200,000 acre-feet of water per year in Upper Basin contributions when conditions allow. The federal government is dedicating $100 million to the Upper Basin to compensate farmers, cities or other water users to use less. Colorado, Wyoming and Utah are also setting up their own state programs to facilitate participation.
Colorado officials expect applications could open this fall and projects could start next year.
โOur position has been and continues to be that we’re going to be part of the solution,โ said Amy Ostdiek, section chief for the Colorado Water Conservation Board at the Steamboat conference. โWe’re going to do it in the ways that we can, at the times that we can, but we can’t provide water certainty for our neighbors downstream that we don’t have ourselves.โ
Criteria for selecting projects, how water users will be compensated and how the Upper Basin gains credit for conserved water are still being worked out.
The Green River flows beneath the Flaming Gorge Dam in Utah. The federal government is sending water from the reservoir to prop up Lake Powell, something it could do in future dry years under a plan to manage the Colorado River. Ted Wood/The Water Desk
The federal plan also creates a potential โconservation poolโ in Lake Powell, allowing the Upper Basin states to store a certain amount of conserved water.
John Berggren, a water policy analyst with the nonprofit Western Resource Advocates, has advocated for a conservation pool and said its inclusion in the federal framework is promising. However, exactly how it would work is not clear.
โHow that pool operates, how the water is used, when it’s moved, if it’s moved, who decides that โ all that is going to depend on future agreements,โ he said.
Some key questions, he said, have to do with what the conserved water is credited towards, such as whether itโs used to offset shortages in the Lower Basin or help the Upper Basin fulfill their legal obligations to deliver water downstream.
The new framework also allows the Upper Basin to come to an agreement with the Interior Department to draw down a few reservoirs when Lake Powell nears getting too low for hydropower. That started happening this year, with water released from Flaming Gorge Reservoir in Wyoming.
A simple illustration of water income and water expenses in a humanโwater system. Water bankruptcy is the outcome of both insolvency and irreversibility conditions, i.e., when water use (expenditure) exceeds water supply (renewable and non-renewable assets) for an extended period resulting in irreparable damages to the underlying natural capital that contributes to water production and stability of the hydrological cycle.
Click the link to read the article on the Sibley’s Rivers website (George Sibley):
โAmid chronic groundwater depletion, water overallocation, land and soil degradation, deforestation, and pollution, all compounded by global heating, a UN report today declared the dawn of an era of global water bankruptcy, inviting world leaders to facilitate honest, science-based adaptation to a new reality.โ
Our Colorado River made their list of exemplary global โhot spotsโ for bankruptcy, with the observation that โthe Colorado River and its reservoirs have become symbols of over-promised water.โ
Udall/Overpeck 4-panel Figure Colorado River temperature/precipitation/natural flows with trend. Lake Mead and Lake Powell storage. Updated through Water Year 2025. Note the tiny points on the annual data so that you can flyspeck the individual years. Credit: Brad Udall
Youโve seen the word โcrisisโ used frequently this year in the countless morbid articles about the Colorado River. But the UNU Institute director Kaveh Madani argued that we are now โpost-crisisโ: the term โcrisisโ implies a deviation from the normal, a disruption to be dealt with in order to get back to normal, but there is now, Madani says, no going back to what passed for โnormalโ in the last century. [ed. emphasis mine]
The study indicates that we have drained too many aquifers, resulting in subsidence that destroys the aquifers for the rest of the geological age; we have lost high-storage wetlands to gullying and lowered water tables; we have spread too much surface water out to dry under an atmosphere heating up incrementally with every additional gallon of fossil fuel we burn; desertification spreads in our wake; et cetera, et cetera. As a result:
The report makes the case for a fundamental shift in the global water agendaโfrom repeatedly reacting to emergencies to โbankruptcy management.โ That means confronting overshoot with transparent water accounting, enforceable limits, and protection of the water-related natural capital that produces and stores waterโaquifers, wetlands, soils, rivers, and glaciersโwhile ensuring transitions are explicitly equity-oriented and protect vulnerable communities and livelihoods.
There is in this research paper the kind of lovely naivete that one finds in most of the analyses of Big Issues today (climate change, systemic racism, corporate personhood versus people, etc.); there is an underlying conviction that when the facts are all laid out, we will rationally accept that, yes, we are indeed in a bankrupt situation. And so we will all sit down together, like rational beings would, and work out ways to resolve the โreality deficitโ between what has been promised and what can be delivered.
