Fun beaver/fish interaction: When I approached this pond, I startled brown trout preparing to spawn below it (beavs filter sediment & keep downstream substrate clean). The fish dashed to the dam & hid in its base. Beavers created perfect spawning grounds: pristine gravel adjacent to dense cover! ๐คฏ๐ฆซ๐
The October rains that changed this water year in the San Luis Valley came at a particularly critical time.
In September the closely-watched unconfined aquifer hit its lowest level ever recorded since monitoring of the troubled aquifer began in January 2002, according to the Davis Engineering report given at Tuesdayโs quarterly meeting of the Rio Grande Water Conservation District.
Knowing that, now imagine the conversations that would be happening in the Valleyโs farming and ranching community had there been diminished or no October rains. The year was shaping up to be among the worst for flows on the Upper Rio Grande and readings on the unconfined aquifer reinforced it.
Then October delivered heavy rains across the southwest, which resulted in historic fall seasonal flows on the San Juan and into the Rio Grande and Conejos River systems. The Rio Grande grew by 80,000 acre-feet and the Conejos River by 20,000 acre-feet as a result of the rains, said Craig Cotten, division engineer for the Colorado Division of Water Resources.
Colorado is now estimating a total annual flow of 470,000 acre-feet on the Upper Rio Grande, up from its earlier estimates for the year at 390,000 acre-feet. Still, the irrigation year on the Rio Grande will likely end on Nov. 1 as scheduled, said Cotten.
โThatโs a big amount of water in just a short amount of time,โ he said in noting the latest accounting for Rio Grande Compact purposes.
2026 budget hearing set
The Rio Grande Water Conservation District set a 2026 budget work session for Nov. 24; then a public hearing to adopt next yearโs budget on Dec. 11. The water conservation agency is proposing a year-over-year increase to its mill levy. It is proposing a 1.75 mill levy property tax, up from 1.6 mills in 2025.
Rio Grande and Pecos River basins. Map credit: By Kmusser – Own work, Elevation data from SRTM, drainage basin from GTOPO [1], U.S. stream from the National Atlas [2], all other features from Vector Map., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=11218868
A core element of Denver Waterโs mission is ensuring the large, complex system that collects, cleans and delivers drinking water for 1.5 million people is prepared to meet future challenges.
And with more than 100 years of operations under its belt, Coloradoโs largest water provider, which serves about 25% of Coloradoโs population, is in the biggest period of capital investment in its history. Denver Water expects to invest about $1.7 billion into the system during the next 10 years.
โThe work we do provides the critical water supply that the community we serve needs to thrive and grow,โ said Denver Water CEO/Manager Alan Salazar.
โContinuing to maintain and invest in the system that supports our water supply will ensure that we โ Denver Water as well as our customers โ are ready for what lies ahead, from a warming climate to the potential for new regulations, while keeping rates as low as good service will allow,โ Salazar said.
Since 2022, Denver Water has replaced an average of 97,000 feet of water mains per year. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Responsibility to maintain and protect the stateโs largest water system, along with a desire to encourage water conservation, keep essential indoor water use affordable and ensure the utility is financially stable, were incorporated into the Oct. 22 decision by Denverโs Board of Water Commissioners to approve new water rates for 2026.
Denver Water is protecting and preparing the complex system and its customers for the future in many ways, including:
Theย Lead Reduction Program, which started in 2020, is protecting customers from the risk of lead in their drinking water and to date hasย replaced more than 35,000 old, customer-owned lead service linesย at no direct cost to customers.
The newย Northwater Treatment Plant, which began operations in 2024, can clean up to 75 million gallons of water per day and can be expanded when needed to 150 million gallons per day.
Theย Gross Reservoir Expansion Project, which began construction in 2022, is designed to nearly triple the reservoirโs storage capacity.
Theย Landscape Transformation Program, which helps customers remodel landscapes dominated by water-intensive Kentucky bluegrass into water-wise, climate-resilient ColoradoScapes.
And ongoing work to replace aging water mains, upgrade infrastructure on the utilityโs southern collection and treatment system, and reach aย net-zero carbon emissionsย goal by 2030.
Overall, Denver Water expects to invest $1.7 billion over the next 10 years in projects that will maintain, repair, protect and upgrade the system, and make it more resilient and flexible in the future.
In addition to rates paid by customers, funding for Denver Waterโs infrastructure projects, day-to-day operations and emergency expenses like water main breaks comes from bond sales, cash reserves, hydropower sales, grants, federal funding and fees paid when new homes and buildings are connected to the system.
The utility does not receive tax dollars or make a profit. It reinvests money from customer water bills and fees to maintain and upgrade the water system.
And the utility is committed to delivering a safe, clean and affordable water supply to its customers while managing the impacts of the larger economy, from inflation to supply chain issues.
How the 2026 water rates will affect individual customer bills will vary depending on where the customer lives (either in Denver or in one of the utilityโs suburban distributor districts) and how much water they use.
And major credit rating agencies recently confirmed Denver Waterโs triple-A credit rating, the highest possible, citing the utilityโs track record of strong financial management.
Monthly bills for single-family residential customers are comprised of two factors: a fixed charge, which helps ensure Denver Water has a more stable revenue stream to continue the necessary water system upgrades to ensure reliable water service, and a volume rate for the amount of water used.
Combining both of those factors, a typical single-family residential customer who uses 104,000 gallons of water annually will see their monthly bill increase by an average of $2.45 to $3.30 over the course of the year, depending on where the customer lives (in Denver or in one of the utilityโs suburban distributor districts) and the type of service the customerโs suburban distributor district receives from Denver Water.
(See the infographic below for information about Denver Waterโs suburban distributor districts, types of service and rates.)
The monthly bill example above includes an increase to the fixed monthly charge, which is tied to the size of the meter. For most single-family residential customers with a 3/4-inch meter, the fixed charge will increase by $1.85 in 2026, to $20.91 per month.
The more you use, the more you pay
After the fixed monthly charge, Denver Waterโs rate structure for residential single-family customers has three tiers based on the amount of water used. The tiers are designed to keep essential indoor water use affordable while encouraging water conservation outdoors. (See additional details about the 2026 rates for the three tiers in the infographic below.)
The first tierย is charged at the lowest rate and covers essential indoor water use for bathing, cooking and flushing toilets. Each customer has their individual first tier determined by the average of their monthly water use as listed on bills that arrive in January, February and March โ when there is very little or no outdoor watering.
The second tierย is for water consumption, typically used for outdoor watering, that is above the customerโs first tier and up to 15,000 gallons of water per month. Water use in this tier is considered to be an efficient use of water outdoors.
The third tierย is for water use of more than 15,000 gallons per month. It is priced at the highest level to signal potentially excessive water use and encourage conservation efforts by larger-lot customers.
Bills in the summer months can be higher if customers use water to irrigate their outdoor landscapes.
Need help?
Denver Water offers one-time payment assistance to customers who may qualify. The utilityโs Customer Care representatives also can help customers navigate payment options and unique circumstances. Customers can reach them via denverwater.org/ContactForm or by calling 303-893-2444.
What customers can do to save water, money
Denver Water encourages all customers to conserve water where they can indoors and out.
Finding and plugging leaks inside the home can be done year-round, and the utility offers rebates for qualified water-saving toilets and sprinkler equipment.
To help customers remodel their lawns to create a more vibrant, diverse ColoradoScape, Denver Water in 2026 will again offer a limited number of customer discounts on Resource Centralโs popular turf removal service and its water-wise Garden In A Box plant-by-number kits. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Outside, Denver Water encourages customers to conserve water by remodeling unused areas of water-intensive Kentucky bluegrass into more diverse, water-wise ColoradoScapes that fit naturally into our dry climate and are interesting to look at through all seasons. These drought-resistant and climate-resilient ColoradoScapes include tree canopies and plants that help maintain vibrant urban landscapes and benefit our communities, wildlife and the environment.
Using less water also means more water can be kept in the mountain reservoirs, rivers and streams that fish live in and Coloradans enjoy. It also can lower monthly water bills, saving money.
Note 1:ย An individual customerโs monthly water bill will vary depending on where they live in Denver Waterโs service area (in Denver or in one of the utility’sย suburban distributor districts), the types of service the suburban distributor district receives from Denver Water, and how much water the customer uses.
Note 2:ย The difference in volume rates (in the infographic above) for Denver Water customers who live inside Denver compared to those who live in the suburbs is due to the Denver City Charter (seeย Operating Rules), which allows permanent leases of water toย suburban water districtsย based on two conditions: 1) there always would be an adequate supply for the citizens of Denver, and 2) suburban customers pay the full cost of service, plus an additional amount.
West Plains Drought Monitor map October 21, 2025.High Plains Drought Monitor map October 21, 2025.Colorado Plains Drought Monitor map October 21, 2025.
Click on a thumbnail graphic to view a gallery of drought data from the US Drought Monitor website. Here’s an excerpt:
This Week’s Drought Summary
Recently, precipitation has been spatially variable across the Contiguous U.S. (โLower-48โ). Over the past 30 days, heavy precipitation (4 to locally over 8 inches) fell on parts of central and southern New England, the interior Northeast (especially eastern New York state), the Ohio Valley (particularly northern Kentucky and adjacent areas), eastern South Carolina, eastern Florida, parts of the Tennessee and adjacent Mississippi Valleys, isolated sites in the central Plains, the higher elevations in the Rockies, central Arizona and other scattered locations across the Southwest, parts of the Great Basin, portions of California (where such amounts are unusual this early in the wet season), and the Pacific Northwest (where these amounts are not unusual).
In stark contrast, an inch or less of precipitation has been noted in the desert Southwest and lower elevations across the interior West, most of the central and southern Plains, the northern Great Plains, the northwestern Great Lakes, portions or northern and western Florida, and some interior sections of the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic region.
Given the regional variability, there were a lot of changes in the Drought Monitor this week, with large parts of the West, much of the Ohio and middle Mississippi Valleys, and scattered locations across northern Mississippi, the Eastern Great Lakes, and the Northeast. At the same time, conditions have deteriorated across much of the southern and south-central Plains, the South Atlantic region from interior Georgia through eastern Virginia, southern parts of the Lower Mississippi Valley, and scattered areas across the rest of the Southeast, the Mid-Atlantic region, the Northeast, the Upper Mississippi Valley, and the northern Plains.
In sum, the array of improvements and deterioration incorporated into this weekโs Drought Monitor resulted in slight declines in overall coverage of the various drought severity levels across the Lower-48. Abnormally dry or worse conditions cover 72 percent of the country, down from 74 percent last week. About 21 percent of the country is experiencing Severe Drought or worse (D2-D4), down slightly from 23 percent last week. For the 50 states plus Puerto Rico in total, coverage of abnormally dry or worse conditions fell from 62 to just under 60.5 percent…
A wide range of precipitation totals were observed last week. Generally, 1.5 to 3.0 inches hit the northern and western Dakotas, much of central and eastern Wyoming, and scattered locations in northwestern Wyoming. An inch or a little more fell on many locations in a swath from central Nebraska into southeastern South Dakota, but other locations reported several tenths of an inch of precipitation at best, with most areas from southwestern Wyoming through western Nebraska and from eastern Nebraska through Kansas reporting little or none. This pattern resulted in less change here than in most other regions. Areas of deterioration were introduced in parts of the east-central and southeastern High Plains Region while improvement resulted from heavier precipitation farther west. The most widespread areas of improvement covered southwestern Colorado and western Wyoming. Coverage of dryness and drought is considerably lower in this region than in others, with the total area entrenched in some degree of dryness or drought (D0-D4) dropping slightly to a bit over 36 percent this week. The extent of Extreme Drought (D3) was almost cut in half, from 3.3 percent down to 1.7 percent. There is no D4 in the Region, but D3 remains across much of southwestern Wyoming and part of central Colorado. The proportion of the Great Plains States in this Region experiencing some degree of dryness or drought (D0-D4) is relatively low compared to much of the Lower-48; specifically, 3 percent of North Dakota, 32 percent of South Dakota, 35 percent of Nebraska, and 28 percent of Kansas…
Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending October 21, 2025.
Some unusually heavy early-season rain and snow has affected portions of the West, including areas of central and southern California where October so far has been wetter than most such months on record. Large portions of central and upper southern California, the Great Basin, and the western and eastern tiers of Utah saw improvement on this weekโs Drought Monitor, along with patches of central and eastern Arizona, southwestern Oregon, central and eastern Washington, and parts of eastern, southern, and western Montana. Only a portion of north-central Montana saw any deterioration. The total area covered by any dryness (D0-D4) declined from 80 to a bit over 74 percent this week while the coverage of the more intense drought categories (D2-D4) dropped from 38.5 percent to just over one-third of the Region. D3-D4 was still entrenched over a decent proportion of the Region, but declined from almost 9 percent last week to about 6.5 percent this week. The only remaining area of the most intense category (D4) is in north-central Idaho…
Moderate to heavy rain resulted in several areas of improvement in Tennessee, central and northern Mississippi, northeastern Louisiana, and eastern Oklahoma. Farther south and west, subnormal precipitation continued for another week, resulting in numerous areas of deterioration from central and southern Louisiana westward across Texas and central through western Oklahoma. The proportion of the Region experiencing some degree of dryness or drought (D0+) increased slightly this week, from 79 percent to about 80.5 percent. There was a bigger jump in areas covered by some degree of drought (37 percent, up from a bit over 32 percent). The most intense drought (D3 with some isolated patches of D4) cover parts of the panhandle of western Texas and a sizeable part of south-central Texas. The heaviest rains this week (2 to 4 inches) were observed in a broken pattern from northwestern Louisiana through northern Mississippi. In contrast, southern sections of the Lower Mississippi Valley and the vast majority of Texas and Oklahoma received a few tenths of an inch at best, with most sites reporting no measurable precipitation…
Looking Ahead
Over the next 5 to 7 days, two general areas are expected to receive heavy precipitation: The Pacific Northwest, and a swath from the southern Great Plains through the Lower Mississippi and Lower Ohio Valleys. Windward areas and higher elevations are expecting 5 to locally over 10 inches of precipitation, with 2 or more inches anticipated for other areas from the Cascades to the Pacific Coast. Meanwhile, 3 to 5 inches are expected from the Red River (South) Valley into eastern Texas and parts of the Lower Mississippi Valley. Elsewhere, totals exceeding 1.5 inches are forecast in the higher elevations of northern and central Idaho and adjacent areas. Moderate amounts (0.5 to locally over 1.5 inches) are expected to fall on the Ohio Valley, the Middle and Upper Mississippi Valley, and remaining locations in the southern half of the Plains outside Deep South Texas. Look for a few tenths to around an inch of precipitation in the northern Sierra Nevada, plus portions of the northern Intermountain West and Rockies. Elsewhere, light amounts at best are anticipated in most of New England, parts of the Mid-Atlantic region, the South Atlantic coastal plain, much of Peninsular Florida, Deep South Texas, most lower elevations across the interior West including the Southwest into central California, plus most of the Great Basin. Daily highs are forecast to average 4 to 8 deg. F below normal from central California through the Pacific Northwest and across the northern Intermountain West. Similar anomalies should affect the Atlantic Seaboard and Piedmont from northern Georgia through southern New England. Meanwhile, unusually warm weather will likely continue across the northern Plains, with daily highs averaging 5 to 10 deg. F above normal from northern Minnesota through the Dakotas and northern Great Lakes into northeastern New York. Also, highs averaging 4 to 8 deg. F above normal are expected from the Southwest through western and southern Texas. Low temperatures should average warmer with respect to normal across most of the Lower-48, especially over the Plains, Mississippi Valley, the Southwest, and the Great Basin. Low temperatures could average 6 to 13 deg. F above normal in the northeastern Great Plains and adjacent areas. The only broad area expecting below-normal lows (by 2 to 5 deg. F on average) stretches from Virginia northward through much of New York.
The Climate Prediction Centerโs 6-10 day outlook valid for October 29 โ November 1 favors heavier than normal precipitation continuing across the Pacific Northwest, where odds for significantly above-normal precipitation range from 50 to 70 percent. Wet weather is slightly favored across most of the Rockies and Plains as well as parts of central and northern California, northwestern Nevada, and the Pacific Northwest. Wetter than normal conditions are nominally favored across Hawaii. Abnormally dry weather is expected from central and western Texas through central and southern sections of the High Plains and Rockies. Odds for subnormal amounts exceed 50 percent from eastern Arizona through parts of the Texas Big Bend. Meanwhile, warm weather is favored from California, the Southwest, and the Great Basin through parts of the northern Rockies, the High Plains, the northern Great Plains, the Great Lakes, and northern New England. There is a better than 60 percent chance for warmth from southern California into western New Mexico. Cool weather is forecast across the South Atlantic region from Maryland through parts of Florida along with the central and southern Appalachians and the adjacent central Gulf Coast. The Hawaii forecast favors warmth, with chances exceeding 50 percent across the western half of the island chain.
US Drought Monitor one week change map ending October 21, 2025.
A detail of a map produced by Water Horse Resources, and published by the state of Utah, showing two pipelines from the Green River, one above Flaming Gorge Reservoir and one below, plus a connecting pipeline between the two. The map is on a Utah state website with a note saying it was โleft at hearingโ on Nov. 11, 2018.
The Utah Supreme Court ruled on a controversial pipeline project in Eastern Utah last Friday. In January 2018, Water Horse Resources, LLC proposed a pipeline project that would send 55,000 acre-feet of water every year from the Green River to the state of Colorado. However, on Nov. 7, 2020, the Utah State Engineer rejected the application…The proposal sought to pipe water to be used for โbeneficial use in Colorado.โ However, a district court found Water Horse failed to establish evidence that the water can be put to beneficial use in Colorado. The pipeline would extend through Wyoming before dropping into an undecided location in Colorado.
Proposed pipeline by Water Horse would bring water from Utah to Colorado. (Courtesy//Utah Supreme Court)
Colorado officials declined to sign onto the project citing the lack of clear authority to administer the diversion of water into the state. Water Horse appealed the district courtโs decision, leading to a years-long legal battle. On Friday, Oct. 17, 2025, the Utah Supreme Court reaffirmed the initial decision of the state engineer to reject the project…The Supreme Court ruling is not the end for the project. According to the courtโs opinion, a renewed application could be submitted and potentially approved by the state engineer.
Until the passage of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) in 1980, miners across the American West extracted gold, silver, and other valuable โhardrockโ mineralsโand then simply walked away. Today, tens of thousands of these abandoned hardrock mines continue to leak acidic, metal-laden water into pristine streams and wetlands. Federal agencies estimate that over a hundred thousand miles of streams are impaired by mining waste. Nearly half of Western headwater streams are likely contaminated by legacy operations. Despite billions already spent on cleanup at the most hazardous sites, the total cleanup costs remaining may exceed fifty billion dollars.
So how did we end up here? In short, the General Mining Law of 1872 created a lack of accountability for historic mine operators to remediate their operations, but CERCLA and the Clean Water Act (CWA) arguably add an excess of accountability for third parties trying to clean up abandoned mines today.
The Animas River running orange through Durango after the Gold King Mine spill August 2015. Photo credit: Jonathan P. Thompson/The Land Desk
The first legislation to address this problem was introduced in 1999. Many iterations followed and failed, even in the wake of shocking images and costly litigation due to the Gold King Mine spill that dyed the Animas River a vibrant orange in 2015. Finally, in December, 2024, Congress passed the Good Samaritan Remediation of Abandoned Hardrock Mines Act of 2024 (GSA).
The GSA is a cautious, bipartisan attempt to empower volunteers to clean up this toxic legacy. The law creates a short pilot program and releases certain โGood Samaritansโ from liability under CERCLA and the CWA, which has long deterred cleanup by groups like state agencies and NGOs. EPA has oversight of the program and the authority to issue permits to Good Samaritans for the proposed cleanup work.
Despite the promise of this new legislation, critical questions remain unanswered about the GSA and how it will work. Only time will tell whether EPA designs and implements an effective permitting program that ensures Good Samaritans complete remediation work safely and effectively. EPA now has the opportunity as the agency that oversees this program to unlock the promise of the GSA.
The GSA left some significant gaps unanswered in how the pilot program will be designed and directed EPA to issue either regulations or guidance to fill in those gaps. EPA missed the statutory deadline to start the rulemaking process (July, 2025) and is now working to issue guidance on how the program will move forward. EPA must provide a 30-day public comment period before finalizing the guidance document according to the GSA. With EPAโs hopes of getting multiple projects approved and shovels in the ground in 2026, the forthcoming guidance is expected to be released soon. While we wait, itโs worth both looking back at what led to the GSA and looking ahead to questions remaining about the implementation of the pilot program.
A Century of Mining the West Without Accountability
The story begins with the General Mining Law of 1872, a relic of the American frontier era that still governs hardrock mining on federal public lands. The law allows citizens and even foreign-based corporations to claim mineral rights and extract valuable ores without paying any federal royalty. Unlike coal, oil, or gasโwhich fund reclamation through production feesโhardrock mining remains royalty-free.
As mining industrialized during the 20th century, large corporations replaced prospectors. Until 1980, mines were often abandoned without consequences or cleanup once they became unprofitable. The result: an estimated half-million abandoned mine features will continually leach pollution into American watersheds for centuries.
CERLCA Liability Holds Back Many Abandoned Mine Cleanups
Congress sought to address toxic sites throughย CERCLA, also known as the Superfund law, which makes owners and operators strictly liable for hazardous releases. In theory, that ensures accountability. In practice, it creates a paradox: if no polluter can be found at an abandoned site, anyone who tries to clean up the mess may be held responsible for all past, present, and future pollution.
The Clean Water Actโs Double-Edged Sword
Even state agencies, tribes, or nonprofits that treat contaminated water risk being deemed โoperatorsโ of a hazardous facility. That fear of liabilityโcombined with enormous costsโhas frozen many potential Good Samaritans in place. Federal efforts to ease this fear have offered little more than reassurance letters without real protection.