This ignores the fact that, when we are first confronted with evidence of something so big in its threat to our way of life, that its correction might require creating a whole new way of life, our first response is to say, โthis canโt be so.โ There has to be a mistake. And a long winding road leads on, into and through a morass of denial, anger, blames cast, responsibilities denied, hopeful negotiations and underlying despair โ the whole medieval pilgrimโs Slough of Despond that must be negotiated before we might actually sit down together and work out some way of resolving the โreality deficit.โ
There is, however, a kind of honesty in coming around to realizing โ and acknowledging โ that a system might be bankrupt. Bankruptcy is not necessarily the end song of what has become bankrupt, although it can be (Chapter 7 bankruptcy). It can instead be a time of operational or financial reorganization, aa time for acknowledging circumstances, conditions and misconceptions not originally taken into account that, accounted for, might enable a measure of eventual recovery and even success.
The seven Colorado River Basin states, still stuck in the zomboid Colorado River Compact, are not there yet, but the Bureau of Reclamation might be getting there. On the viable assumption that the seven states will not come up with a last-minute plan before the end of September and expiration of the Interim and Interim Interim Guidelines, they are preparing to institute a temporary plan that will maintain functionality in the river storage and delivery system, with (they hope) no embarrassing โdead poolโ episodes โ which basically means getting and keeping as much water as possible in the two big reservoirs, Mead and Powell, and that can only happen at considerable cost to users below the big reservoirs.
The Bureau plan will not be carved in stone for forever like the Colorado River Compact; the Bureau will basically be planning operations for two-year periods, through the coming decade; every two years, the parties of interest will reconvene to review and revise the operating plan as circumstances require. This โadaptiveโ approach makes sense in a bankruptcy situation in which the future is mostly unknown. [ed. emphasis mine]
The plan really has no surprises for anyone who remembers the 2022 bolt of reality that caused Bureau Commissioner Camille Touton to tell the water leaders in the seven states to immediately plan to voluntarily cut 2-4 million acre-feet (maf) of water use โ basically a quarter of river use at that time โ or the Interior Department would do it for them. That โ in the centennial year of the Compact โ is probably a good marker for the Bureauโs acknowledgement that we were beyond crisis, and slipping into bankruptcy.
The structural deficit refers to the consumption by Lower Basin states of more water than enters Lake Mead each year. The deficit, which includes losses from evaporation, is estimated at 1.2 million acre-feet a year. (Image: Central Arizona Project circa 2019)
That 2022 siren call was met by the Lower Basin states agreeing to finally take the Lower Basin system losses (evaporation, etc.) and their half of the Mexican obligation out of their river-use shares rather than out of Mead storage until the 2027 water year โ provided they would be paid to do so. The absence of โsurplus flowsโ to take care of those losses โ ~1.25 maf โ from the coming online of the Central Arizona Project was a principal source of the draining of the big reservoirs, the so-called โstructural deficit,โ 30 maf of storage gifted to the Lower Basin.
(A side note on this: The Upper Basin states, since a 1970 Law-of-the-River agreement, have been regularly sending downstream their 750,000 acre-feet for the Mexican obligation and absorbing as part of their whateverโs-left-over share of the river the ~400,000 acre-feet of Upper Basin system losses. The four states have never asked for or been paid for doing that.)
But that 1.25 maf of voluntary shortages was only a large fraction of the 2-4 maf of cuts the Bureau said needed to happen. So the Bureauโs original 2027-28 plan announcement in late July included cuts of up to 40 percent for the states below Mead Reservoir (Arizona, California and Nevada) โ roughly equivalent to the 2022 request for 2-4 maf in cuts. The three downriver states countered that with an offer to permanently do the same 1.25 maf cut (with payment) for 2027-28 they were doing for 2025-26, with intimations of lawsuits if the Bureau pushed too far beyond that.
Arizona has led the countercharge from the states below Mead Reservoir โ being the state with the most to lose, since the junior status of the Central Arizona Project means it would be practically shut down by 40 percent cuts in usage.
A letter to the Interior Department from Tom Buschatzky, Arizonaโs Director of Water Resources, castigated the Bureau plan for making no mention of the Colorado River Compact and the Law of the River (LOTR). The letter insisted that Article III(c) and (d) of the Compact be executed to the letter as stated in the LOTR 1970 agreement: that a minimum of 8.23 maf be released from Powell Reservoir every year โ the Compact commitment of 7.5 maf per year on average passing Lee Ferry, plus the Upper Basinโs share of the Mexican obligation (750,000 af/year).
In their August 21 announcement of the more detailed plan for 2027-28, the Bureau backed down from the 40 percent number, and now wants a 20 percent reduction in use for the two years โ more in line with the Lower Basinโs willingness to continue taking care of its own system losses and Mexican share, but requiring some additional cuts โ and avoided discussion of the Compact issue raised. It will, however, probably be pushing for more cuts in the 2028 discussions for the 2029-30 plan renewal; the Bureau still feels that it needs at least 3 maf in permanent cuts to begin any hope of turning the current near-bankruptcy around, and bringing demand in line with at least current supply.
The Bureau would also like the seven states to be reviewing, revising and executing the two-year plans consensually by 2036, rather than imposing it on them. But Arizona, according to the Buschatzky letter, wants a โlonger, more comprehensiveโ plan from the states, consistent with the LOTR, and โdoes not accept a framework that gives the federal government the discretion to select from a wide range of alternativesโincluding catastrophic cuts to the Lower Basinโevery two years for the next decade.โ
โBankruptcy managementโ would seem to argue that the Colorado River Compact should be on the table along with everything else โ including the nonexistence of the 18 maf river for which the Compact was written. Aย detailed analysis of the current situationย by the โRiver Eldersโ โ the Kuhn-Schmidt-Castle group โ suggested that โBasin water users must focus on solutions to the fundamental, wet-water math problem, rather than legal arguments over paper water.โ [ed. emphasis mine]
Nonetheless, Buschatzkeโs letter states that โArizona reserves the right to seek the resolution of its Compact rights in an appropriate judicial forum.โ The states are not yet willing to acknowledge the bankruptcy of the Compact โ a Humpty-Dumpty that not all the patches and bandaids of the Law of the River can put back together for an ever-shrinking 21st century Colorado River.
That, more or less, is where the river systemโs future sits as of August 21. There will โ thanks to the Bureau โ be a plan for moving carefully into the future, a two-year step at time. A big question is how hard the Bureau will begin to push for the 3-4 maf in permanent cuts by users necessary to stop the march into real dead-pool bankruptcy of the system โ leading to another big question: whether the Compact nostalgitarians will push the system into dead-pool bankruptcy by suing the Bureau/Interior Department over paper water, tying things up in court for another several years.
Ah, the lovely Slough of Despond. There with Henry: โAll day the sun has shone on the surface of some savage swamp, where the single spruce stands hung with usnea lichens, and small hawks circulate above, and the chickadee lisps among the evergreens, and the partridge and rabbit skulk beneath; but now a more dismal and fitting day dawns, and a different race of creatures awakes to express the meaning of Nature thereโฆ.โ Bankruptcy, the Apocalypse โ only the end for those who fail to see that something else is always struggling for a chance to be born; donโt put a period where God (or Nature) would put a comma (Gracie Allen). As Henry also observed, โThe light which puts out our eyes is darkness to us. Only that day dawns to which we are awakeโฆ.โ
Next post, I want to go back to the โdesert riverโ concept to think a little outside the (Compact) box.
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
Click the link to read the release on the ADWR website:
August 21, 2026
After more than three years of difficult negotiations over post-2026 Colorado River Operations guidelines, Arizona and the Lower Basin states have created a level of stability for the Colorado River system with the adoption of the 2027-2028 operating guidelines in the Record of Decision. While the framework for years 3-10 continues to be of concern, we applaud the Department of the Interior for clarifying the decision-making process for operations beyond 2028. That outcome allows for continued negotiations for years 3-10 while preserving our ability to protect Arizonaโs legal rights to Colorado River water.
We will continue to work with our partners in Arizona, the Lower Basin and Interior, to finalize the agreements necessary to implement the Lower Basin Plan. With the Record of Decision, the 2027-2028 Operating Guidelines and the supporting agreements in place, we can focus on a longer-term, equitable, basin-wide outcome that includes shared sacrifices along with our Upper Basin partners in an effort to avoid protracted litigation. The actions in the Lower Basin in recent decades to protect the system have demonstrated how much we can accomplish when we all join together as part of the solution. โย Tom Buschatzke, Director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources
Tom Buschatzke. Photo credit: Arizona Department of Water Resources
Colorado River negotiators are seen at the 2025 Colorado River Water Users Association Annual Conference. From left to right: Becky Mitchell (Colorado), Tom Buschatzke (Arizona), Brandon Gebhart (Wyoming), and John Entsminger (Nevada). (Photo by Jeniffer Solis/Nevada Current)
Nevada officials filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Trump administrationโs order for cuts in water use Monday, marking a major escalation of tensions between the seven states that share the Colorado River. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court of Nevada, asserts that the U.S. Bureau of Reclamationโs operating plan unlawfully authorizes the federal government to reduce the stateโs allocation of the river by up to 71 percent annually sometime over the next 10 years. Such a cut would slash the stateโs share of 300,000 acre-feet down to 86,444 acre-feet. Nevadaโs use, after cashing in water recycling credits with its state-of-the-art system, came in at 198,000 acre-feet last year.