The Clean Water Act compounds the problem. Anyone who discharges pollution into a surface water via any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance must hold a point source discharge permit. By requiring these permits and providing for direct citizen enforcement in the form of citizen suits, the CWA has led to significant improvements in water quality across the country. That said, courts have ruled that drainage pipes or diversion channels used to manage runoff from abandoned mines may also qualify as point sources. As a result, Good Samaritans who exercise control over historic point sources, like mine tunnels, could face penalties and other liabilities for unpermitted discharges, even when they improve overall conditions.
The 2024 Good Samaritan Act Steps onto the Scene
After decades of failed attempts, the Good Samaritan Remediation of Abandoned Hardrock Mines Act was signed into law in December, 2024. The GSA authorizes EPA to create a pilot program, issuing up to fifteen permits for low-risk cleanup projects over seven years. Most importantly, permit holders receive protection from Superfund and Clean Water Act liability for their permitted activities. This legal shield removes one of the greatest barriers to cleanup efforts.
Applicants can seek either a Good Samaritan permit to begin active remediation or an investigative sampling permit to scope out a site for potential conversion to a Good Samaritan permit down the road.
In either case, applicants must show:
they had no role in causing, and have never exercised control over, the pollution in their application,
they possess the necessary expertise and adequate funding for all contingencies within their control, and
they are targeting low-risk sites, which are generally understood to be those that require passive treatment methods like moving piles of mine waste away from streams or snowmelt or diverting water polluted with heavy metals below mine tailings toward wetlands that may settle and naturally improve water quality over time
Under the unique provisions of the GSA, each qualifying permit must go through a modified and streamlined National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review process. EPA or another lead agency must analyze the proposed permit pursuant to an Environmental Assessment (EA). If the lead agency cannot issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) after preparing an EA, the permit cannot be issued. The GSA therefore precludes issuance of a permit where the permitted activities may have a significant impact on the environment.
The pilot program only allows forย up toย fifteenย low riskย projects that must be approved by EPA over the next seven years. Defining which remediations are sufficiently low-risk becomes critical in determining what the pilot program canย proveย aboutย theย Goodย Samaritanย modelย for abandoned mine cleanup. To some extent, โlow riskโ is simply equivalent to a FONSI. But the GSA further defines the low-risk remediation under these pilot permits as “anyย actionย toย remove,ย treat,ย orย containย historicย mineย residueย toย prevent, minimize, or reduce (i) the release or threat of release of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant that would harm human health or the environment; or (ii)ย aย migrationย orย dischargeย ofย aย hazardousย substance,ย pollutant,ย orย contaminant that would harm human health or the environment.”
This excludes โany action that requires plugging, opening, or otherwise altering the portal or adit of the abandoned hardrock mine siteโฆโ, such as what led to the Gold King mine disaster. Many active treatment methods are also excluded from the pilot program, therefore, because they often involve opening or plugging adits or other openings to pump out water and treat it in a water treatment plant, either on or off-site. As a result, the Good Sam Actโs low-risk pilot projects focus on passive treatment of the hazardous mine waste or the toxic discharge coming off that waste, such as a diversion of contaminated water into a settlement pond.
The GSA requires that permitted actions partiallyย orย completelyย remediateย theย historic mine residue at a site. The Administrator of EPA has the discretion to determine whether the permit makes โmeasurable progressโ. Every activity that the Good Samaritan and involved permitted parties take must be designedย to โimprove or enhance water quality or site-specific soil or sediment quality relevant to the historic mine residue addressed by the remediation plan, including making measurable progress toward achieving applicable water quality standards,โ or otherwise protect human health and the environment by preventing the threat of discharge to water, sediment, or soil.ย The proposedย remediation need not achieve the stringentย numeric standardsย requiredย byย CERCLAย orย theย CWA.
Furthermore, it can be challenging to determine the discrete difference between the baseline conditions downstream of an acid mine drainage prior to and after a Good Samaritanย remediationย isย completed.ย Notย onlyย doย backgroundย conditionsย confuseย the picture, but other sources of pollution near the selected project may also make measuring water quality difficult. This may mean that the discretion left to the EPA Administrator to determine โmeasurable progressโ becomes generously applied.
Finally, once EPA grants a permit, the Good Samaritan must follow the terms, conditions, and limitations of the permit. If the Good Samaritanโs work degrades the environment from the baseline conditions, leading to โmeasurably worseโ conditions, EPA must notify and require that the Good Samaritantake โreasonable measuresโ to correct the surface water quality or other environmental conditions to the baseline. If these efforts do not result in a โmeasurably adverse impactโ, EPA cannot consider this a permit violation or noncompliance. However, if Good Samaritans do not take reasonable measures or if their noncompliance causes a measurable adverse impact, the Good Samaritan must notify all potential impacted parties. If severe enough, EPA has discretion to revoke CERCLA and CWA liability protections.
Recently, EPA shared the following draft flowchart for the permitting process:
Disclaimer: This is being provided as information only and does not impose legally binding requirements on EPA, States, or the public. This cannot be relied upon to create any rights enforceable by any party in litigation with the United States. Any decisions regarding a particular permit will be made based upon the statute and the discretion granted by the statute, including whether or not to grant or deny a permit.
Challenges Facing the Pilot Program Implementation
Despite its promise, the pilot programโs scope is limited. With only fifteen Good Samaritan permits eligible nationwide and no dedicated funding, the law depends on states, tribes, and nonprofits to provide their own resources. The only guidance issued so far by EPA detailed the financial assurance requirements that would-be Good Samaritans must provide to EPA to receive a permit. Definitions provided in this financial assurance guidance raised concerns for mining trade organizations and nonprofits alike with EPAโs proposed interpretations of key terms including โlow riskโ and โlong-term monitoringโ. Crucial terms like these, along with terms impacting enforcement when a permitted remediation action goes awry, like โbaseline conditionsโ, โmeasurably worseโ, and โreasonable measuresโ to restore baseline conditions, are vague in the GSA. How EPA ultimately clarifies terms like these will play a large role in the success of the GSA in its ultimate goal: to prove that Good Samaritans can effectively and safely clean up abandoned hardrock mine sites. The soon-to-be-released guidance document will therefore be a critical moment in the history of this new program.
Funding the Future
Funding remains the greatest barrier to large-scale remediation efforts. Coal mine cleanups are funded through fees on current production under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act. Current hardrock mining, however, still pays no federal royalty. A modernized system could pair Good Samaritan permitting with industry-funded reclamation fees, ensuring that those profiting from todayโs mining help repair the past. Without this reform, the burden will remain on underfunded agencies and nonprofits. However, this General Mining Law reform remains politically unlikely. In the meantime, the GSA creates a Good Samaritan Mine Remediation Fund but does not dedicate any new appropriations to that fund. Grants under Section 319 of the CWA (Nonpoint Source Pollution) and Section 104(k) of CERCLA (Brownfields Revitalization) programs may help, but funding opportunities here are limited.
The GSA includes provisions that allow Good Samaritans to reprocess mine waste while completing Good Samaritan permit cleanup work. These provisions include a key restriction: revenue generated from reprocessing must be dedicated either to the same cleanup project or to the GSA-created fund for future cleanups. A January 20, 2025 executive order to focus on domestic production of critical minerals led to a related Interior secretarial order on July 17, 2025, for federal land management agencies to organize opportunities and data regarding reprocessing mine waste for critical minerals on federal lands. Shortly after these federal policy directives, an August 15, 2025, article in Science suggested that domestic reprocessing of mining by-products like abandoned mine waste has the potential to meet nearly all the domestic demand for critical minerals. Legal and technical hurdles might prevent much reprocessing from occurring within the seven-year pilot program. Reprocessing projections aside, the political appetite for dedicated funding for the future may still grow if the GSA pilot projects successfully prove the Good Samaritan concept using a funding approach reliant on generosity and creativity.
Despite Significant Liability Protections, Good Samaritans Face Uncertainties
While the new law should help to address significant barriers to the cleanup of abandoned mines by Good Samaritans, uncertainties remain. The GSA provides exceptions to certain requirements under the Clean Water Act (including compliance with section 301, 302, 306, 402, and 404). The GSA also provides exceptions to Section 121 of CERCLA, which requires that Superfund cleanups must also meet a comprehensive collection of all relevant and appropriate standards, requirements, criteria, or limitations (ARARs).
In States or in Tribal lands that have been authorized to administer their own point source (section 402) or dredge and fill (section 404) programs under the CWA, the exceptions to obtaining authorizations, licenses, and permits instead applies to those State or Tribal programs. In that case, Good Samaritans are also excepted from applicable State and Tribal requirements, along with all ARARs under Section 121 of CERCLA.
However, Section 121(e)(1) of CERCLA states that remedial actions conducted entirely onsite do not need to obtain any Federal, State, or local permits. Most GSA pilot projects will likely occur entirely onsite, so it is possible that Good Samaritans might still need to comply with local authorizations or licenses, such as land use plans requirements. While it appears that GSA permitted activities are excepted from following relevant and applicable Federal, State, and Tribal environmental and land use processes, it is a bit unclear whether they are also excepted from local decision making.
The liability protections in the GSA are also limited by the terms of the statute. Good Samaritans may still be liable under the CWA and CERCLA if their actions make conditions at the site โmeasurably worseโ as compared to the baseline. In addition, the GSA does not address potential common law liability that might result from unintended accidents. For example, an agricultural water appropriator downstream could sue the Good Samaritan for damages associated with a spike in water acidity due to permitted activities, such as moving a waste rock pile to a safer, permanent location on site.
Finally, the GSA does not clearly address how potential disputes about proposed permits may be reviewed by the federal courts. However, the unique provisions of the GSA, which prohibit issuance of a permit if EPA cannot issue a FONSI, potentially provide an avenue to challenge proposed projects where there is disagreement over the potential benefits and risks of the cleanup activities.
Measuring and Reporting Success of the Pilot Program
The Good Samaritan Act authorizes EPA to issue up to fifteen permits for low-risk abandoned mine cleanups, shielding participants from Superfund and Clean Water Act liability. Applicants must prove prior non-involvement, capability, and target on low-risk sites. Each permit undergoes a streamlined NEPA Environmental Assessment requiring a FONSI. To be successful, EPA and potential Good Samaritans will need to efficiently follow the permit requirements found in the guidance, identify suitable projects, and secure funding. The GSA requires baseline monitoring and post-cleanup reporting for each permitted action but does not require a structured process of learning and adjustment over the course of the pilot program. Without this structured, adaptive approach, it may be difficult for Good Samaritan proponents to collect valuable data and show measurable progress over the next seven years that would justify expanding the Good Samaritan approach to Congress. EPAโs forthcoming guidance offers an opportunity to fix that by publicly adopting a targeted and tiered approach in addition to the obligatory permitting requirements.
The EPAโs David Hockey, who leads the GSA effort from the EPAโs Office of Mountains, Deserts, and Plains based in Denver, has suggested taking just such a flexible, adaptive approach in public meetings discussing the GSA. EPA, working in coordination with partners that led the bill through Congress last year, like Trout Unlimited, intends to approve GSA permits in three tranches. EPA currently estimates that all fifteen projects will be approved and operational by 2028.
The first round will likely approve two or three projects with near-guaranteed success. If all goes according to plan, EPA hopes to have these shovel-ready projects through the GSA permit process, which includes a NEPA review, with the remedial work beginning in 2026. These initial projects will help EPA identify pain points in the process and potentially pivot requirements before issuing a second round of permits. This second tranche will likely occur in different western states and might increase in complexity from the first tranche.
Finally, the third tranche of permits might tackle the more complex projects from a legal and technical standpoint that could still be considered low risk. This may include remediation of sites in Indian Country led by or in cooperation with a Tribal abandoned mine land reclamation program. Other projects suited for the third tranche might include reprocessing of mine waste, tailings, or sludge, which may also require further buy-in to utilize the mining industryโs expertise, facilities, and equipment. These more complex projects will benefit most from building and maintaining local trust and involvement, such as through genuine community dialogue and citizen science partnerships. The third tranche projects should contain such bold choices to fully inform proponents and Congress when they consider expanding the Good Samaritan approach.
EPA appears poised to take a learning-by-doing approach. But the guidance can and should state this by setting public, straightforward, and measurable goals for the pilot program. This is a tremendous opportunity for EPA and everyone who stands to benefit from abandoned mine cleanup. But this is no simple task. Each permit must be flexible enough to address the unique characteristics at each mine site, sparking interest in future legislation so more Good Samaritans can help address the full scale of the abandoned hardrock mine pollution problem. But if EPA abuses its broad discretion under the GSA and moves the goalposts too much during the pilot program, they may reignite criticisms that the Good Samaritan approach undercuts bedrock environmental laws like the Clean Water Act. If projects are not selected carefully, for instance, the EPA could approve a permit that may not be sufficiently โlow riskโ, or that ultimately makes no โmeasurable progressโ to improve or protect the environment. Either case may invite litigation against the EPA under the Administrative Procedure Actโs arbitrary and capricious standard or bolster other claims against Good Samaritans.
While the GSA itself imposes only a report to Congress at the end of the seven-year pilot period, a five-year interim report to Congress could help ensure accountability. If all goes well or more pilot projects are needed, this interim report could also provide support for an extension before the pilot program expires. The guidance issued by EPA should only be the beginning of the lessons learned and acted on during the GSA pilot program.
Seizing the Window of Opportunity
The GSA represents a breakthrough after decades of gridlock. It addresses the key fears of liability that stymied cleanup. Yet its success will depend on how effectively the EPA implements the pilot program and the courage of Good Samaritans who are stepping into some uncertainty. If it fails, Americaโs abandoned mines will continue to leak toxins into its headwaters for generations to come. But if the program succeeds, it could become a model for collaborative environmental restoration. For now, the EPAโs forthcoming guidance could mark the first steps toward success through clear permitting requirements and by setting flexible yet strategic goals for the pilot program.
If you are interested in following the implementation of the Good Samaritan Act, EPA recently announced it will host a webinar on December 2, 2025. They will provide a brief background and history of abandoned mine land cleanups, highlight key aspects of the legislation, discuss the permitting process, and explain overall program goals and timelines. Visit EPAโs GSA website for more information.
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
The reversal of fortunes this water year for San Luis Valley irrigators โ going from one of the deadest rivers on record to a bountiful water year that sees full canals and increased reservoir storage โ has been breathtaking.
The โwater yearโ for Valley farmers technically ends Nov. 1, which means no more water in the fields. Now with the mid-October rains from the southwest and resulting historic fall river flows, the state is talking to farmers about extending the water season a bit into November, which would allow for another week of irrigating and another cut of hay.
โIโm working hard, but Iโm not complaining,โ said Greg Higel, whose Alamosa County cattle ranch and hay operation takes in surface water through the Centennial Ditch. It was private ditch operators like Higel who opened their head gates to begin diverting water off the Rio Grande.
โAll of us who live along the river on the flat have water out in the meadows today,โ said Higel.
That was not the case before Sunday, Oct. 12, when it became evident the Upper Rio Grande would be impacted by La Niรฑaโs first seasonal storm.
Back in April at the start of the irrigation season, State Engineer Jason Ullmann warned Valley irrigators that the 2025 water year looked troubling given the lack of snow in the San Juan Mountains and expectation for another light spring runoff.
By August, the Rio Grande through Alamosa was disappearing before our eyes. Literally. The flow of the Rio Grande was 180 cfs at Del Norte, the Conejos at Mogote was running at 75 cfs, and downstream into New Mexico the Rio Grande had become a dry bed in Albuquerque.
The state is talking to farmers about extending the water season a bit into November, which would allow for another week of irrigating and another cut of hay. Credit: The Citizen
Then came the ocean storms over the Pacific and heavy rains through the southwest, and the rivers that are essential to the Valley and downstream into New Mexico sprang to life. The Upper Rio Grande at Del Norte hit 7,180 cfs, and unheard of flow this late into the water season. The Conejos River at Mogote hit its record high flow for the season, and farmers in the southern end of the Valley, like Higel on the west end, opened ditches to take water in.
โThis helps us in the long run,โ said Lawrence Crowder, president of the Commonwealth Ditch.
The Commonwealth had six ditch riders working the storm and diverting water into fields throughout the week. Now the expectation is the water will freeze in the fields and then thaw in the spring to give irrigators โa little extra head start.โ
Total precipitation (inches) from 9-15 October 2025 with gridded data from the PRISM Climate Group and observations from the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail, and Snow (CoCoRaHS) network.
โItโs not going to dry out much between now and when the snow flies,โ Crowder said.
The October moisture also turned around the calculations of the Colorado Division of Water Resources and its delivery of water to the New Mexico state line under the Rio Grande Compact. The weather event, according to initial estimates by the Colorado Division of Water Resources, added 20,000 to 25,000 acre-feet of water to the Rio Grande system itself, and around 10,000 to 15,000 acre-feet that was diverted into the private ditches like the Commonwealth and Centennial.
โAll of us who live along the river on the flat have water out in the meadows today,โ said rancher Greg Higel. Credit: The Citizen
With all the extra water, Colorado no longer thinks it overdelivered this year and instead likely owes in the neighborhood of 5,000 acre-feet to New Mexico.
At the upcoming Rio Grande Water Conservation District quarterly meeting on Oct. 21, Colorado Division of Water Resources officials will deliver a report that should provide final estimates on the amount of water the great storm of October delivered and the impact it had on the Upper Rio Grande Basin.
Needless to say, the reversal of fortunes on the Upper Rio Grande was dramatic. At least for 2025.
Rio Grande and Pecos River basins. Map credit: By Kmusser – Own work, Elevation data from SRTM, drainage basin from GTOPO [1], U.S. stream from the National Atlas [2], all other features from Vector Map., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=11218868
The flooding that breached the levees of Vallecito and Grimes creeks on Oct. 11 and forced the evacuation of 390 Vallecito homes has been described as โunprecedented.โ Record flow rates fueled by record rains left the little valley awash, with recovery efforts expected to continue for months. The event โ which owed its debut to Tropical Storm Priscilla and, to a lesser extent, Tropical Storm Raymond โ is a striking reminder of the power of Mother Nature. But when compared with another destructive flood that inundated towns, drowned fields of crops and washed out miles of railroad tracks, the Vallecito flood hardly made a splash…
The 1911 Flood occurred 114 years ago on Oct. 5, 1911 on the Animas River. According to the Animas Museum in Durango, โ1911 was a wet year for southwest Colorado with heavy snows in the high country and heavy rains through the summer.โ A gentle rain began Oct. 5, the museumโs summary said. By morning, 2 inches of rain had fallen and the storm showed no sign of letting up. The Animas Museum described the Animas Riverโs waters as โunstoppable.โ
[…]
The river flowed at an estimated rate of 25,000 cubic feet per second, washing out railroad tracks and shutting the stretch of Denver & Rio Grande Western Railwayโs railroad for nine weeks. By comparison, the Animas River reached 4,860 cfs on Tuesday, less than a fifth the amount in 1911. Matt Aleksa, meteorologist for the National Weather Service in Grand Junction, said the 1911 Flood was โway worseโ than the flood that washed through Vallecito last weekend. The only real comparable details, he said, are both events were caused by tropical storm systems that resulted in consecutive days of heavy rainfall. He said 1911 opened with a strong winter and heavy snowpack. In the summertime, runoff combined with a strong monsoon season, and disaster finally struck in October when a tropical storm rolled through. The soils were already saturated, meaning moisture from rain wasnโt absorbed into the ground and instead flowed over it. In 1911, Durango received almost 3.5 inches of rain over 36 hours. Silverton received 4 inches of rain. Gladstone north of Silverton received 8 inches of rain, Aleksa said. Between 2 and 4 inches of rainfall was measured in the Animas River Basin and 4 to 6 inches was measured at higher, mountain elevations. He said the Durango area probably received half the precipitation last weekend as it did during the 1911 Flood.
Track of the October 1911 hurricane, along with rainfall measurements in the southwestern US. From the National Weather Service report โTHE EFFECTS OF EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC TROPICAL CYCLONES
ON THE SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATESโ, https://www.weather.gov/media/wrh/online_publications/TMs/TM-197.pdf . h/t Jeff Lukas for pointing out this report.
There is no way around it: The city of Durango must increase water and sewer rates next year and follow up with annual rate increases going forward, according to city officials. For water rates, the city proposes an average monthly increase of $2.80 for residential accounts and $16.76 for commercial accounts. For sewer rates, the city proposes an average monthly increase of $9.18 for residential accounts and $78.14 for commercial accounts. The city, which has a number of significant water infrastructure projects planned for the next decade โ including a $35 million to $40 million replacement of the pipeline that delivers Durangoโs drinking water โ expects its water fund to be $3 million in the red by the end of 2030, officials said. The sewer fund requires a rate increase just to meet operational expenses, which are projected to exceed revenues next year…
The Public Works Department is recommending 10% and 20% increases to water and sewer rates, respectively, to be followed by annual increases yet to be determined. What residents should expect of annual rate increases will be informed by a rate study outlined in pending water and sewer master plans to be completed in 2027, said Bob Lowry, interim Public Works director…Had the city incrementally raised rates annually โsince Day 1,โ current rates would be significantly higher. If rates arenโt raised soon, larger increases will be necessary later on, and utility customers will feel them all the more in their pocketbooks. Lowry said itโs best practice to review water and sewer rates annually and to adjust them no less frequently than every other year.
Map of the San Juan River, a tributary of the Colorado River, in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah, USA. Made using USGS National Map data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=47456307
Exploring the data commons (I need to update the legend, the black lines are max and min)
Click the link to read the article on the InkStain website (John Fleck):
October 9, 2025
A bunch of odds and ends cluttering my brain, blog posts that are half written in my mind that are in the way:
Quoting Luis Villa on accessing the open data commons
Yes.
See graph above.
I always have had more questions (sometimes ill-posed, sometimes well-thought-through) than my coding abilities can execute. (See also domestic wells below.)
I pay for a subscription to Newspapers.com in order to have access to a large portion of my written work. I view what I have written over the course of my life โ newspapers, books, blogs โ as a mindful and intentional contribution to the information commons. But this aligns poorly with the formal economic and legal structures โ โinstitutionsโ as we might define them for our water resources students, the rules that serve as the foundation for the more common-language definitions of โinstitutionsโ that might apply here, the organizations of publishing โ newspapers and book publishers and Inkstain.
The newspaper paid me well (it wasnโt a lot of money, but I viewed it as a fair transaction) and owned what I produced. I pay now for the privilege of reading it. The books are more complicated. I choose to make Inkstain freely available.
Derrida and Adorno, two philosophers I have been poking at of late, are helping me think about the definitional challenges โ not โthe commonsโ in particular, but what weโre doing when we attach words/concepts to things, the cultural quicksand beneath our linguistic feet.
That Postcard
Point Sublime
โthe nearest thing I have seen to being trueโ
Found this in a stack of old Dad stuff. It is my origin story, my father as a young artist in a moment of profound change. In laying the groundwork for his life, it laid the groundwork for mine.
Domestic Wells
OpenET-reported change in evapotranspiration, 2000-2004 compared to 2020-2024. Green is places water consumptive use from all sources has gone up. Brown is places it has gone down.
Density of domestic wells in greater Albuquerque. Dark green is >150 wells per square kilometer. Brown is no wells at all.
See Luisโs comment above about vibe coding and open data.
I am not sure what to do with this. I canโt unsee it.
Iโm out on the epistemological thin ice here, but as a journalist I spent much of my life working in areas where that ice is thin, itโs where the interesting stuff happens.
Ostrom and the Colorado River
Iโve mostly been grabbing the handrail and trying not to fall off as my Wilburys friends, in what we see as a discourse vacuum, charge ahead with our critique of Colorado River governance:
In a 2011 paper, Elinor Ostrom laid out one of the final versions of her โdesign principles,โ characteristics of successful institutional arrangements for collective action around natural resource systems. We spend a lot of time on this in the class I teach with Bob Berrens each fall for UNM graduate students. It was at the heart of my book Water is For Fighting Over, and it is at the heart of Ribbons of Green, the book Bob and I wrote that UNM Press will be publishing next year.
(Did I mention how much I love teaching?)
There are two design principles in particular that are at the heart of the current Colorado River challenges. Quoting from Ostrom 2011:
How are conflicts over harvesting and maintenance to be resolved?
How will the rules affecting the above be changed over time with changes in the performance of the resource system, the strategies of participants, and external opportunities and constraints?
There is an additional principle from Ostrom that shows up over and over in her work, thatโs embedded in her explicit principles: a need for a shared understanding of the quantification of the resource.
I am thinking through how these ideas relate to the current Colorado River challenges. Those challenges suggest what I had thought was a functional system lacks these three things. I am thinking a lot about what I described in 2015 when I was writing Water is For Fighting Over, versus what I see happening in 2025. What has changed, or what did I miss?
In which I get my first ambulance ride
Burying the lead here (I always hated the artifice of the journalistic jargon-spelling โledeโ), but I had occasion recently to spend a few days in the bubble of the medical-industrial complex. Iโm fine, I think, but the identification of a โnewโ life-changing risk is in actuality the identification of a risk that has probably been there all along. Itโs just that now I know about it.
Which means I can do some stuff to reduce that risk, including magical pharmacology (โIf I crash,โ I told my bike-riding buddy Sunday, โbe sure to tell the EMTโs!โ) and also saying more โnosโ to the stresses of my life of public engagement. My contributions to the commons are not without personal cost, as well as the personal benefits I derive. (Sorry, J.)
It also means that I spend a lot of time thinking about this (new?) risk. This is subtext to all the rest of what I just wrote.
Our post from over the weekend highlighted the first round of heavy rainfall and flooding in southwest Colorado. There was a break in the rain on Sunday, October 12, and then a second round of heavy rain on Monday the 13th associated with moisture from remnant Tropical Storm Raymond. Thatโs right, a one-two punch of tropical moisture from the larger Priscilla and then from Raymond a couple days later. Here are some observations of the total precipitation over the entire event.
Total precipitation (inches) from 9-15 October 2025 with gridded data from the PRISM Climate Group and observations from the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail, and Snow (CoCoRaHS) network.
With soils already saturated and rivers and creeks running high, the Monday rainfall led to even more flooding in La Plata and Archuleta Counties. The San Juan River at Pagosa Springs actually peaked slightly higher on Tuesday morning than it did on Saturday, once again reaching major flood stage.
The high elevations of the San Juan mountains received another 3-4โณ of precipitation on Monday (a bit of it as snow on the higher peaks), with 1-3 additional inches at lower elevations around Pagosa Springs, Bayfield, and Durango. This brought the 7-day total precipitation to a remarkable 10.2 inches at the Upper San Juan SNOTEL station, with over 9โณ at several other sites.
7-day precipitation at southwestern Colorado SNOTEL stations from 9-15 October 2025. From the USDA NRCS interactive map
Volunteer observers from the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail, and Snow network (CoCoRaHS) recorded over 7 inches of rainfall in 7 days north of Bayfield and northwest of Pagosa Springs. These are huge rainfall totals for this part of the state!
CoCoRaHS precipitation observations for the period from 10-16 October 2025 in La Plata and Archuleta Counties. From https://maps.cocorahs.org/
Updating the table from the previous post to show seven-day precipitation accumulations at the Upper San Juan SNOTEL station, we see that the 10.2โณ from the recent storm is surrounded only by huge winter snowstorm cycles. In the years since that station was established in 1978, there arenโt any fall rainstorms that come anywhere close to rivaling it.
Ranking of the top 7-day precipitation totals at the Upper San Juan SNOTEL station since 1978, with overlapping periods removed. Data from ACIS.
The hurricane and flood of October 1911
Looking back farther in history, however, there is one event that surpassed this one in terms of the level of flooding in the southwestern US (including Colorado): the โSonora hurricaneโ of October 1911. This caused the flood of record on many rivers in southern Colorado, including the San Juan at Pagosa Springs (the 17.8 feet shown on the graph at the beginning). Jonathan Thompson of the Land Desk had a great summary a few years ago about that flood along with other historic floods in the region. (h/t John Orr for pointing me to this).
The track of the 1911 hurricane appears to be somewhat similar to what happened with Priscilla this year, with tropical moisture streaming ahead of the decaying circulation. (Animations below are from this year, the map below that is the track of the 1911 hurricane.)
Track of the October 1911 hurricane, along with rainfall measurements in the southwestern US. From the National Weather Service report โTHE EFFECTS OF EASTERN NORTH PACIFIC TROPICAL CYCLONES
ON THE SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATESโ, https://www.weather.gov/media/wrh/online_publications/TMs/TM-197.pdf . h/t Jeff Lukas for pointing out this report.
There are a lot more rainfall observations available now than there were during the 1911 storm (thank you, CoCoRaHS observers and SNOTEL network, among others!), but from the available data, the rainfall totals over 1-2 days in the 1911 storm were greater than those in the 2025 event, but the fact that there were *two* tropical cyclone remnants in 2025 made the total precipitation over 5-7 days much greater. The break in the rainfall on Sunday in between the two waves of heavy rain was certainly important, or the flooding could have been closer to what happened in 1911.
And it turns out there was a particularly controversial rainfall observation in October 1911 โ I was not really aware of this previously, but my predecessor Nolan Doesken was involved in many of the debates surrounding the chart shown here.
Photo of the cooperative observer form from Gladstone, Colorado, October 1911.
This is the observation form from Gladstone, Colorado, north of Silverton, at around 10,500 feet elevation. It shows 8.05โณ on October 5, 1911. Thereโs no question that a lot of rain fell in southwestern Colorado during that storm based on the floods that happened, but if itโs possible for over 8โณ of rain to fall in one day at 10,500 feet, that has major implications for the robustness of infrastructure that is needed. A later study of the flooding near Gladstone by Pruess, Wohl, and Jarrett found that it was not consistent with such large rainfall accumulations (or at least not within 24 hours), and the Gladstone observation is now generally deemed to be unreliable.(Thanks to Jeff Lukas for pointing this paper out.) Even so, Silverton recorded 4.05โณ on October 5, 1911, and flooding on the Animas and San Juan Rivers reached record levels (at least since measurements have been in place)
The good news: improvements in drought conditions
The flooding in southwestern Colorado led to the destruction of multiple homes and to major disruptions around the region. But the flip side is that all the rain will help to ameliorate the lingering drought in the area. Everyone would prefer that the water arrive more steadily rather than in a huge burst like this, but as noted in this Colorado Sun story, small reservoirs like Vallecito saw big boosts in their storage from the storm. On this weekโs US Drought Monitor, there were widespread two-category improvements in southwestern Colorado, going either from D2 (severe drought) to D0 (abnormally dry), or from D1 (moderate drought) to nothing on the map. Two-category improvements in one week are very rare for the Drought Monitor, typically only applied when there are major rain events associated with tropical systems.
Summary of US Drought Monitor changes for the week ending October 14, 2025. Courtesy of Allie Mazurek, Colorado Climate Center.
Both the Animas and Rio Grande Rivers saw huge increases in streamflow, with 7-day average flows near record levels for the fall, and close to the average early-summer peak from snowmelt runoff. On the Rio Grande, only the peak from October 1911 is higher than the current average flow for the period between October and April. [Daily data is missing for the Animas in October 1911, but it surely peaked even much higher than shown on the graph.]
Other than around the San Juan Mountains, this event didnโt end the drought that goes back to last winter (or even longer, depending on how you define it) across western Colorado, but did put a nice dent into the precipitation deficits that had mounted over that period. Now itโs time to look ahead to the snow accumulation season and see what arrives in the usual source of water in western Colorado: the mountain snowpack.
We got pulled in to analyzing this major storm, along with some other activities this week, but we will be finalizing and releasing our recap of Water Year 2025 within the next week or so, so please stay tuned for that! [Subscribeย hereย if you want to get it delivered straight to your inbox. And use the โsubscribeโ box here on the blog if you like these posts and want to get them in your email โ itโs a different mailing list.]
The Lee-Curtis proposal would bring OHV traffic into the wildness and quiet of Cathedral Valley in Capitol Reef National Park. Photo courtesy Stephen Trimble
In her โLast Wordsโ interview that was broadcast after her death, Jane Goodall talked about her calm in the face of โthe dark times we are living in now.โ She devoted her life to battling for conservation but attributed this serenity to the time she spent in the forest with the chimps. All those weeks and months and years of quiet observation.
Such quiet is a rare gift. I havenโt been in Goodallโs Tanzanian rain forest, but recently shared Utahโs Capitol Reef National Park with a 25-year-old cousin visiting from urban America. Once in the canyons he kept pausing to say, โitโs so peaceful, so still.โ He was astonished and renewed by that quiet.
This canyon country stillness is under attack. The assaults come in waves powered by motorized vehicles, engines revving.
First, the Trump administration proposes abandoning the 2023 Bureau of Land Management travel plan for Labyrinth Canyon. This 300,000-acre Utah wildland along the Green River just north of Canyonlands National Park is a gemโa fretwork of slickrock canyons along the river. Labyrinth preserves quiet for rafters, hikers, and bighorn sheep. No death-defying rapids here on this lazy, looping stretch easily paddled by families in canoes.
In a model compromise, the current Labyrinth plan maintains access to more than 800 miles of off-highway-vehicle (OHV) routes, closing only 317 miles to vehicles. In the surrounding Moab region, more than 4,000 miles of routes remain open. OHVs have plenty of room to roam.
But moderation is never enough for Utah politicians determined to motorize every inch of our public lands. They are pushing to reopen 141 miles of closed OHV routes at Labyrinth and hoping for even more. You can comment here before October 24.
In another backtrack on conservation in Utah, the administration has solicited bids for coal leasing on 48,000 acres of BLM land, much of it on and near the boundaries of national parks. The big views from Capitol Reef, Zion, and Bryce Canyon donโt stop at the park boundaries. Visitors, many from other countries, would be horrified by such industrialization of these world-class destinations. Rural Utah depends on these tourists to survive economically.
These are lands that even the conservative second Bush administration deemed unsuitable for mines. As Cory MacNulty, with the National Parks Conservation Association, said of the proposed leasing, โItโs absurd.โ
Now the OHV battalions are threatening to overwhelm Capitol Reef National Park.
Utah Republican Senators Mike Lee and John Curtis introduced a bill on October 5 to open virtually every road in Capitol Reef to off-roaders. They claim that disabled Americans need this fundamental change to park policy, though even the parkโs back roads are currently accessible by moderately high-clearance cars and trucks. Thereโs absolutely no need to permit noisy and destructive OHVs.
The senatorsโ second bill would potentially open other national parks to OHV use. Lee tried to pass nearly identical bills in 2021 and encountered a buzzsaw of resistance from national park advocates.
As retired Capitol Reef superintendent Sue Fritzke said, โOHVs would denigrate the very resources those sites have been set aside to protect, with increased dust and noise and impacts on wildlife, endangered species, and visitors.โ
At each mile farther into remote corners of the park, off-highway vehicles become more problematic. Even though a majority of riders obey the rules, some will go off-road. They just will. Their vehicles are designed for this exact purpose. In Capitol Reefโs considerable backcountryโas in all underfunded national parks and monumentsโ staffing does not allow for constant patrolling to apprehend and ticket wrongdoers.
Capitol Reef is a place to slow down, not speed up. To revel in quiet, not reach for earplugs. To share the healing land with tenderness and restraint.
Lee disrespects national park values with these twin bills, and Curtis, who likes to tout his nature sensitivity on hikes with constituents, should know better. Their misguided proposals should be left to wither in committee and die. Those of us who love the restorative peace of national parks will just keep fighting such regressive bills.
Stephen Trimble: Photo credit: Writers on the Range
In her last interview, Jane Goodall asked us to never give up: โWithout hope, we fall into apathy and do nothing. If people donโt have hope, weโre doomed. Letโs fight to the very end.โ
We will.
Stephen Trimble is a contributor to Writers on the Range, writersontherange.org, an independent nonprofit dedicated to spurring lively conversation about the West. He is a writer and photographer in Utah.
The Gifford Homestead in Capitol Reef National Park. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.
Democrats on budget committees tell EPA and Interior to halt potentialย staff cutsย during the shutdown.
White House budget office says $11 billion inย Army Corps infrastructure projectsย will be paused.
BLM will begin an environmental analysis of a proposed expansion of aย Mojave Desert gold mineย that will need more groundwater to operate.
And lastly, EPA prepares to permit abandoned hardrock mine cleanups under a new Good Samaritan law.
โIf you were a nonprofit or a county with a serious water pollution issue coming out of an old set of mine tailings, you could not work on that problem. The moment you touched it, you accepted total liability for the pollution going downstream. So nobody would ever do anything about all these 140,000 abandoned mines. Almost every one of them having some environmental problem. Almost all of it connected to water.โ โ Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO) speaking with the Western Governorsโ Association podcast about the problem of cleaning up abandoned mines in the western United States.
Last year the Good Samaritan Remediation of Abandoned Hardrock Mines Act was signed into law. It requires the EPA to permit 15 pilot cleanup projects to be completed within seven years. The projects can be located on private, federal, or state land.
David Hockey, acting director of the EPA Office of Mountains, Deserts, and Plains, said the agency will review project applications starting this fall. He hopes to have the first projects under construction next year and all 15 in progress by summer 2028.
By the Numbers
$11 Billion: Army Corps infrastructure projects that will be โpaused,โ Russell Vought, the director of the White House budget office, wrote on X. Vought blamed the government shutdown for the freeze. The targeted projects are mostly in states where Democrats are in power, E&E News reports.
News Briefs
Potential Shutdown Staff Cuts Leading Democrats sent letters to the heads of EPA and Interior asking them to halt potential job cuts at their agencies during the shutdown.
Sen. Jeff Merkeley and Rep. Chellie Pingree are the ranking Democrats on the budget committees that oversee spending by those agencies.
Their concern is over the administrationโs use of โreduction in forceโ during the shutdown to pare the federal workforce closer to President Trumpโs vision of a diminished bureaucracy, even though Congress is supposed to set funding levels.
โThis coordinated, government-wide approach to implementing RIFs during a lapse in appropriations appears designed to circumvent the appropriations process,โ they wrote in their letter to Lee Zeldin, EPA administrator.
Of particular concern, they wrote, are proposed changes and reductions to the EPAโs science assessment and research division.
Similar concerns were raised in the letter to Doug Burgum, the interior secretary.
Studies and Reports
State Revolving Fund Audits The EPA Office of Inspector General reviewed the financial documents for the state revolving fund programs, the main federal vehicle for water infrastructure funding.
The review found that 42 state drinking water programs and 43 clean water programs had an independent financial audit.
Audited financial statements help to identify wasteful and fraudulent spending.
On the Radar
Shutdown Continues Nineteen days and counting, as of this writing.
The expansion would extend the mineโs life by 30 years and would entail construction of a 32-mile pipeline to supply 2,250 acre-feet of groundwater per year.
The mine is part of FAST-41, a federal program to accelerate project permitting and environmental reviews through close interagency coordination. The project dashboardsuggests that permitting for the Castle Mountain expansion will be completed by December 2026.
Public comments are being accepted through November 20. Submit them via the above link.
A virtual public meeting will be held on November 5 to outline the project and collect public input. Register here.
Federal Water Tap is a weekly digest spotting trends in U.S. government water policy. To get more water news, follow Circle of Blue on Twitter and sign up for our newsletter.
Colorado River “Beginnings”. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism
Click the link to read the article on The Aspen Times website (Ali Longwell). Here’s an excerpt:
October 8, 2025
The Shoshone water rights acquisition and negotiations on post-2026 Lake Powell and Mead operations dominate conversations at the Colorado River Districtโs annual water seminar
Western Slope elected officials, water managers, engineers, and conservationists met in Grand Junction on Friday, Oct. 3, all focused on one thing: the uncertain future of the Colorado River.
โWater users, as a lot, tend to crave certainty, and that certainty seems more and more elusive these days,โ said Peter Fleming, general counsel for the Colorado River District, at this yearโs annual seminar hosted by the River District.
While the seminar broached many of the challenges and opportunities facing those who rely on the Colorado River, most discussions came back to two looming decisions that will dictate how the future looks for the 40 million people, seven states, two counties, and 30 tribal nations that rely on the waterway.ย This includes the River Districtโsย proposed $99 million acquisition of the Shoshone water rightsย and the interstateย negotiationsย over the post-2026 operations of Lake Powell and Lake Mead. Both decisions will have ramifications for all Colorado River users โ including agriculture, recreation, and municipal water โ but are stalled by competing interests, be it political, geographic, or otherwise…The River District is currently working through a multi-year process to purchase the Shoshone water rights from Xcel Energy for $99 million. The rights โ established in the early 1900s โ are the oldest, non-consumptive water rights on the Colorado River…The Shoshone water right is currently tied to the hydroelectric power plant in Glenwood Canyon, which returns 100% of the water used to produce electricity to the river. However, he said that uncertainty surrounding the plantโs longevity, given its age and location โ which he called an โarea of great geohazardโ โ led the River District to seek acquisition of the rights. Under the proposed acquisition, Xcel would continue to operate the plant…The district intends to purchase the right and reach an instream flow agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board โ theย only entity that can hold an instream flow water rightย in Colorado.ย Doing so would maintain the status quo of the river, the River District claims. Defining what the status quo looks like, though, has led to disagreements between the West Slope entity and East Slope water providers…
Water allocation on the Colorado River dates back to the 1922 compact agreement, which divided the river between the upper and lower basins. Right now, itโs not the compact, but the 2007 operational guidelines for Lake Powell and Lake Mead that are being renegotiated. While the four Upper Basin states โ Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming โ rely predominantly on snowpack for water supply, the Lower Basin states โ Arizona, Wyoming, and Nevada โ rely on releases from Lake Powell and Lake Mead. The 2007 guidelines for the two reservoirs, which govern how they store and release water, are set to expire in 2026. The seven states have until Nov. 11 to try and reach a consensus on the reservoirsโ post-2026 operations; otherwise, the federal government will step in and impose its own plan.ย
Becky Mitchell, who has been negotiating on Coloradoโs behalf, said on Friday that she is โhopefulโ for this seven-state consensus โbecause the alternative is not great.โย โI think weโve kicked the can and weโre at the end of the road,โ Mitchell said…Throughout the negotiations, the Lower Basin states have advocated for basin-wide water use reductions. The Upper Basin states, however, have pushed back on the idea, claiming they already face natural water shortages.ย
โIn Western Colorado, it happens every year,โ [Andy] Mueller said.ย
CSU Spur at dusk October 14, 2025. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots
Click the link to read the article on the Big Pivots website (Allen Best):
October 17, 2025
We heard about Coloradoโs warming but uncertain climate. We heard about research projects. But what exactly is this new Climate Hub all about?
Colorado State University has created a Climate Hub that is to be based at its Spur campus in the heart of what used to be industrial Denver. This is on the grounds of the National Western Complex.
This is north of downtown Denver, near Coloradoโs transportation hub: the intersection of Interstates 70 and I-25. When I first visited the National Western, no interstate highways existed anywhere. That dates me. I can vaguely remember my grandfather, a farmer/rancher from northeastern Colorado, boosting me up atop a fence to see all the cattle. I suspect that some were his.
The cattle have all disappeared except during the Stock Show each January. You can still smell a bit of manure, though, when walking from the parking lot to the Hydro Building, one of four major and architecturally interesting buildings erected on this new campus so far. A certain amount of research goes on at this campus. A correspondent from Gardner, a hamlet in south-central Colorado, mentioned that he had just mailed water and soil samples that he needed tested to the laboratory in the Hydro Building. Denver Water operates its lab there.
As for this event, I suspect it would fall under the label of โmarketing.โ I was there for the full two hours of presentations and heard much that was interesting but left without understanding exactly what was new.