โThere are four states upstream of us that are facing zero mandatory reductions,โ said John Entsminger, general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority, in a Monday interview. โThat is not going to balance the system. This is a system-wide problem. It requires system-wide solutions.โ
Lawyers for the Colorado River Commission of Nevada, the water authority and the state as a whole requested an injunction to halt implementation until federal documents can reflect the toll water cuts would have on Southern Nevadaโs $180 billion economy.
โThis shortfall will cause devastating environmental, socioeconomic, and health and human safety impacts to southern Nevada and its citizens,โ attorneys wrote. โFederal Defendants failed to consider such impacts in any meaningful way.โ
While 2027 and 2028 will see allocation cuts that the Lower Basin states of Nevada, California and Arizona have already agreed to, the years 2029 to 2036 could bring much harsher reductions. Entsminger said he felt it was important for Nevada to have its own representation on the issue, but he added he would be surprised if California and Arizona donโt sign on to the lawsuit, considering officials remain aligned in their positions. No mandatory cuts will be imposed on the Upper Basin states of Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming. Entsminger submitted a letter to all six Colorado River basin states Monday, saying the stateโs decision to sue wasnโt made lightly but that โhiding from reasonable legal interpretations in order to defer hard political decisions helps no one over the long term and further endangers our shared resource.โ
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
Earlier that same day, the Department of Interior had issued its record of decision about how it would manage the key dams and hence the river during the two water years beginning in October. This came after Colorado and the six other basin states had failed during two years of negotiations to agree about how to share diminished river flows.
As even schoolboys in Kentucky likely know, the Colorado River has encountered severe problems since 2000. Flows in the river are down 20% and continuing to decline in direct proportion to rising temperatures. The two big reservoirs, Mead and Powell, have declined 75% in stored water.
The lower-basin states, which get their water from these two big reservoirs, had already cut their use significantly. The Department of Interior has ordered the three states to expect 1.25 million acre-feet less water from Mead during the next two years. It also expects the three states to figure out how to store 700,000 acre-feet over the next two years. Colorado and other upper basin states cannot expand water use.
Agriculture users, said Udall, will bear the brunt of these cutbacks. Municipal users โ all the cities from Coloradoโs Front Range to southern California get water from the river and its tributaries โ will have to chip in with water savings. Infrastructure limitations of the two big dams, Hoover and Glen Canyon, when holding little water need to be resolved. For example, penstocks [river outlet tubes] on the two big dams were never designed for day-in, day-out use, as may be necessary with reduced amounts of water. And as for the hydroelectric production? Yes, itโs a small amount but important. It provides backup power.
The process created by the Interior Department โ the Bureau of Reclamation is the key agency within Interior โ requires new plans every two years for the next decade. Udall sees merit in this approach.
โWhen the negotiations started, the idea was that weโre going to get a 20-year plan. We got five two-year plans, which you might see as a setback, but I think we might have blundered into something actually useful, because it potentially is true adaptive management, where people get to pay attention repeatedly as this evolves.โ [ed. emphasis mine]
Udall also sees strong dynamics producing solutions.
โI think weโre going to see a solution because the people who are involved in the negotiations are hard-working. Theyโre knowledgeable. Theyโre intelligent. They have super good relationships with each other. And they know that the chips are down. If they donโt solve it, the solution Mother Nature provides will be downright ugly. I think we will solve this. I actually do.โ
When the breakthroughs will occur, Udall said he didnโt know. And he hedged his confidence with caution. โI wonโt put bets on this.โ
What is clear, though, is that Arizona will be key to solving the conundrum of 21st century flows being far less than 20th century expectations. The river in the last century average 15.2 million acre-feet. Even when it carried healthy volumes of water, though, the river had ceased to reach an embayment of the Pacific Ocean. Flows this century have declined and, since 2020, remarkably so: to an average of just 10 million acre-feet.