CSU undeniably has its fingers in what the Climate Hub, at its website, calls โa defining challenge of our time.โ
Russ Schumacher, the state climatologist, a professor at CSU, was an obvious choice for leading off a program like this. He recapped the climate report issued in 2024: We have already warmed an average 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit, he said. The 10 warmest years in Coloradoโs recorded history going back to the 1870s have been in the 21st century. Last year was the fourth warmest, but this year, not as warm โ but still in the top 20 on record.
And much more warming is in store, between 1 and 4 degrees Fahrenheit by 2050, given current emissions trajectories.
โPrecipitation is more complicated,โ he explained. โIf you look at long-term trends, it hits hard, too, but you see a lot of ups and downs.โ
Flooding will worsen, as will wildfires. We can also expect more heat waves and droughts.
Oh yummy. Somebody other than Russ, with his happy persona, could leave you very depressed.
The Climate Hub โexplainerโ meeting on Oct. 14 on the CSU Spur campus. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots
But then, thatโs the story at CSU. They are figuring out solutions. Debby-downer is not the vibe.
For example, there was no talk of converting the world into vegetarians. Instead, Dr. Sara Place, who is an associate professor of feedlot systems (yes, Iโm not making this up), talked about the effort to reduce the methane from the burping of cattle. Itโs burps, not farts, that produce this significant component of our greenhouse problem. They constitute 3.1% of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
The takeaway static from the cows-burping presentation was that 80% of the methane emissions come from cattle grazing on grass, not cattle chowing down in feedlots as they fatten up for the conveyor belt to the butchery. And yes, solutions are being devised, although I am at a loss to explain any of this.
Somewhat similarly, we got a peek at the research that has been underway at CSU now for a number of years to tighten up the methane emissions leaking from our โnaturalโ gas infrastructure. โYou canโt manage what you donโt measure,โ said Dr. Dan Zimmerle.
And still other research, some of it global in scale, is underway, a bit difficult to summarize in something less than, well, maybe a 10,000-word tome. And some of it very Colorado-centric. One presenter asked if any of those in the room had been to Sterling? To Eads? (These are towns in eastern Colorado). My hand was only among a few raised in the room.
This was all part of an explanation about a new concept called digital twins. They can observe what is happening in the field from laboratories.
Surprising, though, was a tag-team effort to peel us back from the narrow confines of what we think we know to imagine possible futures. It was a marked departure from the usual conveyor belt of facts and exhortations at climate meetings.
Courtney Schultz, director of the CSU Climate Initiative, quoted an author, Jim Dater, who had said that the future cannot be predicted. The only useful ideas about the future should (at first) appear to be ridiculous.
Only later did I think about science itself. Some of the big ideas, such as plate tectonics, were originally seen as ludicrous, to be laughed out of the room.
We were asked by Lynn Badia, a professor of English, to engage in what she called speculative storytelling.
We were quickly induced to exercise some of this outside-our-boxes imagining. Canโt say that anything I imagined for Olde Town Arvada in 2050 was all that imaginative. High(er) rises? Fewer blue skies. The next round, I got a little more adventurous: glasses that you could wear that would allow you to see the essence of the person you were looking at.
Again, only later, did I ponder smart phones. Twenty-five years ago could I see people wandering down sidewalks, sauntering across streets, seemingly mindless of traffic or, for that matter, anything else around them, their faces scrunched close to little boxes in their hands? We call them smart phones, and sometimes I seem them in droves โ and just down the street.
โHave you exaggerated the possible changes to the point of absurdity?โ Badia asked us.
It was fun. I am so accustomed to trying to verify facts, not to imagine the future.
Others in attendance that I consulted afterward echoed my read on the event. CSU wants to make its presence better known and the willingness to work with the private sector. That already exists with the methane-testing center. Zimmerle said they were working with many oil and gas companies trying to respond to increasing regulation by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. A member of the Climate Central team talked about providing help to Fort Collins Utilities.
One individual pointed to two themes: (a) the value of collecting, analyzing and making available substantive data; and (b) a growing partnership between universities and the private sector, filling in the new gap caused by the termination of the federal government as a research partner.
You can also see that at the CSU Climate Hub website in its statement that it โpartners with diverse groups to co-create impactful solutions.โ
The Legacy building, which is located across the street from the Hydro and Terrra buildings on the CSU Spur campus in Denver, appears to be ready for imminent occupancy. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots
As we left the Hydro building, I paused to study the latest edifice โ a word I use with deliberation โ that is soon to be available for public occupation. Just down the street, though, were train cars, perhaps containing crude oil. Who knows.
When I first moved from the mountains to Denver in 1998, I remember the vacant field west of the train tracks at Union Station. Nothing there. A place of homeless people, maybe. Now? The folks from Aspen and Vail have built luxury real estate. Some of the units overlook the train tracks that to this day are used by coal trains exporting carbon from the coal pits of Wyoming to distant power plants.
I could not then imagine the scene observable today at Union Station. Frankly, it has been very hard for some people to imagine the end of the fossil fuel era. But I may live long enough to see the end of those coal trains. I can imagine that.
President Donald Trumpโs quest for what he calls energy dominance has run into a few snags, many of which are of his own making. Letโs set aside, for a moment, the fact that the term โenergy dominanceโ doesnโt really make sense (What is energy dominating? Or are we dominating energy? Or โฆ????). Letโs assume that itโs just an insecure maleโs version of energy independence (so woke!), or just a dumb term for producing enough energy to keep all the data centers running.
In that case, donโt you think youโd want to use all of the tools โ or weapons, if you prefer โ at your disposal? Certainly any reasonable person, even one who doesnโt care about pollution or greenhouse gas emissions, would do that, pushing for more solar, wind, battery storage, hydropower, and geothermal, in addition to nuclear and natural gas. But as has been shown over and over, Trump tends to let his personal whims โ along with a desire to crush everything that he thinks Democrats favor โ erase rationality.
As a result, he has waged war on the most promising energy sources (i.e. solar and wind), while trying to dust off the old, dying ones (i.e. fossil fuels) and prop them up on the battle lines in hopes they wonโt fall down too soon. Well, itโs not working out so well.
Oil and gas drilling is continuing on federal lands, although at a much slower pace than during the Biden administration, even though Trump has handed out drilling permits like candy at a parade. Thatโs in part due to low oil prices, and in part due to higher drilling costs: Trumpโs tariffs have increased the price of pipe and other materials used on the rigs.
The number of rigs actively drilling has stayed somewhat steady over the last nine months, but rig counts remain below what they were in 2023 and 2024 and there are no signs that Trumpโs โdrill, baby, drillโ rhetoric is having the desired effect. Source: Baker Hughes, Land Desk graphic.
But the most obvious failure is playing out in the administrationโs bid to revitalize the flagging coal industry. Letโs take a look:
After the administration and congressional Republicans made much ado about rescinding Biden-era moratoria on new federal coal leasing, the Interior Department rushed to auction off parcels containing hundreds of millions of tons of coal in Montana, Wyoming, and Utah. They flopped:
In Montana, the Navajo Transitional Energy Companyย bid $186,000ย for a tract containing an estimated 167 million tons of coal adjacent to its Spring Creek Mine in the Powder River Basin. Thatโs a mere 1/10 of one cent per ton. Contrast that with other Powder River Basin leases in 2012 that brought in more than $1/ton. The feds rejected the bid, saying it was below fair market value.ย
The dismal result prompted the Bureau of Land Management to cancel the 441-million-ton West Antelope coal lease sale in Wyoming.ย
And then the Interior Departmentย rejected a single lowball bidย for a lease containing about 6 million tons of federal coal in Utah.ย
On a somewhat related note: After the Trump administration announced it would subsidize the coal industry to the tune of $625 million, PacifiCorp said it would go forward with its plans toย convert the Naughton coal plantย in Wyoming to run on natural gas.
Youโd think that maybe the administration would get a hint and adjust their strategy accordingly. Yeah, right.
A warning sign in the Lisbon Valley. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.
โ๏ธ Mining Monitor โ๏ธ
Last week, Anfield Energy announced that Utah regulators had approved its proposed Velvet Wood uranium mine in the Lisbon Valley. โPermitting Complete, Construction to Follow,โ the companyโs press release says, adding that they expected to break ground within 30 days. The project was the first beneficiary of Trumpโs accelerated โenergy emergencyโ permitting, and the BLM completed its environmental review in a mere 13 days.
The company may be jumping the gun a bit. The Utah Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining actually gave only tentative approval to the project, conditioned upon the company posting a $539,000 bond. And it specifies that no ground disturbance can happen until the project gets other applicable agenciesโ go-ahead.
But as Sarah Fields of Uranium Watch points out, Anfield has not yet received approvals from other state agencies for its radon ventilation shafts, wastewater treatment plant, or its air quality permit.
Anfield โ or at least its PR team โ is busy as of late. They also announced that they had completed the first phase of exploratory drilling at the defunct JD-7 uranium mine in the Paradox Valley. While these announcements are a dime-a-dozen, I was a bit intrigued by this one, because the JD-7 is like a poster child of the follies of the last uranium โboom.โ Itโs an open pit, a gaping wound overlooking the valley, but never actually produced any uranium because the โboomโ busted before it even really began. Somehow Iโm not convinced that this time will be much different.
As one might expect, the recent rains and resulting flooding boosted reservoir levels. Navajo Reservoir saw its surface level jump considerably (rising about 10 feet) due to all that water in the San Juan River. However, itโs still lower than it was this time last year.
Source: Lake Navajo Water Database
Lake Powell, which is much, much bigger, only added 1.28 feet to its surface level, and remains 32 feet below what it was on this date last year. But as the following graph shows, the big water is still making its way into the reservoir, so its level could keep climbing.
๐ธ Parting Shot ๐๏ธ
Iโm on the road right now, making my way from southern Oregon to southwestern Colorado via a circuitous route. And no, Iโm not in the Silver Bullet (Iโll reveal the purpose of the trip later, along with more details about Land Desk transportation). I donโt have my good camera with me, but Iโve tried to get some snapshots anyway.
Gravestones in City Cemetery, Yreka, California. Photo credit: Jonathan P. Thompson
Snow and water in the eastern Sierras. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.
Basin and Range country along Hwy 50. Photo credit: Jonathan P. Thompson
Klamath salmon are spawning in the Williamson River 4 the 1st time since the early 1900s. This pivotal moment is a testament to decades of activism, rigorous scientific research & advocacy from Klamath Basin Indigenous communities & allies. Photos by Paul Wilson/Klamath Tribes pic.twitter.com/P1gYxhUXaD
โAbout 80% of the water goes to agriculture. If youโre using a big share and itโs more cost-effective, then thatโs going to need to be the target,โ said a co-author of the study. (Photo: Bureau of Reclamation Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0)
The most cost-effective and quickest way to conserve the Colorado Riverโs shrinking water supply amid persistent drought and rapid population growth is changing how states handle the largest use of water on the river: agriculture.
Agriculture uses about 80% of the riverโs water, but the good news is that paying farmers not to use water allotted to them has proved to be remarkably cost-effective.
Thatโs according to a comprehensive study examining 462 federally funded Colorado River conservation and supply projects using available spending data from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
The study, published in the Journal of the American Water Resources Association last week, was conducted by UC Riversideโs School of Public Policy in partnership with the Utah Rivers Council.
The water projects examined โ ranging from large-scale infrastructure such as reservoirs and wastewater treatment plants to agricultural water use โ totaled about $1 billion in federal funding between 2004 and 2024.
โHow much water is actually being saved for every dollar we are spending?โ asks Mehdi Nemati, an assistant professor of public policy, co-author of the study. โIf we want to be more efficient or gain more water saved per dollar spent, then answering this question matters.โ
โThe big message is not all water savings are equal. Some projects saved water at a fraction of the cost of others,โ he continued.
Agricultural conservation programs conserved water for as low as $69.89 per acre-foot. On average, agricultural conservation programs cost about $417 per acre-foot, while local supply projects โsuch as reservoirs, wells, and wastewater treatment facilitiesโcost more than $2,400 per acre-foot on average. (An acre-foot is the amount of water needed to cover one acre of land to a depth of one foot, or about 325,851 gallons.)
โSpending money to conserve water within the agriculture sector seems to be one of the most cost-effective ways. Thereโs also a lot of room to improve and save more water in this sector,โ Nemati said. โAbout 80% of the water goes to agriculture. If youโre using a big share and itโs more cost-effective, then thatโs going to need to be the target.โ
Historically, farmers have been reluctant to lower their water use out of fear the government might take their water permanently. But the study found that agricultural conservation programs, particularly those that provided financial incentives to promote behavioral changes among farmers, were successful at delivering water savings at a relatively low cost.
The most common type of agricultural conservation program was paying farmers who rely on the Colorado River to reduce their water use on crops during certain non-critical periods, saving an average of 747 acre-feet per year at a cost of about $140 per acre-foot.
Paying farmers to temporarily leave their fields empty โ particularly for water-intensive crops like alfalfa โ produced an average annual water saving of 17,500 acre-feet per year at an average cost of about $193 per acre-foot, according to the study.
โGrass, alfalfa, corn pasture, these are all water intensive crops. Thatโs where we get our most savings per dollar, and there is huge room for savings. I would say these are low hanging fruit,โ Nemati said.
Other programs studied paid farmers to replace flood irrigation with precision methods such as drip or sprinkler systems, which demonstrated substantial efficiency improvements while maintaining agricultural productivity.
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation spent about 30% of water conservation funding between 2004 and 2024 on agricultural projects.
Agricultural conservation projects had an average lifespan of about three years, meaning once those short-term projects end water savings are expected to gradually decline.
Water-intensive crops are where the savings are
Much of the funding used to pay farmers to conserve Colorado River water was provided by the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act, which helped double agricultural water conservation from 1.5 million acre-feet of water to over 3 million acre-feet of water, according to the study.
Water recycling and treatment facilities also proved to be a cost-effective way to conserve substantial amounts of water in the long-term, despite higher initial construction costs. Water recycling and treatment facilities had an average lifetime cost of $385 per acre-feet with an average annual water savings of about 18,600 acre-feet.
Despite the large potential for water savings through water reuse projects, only about 7% of the bureauโs water conservation funding was spent on reuse projects. California got the lionโs share of that funding, about 80%. Upper Basin states received only 4% of reuse funding, while Tribal areas received no funding.
Thereโs a lot of room for improvement in water recycling across states that rely on the Colorado River. One recent study found that Upper Basin states โ Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico โ recycled less than 5% of their water, as compared to Lower Basin states โ California, Arizona and Nevadaโ which recycled more than 30% of their water.
The study also revealed a major disparity in federal funding for water conservation projects between the Upper Basin and Lower Basin states.
Between 2004 and 2024, Upper Basin states only received about 6% of overall water conservation spending by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, while about 75% was directed to the Lower Basin, and about 19% was designated for Tribal areas, some of which extend across both regions.
Nevada received nearly $6 million for 28 water conservation projects for an average annual savings of roughly 1,500 acre-feet at a cost of about $3,800 per acre-foot.
Itโs a stark contrast to Upper Basin states like Colorado, which received about $610,000 in federal funding for 47 water conservation projects for an average annual savings of about 2,100 acre-feet at a cost of about $285 per acre-foot.
Itโs an example of how federal dollars could be more efficiently used to conserve water across the Colorado River Basin by rethinking funding priorities.
โIn some areas in Nevada there has been tremendous investment in the urban side and efficiency gains in the urban side. But if youโre looking at the lowest dollar per acre feet, water-intensive crops are the areas we want to target,โ Nemati said.
โThere are areas in the Upper Basin that could save water for a fraction of money being used in Nevada or southern California,โ he said.
Just after the Southwest suffered through one of the drier summers on record, the remnants of cyclone Priscilla barreled through the region and dumped enormous amounts of rain in the San Juan Mountains and other areas. Previously dry arroyos became raging torrents, and the rivers swelled up and, in many cases, jumped their banks and wreaked havoc and destruction. And it happened not once, but twice โ so far โ with the first wave hitting over the weekend of Oct. 11, and the second wave underway as I write this on Tuesday morning.
Priscilla favored โ if thatโs the right word here โ the high country, depositing more than four inches of rain during the first wave at Columbus Basin in the La Plata Mountains, more than five inches at the Vallecito SNOTEL station, and more than six inches at Wolf Creek Pass. Interestingly, Molas Pass south of Silverton received โonlyโ three inches during the first wave.
Rain totals for select locations from the first wave of the storm (Oct. 10-12). Source: National Weather Service.
The moisture on Wolf Creek and surrounding areas made its way into the San Juan River, which ballooned into a roiling monster that inundated parts of downtown Pagosa Springs, including sections of the hot springs resort. During the first wave, the riverโs flow reached 8,270 cubic feet per second, which was the highest level since the flood of 1927. And during the second wave, it reached a whopping 8,450 cfs.
Note that this is for water years (which is why todayโs flows appear under 2026), that several years are missing prior to 1935, and that the 1911 number is an estimate and the 1927 number may be as well. Source: USGS.
While todayโs high waters pale in comparison to those that raced through Pagosa (destroying homes and infrastructure) in 1911, it is notable that they far exceed those during the flood of 1970, which was the largest flooding to hit the region in more recent memory.ย Hereโs my take on the 1911 flood in Pagosa:
Clearly all the water will relieve some drought conditions, though certainly not cure them yet. And it is a huge start to the 2026 water year, as can be seen in this graph of accumulated precipitation at Wolf Creek Pass. The station has received 9.9 inches of rain in just two weeks, the highest amount on record.
The San Juan wasnโt the only river to rage. Vallecito Creek above the reservoir hit a mind-blowing 6,980 cubic feet per second on Oct. 11, forcing the evacuation of hundreds of homes in the area. The second wave was substantial, as well, but so far isnโt as extreme as the first wave.
The Animas River through Durango, meanwhile, also grew tremendously, but did not reach flood stage during the first wave, topping out at just under 5,000 cfs. Levels are still increasing as I write this, but it doesnโt appear that they will go much higher this time around. Stay safe everyone!
And, if you want to read more about the history of flooding in the Four Corners Country, check out my long-read from a few years back. Iโve taken down the paywall for a limited time on this one, so everyone can read it โ even you free-riders! (And if you like it, maybe youโd consider subscribing).
South Platte River south of Brush. Photo/Allen Best
Click the link to read the article on the Big Pivots website (Allen Best):
October 16, 2025
Colorado say this is really an effort by Nebraska to renegotiate the 1923 South Platte River Compact. But is the core of this story about water for metropolitan Denver?
Mark Twain in July 1861 traveled through the northeast corner of what was then Colorado Territory, stopping briefly at a place called Overland City. Itโs now called Julesburg. It lies along the South Platte River no more than three or four miles from the Nebraska border.
After briefly serving in the Civil War, the young fellow was on his way to the gold mining riches of the Sierra Nevada. In โRoughing It,โ his later recounting of that and other Western adventures, he called the encampment the โstrangest, quaintest, funniest frontier town that our untraveled eyes had ever stared at and been astonished with.โ
Governor Clarence J. Morley signing Colorado River compact and South Platte River compact bills, Delph Carpenter standing center. Unidentified photographer. Date 1925. Print from Denver Post. From the CSU Water Archives
Twain always was the master of overstatement. But then, you need to remember he had come of age on the Mississippi River when reading his description of the South Platte River. He called it a โmelancholy streamโ that was โonly saved from being impossible to find with the naked eye by its sentinel rank of scattering trees standing on either bank. The Platte was โup,โ they said โ which make me wish I could see it when it was down, if it could look any sicker and sorrier.โ
Oh, that Clements fellow could milk a moment. He spent only an hour there before continuing west. I actually spent a night in Julesburg. The next morning I drove to the community cemetery. Itโs located east of the town, the river, and Interstate 76. From the cemetery I made out an incision in the side of a hill. It was the remnant of the effort begun in 1894 to create a ditch. The ditch was to export water from the South Platte 13 river miles in Colorado and into Nebraska, there to irrigate farms in Perkins County.
Investors in that ambition, the Perkins County Canal, ran out of money. A compact governing the South Platte between Colorado and Nebraska negotiated in 1923 left Nebraska with the right to build the canal and divert up to 500 cubic feet per second from mid-October until April 1, according to Nebraska Public Media, and the idea was studied again in the 1980s. But again, it got no traction.
Three years ago, Nebraska set out again to realize the diversion. It has set aside $628 million, most of it received from the federal government as part of the Covid-19 pandemic stimulus. The state has taken steps to plan and permit the project through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
In July, Nebraska asked the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that Colorado has violated the compact, both by not delivering enough water in the non-irrigation season and also by preventing Nebraska from building the canal. Colorado has said it is abiding by the compact and acknowledges Nebraskaโs right to build a canal.
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis and Attorney General Phil Weiser, who hopes to succeed Polis as governor, announced yesterday that they had urged the U.S. Supreme Court to reject the case.
โNebraskaโs claimed violations rely on speculative and premature allegations. To the extent any legal issues arise in the future, there are alternative forums to resolve them. The Supreme Court need not take a case that would put the court and the parties on a long, time-intensive, and expensive path that might well, in the end, put the states right back where they were before Nebraska filed (its) proposed complaint,โ said Weiser.
โEven if the court decides to take up part or all of Nebraskaโs case. Iโm confident that we will win on the merits. Both the facts and the law are on our side.โ
The South Platte River originates in South Park and then wanders northeast, entering Nebraska just a few miles west of Coloradoโs northeast corner. The red line here distinguishes the upper South Platte Basin in Colorado from the lower basin. The compact between Colorado and Nebraska speaks only to the lower basin. Image: U.S. Geologic Survey.
Coloradoโs brief in response to Nebraskaโs lawsuit is just that, at least by legal standards: 35 pages long. It opens with this statement: โLike every western state, Nebraska wants more water.โ Colorado acknowledges Nebraskaโs right to build a canal, it says, but the Cornhusker state has โonly just begun to plan and permit its project.โ
In other words, Colorado contends that whatever may eventually be disputed is not ready for prime time. The Supremes have better ways to spend their time.
Why the Supreme Court? Because interstate issues must go before the highest court. In such cases, it commonly appoints a โspecial master,โ typically a retired judge, to hear the case and report findings to the Supremes.
For example, a special master was used in the dispute between Texas, New Mexico and Colorado involving the Rio Grande. A special master was also enlisted in the dispute between Kansas and Colorado involving the Arkansas River.
Colorado wants to avoid this battle.
Coyote Gulch’s VW Bus South Park 1973.
A hard-working river
The South Platte may be among the hardest-working rivers in the United States. It arises in South Park, flanked by the Mosquito and Tarryall ranges, southwest of Denver, flow 380 miles through Colorado before entering Nebraska. Between 70% and 85% โ seemingly authoritative sources differ substantially in estimates โ of Coloradoโs nearly 6 million residents live in the South Platte River Basin. The basin also has 30% of the stateโs irrigated agriculture, well more than half coming from the flows of the South Platte or its tributaries.
What exactly is this dispute about?
Nebraska, says Colorado, โappears to be using the prospect of the canal and this request for Supreme Court action as leverage to renegotiate the South Platte River Compact.โ
Oct. 15 was Coloradoโs deadline for responding to the lawsuit filed by Nebraska against Colorado on July 15. The press conference where Nebraskaโs politicos announced the lawsuit was full of rhetoric. โWeโre going to fight like heck. Weโre going to get every drop of water,โ said Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen. โWeโve been losing to Colorado on this issue for too long.โ
He piled it on. โThey want absolutely everything. Theyโre even stealing the water from their own farmers, for crying out loud,โ he said according to a July 16 story in the Nebraska Examiner.
Pillen said Colorado is storing more water for its โupstream economy,โ presumably reference to the Denver metropolitan area.
Polis, in his Oct. 15 comments, made no mention of metropolitan Denver, instead emphasizing the threat to โour robust agriculture industry and our rural communities in Northeastern Colorado.โ He dismissed the lawsuit by Nebraska as โmeritless.โ
The South Platte River provides the water crucial for even a marginal economy in the lower South Platte River Valley of Colorado. Perkins County Canal Project Area. Credit: Nebraska Department of Natural Resources
The Denver Post, in a Sept. 21 story, mined the agriculture component after reporter Elise Schmelzer followed Weiser to a meeting in Julesburg to meet with farmers there. Darrin Tobin, a Sedgwick County commissioner, said if the canal gets built, it will potentially turn everything in the last 20 miles of the South Platte River Valley to the state line into โalmost an unusable wasteland.โ
If the canal is built, Nebraska will use much of the winter river flow that Coloradans rely upon to fill ponds, which are used for augmentation. These augmentation ponds allow the farms to use more water during irrigation season.
Irrigated land produces more and hence has higher property values, which means a broader tax base. Sedgwick County ranks 44th among Coloradoโs 64 counties in per capita income.
What is this dispute about?
Is this really about retaining the vitality of places like Ovid and Julesburg? I have to think itโs more โ as the Nebraska governor insinuated โ about the situation of metropolitan Denver and other northern Front Range communities.
The South Platte long, long ago ceased to be able to support a population this large and farms, too. Denverโs first major transmountain diversion began importing water from the Colorado River headwaters through the original bore of the Moffat Tunnel in 1936. Now, the headwaters of the Colorado River are all but plumbed out. Too, the Colorado River has its own problems.
In recent years, Front Range communities have started looking inward, to impose greater efficiencies. Denser populations enable that. Denver has actually expanded its population greatly in the last 20 yeas without using more water. The city has been rising, not expanding. The growth in demand comes from the outer rings of suburbs and the exurbs.
Platte Valley Water Partnership project overview. Credit: Parker Water
Revealing are the plans by Parker Water and Sanitation District, now joined by Castle Rock, to build a pipeline far down the South Platte River to the Sterling area. The plan would be to hold back water during winter or those occasional times of spring runoff when the river is carrying uncommitted amounts of water. This plan, called the Platte River Water Partnership, would involve some new impoundments of water.
The Lower South Platte Water Conservation District, which consists almost entirely of farmers, supports the plan in collaboration with Parker Water. They see some benefits to โnewโ water, courtesy of Parkerโs checkbook, and an alternative to โbuy and dry.โย The broad outlines are explained in this story published in Big Pivots during July.
Ron Redd, district manager of Parker Water and Sanitation District, right, makes a point to Jim Yahn and Joe Frank at the structure used to divert water from the South Platte River to Prewitt Reservoir. Owners of Prewitt, who are part of Yahnโs organization, have decided they do not want to be part of Parkerโs ambitions. Frank leads the South Platte River Water Conservancy District. Photo/Allen Best
The fundamental story is that the newer and more affluent cities on metropolitan Denverโs southern fringe rely heavily on unsustainable pumping of groundwater. They have started lessening that dependency in the last 20 years, and this is an effort to further reduce that dependency.
As you might expect, the issues in this dispute between the two states are somewhat complex. I found a Sept 24 essay by J. David Aiken, a professor in the Department of Agriculture Economics at the University of Nebraska โ Lincoln, illuminating.
Aiken takes the story back to the drought of 2002, the year that Colorado was finally forced to address a long-festering issue about the impact of wells drilled for agriculture along the riverine aquifer in the South Platte Valley. That action yielded 4,000 (out of 9,000 total irrigation wells being required to cease pumping.
We then have a study in 2017 South Platte storage. It found that Colorado was allowing an average 332,000 acre-feet of water to flow into Nebraska beyond minimum compact compliance. That was followed by a study of how these โsurplus flowsโ could be used by Denver instead. of buying agriculture land for its water rights, a.k.a. โbuy and dry.โ
Then came work by Denver metro water interests on a study about how to take advantage of the 332,000 acre-feet. Soon after came Parker Waterโs plans to avoid buy-and-dry in its partnership with the lower-valley irrigators by figuring out how to retain the remaining uncontested water.
Who will this contest between Colorado and Nebraska?
Nebraska has some valid complaints about Coloradoโs actions, says Aiken, but Colorado โwill likely raise some very interesting legal issues of their own, which could lead to Nebraskaโs not being able to pursue the Perkins County Canal project.โ
One legal wildcard will be whether Nebraska could demonstrate that the Denver metro water supply projects in the South Platte Basin would reduce flows through the protected critical habitats in Nebraska used by whooping cranes. The species is listened as endangered by the federal government. This argument could strengthen Nebraskaโs case.
When Nebraska first announced its renewed Perkins County canal plans, I shrugged it off as a minor tempest. But now I find it more interesting, part of the tightening vise on Coloradoโs still rapidly-growing Front Range cities. Certainly, weโre not Las Vegas. Not even a Phoenix. In some ways, we are still luxuriant with water. But now, Colorado is seeing the bottom of the cup. This new reconciliation has been underway since the early 1990s.
As for the South Platte and the 1923 Colorado-Nebraska compact, remember that it allowed Nebraska to divert up to 500 cfs from Oct. 15 through March. On Wednesday night, the river was flowing 270 cfs at the Balzac Gage near Sterling. There are asterisks to this that we donโt want to get into, but the point is that there isnโt much river here and hence the quarrel.
Twain has often been credited with saying that whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting over. Actually, somebody else almost certainly made up that phrase now grown tiresome in its use. But if Weiser, is correct, there will likely be plenty of fighting. He told the Post in September that more than a billion dollars might be spent in litigation during the next decade, and he insisted that all the time in the courtroom will leave neither state better off.
The South Platte River Basin is shaded in yellow. Source: Tom Cech, One World One Water Center, Metropolitan State University of Denver.
A late-season surge of tropical moisture brought heavy precipitation and areas of flooding to parts of the Four Corners States. Amounts of 4 to locally over 6 inches were reported in parts of interior Arizona and southern Colorado. Farther east, a potent coastal storm system brought gusty winds and heavy rains to parts of the East Coast. Rainfall totals approached one foot near Georgetown and Pawleyโs Island, SC while amounts of 7 to 10 inches were scattered across South Carolina and near Whiteville, NC. Totals of 4 to 6 inches were measured at scattered locations from South Florida northward through eastern Massachusetts. Wind gusts reached 60 to 65 mph at several buoys near the North Carolina Coast; Cape Lookout, NC; and Island Beach Park, NJ. In contrast, only a few tenths of an inch, at most, fell across southeast California, most of the Great Basin, the central and northern High Plains, much of the Great Plains, the Great Lakes Region, portions of the Middle and Lower Mississippi Valley, much of the interior Deep South, and the Gulf Coast Region. Drought designations improved by multiple categories in some of the wetter areas across interior Arizona, southern Colorado, and eastern South Carolina while broad areas of 1-category improvement covered the central and southwestern Four Corners Region, The Middle and Lower Ohio Valley and adjacent locations, and portions of the Atlantic Coast from south Florida through southern New England. In contrast, dryness and drought persisted or intensified across large parts of the Deep South away from the Atlantic Coast, the central Gulf Coast Region, the Lower Mississippi Valley, the east-central and south-central Great Plains, and scattered locations across the northern tier of the Lower-48 from Montana through northern New England…
Heavy to excessive precipitation pounded the higher elevations of Colorado. Most areas from west-central through south-central portions of the state received at least 3 inches of precipitation, with much heavier amounts โ approaching 8 inches in spots โ falling on the higher elevations of south-central Colorado. This precipitation let to widespread improvements, with some of the wetter areas noting 2-category improvements. Elsewhere light to moderate precipitation (generally 0.5 to 1.5 inches) fell on most of the Plains and Wyoming, with amounts over an inch recorded in isolated sections of central Kansas, eastern North Dakota, and westernmost Wyoming. Significant areas of dryness development or deterioration were limited to eastern Kansas and the southern tier of South Dakota…
Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending October 14, 2025.
Late-season tropical moisture surged into the Four Corners States, bringing heavy to excessive precipitation to large parts of Arizona, western New Mexico, and eastern Utah. Improvement was also noted in scattered areas across central and western Utah, and southwestern Montana. The only areas of deterioration were in north-central and northeastern Montana, where parts of a few counties slid from D0 into moderate drought (D1). In other parts of the West Region, precipitation amounts were nondescript, and dryness and drought were essentially unchanged…
Recent rainfall allowed for some improvement in dryness and drought across western Tennessee, adjacent Mississippi, central Oklahoma, and western Texas. However, deterioration was more common in aggregate across the South Region, with most of northwestern Mississippi, Louisiana, and eastern Oklahoma noting some intensification. There were scattered areas of moderate to locally heavy rainfall, but most of the Region recorded subnormal amounts for the week…
Looking Ahead
During October 15-20, 2025, heavy precipitation (1.5 to 3.0 inches) is forecast for coastal and windward locations from the Cascades to the Pacific Ocean, across eastern Montana and adjacent North Dakota, along a frontal boundary from the Middle Mississippi Valley through the central tier of the Great Lakes Region, and across scattered locations in northwestern Pennsylvania, the Tennessee Valley, and the Lower Ohio Valley. Moderate amounts of 0.7 to 1.5 inches are anticipated in the remainder of the Pacific Northwest, the higher elevations of the northern Intermountain West, central and northern Wyoming, the northern tier of the Plains, parts of the central Great Plains, most areas from the southeastern Great Plains through the Gulf Coast Region, the interior Deep South, most of the Ohio Valley, the lower Northeast, and southern New England. Meanwhile, a few tenths of an inch at most are expected across the South Atlantic Region, most of the southern half of the Plains, and the southwestern quarter of the Lower-48. Temperatures should average generally below-normal from the Rockies westward, and above-normal from the Plains to the Atlantic Coast. Daily highs are expected to average 4 to 5 deg. F below normal from southeastern California through southern Idaho and eastern Oregon while readings top out 8 to 11 deg. F above normal on average across central and southern Texas and most of Maine.
The Climate Prediction Centerโs 6-10 day outlook valid for October 21-25 favors heavier than normal precipitation across central and northern California, northwestern Nevada, and the Pacific Northwest. Chances for totals in the top one-third of historical occurrences exceed 60 percent west of the Cascades. Wetter than normal conditions are nominally favored across Hawaii, most of Alaska, southern sections of the Rockies and High Plains, central and western Texas, and from the Great Lakes through much of the mid-Atlantic Region and Northeast. Subnormal precipitation is more likely across central and northern sections of the Rockies and Great Plains as well as parts of the South Atlantic Region. Warmer than normal weather is expected from the northern Intermountain West to the Appalachians, plus much of the South Atlantic and Northeast. Southern Texas and most of Maine are most likely to experience warmer than normal weather. Unusually warm weather is also favored across the eastern half of Mainland Alaska and across Hawaii. Temperatures are expected to average closer to normal from the Rockies through the West Coast and across the Carolinas and Virginias. The central tier of Alaska is also expected to average near normal while subnormal temperatures are nominally favored across western Mainland Alaska.
US Drought Monitor one week change map ending October 14, 2025.
Wonk warning: Iโll be explicating the chart above. If this sort of thing bores you, or just gets you more, not less confused about whatโs going on with the river today as the negotiators for post-2026 system management continue to negotiate with a November 11 deadline, then Iโd say take a break until next post, when Iโm going to try to explain why I call this stuff โRomancing the River.โ
For those reading on here, remember my purpose from earlier posts: to show a reasonably equitable division of the consumptive use of the Colorado River waters among the seven states and Mexico, with no โtemporaryโ division into competitive Upper and Lower Basins โ the Compact they really wanted to do in 1922. I present the table above as just a draft effort in that direction; there will be arguments about some of the specific figures, but the method to the madness might have some merit.
All the consumptive use information is from Bureau of Reclamation records accessible online, or from other cited historical documents going back to the 1922 Compact. The Bureau publishes consumptive use records every five years โ eventually. (Figures for 2016-2020, for example, still have โComing soon!โ where one would click to get them.) All quantities are expressed in millions of acre-feet (maf) or thousands (kaf).
To just jump into it, hereโs a column-by-column explication of the chart. I suggest clicking on the image above to get an enlargable view of the table. If nothing else, this table is kind of a history-in-numbers of the Colorado River in the 20th century CE. (It is important to remember too that, thanks to the 1952 McCarran Amendment, all the Indian tribal rights are negotiated intrastate, although suits and appeals go to the federal courts โ a separate set of challenges from what the seven states are trying to negotiate right now.)
Column 1, River Users: I make no reference to the Upper and Lower Basin, but it does make sense to distinguish between the โhot desertโ states below the canyon region, and the โcold (orographic) desertโ states above the canyons, due to the significant difference in system losses โ evaporation, transpiration, bank and aquifer storage and other losses. We will start with some analysis of those lines in the table, one for each set of desert states (considerably higher for the subtropical โhot desertโ region than the higher and cooler โcold (or steppe) desertโ region.
System Losses, Structural Deficit and Surpluses: These constitute the riverโs wild card. Natural system losses were listed in the paragraph above โ all the natural things that happen to water mixed with sun, wind and thirsty ground. Storage reservoirs are built on snowmelt rivers to increase the amount of water available for use through a longer period of time, storing the two-month snowmelt flood for use through the rest of the year. But increasing in reservoirs the amount of water available for use does not increase the amount of water; in fact, it decreases that, as the stored water spreads out in reservoirs under a desert sun that can evaporate annually as much as six acre-feet per acre off of open water in the lower Colorado River.
This was completely ignored in the Colorado River Compact, despite the fact, that as Eric Kuhn and John Fleck pointed out in their book Science Be Dammed, there were scientists who tried to advise the commissioners. Today, with two huge reservoirs, another half dozen big reservoirs and a lot of little ones, along with around 600 miles of large open aqueducts meandering through the hot deserts, somewhere between 12 and 16 percent of the river is lost to the system under the sun and wind.
The compact commissioners, thinking they had an 18 maf river, believed that evaporation would be covered by the surplus they anticipated above and beyond the quantities consumed by the seven states and Mexico. That was actually the case, well into the 1980s. But as more users materialized in the states above the canyons, and the Central Arizona Project began to draw from the mainstem, the โstructural deficitโ from ignoring the system losses began to draw down the big reservoirs. These natural system losses were estimated at around 800,000 af annually from the mainstem for the states below the canyons, and between 400,000 and 500,000 from Powell and the other Colorado River Storage Project reservoirs.
Another element in the structural deficit was consistent provision for Mexicoโs treaty allotment of 1.5 maf per year. The compact made the Upper and Lower Basin each responsible for half of whatever portion of that allotment which was not covered by surplus flow (up to 750 kaf). Beginning in 1971, however, under a 1970 reservoir management agreement, the Bureau began releasing the Upper Basinโs full half of the 1.5 maf each year, whether it was a โsurplus yearโ or not. A similar arrangement was not made for the Lower Basin share of the Mexican allotment; the Bureau apparently has just continued to charge it to โsurplusโ โ along with the Lower Basinโs system losses โ whether or not there was actually that much surplus. These โstructural deficitsโ were almost as responsible for the big 21st-century reservoir drawdown as was the โmillennial drought.โ A figure of around 2 maf was established for these natural and cultural commitments: 1.5 maf for the โhot desertโ states, 1.2 maf for the โcold desertโ states โ those states having consistently delivered their 750 kaf share for Mexico (leaving the 450 kaf in the table). The three states below the canyons have apparently agreed to accept responsibility for their 1.5 maf after 2026, although they are not saying much yet about how that consumption will be divided up.
Back now to the columns.Column 2, Authorized Allotments: These are based on the 18 million acre-feet (maf) river we all believed we were working with back in the 1920s. The Colorado River Compact allotted 7.5 maf to each of its Basins. The Boulder Canyon Project Act made the Bureau water-master for the Lower Basin states, and set their individual allotments, contested by Arizona but confirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in the lastย Arizona v. Californiaย case (BCPA/SC). The Mexican allotment was set by the 1944 two-rivers treaty. And in 1948, the four Upper Basin states created the Upper Colorado River Compact. Knowing by then that it was not an 18 maf river, they gave themselves percentages โof whateverโs leftโ (OWL) after compact obligations to the downriver states and their share of the Mexican treaty obligation were fulfilled. This column shows what that โ% OWLโ would be if those states actually got 7.5 maf regularly. The cold-desert states have never even come close to those figures.
Column 3:ย This column shows the allotments for the 14.5 maf average of the riverโs โnaturalโ flows for the 1930-2000 period, the period when all of the riverโs major development took place. All of the โaveragingโ fell on the states above the canyons. Allotments for Mexico and the three states below the canyons were legally and physically โset in concreteโ at 9 maf โ legally by the Supreme Court affirmation of the BCPA allotments, and physically by the two big linked reservoirs, Mead and Powell. The four states above the canyons took their floating percentages from what nature provided, or didnโt โ estimated natural flows for that period ranged between 5 and 24 maf. The average โof whateverโs leftโ (OWL) after the obligatory quantity was sent to the states below the canyon and Mexico was assumed to range between 5 and 6 maf โ if no attention was paid to the structural deficit and system losses. And for most of that period, there were no worries there; the states above the canyon were not using that much water until the substantial transmountain diversions (100 percent depletions) were completed. The table figures for those states (unlike the figures for the states below the canyons) amounted to wishful thinking for a future that will never happen.
Column 4 gets real: a compilation of three columns with five-year consumptive use averages for three periods, covering the time when the physical development of the river storage and delivery systems was being completed, and consumptive use of the river was approaching full development too โ but just on the edge of the trauma of the โmillennial droughtโ (which may last for a millennium) and the near-collapse of the storage system. The attempt at normal distribution for the 2001-2005 period might be considered just beyond that edge โ like the roadrunner cartoons, when Wiley Coyote runs a few yards into the air beyond a cliff โ then looks downโฆ. These dates are bookended by two โreservoir coordinationโ elements in the โLaw of the Riverโ: the 1970 โCriteria for the Coordinated Long-range Operation of Colorado River Reservoirsโ and the 2007 โInterim Guidelinesโ for coordinated operation of the Powell and Mead Reservoirs, set to expire next year.
The Bureauโs five-year compilation tables include, for the first time maybe, the system losses/structural deficit.
Something worth noting: Californiaโs consumptive use during this 35-year period started well above the stateโs 4.4 maf compact allotment, and then declined, while uses for all the other states were increasing. This is because Californiaโs major users had decided, before Hoover Dam was even started, that they would โborrowโ 800,000 af of unused Upper Basin water until the Upper Basin needed it. They would, in other words, grow on borrowed water. The Bureau of Reclamation allowed this, because they assumed that the Colorado River would eventually be augmented by even greater public works from some larger river basin. Optimism is a sunny thing. On the strength of this, the Metropolitan Water District on the Southern California coast built its 250-mile aqueduct to carryย twiceย the 500,000 af that was their share of Californiaโs 4.4 maf allotment. They began decreasing their โborrowedโ usage during this 35-year period, in anticipation of the 2006 California Limitation Act โ thanks mostly to the California State Water Project exporting water from Northern California.
Arizonaโs jump in usage between 1971-75 and 1991-95 was due to the completion of the Central Arizona Project. To give a more accurate picture of โthe completed river system,โ only its 1991-95 and 2001-2005 figures were used in compiling Column 5.
Column 5: A compiled average for the three five-year periods โ resulting in the 14.5 maf river of 1930-2000.
Column 6: An attempt to divvy up the system losses/structural deficit (SLD) between the seven states and Mexico. My operating assumption is that the โhot desertโ states and the โcold desertโ states should share these losses proportionally to their consumptive use. This meant creating percentages of the 9.0 maf of decreed use for the four entities below the canyons; the four entities above the canyons were already operating on percentages.
Iโm sure the state (guess which one) with a lot of pre-compact โseniorโ water will object vehemently to this concept, wanting all the junior users to absorb those losses. This is a misapplication of the appropriation doctrine, in my estimation; it was set up for resolving differences among specific users, not for the resolution of major river management issues related to natural phenomena like evaporation and riparian storage, or natural and cultural changes like a warming climate. These issues fall equally on all users, everyoneโs fault and responsibility. But such rational and moral arguments will probably not dent Californiaโs resolve of seniority uber alles.