Flows will almost certainly decline further. Accumulating greenhouse gas emissions guarantee continued warming, producing reduced flows.
โWestern water law is enormously complicated and really inhibits solutions,โ he said. โWeโve made a whole bunch of policy mistakes through time, including permanent allocations, assuming way too much water, and enforcing or legalizing really unrealistic policies.โ
Whether the framework created by the federal government for finding solutions will work, he said, will depend upon hydrology. In some circles optimism remains that the strong El Niรฑo this year will produce improved precipitation and hence greater flows. And maybe it will, said Udall, but the record on flows during El Nino years has been all over the scattergram. A few very big years โ 1983 and 1998 stand out โ yes. But some real duds, too. In other words, this coming winter could conceivably be as bad as the past winter. Or, if not as bad, then will continue the downhill slide.
Now rewriting the rules
Udall also made the point that prior agreements were incremental in nature, unlike what the new federal rules represent.
โThe rules in 2007 and 2019 were really hard fought, but they were incremental. They were truly incremental. What weโre looking at right now, itโs not incremental. Itโs a complete rethink,โ he said.
โI think people mistakenly thought that, given the successes in 2007, 2019, we would just kind of waltz our way to new rules. And I think thatโs the wrong way to think about whatโs going on. This is a really a different deal in 2026.โ
This new paradigm imposed by the federal government, Udall went on to say, is the โfirst global instance where climate change is forcing a complete redo of water management. I think I can make a pretty good case for that.โ
Udall/Overpeck 4-panel Figure Colorado River temperature/precipitation/natural flows with trend. Lake Mead and Lake Powell storage. Updated through Water Year 2025. Note the tiny points on the annual data so that you can flyspeck the individual years. Credit: Brad Udall
Udall has become well known at water meetings in Colorado and beyond, particularly during the last decade, in warning that communities and economic sectors dependent upon the Colorado River were headed for trouble. Climate change is water change, he began saying more than 20 years ago. And in 2014, he conducted research along with another scholar, Jonathan Overpeck, that showed the strong correlation between rising temperatures and reduced flows in the river. That science, he said, has strengthened.
Although living in Boulder, Udall in recent years has been affiliated with Colorado State Universityโs Colorado Water Center. There, he wears the title of senior water and climate research scientist/scholar.
However, Udall is also understood in terms of his family tree. He is a descendant of John D. Lee, the Mormon settler for whom Lee Ferry (also called Lees Ferry) is named. Located in Arizona, near the Utah border, it divides the Colorado Riverโs upper and lower basins.
Donโt make too much of being a John D. Lee descendant, he said. โHe had 21 wives that we know of, and some have suggested he has 800,000 descendants. That might actually be part of the problem with the Colorado River.โ
Ken Sleight the original Monkey Wrencher photo via Salon
As for his personal familiarity with the river, Udall divulged that he has rafted the Grand Canyon 45 times, at least some of those in the employ of Ken Sleight, best understood by readers of Edward Abbeyโs โMonkey Wrench Gangโ as the model for Seldom Seen Smith.
Arizonaโs role
In Udallโs view, Arizona is central to solving this 21stย century problem. The Central Arizona Project will โsee a whole lot less water, but itโs not going to zero. I donโt know quite how that gets revolved, but thatโs just so clear,โ he said.
The Central Arizona Project delivers water from the Colorado River through 336 miles of canal to metropolitan Phoenix and ultimately Tucson, with farms along the way. It was authorized by Congress in 1968 and completed in 1993. Both his father, Morris, and his uncle, Stewart, were key figures in this. It can deliver 1.6 million acre-feet, the majority of the 2.8 million acre-feet that Arizona was scheduled to receive from the Colorado River under a 1964 court ruling.
As Udall pointed out, farms that got water from the project have received far less since cutbacks began in 2020. And now, more cuts for the farms โ and cities โ will be coming.
Given an hour for his presentation, far longer than his usual 20- or 30-minute slots, Udall had time to sketch some history, even taking time to define the universal way of measuring water quantities in the basin, the acre-foot.
โThe reason that an acre-foot is used is farmers farm in terms of an acre,โ he explained. โIn the upper basin, you might put a foot or two feet of water on top of an acre to get a hay crop out. In the lower basin, near the Mexico border, you might put 10 feet of water on top of an irrigated field to get 10 different cuttings of alfalfa.โ
Credit: The Land Desk
Thoughts about hay
Alfalfa came up in the Q&A. The question, in not so many words, was how to cut back water used to feed livestock. After all, agriculture uses about 75% of the water (after evaporation) in the Colorado River, and alfalfa and other feedstocks comprise a large portion of that. A full hour could have been devoted to that question โ and likely left topics on the table. The tension inherent in this topic is revealed in how the Family Farm Alliance describes this push replace animal forage to crop switching: โcrop shaming.โ
โItโs easy to hate on alfalfa because people donโt eat it, but we kind of do, right? Dairy, ice cream, beef cattle. And the idea that youโre going to tell farmers not to grow alfalfa, which turns out to be a pretty good crop for them in their rotation, probably isnโt going to work very well. Youโre probably far better off to say, โHey, hereโs your reduced allocation. You use it as you want,โโ responded Udall
โI think most people in this room donโt care about corn. We very much care about alfalfa, and its water use, but Iโm not sure trying to prohibit farmers from using a crop thatโs key in their rotation and actually has some kind of interesting benefits is a suitable way to get there. โ
Udall also mentioned the difficulties of crop switching.
โItโs been suggested that ag shift to higher value products that use less water. One way to do that is only grow stuff in the winter because growing in Yuma (Arizona) and Imperial (Valley) in midsummer is not a great idea. But when you ask a farmer to shift produce or products, you ask them to change marketing, you ask them to (change) labor, transportation, storage, equipment, knowledge. You ask them to change a lot of things, and arguably thereโs a need to help this transition happen.โ
This discussion, he concluded, is one that needs to be had but is very complicated. โIt really is going to take a deep dive to figure out how to deal with this.โ
You will be able to soon hear what Udall had to say (and see the slides he shared) at the Getches-Wilkinson Centerโs site. The history lessons alone make it worth an hour.
A few other snippets:
โข โThe lower basin wants some contribution from the upper basin (in reducing use) maybe 5% or maybe 2%, but some kind of skin (in the game). And the upper Basin says no way. Until recently, the upper basin wanted to reserve the right to increase its use.โ
โข Our (Colorado delegate to the Upper Colorado River Commission) Becky Mitchell has recently been saying, you know, none of this gets us any extra water. And we need to move beyond this, and I applaud Becky for saying that.โ
โข Udall told a fascinating story about the Central Arizona Project. At the time the proposal for federal funding was before Congress, the Upper Colorado River Commission paid a Denver-based engineer to examine the numbers. That engineerโs conclusion: Thereโs not enough water for the Arizona project once the upper basin uses its full allocation (as defined in the Colorado River Compact of 1922). The number was 1.2 million acre-feet a year. And the two big reservoirs, Mead and Powell, have been losing 1.25 million acre-feet a year.
โข The idea in 1968, said Udall, was that the federal government was going to figure out how to augment flows of the Colorado River. One of the ideas was to export water from the Snake River in Wyomingโs Jackson Hole to the Green River and hence the Colorado. Washington Sen. Henry โScoopโ Jackson and other members of Congress from the Pacific Northwest objected. And the augmentation that was part of the thinking never has happened.
Green River Basin
โข On the first-in-time, first-in-right premise of Western water law. โYou know, first-in-time, first-in-rank gets reinvented by 4-year-olds every day of the year throughout the world. I was here first; itโs mine. And most parents step in and say youโre going to share, right: But not Western water law. It was completely understandable in the 1800s, where you had a few users. But itโs really not so great in modern society. โฆ
โYou canโt have a case where 1,500 famers deprive 5 million people in Phoenix or 2 million people in the Front Range of water, of what Iโll call critical human water needs. It just isnโt going to work politically. Shared sacrifice would be a whole lot better way to deal with this.โ
Itโs pretty hard to cut back water use under Western water law, because if one user decides not to take water, the next user downstream can grab it. โIf weโre trying to get water to Lake Powell, you have to rethink how this gets done.โ
Colorado statewide annual temperature anomaly (ยฐF) with respect to the 1901-2000 average. Graphic credit: Colorado Climate Center
โข Temperatures have increased 3 degrees Fahrenheit since 1979. โNot a single year after 2000 is below the 20th century average,โ he said of the Colorado River Basin. โIncreased temps lead to increased evaporation. We think you can lose up to 5% flow (of water) per degree rise.โ
Temperature increases have produced up to 15% increase in losses due to evaporation.