Column 7 just adds those proportionate shares of the system losses/structural deficit to the consumptive use averages for the seven states and Mexico in Column 5, leaving the system losses/structural deficit lines empty. This is not increasing the amount of water for each state; it is increasing the amount of consumption each has to manage. This column, Iโm arguing, is the seven-way equitable division of consumptive use that the Compact commissioners wanted to create in 1922, but lacked the information about both the river and their futures to develop. Now, a century later, that future is here, like it or not, and weโre sadder but wiser in knowing the river.
Thereโs probably an error at the bottom of this column; instead of 0.00 in the โSurplus or Drainโ column, it should probably be โ-2.00 mafโ: the difference between the 14.5 maf 20th-century river and the 12.5 maf early 21st-century river. This was the frightening drawdown of the early 21st century decades.
Column 8 then uses the Column 7 figures to calculate what percentage of the 14.5 maf river each of the eight entities โowns.โ
Column 9 then applies those percentages to the 12.5 maf Colorado River of the 21st century โ and subtracts from each stateโs total consumption its share of system losses and structural deficit โ thus showing what each state will actually have with which to try to do what it is doing today with its presumed allotment for consumptive use of the 14.5 maf river of bygone days. Read it and weep. (Note that Iโve put the 1.5 and 0.45 maf system losses/structural deficit numbers back in Column 9 to remind you that they have not disappeared from the system; theyโve just been re-collated from those portions of the individual statesโ total consumptive uses.)
I would welcome comments and criticisms of this work. I do believe it is the kind of pinning down of numbers we need to finally do for the Colorado River, if we are going to go into the post-2026 era with our eyes open. โWoke,โ you might say.
By my next post, there will probably either be a new management plan for the river in the messy agonies of birthing โ or there wonโt. If there is, I would wager a six-pack that they will drag along the old two-basin cold-war division. And Iโd wager further that the ratio of total consumptive use for the four โstatesโ below the canyons to the four states above the canyons will be between within a few points either way of 70-30. Is that โequitableโ? Given the amount and productivity of land under cultivation, and the number of people gathered in large metropolitan ganglia, and the location of most of the Indian nations, it probably is. But โ itโll probably be another point of discussion.
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
Overview of the 18 CAMELS HUC2 basins (or zone) across CONUS.
Click the link to access the article on the AGU website (Sadegh Sadeghi Tabas,ย Vidya Samadi,ย Catherine Wilson,ย Biswa Bhattacharya). Here’s the abstract:
September 22, 2025
As Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) are being increasingly employed to make important simulations in rainfall-runoff contexts, the demand for interpretability is increasing in the hydrology community. Interpretability is not just a scientific question, but rather knowing where the models fall flat, how to fix them, and how to explain their outcomes to scientific communities so that everyone understands how the model arrives at specific simulations This paper addresses these challenges by deciphering interpretable probabilistic DNNs utilizing the Deep Autoregressive Recurrent (DeepAR) and Temporal Fusion Transformer (TFT) for daily streamflow simulation across the continental United States (CONUS). We benchmarked TFT and DeepAR against conceptual to physics-based hydrologic models. In this setting, catchment physical attributes were incorporated into the training process to create physics-guided TFT and DeepAR configurations. Our proposed physics-guided configurations are also designed to aggregate the patterns across the entire data set, analyze the sensitivity of key catchment physical attributes and facilitate the interpretability of temporal dynamics in rainfall-runoff generation mechanisms. To assess the uncertainty, the modeling configurations were coupled with a quantile regression by adding Gaussian noiseย ย with increasing standard deviation to the individual catchment attributes. Analysis suggested that the physics-guided TFT was superior in predicting daily streamflow compared to the original TFT and DeepAR as well as benchmark hydrologic models. Predictive uncertainty intervals effectively bracketed most of the observational data by simultaneous simulation of various percentiles (e.g., 10th, 50th, and 90th). Interpretable physics-guided TFT proved to be a strong candidate for CONUS daily streamflow simulations. [ed. emphasis mine]
Created by Imgur user Fejetlenfej , a geographer and GIS analyst with a โlifelong passion for beautiful maps.โ It highlights the massive expanse of river basins across the country โ in particular, those which feed the Mississippi River, in pink.
Perkins canal drawing showing the Colorado portion, courtesy Nebraska Department of Natural Resources.
Here’s the release from Governor Polis’ office (Lawrence Pachecoย and Shelby Wieman):
October 15, 2025
Governor Jared Polis and Attorney General Phil Weiser today urged the U.S. Supreme Court to reject a case about the South Platte River Compact and Nebraskaโs efforts to build the Perkins County Canal. Colorado is complying with its obligations under the compact and not obstructing Nebraskaโs efforts to build the canal, so there is nothing for the court to review at this time, according to a brief filed with the court.
The South Platte River originates in Colorado and supplies water for the stateโs biggest cities and some of its most productive agricultural lands. The river starts in the Rocky Mountains and winds roughly 380 miles northeast into Nebraska. The South Platte River Compact is an agreement between Colorado and Nebraska that establishes the Statesโ rights and responsibilities to use water in the South Platte.
While Colorado acknowledges Nebraskaโs right to build the Perkins County Canal, Nebraska has failed to move forward on the project for over 100 years. Recently, Nebraska officials have taken preliminary steps to plan and permit the project through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, but numerous steps lie ahead during which Nebraska, and others who might be affected by the project, will identify potential issues and fully study any impacts.
Nebraska appears to be using the prospect of the canal and this request for Supreme Court action as leverage to renegotiate the South Platte River Compact. Colorado will ensure that Nebraska honors the letter of the Compact, just as Colorado always has.
โWater is the lifeblood of our state. We have always faithfully honored the century-old South Platte Compact and all other water agreements with our downstream neighbor states, and we will continue to do so. We refuse to sit idly by while Nebraska chases a meritless lawsuit that threatens Coloradoโs precious water resources, our robust agriculture industry, and our rural communities in Northeastern Colorado,โ said Governor Jared Polis.
Attorney General Weiser said Colorado is complying with the compact and not interfering with Nebraskaโs efforts to build the canal. As such, Nebraska hasnโt raised any claims ripe for Supreme Court review. Whatever issues arise in the future can be addressed through federal permitting processes or lower courts.
โNebraskaโs claimed violations rely on speculative and premature allegations. To the extent any legal issues arise in the future, there are alternative forums to resolve them. The Supreme Court need not take a case that would put the court and the parties on a long, time-intensive, and expensive path that might well, in the end, put the States right back where they were before Nebraska filed their proposed complaint,โ said Attorney General Weiser. โEven if the court decides to take up part or all of Nebraskaโs case, Iโm confident that we will win on the merits. Both the facts and the law are on our side.โ
Nebraskaโs claims that Colorado authorizes water uses that harm Nebraska during the irrigation season are not supported by facts. Jason Ullmann, the State Engineer and Director of the Division of Water Resources, said Nebraska has only recently suggested they were concerned that Colorado was not meeting its obligations during the irrigation season.
โFor over 100 years the Colorado State Engineerโs Office has worked with Nebraska and performed the hard work of ensuring Colorado meets its compact obligations on the South Platte River. This means we make difficult decisions every day on who receives their water and when based on the priority system and compact terms. As a result, water users in Colorado and Nebraska all receive their allotted share, said Jason Ullmann, State Engineer and Director of the Division of Water Resources โWe were surprised and disappointed by Nebraskaโs lawsuit and are hopeful once all the briefs are filed that we can resume discussions to meet the mutual needs of both of our States.โ
The Supreme Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction over interstate disputes, such as border disputes and water rights. States must file a motion for leave to file a bill of complaint to bring a case to the court. The Supreme Court must still decide whether to accept the case.
The case is Nebraska v. Colorado, case number 220161.
The dangerous high waters on the San Juan River and Upper Rio Grande are beginning to recede following the surge from heavy rains that created historic autumn peak streamflows on the San Luis Valleyโs river system.
The high flows also came at the end of irrigation season for Valley farmers and the Colorado Division of Water Resources, which will now account for the extra water in its management of the Rio Grande Compact.
The Rio Grande itself peaked at 7,000 cfs from the bounty of rain that came through the southwest region here in mid-October. The Colorado Division of Water Resources is estimating that the out-of-character weather event added 20,000 to 25,000 acre-feet of water to the Rio Grande system itself and around 10,000 to 15,000 acre-feet that was diverted into the Valleyโs canal system, according to staff engineer Pat McDermott.
That measuring of the water and accounting for how it fits into this yearโs obligations under the Rio Grande Compact is underway. The irrigation season ends Nov. 1.
McDermott, in a report Tuesday to Rio Grande Basin Roundtable members, said not all of the water will be of beneficial use to the Valley and the Upper Rio Grande Basin. The middle Rio Grande could see about 5,000 acre-feet flow downstream, but with a largely dry riverbed in Albuquerque, benefits from the October storms likely wonโt extend as far south as Elephant Butte.
โThis is not a significant event in New Mexico,โ McDermott said.
For the reservoirs on the western and southern end of the Valley, it has been. Rio Grande Reservoir, Platoro Reservoir and Terrace Reservoir all will increase storage, with the reservoirs all in priority during the irrigation season for the first time since 2019.
Rio Grande Reservoir will have somewhere between 2,000 and 4,000 acre-feet of storage, Platoro Reservoir has increased its storage and Terrace Reservoir has gone up about 2,000 acre-feet, McDermott said.
โThis is kind of unusual to have this big a flow event,โ McDermott said. โIt doesnโt happen.โ
McDermott noted the importance and effectiveness of the Valleyโs canal ditch riders, who worked to push water into their ditches to help with the surges of streamflow.
The Empire Canal, Monte Vista, the Rio Grande Canal, the Farmers Union, San Luis Valley Canal all opened their ditches to take in water, McDermott said.
โWe here have very, very cooperative owners that have opened up their ditches after several months of non-use. We want to thank all those ditch operators for getting out there and taking some of this available flow. It is a wonderful thing.
โThis is a really good thing for our basin,โ said McDermott. โItโs going to give us an opportunity to get some water back out into the ditches late in the season, which we donโt see very often.โ
Much of Valley will now go into its offseason with moist soils. But as McDermott noted, areas like the critical Saguache Creek, Carnero Creek, and the east side of the Valley down south through Trinchera didnโt receive much benefit from the rains.
The next best thing would be a normal to above-normal snow season in the San Juan Mountains and Sangre de Cristo range.
La Niรฑa is still looking weak. But as October has shown, weather can happen.
Rio Grande and Pecos River basins. Map credit: By Kmusser – Own work, Elevation data from SRTM, drainage basin from GTOPO [1], U.S. stream from the National Atlas [2], all other features from Vector Map., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=11218868
Here’s the release from the Colorado Water Trust (Kate Ryan and Blake Mamich):
October 7, 2025
Coloradoโs rivers are running on empty asย drought grips the intermountain west. But a record-setting response from Colorado Water Trust is helping keep critical stretches of rivers around our state flowing for fish, farms, and communities alike.
This year, Colorado Water Trust is operating more projects across more rivers than at any point in its 24-year historyโand restoring more water to streams than ever before. Across the state and on both sides of the Continental Divide, Colorado Water Trust is partnering with local irrigators, water districts, state agencies, and funders to release more than 16,000 acre-feet of water (over 5.2 billion gallons) back into rivers when itโs needed most. This unprecedented effort highlights how collaboration and creativity can sustain Coloradoโs rivers through crisis, offering a model of resilience at a time when the stateโs waterways face one of their toughest seasons yet.
Colorado is in the grip of a devastating drought.ย Nearly 45% of the stateย is currently experiencing at least moderate drought conditions, with significant portions in severe and extreme drought. Streams across the state are shrinking, water temperatures are rising, and ecosystems, farms, and communities are all feeling the strain.ย In many places, streamflow gauges are reporting flows in the lowest 10-25 percentile for this time of year. Rivers in some regions are hitting historically low levels far earlier in the season. This year marks theย earliest call on the Yampa River in recorded history. The situation is dire, and without swift, creative intervention, stretches of Coloradoโs treasured rivers could be left dry.
In response, Colorado Water Trust is rising to meet this challenge by running nearly all of its projects across the state, ensuring that water is returned to rivers when it is needed most. The scale of the response is unprecedentedโthis year is predicted to see more water restored to Coloradoโs rivers through Colorado Water Trustโs work than in any other year since the organization was founded. Some of this yearโs projects include:
This map shows the 15-mile reach of the Colorado River near Grand Junction, home to four species of endangered fish. Map credit: CWCB
Colorado River: On the Colorado River, Colorado Water Trust is again operating its project on the 15-Mile Reach, a stretch of river critical to the survival of four endangered and threatened fish species. Colorado Water Trust is expected to restore well over 1 billion gallons of water to this critical reach by releasing water from Ruedi Reservoir near Basalt which is then restored to the Fryingpan and Roaring Fork Rivers before it reaches the 15-Mile Reach of the Colorado River. Through innovative partnerships with the Grand Valley Water Users Association, Orchard Mesa Irrigation District, and the Upper Colorado Endangered Fish Recovery Program, water is being delivered at key times to support flows in this fragile habitat. Backed by generous support from corporate partners such as Niagara Cares, Coca-Cola, and Coors Seltzer, this project has become a model of collaboration and creativity.
Yampa River: Further north in the Yampa Valley, Colorado Water Trust is implementing our projects on the Upper and Lower Yampa River. Releases from Stagecoach Reservoir, made possible through collaboration with Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District and the Colorado Water Conservation Board, have been restoring significant volumes of water to the Upper Yampa as it passes through downtown Steamboat Springs since June. This water is vital for endangered fish within the reach, as well as the recreation economy downstream. Additionally, on the Lower Yampa, strategic releases out of Elkhead Reservoir in coordination with the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the Colorado River District are sustaining critical habitat for endangered fish, as well as supporting the agricultural community downstream. These projectsโalready amounting to thousands of acre-feetโare keeping the Yampa River flowing through one of its most critical seasons. Without these boosts, irrigators, fish, and the communities of the valley would be facing even greater hardship. These projects are made possible thanks to generous funding from the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the Yampa River Fund, Colorado River District, and more.
Around the state: On smaller tributaries, Colorado Water Trust is also making a difference.The Slater Creek Project, in partnership with local ranchers and Western Resource Advocates, is improving conditions for an important headwater tributary to the Yampa River while supporting the local agricultural economy. So far, this project has restored over 100 million gallons of water to Slater Creek. On the Fraser River, Colorado Water Trust has teamed up with the Grand County Mutual Ditch and Reservoir Company to improve late-season flows through the Vail Ditch Project. This effort, which will return roughly 16 million gallons of water this year, helps cool the river and support critical trout spawning runs. In Boulder County in the Indian Peaks Wilderness by the Continental Divide, Colorado Water Trustโs project out of Jasper Reservoir released water and accounted for approximately 32% of flows in Middle Boulder Creek upstream of Barker Reservoir and 25% of flows in Boulder Creek in downtown Boulder. Across the state, permanent long-term projects are also running, steadily and reliably delivering water to rivers during the hottest, driest part of the year.
Taken together, these efforts represent the most ambitious season in Colorado Water Trustโs history. By weaving together partnerships with irrigation companies, conservancy districts, state and federal agencies, and local communities, and by drawing on the support of a diverse array of fundersโColorado Water Trust is delivering hope where it is needed most.
โThese projects demonstrate the power of partnership to keep rivers flowing, even in the toughest years,” said Kate Ryan, Colorado Water Trustโs Executive Director. โIt just goes to show how everyoneโno matter who you are or where you liveโcares about protecting Coloradoโs rivers and the people who depend on them.โ
While drought continues to tighten its grip on Colorado, these projects demonstrate that collaboration and innovation can keep rivers alive. In the face of crisis, Colorado Water Trust is proving that when partners and funders come together, rivers can be sustained for people, farms, fish, and communities alike. This year will mark the most flow ever restored to Coloradoโs rivers through Colorado Water Trustโs workโa milestone born from collaboration, ingenuity, and urgent necessity.
โItโs a strange mix of pride and worry,โ said Blake Mamich, Program Director for the Colorado Water Trust โOn one hand, Iโm thrilled to see so much water restored to rivers this year. On the other, I know that the only reason we can do this work at this scale is because itโs so needed: drought and climate stress are hitting us harder and harder. Thatโs a hard truth we carry with us every day.โ
As Colorado enters one of its most critical water years in recent memory, Colorado Water Trust is committed to ensuring that, even in the face of historic drought, Coloradoโs rivers will continue to flow.
About Colorado Water Trust
Colorado Water Trust is a statewide nonprofit organization with a mission to restore water to Coloradoโs rivers. Since 2001, theyโve restored over 26 billion gallons of water to Coloradoโs rivers and streams. ColoradoWaterTrust.org.
As the Upper Division States negotiate ways to equitably and sustainably manage the Colorado Riverโs future supplies, their water users face the harsh reality of living within the riverโs 21st-century limits.
This year, in New Mexico, the San Juan Chama project received 31% of their normal Colorado River water supply, a 69% reduction, which is used by Albuquerque and Santa Fe, as well as for agricultural purposes.
โThe San Juan-Chama Project contractors are absorbing unavoidable natural hydrologic shortages and have had to learn how to operate under constrained supplies, higher costs, and mounting climate pressures,โ said Diane Agnew, the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Water Utility Authorityโs Water Rights Program Manager. โThis ongoing uncertainty in water availability is placing significant strain on water users, challenging infrastructure investments, and disrupting water management strategies that are critical to our communities and economy.โ
In Colorado, the Dolores Water Conservancy Districtโs water users faced cuts of up to 44%. Thousands of acres remain fallowed both on the Ute Farm & Ranch and north towards Dove Creek.
โOur farmers are left with year-by-year gambles with last-second planning going late into May and limiting farmersโ abilities to make long-term, successful crop rotation planning,โ said Ken Curtis, GM of the Dolores Water Conservancy District. โThe Dolores snowpack is disappearing, and the historic runoff has dropped by even greater magnitudes. Water is no longer reliably available.โ
2025 marks the fifth year out of the last eight years with shortages impacting the Conservancy District. Many acres have remained fallow since 2021, when available project water supplies dropped to zero. Local farmers did not have the time and resources to bring fields back into production prior to this current shortage โ all of their shortages are uncompensated and involuntary.
The District supplies water to the Ute Mountain Ute Tribeโs Farm and Ranch Enterprise. The Tribe was forced to turn off irrigation spigots to 60% of their land and lay off farm workers. The crop plan for 2025 only included the existing, high-value alfalfa needed to sustain the Farm & Ranch Enterprise [FRE].
โWe [FRE] are merely surviving, not adapting,โ said FRE irrigation manager Michael Vicente when responding to his view of the historic drought. Severe water shortages in Utahโs Uintah Basin, driven by Colorado River cuts, are forcing ranchers to reduce cattle herds, raising production costs and straining the local economy.
โSpring runo๏ฌ was dismal at best. Early 1900s era water rights only received a week or two of natural flow delivery. Shortages were so severe that in some basins, they even a๏ฌected senior 1861 water rights.
These shortages are directly impacting cattle production,โ said Dan Larsen, Board Member at the Colorado River Authority of Utah. โRanchers are being forced to cut back their herds, which not only raises costs for producers but also ripples through our entire local economy.โ
Hydrologic shortage is also impacting Utahโs Demand Management Pilot Program, which is exploring voluntary, compensated water conservation in the Colorado River system in Utah. For example, the Central Utah Water Conservancy District enrolled 4,500 acre-feet of water in the program; however, the water rights held by the District were cut in priority on June 8, much earlier than the typical mid-summer cut, resulting in only around 900 acre-feet being delivered to the Program.
Agricultural producers are weighing potential impacts from hydrologic shortage on their operations as they consider participating in conservation-related pilot programs Nick Sampinos, a farmer along the Price River, said โPersistent drought conditions are a constant challenge, however, the Utah Demand Management Pilot Program has provided us with much needed assistance and set the stage for economic sustainability of our farming operation well into the future.โ
In Wyoming, historic drought and Colorado River shortages have driven the Blackโs Fork River down to a 1891 priority date, forcing the state to regulate o๏ฌ water rights to more than 52,000 irrigated acres in 2025 in that drainage alone.
โThis year, more than 163,000 acres of irrigation were shut o๏ฌ in Wyomingโs portion of the Green River Basin,โ said Kevin Payne, Division IV Superintendent of the Wyoming State Engineerโs O๏ฌce. โThis is an extraordinary reduction with serious impacts on producers and rural communities across southwest Wyoming.โ
The Upper Basin has consistently used less than its legal entitlement through strict water administration. The four states of the Upper Basin remain committed to continued work in implementing and expanding water management initiatives, including accounting for conservation-related activities in 2026.
The Upper Basinโs sacrifices arenโt abstract; they carry real human and economic consequences. As Colorado River negotiations continue, Upper Basin leaders are clear: river operations must adapt to the actual supply and prioritize rebuilding storage to restore resiliency.
About the Upper Colorado River Commission (UCRC):
The UCRC is an interstate administrative agency made up of duly appointed representatives from the four Upper Division States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming.
Army Corps, for fourth consecutive year, authorizes anย underwater damย to keep salt water from moving up the Mississippi River in Louisiana.
A cold-water flow experiment atย Glen Canyon Damย to disrupt non-native fish downstream will end within a week.
Senate passes aย defense spending authorization billย with water-related provisions.
And lastly, EPA sits on a โforever chemicalโ toxicity assessment, ProPublica finds.
โDo not make American families pay the price for Trumpโs war on affordable American energy.โ โ Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) speaking on the Senate floor to rally votes to end President Trumpโs national energy emergency. Heinrich and his Democratic colleagues faulted the White House for increasing electricity prices by cancelling wind and solar projects and fully supporting data center developments, which consume large quantities of electricity. Yet, the Democratsโ effort to repeal the emergency declaration failed.