โข As for precipitation, the last 27 years have been the worst 27 years since record-keeping began in 1895. The declines worsened beginning in around 2015.
A 1% decline in precipitation leads to a 2% decline in flows.
โข As for Udall writing a book, as one audience member suggested, he said other authors have covered much of the same ground, even if he has a somewhat different angle. โI donโt know. I need an assistant!โ
Brad Udall is pictured at Boulder Reservoir, which helps deliver water from the Upper Colorado River to the Front Range. Photo: Vance Jacobs/Colorado State University
The Bureau of Reclamation’s 10-year plan for managing Colorado River flows seeks to preserve enough water behind the Hoover Dam to sustain electricity generation. (Angus M. Thuermer Jr./WyoFile)
A federal drought plan for the Colorado River and its tributaries in Wyoming shouldnโt stop Wyoming from building a new dam and reservoir in Carbon County, two Western water experts say.
The Bureau of Reclamation plan for the sweeping basin focuses on maintaining enough water in Lake Powell and Lake Mead to generate electricity and prevent degradation of critical infrastructure, professors from Utah and Arizona said last week.
The 10-year framework to manage water storage and releases in the complex seven-state, two-nation system seeks to balance predictability and flexibility in two-year increments. It also acknowledges that the government has little to no authority over water use in headwater states Wyoming, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico, said Sarah Porter, the director of the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State Universityโs Morrison Institute.
โOne way of reading the final environmental impact statement,โ Porter said, โis the Bureauโs determination that it doesnโt really have any authority to limit water use in the headwaters.โ [ed. emphasis mine]
A controversial dam proposed on the West Fork of Battle Creek, which flows into the Little Snake River, above, and the Colorado River could still be built despite a drought that prevents Lake Powell and Lake Mead from filling. (EcoFlight)
Drought will likely cause agricultural stress in Arizona, Nevada and California, threatening the supply of winter vegetables and possibly other crops, she said.
โWe probably wonโt be eating as many salads,โ she said, because Arizona is where winter lettuce is harvested. โItโs all grown in Yuma.โ
More important for Wyoming might be that the Bureau of Reclamationโs final environmental impact statement recognizes the independence of headwater, or upper-division, states to essentially use water as they see fit. Efforts to conserve water in the Upper Basin โare not within the scope of this EIS,โ the federal document states.
So while farmers downstream may see their traditional supplies cut, Wyoming forges ahead with plans for the 10,000-acre-foot West Fork dam and reservoir in Carbon County where 6,000 acre-feet a year would be poured onto fields for late-season irrigation on ranches.
Energy equation
The Bureau is imposing the plan after the seven states failed to agree on how to share Colorado River flows as drought crimps traditional allotments that were based on too-rosy estimates.
โWe have the lowest reservoir storage weโve ever seen,โ said David Rosenberg, a Utah State University professor and water researcher. โWe have very low inflows.โ
He and Porter spoke in a Zoom webinar hosted by SciLine, a nonprofit that connects reporters with scientists.
The two called the Bureau of Reclamation plan a decision-making framework for distributing water in the three Lower Basin states โ initially for two years.
โIt doesnโt place the basin on a path to stabilizing the system at all,โ Porter said. โIt doesnโt resolve conflict at all. It doesnโt achieve the [long-term] things that the basin really needs at this point.โ [ed. emphasis mine]
The Colorado River Basin spans seven U.S. states and part of Mexico. Lake Powell, upstream from the Grand Canyon, and Lake Mead, near Las Vegas, are the two principal reservoirs in the Colorado River water-supply system. (Bureau of Reclamation)
But the plan is โa very clear statement,โ Rosenberg said, โof how theyโre going to protect infrastructure.โ
That infrastructure includes the two major dams, associated power plants and canals that would become useless, even degraded, if the water levels in Powell and Mead drop below critical levels. With the plan, Rosenberg said, the Bureau states: โWeโre still going to be generating hydropower.โ
View below Flaming Gorge Dam from the Green River, eastern Utah. Photo credit: USGSBlue Mesa Dam. Photo credit: ReclamationThe outflow at the bottom of Navajo Dam in New Mexico. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism
Powellโsย Glen Canyonย and Meadโsย Hoover dams can generate some $443 million of market-price electricity a year when operating fully, according to calculations from the Bureau of Reclamation and theU.S. Energy Information Administration. To keep those two reservoirs flush, the Bureau will release water from Wyomingโs Flaming Gorge Reservoir and from Coloradoโs Blue Mesa Reservoir and New Mexicoโs and Coloradoโs Navajo Reservoir.
Beyond that, the Bureauโs plan targets the three Lower Basin states for reductions, depending on water in the river system and reservoirs.
Headwater states largely rely on stream and river flows determined by spring runoff. The at-risk region in Wyoming includes the Green River and its tributaries and the Little Snake River in Carbon County.
In contrast, the Lower Basin โgets all of its water, Colorado River water, from the reservoirs,โ Porter said. Itโs a lot more complicated to curtail Upper Basin use โthan simply to not deliver water out of a reservoir,โ she said. โAnd thatโs a sore point with the Lower Basin.โ
The two professors predicted a fight. โWe expect theyโll be challenging this administrative process,โ Porter said of the lower division statesโ reaction to the Bureauโs EIS.
Compact call coming
Thereโs more on the horizon too.
โI also expect that within the next year and a half, or maybe two years, there will be what we call a compact call,โ Porter said, โa demand from the Lower Basin for water that the Lower Basin contends the Upper Basin is obligated to deliver.
โThat challenge will occur in the United States Supreme Court and that could take 10, 20, 30 years.โ
Under the 1922 Colorado River Compact and associated agreements, the upper division states canโt diminish the flow from Lake Powell below 7.5 million acre-feet annually, calculated on a 10-year rolling average. Thatโs half what engineers originally calculated the watershed would produce; half belonging to the headwater states, half to the Lower Basin. That estimate is now considered to have been exuberantly optimistic. [ed. emphasis mine]
โWe really need to figure out a way collectively to be reducing demand in the Colorado River by at least 3 million acre-feet out of the 15 million,โ Porter said, โand that probably canโt all fall on the Lower Basin.
โThe Lower Basin,โ she said, โdidnโt agree to be junior to the Upper Basin.โ
If Upper Basin states donโt deliver the 7.5 million acre-feet past the Lee Ferry gauging station just below Lake Powell, headwaters curtailment will begin, starting with the most recent, or junior, water-right holders.
Until then, conservation in Wyoming will be voluntary, generally meaning that if an irrigator or other user forgoes their water right, they will need to be paid. In previous trial conservation programs, that has cost $500 an acre foot.
But a compact call by Lower Basin states would lead to curtailment โ a mandatory cutting off of Upper Basin water use starting with the most recent, or junior, rightsโ holders. Long-established ranches and irrigators hold senior rights while Wyoming municipalities and industries in the Green River Basin are likely among the first to be curtailed.
The proposed dam would be 264 feet high, 700 feet long and made out of concrete. (Major King for WyoFile)
Under the โLaw of the River,โ Wyoming has rights โ on paper โ to 14% of the Upper Basinโs 7.5 million acre-feet annually. Thatโs about 1 million acre-feet. But the state engineer estimated in 2010 that Wyomingโs rights amount to 847,000 acre-feet a year, according to the stateโs 2010 plan for the basin. Wyoming uses 680,076 acre-feet and has rights to another 166,924, the latest plan states.
That makes the 100,000 or so Wyomingites who rely on or use Green River water relatively water rich compared to the 40 million down-streamers who rely on the river for some or all of their agricultural and municipal needs. In essence, 100,000 Wyomingites have rights to almost 1 million acre-feet while 39.9 million down-streamers divvy up 7.5 million acre-feet.
The implications go beyond the scarcity of your garden-variety salad.
โIf there are big reductions in water supplies to those [Lower Basin] areas, there really will be impacts on our food supply nationally, not to mention other impacts,โ Porter said.
Phoenix reclaims wastewater through a multi-step filtration process – settling, aeration, disinfection – turning it into clean water for parks, cooling, and natural restoration.
Recycling water
While the prospect of southwestern metropolises crashing headlong into ugly sewerage problems caused by the crisis would seem to loom, donโt put all your money into wag-bags and porta potties yet. The municipalities are figuring out how to cope.
โThose cities are making massive investments in advanced water purification to treat reclaimed water to potable to reduce reliance on annual deliveries of Colorado River water,โ Porter said. โThat access to other water supplies or other water management strategies isnโt really available to agricultural water users or, to a great extent, the tribes who are significant rights holders to Colorado River water.
โWe may see impacts to cities really smoothed out and not be very disruptive,โ she said. โIf we do have disruptive impacts, they will probably fall on rural areas and tribal communities in the Lower Basin.โ