River Mile 53.1: Approximate location of the front of the saltwater โwedgeโ that is pushing up the Mississippi River, in southern Louisiana, according to the Army Corps of Engineers. If the wedge moves far enough upriver it will endanger drinking water supplies for communities that draw from the river. Chloride concentrations are higher in the trailing sections of the wedge. The Corps estimates that the point at which they exceed EPA drinking water standards is 15 to 25 miles behind the wedge front.
News Briefs
Saltwater Barrier The Army Corps of Engineers, for the fourth consecutive year, has authorized the construction of an underwater dam across the bottom Mississippi River as a way of keeping salt water from the Gulf of Mexico from moving upriver and spoiling municipal water supplies.
A contractor is building the dam at river mile 64. As of October 10, the front of the saltwater wedge was estimated at river mile 53.1.
Salt water intrudes when river flows are too feeble to push it out. These low-flow conditions have happened in the late summer or early fall every year since 2022.
Because salt water is heavier than fresh, the intrusion happens along the bottom of the river, which is why the temporary earthen dam is placed across the river bed.
If salt water moves too far upstream, it will contaminate the water supply for communities whose intake pipes extend into the river. In 2023, the Army Corps barged 153 million gallons of fresh water to communities in southern Louisiana that were affected by the saltwater intrusion.
Senate Passes Defense Spending Bill The Senate passed a bill that authorizes defense spending for fiscal year 2026. The bill also has a number of water-related provisions.
It requires the Defense Department to conduct a pilot wastewater surveillance study at four or more military installations. The goal is to test wastewater for substances that would identify drug use among service members or the presence of infectious disease. (Wastewater surveillance grew in prominence as a testing tool during the Covid pandemic.)
It establishes a working group on โadvanced nuclearโ technologies that could power desalination facilities.
It requires a report on energy and water use for any data center built or expanded on military property.
It repeals a moratorium on the burning of PFAS substances, including firefighting foam.
The bill includes an amendment from Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) that requires NASA to pay for new drinking water wells for the Eastern Shore town of Chincoteague. The townโs existing wells were contaminated with PFAS when the land was owned by the Navy. That land has since been transferred to NASA.
Studies and Reports
EPA Sits on โForever Chemicalโ Report An EPA report on the toxicity of PFNA โ one of the thousands of PFAS in circulation โ was ready to be published in mid-April, ProPublica reports. But the agency has not yet released it.
PFNA is one of six PFAS that the Biden administration decided to regulate in drinking water. The Trump administration announced in May that it would attempt to reverse that decision for four of the chemicals โ including PFNA.
On the Radar
Glen Canyon Dam Flow Experiment The Bureau of Reclamation began releasing cool water from the depths of Lake Powell in mid-August.
The cold water is meant to disrupt smallmouth bass spawning downstream of Glen Canyon Dam. Smallmouth bass are a non-native species that federal agencies and their partners are attempting to rein in to protect threatened native species like the humpback chub.
The cold-water flow experiment is set to end by October 20.
Because the cold-water flows bypass Glen Canyon Damโs turbines, the dam has been producing less power. That means more power purchased on the market. According to the Western Area Power Administration, which markets federal hydropower, purchased power expenses are โsignificant.โ WAPA opposed the cold-water release plan, arguing the end date should be October 1, which would reduce purchased power costs.
Sales of hydropower fund the operation and maintenance of Glen Canyon Dam.
Federal Water Tap is a weekly digest spotting trends in U.S. government water policy. To get more water news, follow Circle of Blue on Twitter and sign up for our newsletter.
I was wrong, and woefully so. I want to apologize for that and let you know how remorseful I am: I dearly, dearly wish that I was right. But alas โฆ
See, back in November I wrote a dispatch about what to expect from the incoming Trump administration, particularly concerning public lands and the environment. It actually turned out to be fairly accurate on the public lands stuff, but there was this one offending paragraph that, I fear, may have lulled some of my readers into complacency (when they should have been preparing to resist). Here it is:
Oh, boy. Trump has been in office for less than nine months, and already heโs checked off all of the boxes that naive little me figured (and hoped) he would never dare even attempt. He and Goebbels-clone Stephen Miller and friends are going full-on fascist and trampling on the First Amendment and the U.S. Constitution in general, they are prosecuting political opponents, they are using the โDepartment of Warโ to target the โenemy within,โ they are suing and bullying the media for reporting the truth and making fun of him, and they have engaged in a brutal โ and performative โ intimidation and terror campaign against immigrants and anyone who โlooksโ like they might be an immigrant. Making it even worse, the President of the United States treats it all like some sort of joke, acting like a pre-pubescent middle school bully while posting stupid videos portraying he and Russell Vought (a primary architect of Project 2025, which Trump disavowed during the campaign) as the grim reaper out to destroy Americaโs democracy (and the economy).
So, yeah, I was way off. Apologies for my naivety.
But I was right about one thing. I predicted Trump would practice governance by spite. He has, and done it to the extreme. Not only are his words malicious, but so are his policies, fueled by a lust for vengeance. His tariffs are aimed at punishing other countries (even though they ultimately only punish American consumers and businesses โ even his beloved oil and gas industry).
His quest for โEnergy Dominanceโ is anything but that. Sure, heโs trying to help out his fossil fuel tycoon buddies, but I think heโs even more interested in retribution against the โlibsโ and the environmentalists that takes the form of an all-out assault on the environment, the climate, public lands โ and everyone who cherishes or depends on these things. If he wanted to bolster energy, he would have at least stood aside and let the burgeoning solar and wind do their thing alongside fossil fuels by taking an โall of the aboveโ approach. Instead, he has done everything possible to stifle these energy sources, simply because they are cleaner than coal and gas. He shut down the Solar for All program, thus denying thousands of low- and middle-income families access to rooftop solar and a smidgeon of their own energy independence and lower utility bills. Whereโs the dominance in that?
And now the Trump administration has canceled some $8 billion in federal funding for clean energy, efficiency, and grid reliability projects across the nation, many of them in the West. And while one might think that this is just another assault on clean energy (which it is), or maybe a way to slash expenses to pay for tax cuts for billionaires (that, too), itโs primarily motivated by, yet again, revenge: The cuts were limited to states that voted for Kamala Harris in the 2024 election.
Yes, you read that correctly. While funding was zeroed out for blue states, identical projects in neighboring red states were left untouched. He is doing this to punish Democrat-leaning states, but the victims end up being small and large businesses that banked on those funds, the folks who work for those firms, the environment, and ultimately folks like you and me who will see our utility bills increase (because someone has to pay for those grid upgrades). And guess what? You wonโt be saved just because youโre in a red congressional district.
This is not normal, nor is it politics as usual.
In fact, the funding that the Trump administration is taking away from individuals, organizations, and businesses, was allocated by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act, both of which Congress passed during the Biden administration. The vast majority of the funding from those bills went to Republican states and districts that voted for Trump in 2024. The funded projects created thousands of new jobs across the country and added up to billions in investment in communities in the Phoenix area, along Coloradoโs Front Range, in Nevada, and elsewhere.
Iโm not saying all of these projects were wonderful, or that theyโd all succeed. Some were full on boondoggles, others would inflict more harm than good. But the funding was approved by Congress, and the organizations that received them were banking on them, had invested a great deal of their own money into the funded projects, and had built up workforces. For the administration to then take back the money, some of which had already been spent, for purely political, vindictive reasons, is both wrong and cruel.
And if you think that this is just for a bunch of solar panels, think again. Hereโs a list of some of the biggest projects that were defunded (which includes some funds that Trump had previously cancelled).
$2.2 billion: Amount rescinded for hydrogen fuel production and distribution hubs in California and the Pacific Northwest.
$70 million: Amount rescinded from Xcel Energy toย installย 1,000 megawatt-hour iron-air battery energy storage systems in Colorado and Minnesota.
$50 million: Amount rescinded from the Tribal Energy Consortiumโs Ignacio, Colorado-based program aimed at reducing methane emissions from tribal owned and operated oil and gas wells and facilities located on tribal lands.
$326 million: Amount rescinded from Colorado State University for aย projectdesigned to develop methods for reducing methane emissions from oil and gas wells.
$15 million: Amount rescinded from Kit Carson Electric Cooperative in northern New Mexico for a grid resilience project.
$6.6 million: Amount rescinded from Navajo Transitional Energy Company for studying and developing a carbon capture retrofit project for the Four Corners coal-burning power plant in New Mexico.
Hundreds of millions of dollars more are being clawed back from Portland General Electric, Southern California Edison, Tri-State Generation and Transmission, the Imperial Irrigation District, and the Electric Power Research Institute โ the list goes on and on. But it never extends to similar projects in red states.
Even as Energy Secretary Chris Wright was announcing the funding cuts, for example, his department went forward with a $2.23 billion loan for Lithium Americas and its contentious Thacker Pass mine in Nevada (which voted Republican in the last presidential election). In exchange, the administration took a 5% equity stake in both the company and in the firm. Never mind that the project is opposed by the Reno-Sparks Indian Colony, the Burns Paiute Tribe, and the Summit Lake Paiute Tribe, as well as by numerous environmental groups, and that the price of lithium is lower than itโs been since 2021. Go figure.
๐ต Public Lands ๐ฒ
As expected (and as I correctly predicted would happen), the Trump administration is busy unraveling environmental protections and resource and travel management plans for public lands around the West. The most recent targets include:
The Bureau of Land Managementโs Rock Springsย resource management planwhich covers about 3.6 million acres of public lands in southwestern Wyoming, including the Red Desert. A solid, common-sense plan was first released about two years ago that aimed to push energy and other development away from the most sensitive areas. It was years in the making, and was a compromise. And yet, Wyomingโs right-wing was up in arms, saying it was too restrictive. That prompted the BLM to go back to the drawing board and incorporate more public input. They came back with a far less restrictive plan, a compromised compromise, I guess you could call it. Thatโs not enough for the current administration and their industry donors, however: The BLM is going to revise it again, this time to bring it in line with Trumpโs โUnleashing American Energyโ agenda.ย More details and commenting instructions here.ย
The BLM is โreassessingโ the off-road route designations in its Labyrinth/Gemini Bridges travel plan that includes about 300,000 acres of slickrock-covered public lands near Moab. The new plan was issued late in 2023, and left a whopping 800 miles of roads and trails opened to motorized travel. The off-road-vehicle lobbyย sued to overturn the plan, but were shot down in court. You have until Oct. 24 toย comment on this one.
During water year 2025, drought moved into and intensified throughout most of the Interior West. Source: U.S. Drought Monitor.
๐ฅต Aridification Watch ๐ซ
The 2025 water year has come to an end (on Sept. 30), and while we know it was a fairly lousy one for most of the Western U.S., the data is now beginning to come in letting us know just how lousy it was. Some of the stats arenโt updated yet, and may not be for a while, thanks to the government shutdown and the Trump administrationโs fear of the word โclimate.โ
For the most part, the water year started out quite nicely, precipitation wise, with above โnormalโ amounts of rain and snow falling in October and November. But that was followed by a severe lack of snow, a dry, warm spring, and a late-to-arrive monsoon. The snowpack deteriorated, spring runoff was weak, and drought intensified under the hot, dry sun of summer, with only a bit of relief finally arriving in September.
Resulting low streamflows led to a 33-foot drop in Lake Powellโs surface level during the water year. Here are the charts and the numbers:
8.08 million acre-feet: Total Lake Powell inflows, water year 2024 (Unregulated inflows = 7.98 MAF)
3,578 feet: Lake Powellโs surface elevation on Oct. 1, 2024
5.14 million acre-feet: Total flows into Lake Powell during the 2025 water year. (Unregulated inflows = 4.69 MAF)
3,545 feet: Lake Powellโs surface elevation on Oct. 1, 2025
11.96 MAF: Inflows during water year 2023
21.65 MAF: Inflows during water year 1984 (the highest since Glen Canyon Dam was completed in 1963).ย
9.85%: Percent of the Western U.S. that was experiencing severe to exceptional drought at the beginning of the 2025 water year.
44.12%: Percent of the Western U.S. that was experiencing severe to exceptional drought at the end of the 2025 water year.
๐คฏ Annals of Inanity ๐คก
You just canโt make this stuff up. MAGA-world is rife with conspiracies about the Charlie Kirk killing last month, which is hardly surprising. I guess itโs tough for some folks to believe that some 22-year-old Mormon kid from a Republican, gun-loving family could assassinate a right-wing entertainer and provocateur on his own. He must have had help from that ever-elusive Antifa (which is not an organization, but simply a shortening of the term anti-fascist). Or maybe it was Mossad โ a favorite theory among a certain sect of the right wing.
But then thereโs Candace Owens, MAGA podcaster and Crazytown mayoral candidate. Sheโs raising the possibility that Phil Lyman was involved in the plot to assassinate Kirk. Yes, that Phil Lyman: the former San Juan County Commissioner who gained notoriety after leading an ATV ride โ with Ryan Bundy and his โmilitiaโ buddies making a cameo โ down Recapture Canyon just days after the Bunkerville standoff. Lyman has since swerved further and further into MAGA-land, served as a Utah state representative, received a pardon from Trump, and hurled some conspiracy-laden accusations of his own after losing the gubernatorial election to Gov. Spencer Cox.
I tried to listen to Owensโ argument and alleged evidence (including the link, with a suggestion not to click on it) regarding Lyman and couldnโt make any sense of it. But I guess Owensโs following is big enough for folks to take it kind of seriously. Even Cox, whom Lyman has assailed with accusations of his own, took to social media to defend his right-wing rival. Meanwhile, Iโll be making some popcorn while I wait to see how this one plays out.
In an era where climate change and overconsumption threaten our waterways, a remarkable act of generosity and foresight has emerged from the Indian Peaks Wilderness area of Colorado. On August 29, 2024, an anonymous donor gifted Jasper Lake, including the parcel of land surrounding it and the senior water rights it stores, to the Colorado Water Trust. This marked the largest water donation in Coloradoโs history. This act ensures the protection of 37 miles of Boulder Creek, safeguarding its flow, ecosystems, and recreational value for generations to come. Since 2024, 100 million gallons of water have been restored to the river as a result of this donation, and the annual benefit will continue to accrue to Boulder Creek streamflow indefinitely.A warming climate will continue to put pressure on Boulder Creek, but this source of water will be protected forever.
Over the past 25 years, the Colorado Water Trust has restored 27 billion gallons of water to 814 miles of rivers and streams throughout Colorado. Here is how it works: Much like a land trust can invest in conservation easements to protect property for future generations, the Colorado Water Trust invests in water rights to protect streamflow in our rivers. Water in Colorado is not only the lifeblood of our state and economy, but the right to use it can also be bought and sold. Instead of diverting water out of the river, the Water Trust uses water rights to protect that water in the river.
In the western United States, where water scarcity is an ever-pressing reality and climate change threatens to exacerbate hydrological extremes, the permanent donation of storage water from Jasper Lake to environmental benefit marks a profoundly important milestone. This is not merely a gift of water; it is a precedent-setting, visionary act that fuses water law ingenuity, ecological foresight, and an ethic of stewardship. In an era dominated by competing interests and escalating scarcity, the Jasper Lake donation offers a replicable path forward for other Western states grounded in cooperative frameworks, legal adaptability, and the kind of selfless generosity that serves the public interest.
Jasper Lake Donation
In 1890, nearly a century before Congress designated the Indian Peaks Wilderness as a part of the nationโs Wilderness Preservation system, the Boulder High Line Canal Company constructed Jasper Reservoir. Known to hikers and wilderness visitors as Jasper Lake, the reservoir has been a source of agricultural water in Boulder County and areas east of the mountains since that time. Nestled just east of the Continental Divide, this enclave for cold-water fish, moose, and backpackers doubled in purpose. Irrigation companies and the Colorado Power Company operated the reservoir over the next century.
Since the 1890s, Jasper Lake has been in a series of private ownerships, having been bought and sold multiple times. In recent years, the City of Boulder leased Jasper Lake water from private owners and provided that water to various Boulder County irrigators. During that time, the Colorado Water Trust worked with the owners of Jasper Lake to craft a plan for its use for environmental improvements and public benefit. As these conversations progressed, the owners generously offered Jasper Lake as a donation to the Water Trust.
The Water Trust then sought out a steward for the reservoir with both the capacity and knowledge necessary to manage and maintain the reservoirโs infrastructure. While the Water Trust owns multiple water rights, it focuses its time and energy on transactions that boost streamflow. Finding the right stewardโone who would commit to using Jasper Lake water in environmentally-compatible operationsโwould free the nonprofit from the burden of operating a high-hazard dam while meeting its mission to add water to Coloradoโs rivers. Accordingly, the Water Trust sought a partner with a desire to uphold the environmental and community values vital to operating Jasper Lake in a way that complements the mission of the Water Trust. Luckily, the nonprofit found such a willing steward and partner in the Tiefel Family.
The Tiefel Family, long-time residents of Colorado, have a deep-rooted connection to the stateโs natural landscapes and water resources. Known for their unwavering commitment to environmental preservation, the Tiefel Family has dedicated themselves to protecting Coloradoโs vital water ecosystems. With a passion for ensuring that future generations can enjoy the natural beauty of Boulder Creek and its surrounding areas, the Tiefel Family established 37-Mile LLC. Named after the length of protected streamflow from Jasper Lake through the wilderness and down Boulder Canyon, 37-Mile LLC is a testament to its mission of safeguarding the regionโs water resources from development pressures while promoting sustainable agricultural and irrigation practices.
โOur stewardship of Jasper Reservoir aligns with our broader vision of environmental conservation and community enrichment,โ said Doug Tiefel of 37-Mile LLC. โThe family is honored to partner with the Colorado Water Trust to ensure that the reservoirโs water continues to benefit the local ecosystems and communities, reinforcing our legacy of environmental responsibility.โ
Jasper Reservoir/Boulder Creek. Credit: Colorado Water Trust
With the support of the Tiefel Family and 37-Mile LLC, the Colorado Water Trust entered into an arrangement that benefits all involved. After the Water Trust accepted the reservoir donation, 37-Mile LLC entered into a purchase agreement to acquire the reservoir subject to a public access easement and a set of restrictive covenants that permanently protect public access to the reservoir and ensure that water released from Jasper Lake will continue to provide environmental benefits well into the future. As an additional benefit, once the water has traveled through Boulder Canyon and to the plains, agricultural producers can then use the water downstream.
The Jasper Lake water donation is truly exceptional in its structure and intent. The reservoir is ideally positioned at high elevation with a long carriage distance, benefiting stream flow in a highly visible and environmentally conscious area like Boulder Creek. The ability for a secondary use downstream for agricultural benefit further enhances its value. Most environmental water transfers have historically involved direct flow rightsโtypically less reliable and subject to seasonal variability. What makes Jasper Lake unique is that it involves the donation of storage water, which is highly reliable and valuable. Unlike junior water rights that may or may not be available in a dry year, this donation ensures actual wet water in the stream, when and where it is needed.
Through a uniquely cooperative agreement involving the Water Trust, a generous donor, a family with strong farming and ranching ties to the region, and planning support from the City of Boulder, this donation not only protects two critical componentsโagricultural heritage and instream ecological healthโbut also creates a new archetype for interagency collaboration. The result is a permanent, flexible, and legally sound environmental asset that will benefit both the creek and downstream users in perpetuity.
This project involving Jasper Lake and its water rights represents a new concept in water management, one that the Water Trust hopes to replicate many times in the future. It proves out the potential for the prior appropriation system to rise to meet environmental challenges without the application of an administrative public trust regulatory layer. The biggest challenge is financial. These are market-based transactions and so the Water Trust must either accept donations or be prepared to make competitive offers to be able to acquire permanent public access, remove development potential, and safeguard environmental benefits.
How the Water Trust was Formed; Colorado Water Law 101
Some of the best legal minds in Colorado and the West meticulously brewed the initial notion for a nonprofit trust that would utilize water rights for environmental benefit. The Water Trust was founded in 2001 by water rights scholar David Getches and now-retired water attorneys Michael Browning and David Robbins. Browning, who was the first chair of the board credits the initial concept being introduced by fellow law colleague Larry McDonnell, who was also on the faculty at the University of Colorado Law School. With early guidance from David Harrison, the Water Trust has grown from a fledgling nonprofit to a respected water rights innovator, facilitating over sixty transactions that have restored millions of gallons to rivers and streams across Colorado.
The Water Trust emerged from the recognition that the prior appropriation doctrine, often seen as rigid and zero-sum, could be creatively applied to benefit rivers. The Water Trust set out to proactively secure senior water rights for instream flows in collaboration with the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB), a state agency that holds the exclusive authority to place water to the beneficial use of instream flow in the State of Colorado as a way to preemptively address concerns about the future of the doctrine. Colorado has been a pure prior appropriation state since even before the 1873 Centennial State ensconced the practice in its constitution. Known as the โColorado Doctrine,โ a set of laws that the Territorial legislature passed in the 1860s established that:
The stateโs surface waters and groundwaters constitute a public resource for beneficial use by public agencies, private persons and entities;
A water right is a right to use a portion of the publicโs water supply;
Water rights owners may build facilities on the lands of others to divert, extract, or move water from a stream or aquifer to its place of use;
Water rights owners may use streams and aquifers for the transportation and storage of water.
The Water Trust operates squarely within the strict prior appropriation structure that the Colorado Doctrine established. In some western states, such as California, the public trust doctrine has been recognized to create an affirmative duty of state government to act as legal guardian for natural resource assets, including streams and rivers. Colorado, however, has remained a pure prior appropriation state since the 1800s.
The creation of the CWCB instream flow program in 1973 was an environmental era attempt to address streamflow issues without creating an exception to prior appropriation. As the federal government legislated into law environmental measures including the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, the State of Colorado ensured that water right administration and the practice of prior appropriation would remain untouched by federal environmental measures. However, the initial CWCB instream flow program was not effective enough in protecting streamflow. At the outset, the CWCBโs instream flow program could only appropriate junior water rights and acquire senior water rights at minimum stream flow rates โnecessary to preserve the environment to a reasonable degree,โ which were often insufficient for genuine environmental protection. This shifted in 2002 when the legislature enabled the CWCB to acquire senior water rights and change their use to instream flow in water court, achieving more reliable priorities and stream flow rates โto improve the environment to a reasonable degree.โ
Still, by the turn of the Century, the CWCB had acquired only a handful of senior water rights for instream flow use, and consequently, not all Coloradans found the state instream flow program to be satisfactory. Citizen-led groups had proposed multiple ballot initiatives, but each had failed to recognize one form or another of public trust in Colorado. Michael Browning explained that the Water Trustโs formation in 2001 was partly a response to concerns surrounding the public trust doctrine and its potential impact on established water rights in Colorado. The founders of the Water Trust aimed to acquire senior water rights voluntarily and work with the CWCB to convert them to instream flow use, preserving their priority dates. The founders understood that acquiring senior priorities for instream flow water rights was key to both meeting environmental priorities and safeguarding the prior appropriation system in an era where many people value sustainability and recreation equally with consumptive water use.
Key early strategies involved acquiring agricultural water rights and partnering with the CWCB for holding and applying them to instream flow use. Browning described the initial concept of purchasing existing water rights for agriculture and converting them to instream flows. The founders sought input from environmental and agricultural groups to ensure they wouldnโt be seen as a threat and engaged with the CWCB to navigate the politics of instream flows. Over time, the Water Trust strategy has expanded to include acquisition of reservoir rights like Jasper Lake and exploring ancillary uses such as downstream agricultural application, with environmental benefits accruing on a stream reach but no instream flow use per se.
It has always been crucial for the Water Trust to be perceived as working within the prior appropriation water rights system and not as a radical group trying to undermine it. From the outset, the Water Trust has committed to voluntary transactions and working through water courts. The initial board consisted of water engineers and lawyers, with an effort to include representatives from agriculture. Browning noted that there were initial fears from some in the water community, but the boardโs credibility helped alleviate opposition. Over time, the Water Trust has grown from a small, Denver-based nonprofit to an influential statewide organization, with staff in the Upper Arkansas Basin and southwest Colorado, establishing roots in the communities where it has the greatest impact.
The first Water Trust acquisition of the Moser Water Rights on Boulder Creek near the Blue River was instructive. A retiring ranching couple wanted to protect their land under conservation easements, but then discovered they could also protect their senior water rights to benefit the environment. Their senior water rights gained a dual-purpose when the Mosersโ collaborated with the Water Trust: CWCB-facilitated instream flow for the creek, and downstream augmentation supply for the Colorado River District, stored in Wolford Mountain Reservoir. The initial funding for the first water right purchase was primarily private, with the water right costing around $15,000. A significant turning point was the involvement of the Walton Family Foundation, which provided substantial grants allowing the Water Trust to grow and hire staff, including Amy Beattie as its first full-time executive director. Linda Bassi, Chief of the Instream Flow program for the CWCB, was also a key supporter, recognizing the opportunity to enhance the seniority of instream flow rights. The Water Trust developed a partnership with the CWCBโthe Water Trust would work with water right owners to purchase water rights and develop streamflow restoration projects, and the CWCB would hold and operate the acquired water for instream flows.
Case studies such as the Little Cimarron River transfer further highlight the Water Trustโs innovative model. In that project, water rights were split to allow both early-season irrigation by the landowner and late-season instream flow use by the CWCB, satisfying both agricultural and environmental needs without the typical winner-takes-all approach. This was the first โsplit-seasonโ use of water for both irrigation and instream flow approved in Colorado water court. Nuanced arrangements like this have allowed the Water Trust to earn the confidence of landowners, water users, and government entities alike.
How the Water Trust has Adapted; Water Law 201
Under the Prior Appropriation Doctrine, water rights are governed by โfirst in time, first in right.โ While this doctrine has often been characterized as overly rigid, seasoned attorneysโsuch as the late Colorado Supreme Court Justice Greg Hobbs and othersโhave long shown how water rights can be changed for new uses while maintaining senior priority. As Hobbs is purported to have said, and as board members and staff attorney for the Water Trust have expressed: Weโve done this forever for our clientsโฆ now letโs do it for our rivers.
Colorado law permits changes of use to be decreed by its water court, provided thereโs no injury to other vested and decreed water rights. Changing a water right requires limiting the use to historical consumption and diversion patterns in time, place, and amount. The change process is cumbersome, often requiring tens of thousands of dollars in legal and engineering fees in addition to multiple years to usher a water court application from start to finish. However, the end result is essential for water users who need a reliable supply, because the seniority, or date of appropriation assigned to a water right originally, is maintained throughout the change of use process. Historically, an overwhelming proportion of these transfers have involved shifting water from agriculture to municipal or industrial uses. In recent years, and thanks in part to the fortitude of the Water Trust and the CWCB, instream flow rights transfers have grown to become 1% of water right changes statewide. While the shift is small, it has transformed rivers like the Little Cimarron and the Alamosa, adding flowing water back into riverbeds that were once unseasonably dry. It signals that environmental uses are not second-class claims but essential components of modern water management.
The Jasper Lake donation exemplifies this principle. The donor, instead of selling the valuable storage water on an open market, permanently gifted it for environmental useโa use now recognized and legally protected under Colorado law. And it was not only the generous donor who has supported their local stream systemโ37-Mile LLC as the buyer agreed to a set of strict covenants, essentially stripping the Jasper Lake water right of its development potential. This donation operates within the same legal framework as the early consumptive use transfers, including the Moser and Little Cimarron water rights, proving that environmental values can thrive without rewriting the rulebook.
Borrowing from Land Conservation Practices to Save Rivers
The water from Jasper Lake is not just turned loose; it is released into Jasper Creek, from which point it flows down 37 miles of Middle Boulder Creek and Boulder Creek before the Tiefel Family diverts it back out of the stream system for irrigation use. Unlike many Water Trust projects, there is no CWCB instream flow use of the water. Instead, the Water Trust ensured that the water would remain in Boulder Creek by choosing to partner with 37-Mile and requiring, as a condition of their partnership and sale, that 37-Mile would agree never to redivert the water until it reaches that 37-mile point, in addition to several other restrictions.
The restrictions that the Water Trust imposed include restrictive covenants and a public access easementโlegal constructs adopted from land use law. Applying these principles, the property and water rights are permanently tied to ecological and public uses, while still respecting historical agricultural use for the Jasper Lake water. This flexibility was a key component that made the donation viable and attractive, and avoiding water court for a change of use enabled the participants to save on costs and time. The protections that the Water Trust tied permanently to Jasper Lake, the parcel of land surrounding it, and the water rights stored in it include the following:
An easement allowing the public to access Jasper Lake and the parcel of land surrounding it. Colorado law limits the liability of landowners who hold title to inholdings on public lands provided there is signage, which was key to the ability of 37-Mile to take on this responsibility;
Jasper Lake water must be stored until at least August 15 of each year, which provides the public with an opportunity to enjoy the beauty of its waters;
The owner of the Jasper Lake water right must take water deliveries beginning on or after August 15 of each year, which ensures that flows in the Boulder Creek drainage are boosted after snowmelt, when fish and the environment need it most;
The owner of Jasper Lake must take steps to avoid abandonment of the water right;
The owner of Jasper Lake must allow Colorado Parks and Wildlife to stock the lake with fish; and
Finally, if the owner of Jasper Court ever goes to water court, they must consult with the CWCB regarding the possible addition of instream flow use to the water right.
The covenant model ensures that the ecological intent of the donation is locked in perpetuity, regardless of future ownership changes. This legal durability is critical in an age of shifting climate variability and volatile hydrology. Moreover, the Jasper Lake donation includes an engineering-informed management plan that allows for strategic releases during critical low-flow periods, providing adaptive benefits for aquatic species, riparian vegetation, and downstream users. It is this combination of legal permanence and operational flexibility that makes the model so powerful.
Why Storage Matters: True Volume, True Impact
Storage rights, especially those high in the drainage area like Jasper Lake, offer great flexibility in release and can be timed to supplement flows when needed most. The long carriage distance of Jasperโs releases down Boulder Creek allows for significant stream flow restoration. Storage water can be released during dry seasons when streamflow is lowest, directly improving water quality, mitigating temperature spikes, and sustaining aquatic life. As the old adage goes, โThe solution to pollution is dilution.โ More water in the stream doesnโt just benefit fish and bugs; it improves drinking water quality for downstream communities and strengthens overall watershed health.
This is a crucial point: while senior direct flow rights can sometimes provide benefit when left in the stream, they often do so inconsistently. Stored water, by contrast, provides discretely measurable volumes that can be scheduled and managed. This transformed the Jasper Lake donation from a gesture to a guaranteed outcome. Drinking water providers, such as those in the Boulder and Denver metro areas, depend on baseflows to keep treatment costs low. High-quality source water means fewer chemicals and less energy to meet Safe Drinking Water Act standards. In this way, streamflow restoration becomes an upstream investment in downstream public health.
Perhaps most importantly, leaving water in the river should be understood not as a passive default, but as an affirmative beneficial use. Traditionally, beneficial use has been defined through diversionโwater being taken out of the river for agriculture, industry, or municipal supply. But Colorado law now affirms that instream flows can meet the beneficial use standard when they are legally protected and used to preserve the natural environment. This conceptual shift is profound. It re-centers the health of the river itself as a priority, recognizing that a flowing stream provides ecological services, supports recreation economies, enhances water quality and sustains life throughout the basin.
Why Permanence Matters: Creative and Collaborative Solutions
What makes the Jasper Lake donation especially promising is its emphasis on collaboration. Governments, nonprofits, agricultural stakeholders and local communities worked in unison to ensure the projectโs success. Each party brought their priorities to the tableโagricultural heritage, legal acumen, ecological resilienceโand emerged with a better outcome than any could have achieved alone.
There are few other legal mechanisms in Colorado to protect water for the environment: RISIDS (Recovery Implementation for Endangered Species), Wild & Scenic River designation (with only one such stretch in Colorado), or narrowly focused instream flow rights used by the CWCB. The Jasper Lake project expands this limited toolbox, showing that partnerships and legal creativity can yield conservation outcomes without requiring federal mandates.
Another instructive comparison is the Water Trustโs work on the Yampa River system, where cooperative agreements among the CWCB, environmental organizations, and agricultural users have led to temporary instream flow leases and beneficial use deliveries to preserve flows during dry years. These leases, though helpful, are inherently limited by duration and uncertainty. That uncertainty is, at least to some extent, mitigated by the existence of the Yampa River Fund, an endowed and locally-managed fund that pays for water leasing and sponsors other work to improve the Yampa River and its tributaries. Jasper Lake moves even beyond that, embedding conservation in perpetuity.
A Model for the West
Twenty-nine states operate under some form of the prior appropriation doctrine. The Jasper Lake donation stands as a model that others can emulate. Michael Browning said he still sees great opportunities for similar initiatives in other western states, especially those in the Colorado River Basin, emphasizing the role of nonprofits in adapting the water rights system to recognize environmental and recreational values. By demonstrating that private rights can be permanently converted to public goodsโwithout litigation, without legislative overhaul, and without harming other usersโthis project charts a replicable path forward.
While unique in the seven states of the Colorado River Basin, the Water Trust is not alone. The Oregon Water Trust, founded in 1994, and the Washington Water Trust, founded in 1998, are similar organizations. There is an Arizona Water Trust that primarily focuses on land donations that may include water rights. Montana, New Mexico, and Utah have all explored instream flow programs, but few have integrated storage donations. In the Upper Snake Basin of Idaho, a pilot effort to lease stored water for environmental flows is promising, but still temporary. Jasper Lake shows that permanent storage donations are possible, legal, and immensely beneficial. Especially in the seven basin states, the Colorado Water Trust serves as a useful model and tool for others to replicate.
Lessons Learned
Perhaps the most profound lesson from Jasper Lake is the value of permanence. One-time leases and short-term mitigation projects are common, but they do not provide the stability or reliability that rivers need. Permanency ensures predictability. It signals to ecosystems and economies alike that someone is planning for the long term.
Moreover, the donation sets a precedent that stored water can and should be used for instream benefitโand that such uses are not just legally viable but deeply beneficial to the broader hydrological system. As we consider future projects, the importance of true volume, collaborative administration, and permanence cannot be overstated.
Another key takeaway is the importance of patience. Water transactions require timeโnot just to navigate the legal and engineering hurdles, but to build the trust among stakeholders that makes such projects durable. Funders, partners, and policymakers must embrace this long view. Water transactions require the same patience and investment mindset we bring to ski areas, resorts, transportation, reservoirs or other large infrastructure projects. But the payoffโcleaner rivers, healthier ecosystems, and stronger communitiesโis well worth it.
Gratitude and Foresight
As Michael Browning said, โProgress is possible with goodwill and a shared need.โ The Jasper Lake donation is more than a gift. It is a template, a catalyst, and a moral benchmark. It shows that with legal creativity, trust among partners, and courageous donors, we can build a more resilient and ecologically rich future.
As the West grapples with aridification and changing demands, projects like Jasper Lake shine like beacons. They show us what is possible when we work together and think beyond ourselves. None of this would be possible without the extraordinary foresight and generosity of the donor. In a market where water rights fetch increasingly high prices, the choice to donateโpermanently, and without reservationโis not only rare but deeply courageous. It reflects an ethic of care that transcends personal gain and speaks to a commitment of legacy, community, and the natural world.
The success of the Colorado Water Trust also reflects gratitude for the legislative frameworks that made it possible. Coloradoโs instream flow program, the CWCBโs administrative role, and the legal structure built into prior appropriation water law all played essential roles. The Jasper Lake project didnโt require new laws; it simply needed the right vision and the will to collaborate. All it required was to Just Add Water.
Jasper Lake is truly a remarkable and historic gift.
Kate Ryan is a water lawyer who joined Colorado Water Trust in 2018 and was appointed as Executive Director in 2023. Her past clients included farmers, ranchers, municipalities, landowners, and the CWCB. Before going to Berkeley Law she obtained a masterโs degree in geography at the University of Colorado. Kate does her work at the Colorado Water Trust in order to support that which she holds most dearโour incredible state and the people within, the beautiful rivers and mountains we explore, and a future for her kids where they can experience a continuation of it all.
Matt Moseley is a communication strategist, author, speaker and world-record adventure swimmer. He is the principal and CEO of the Ignition Strategy Group, which specializes in high-stakes communications and issue management. As the author of three books and is the subject of two documentaries, he uses his swimming around the world to bring raise awareness about water issues. He is the co-chair of the Southwest River Council for American Rivers and is a member of the Advisory Board for the Center for Leadership at the University of Colorado at Boulder. He lives in Boulder with his wife Kristin, a water rights attorney and their two children.
September precipitation was mixed across the region, with below normal conditions in Utah and northeastern Wyoming, and above normal conditions in eastern Colorado and southeastern Wyoming. Temperatures were near to above normal for the majority of the region, with a large pocket of record-warm temperatures in southwestern Wyoming. The first snowfall of the season was observed on September 22 in Utah and September 23 in Colorado. Drought conditions remained the same in Utah and improved in Colorado and Wyoming, with regional drought coverage at 61% as of September 30. Monthly streamflow conditions were near to below normal across much of the region. The probability of La Niรฑa conditions developing is 60% by mid to late fall. NOAA seasonal forecasts for October-December suggest an increased probability of below average precipitation and above average temperatures for the region.
The region experienced a mix of moisture conditions in September, with very dry conditions in western and northern Utah, and wet conditions in northeastern Colorado and southeastern Wyoming. Below normal precipitation occurred throughout most of Utah and northeastern Wyoming, while above normal precipitation occurred throughout most of eastern Colorado and southeastern Wyoming. A large pocket of record-wet conditions occurred in northeastern Colorado, and a pocket of record-dry conditions occurred in Johnson County, Wyoming.
September temperatures were near to above average throughout most of the region, except for pockets of 0 to 2ยฐF below normal temperatures in southern Colorado and southern Utah. The majority of Wyoming and northern Utah experienced 2 to 4ยฐF above average temperatures, with pockets of 4 to 6ยฐF above average temperatures in northern and western Utah, and northern and western Wyoming. One small pocket of 6 to 8ยฐF above normal temperatures occurred in Park County, Wyoming and an area of 2 to 4ยฐF below normal conditions occurred in Las Animas County, Colorado. A large pocket of record-warm temperatures occurred in southwestern Wyoming.
The first snowfall of this snow season was observed on September 22 at 10,715 feet in Bald Mountain Pass on Mirror Lake Highway in Utahโs Uinta Mountains. On September 23, Colorado received up to 8.8 inches of snowfall, particularly east of the Continental Divide above 10,500 feet, with the most falling in Glendevey. As of October 1, all SNOTEL sites are reporting no accumulated snow. Here are the top five snowfall totals in Colorado from September 23:
Glendevey, Colorado – 8.8 inches
Arapahoe Peak, Colorado – 8 inches
Cameron Pass, Colorado – 7.2 inches
Berthoud Pass, Colorado – 7.2 inches
Winter Park, Colorado – 7 inches
Drought conditions improved during September in Colorado and Wyoming, while all of Utah continues to remain in at least moderate (D1) drought. By September 30, regional drought coverage was 61%, a 6% improvement since the end of August. Colorado saw the removal of exceptional (D4) drought conditions on the West Slope and a 14% reduction in extreme (D3) drought. Wyoming also saw a 6% decrease in D3 drought conditions near Yellowstone region and in the south-central portion of the state. Coverage of extreme drought conditions in Utah decreased by 4% and severe (D2) drought declined by 4%.
Monthly streamflow conditions were near to below normal across large parts of the region, with much below normal conditions in northwestern Wyoming and western Utah during September. Several USGS stream gages reported September streamflow conditions in the lowest 3% of all historical observations, including seven in Wyoming, six in Utah, and one in Colorado. While the majority of streamflow gages in the region reported near to below normal conditions in September, several gages reported above to much above normal conditions, particularly along the Front Range in Colorado. Additionally, a few USGS stream gages reported September streamflow conditions in the highest 96% of all historical observations, including two in Utah and one in Wyoming.
There is a 60% chance of La Niรฑa conditions developing by November. By January, there is an equal probability of La Niรฑa or neutral ENSO conditions and the probability for La Niรฑa decreases throughout the remainder of winter 2026. The NOAA Monthly Precipitation Outlook suggests an increased probability of above average precipitation for northern Wyoming and below average precipitation for southeastern Colorado in October. The NOAA Monthly Temperature Outlook suggests an increased probability of above average temperatures for all of Colorado, eastern and central Wyoming, and southern Utah in October. The NOAA Seasonal Outlooks for October-December suggest an increased probability of below average precipitation in all of Colorado, southern and eastern Utah, and southeastern Wyoming, and an increased probability of above average temperatures throughout the region.
The Colorado River is in a water crisis as consumption continues to outweigh the natural supply each year. To stabilize the system, Colorado River Basin that water use must be balanced with natural river flows. According to the recent report, โAnalysis of Colorado River Basin Storage Suggests Need For Immediate Actionโ (Schmidt et al. 2025) the basin currently has 6.3 million acre-feet of accessible water storage in Lakes Powell and Mead. If next year is a repeat of this yearโs unforgiving hydrology and water use remains the same in the basin, Schmidt et al. estimate that consumptive use will exceed the natural flow in the river basin by at least 3.6 million acre-feet, leaving only 3.6-3.7 million acre-feet left in storage above critical elevations in Lakes Powell and Mead by late summer 2026. According to the report, depleting half of the basin’s storage by the end of water year 2026 will leave water managers with limited flexibility when the new post-2026 operating regime comes into effect. To avoid this outcome, the basin requires immediate and substantial reductions in consumptive use.
Significant weather event: On September 23, Denver set a daily rainfall record of 1.28โ of precipitation at Denver International Airport, making it the wettest September 23 since records began in 1872. Denverโs Central Park weather station recorded 1.33โ of rain, making September 23 the wettest day since June 22, 2023 for Denver. This same storm brought heavy, wet snow to the high country, with the most snow reported at the Glendevey weather station in Larimer County at a total of 8.8โ of snow (see above for the top five snowfall totals from September 23). Here are the top five rainfall totals from September 23 in Colorado:
On a day in late May [2022] when wildfire smoke obscured the throat of an ancient volcano called Shiprock in the distance, I visited the Ute Mountain Ute farming and ranching operation in the southwestern corner of Colorado. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots
Farmers, ranchers and other water users in four Western states, including Colorado, are cutting back on water use because of low flows through the Colorado River Basin.
Less than half the normal amount of water flowed into Lake Powell from the Upper Basin states โ Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming โ this summer. Farmers in the four-state region fallowed fields and changed their crop plans to adapt to a smaller water supply. The dry summer conditions coincided with high-stakes negotiations over how the water supply for 40 million people will be managed starting in August 2026.
In the Upper Basin, officials are trying to emphasize the existing shortages that happen each year as natural water supplies are strained by a changing climate.
โThe Upper Basinโs sacrifices arenโt abstract; they carry real human and economic consequences,โ the Upper Colorado River Commission said in a news release Wednesday.
About 2.6 million acre-feet of water flowed into Lake Powell from the Upper Colorado River in April through July. Thatโs 41% of the average from 1991-2020, according to the Colorado Basin River Forecast Center.
One acre-foot roughly equals the annual water use of two to three households. Itโs enough to cover a 1-acre field in 1 foot of water.
For the entire water year โ from Oct. 1, 2024, through Sept. 30 โ about 4.69 million acre-feet ran into Lake Powell from the Upper Colorado River. Thatโs 49% of the 30-year average, according to the center. It was the seventh driest year since 1963, when the center started making forecasts.
Wyoming shut off water to more than 163,000 acres of irrigated land in the stateโs portion of the Green River Basin, according to the river commission news release.
โThis is an extraordinary reduction with serious impacts on producers and rural communities across southwest Wyoming,โ said Kevin Payne, Division IV superintendent of the Wyoming State Engineerโs Office.
Severe water shortages in Utahโs Uintah Basin, driven by Colorado River cuts, forced ranchers to reduce the size of cattle herds, raised production costs, and strained the local economy.
The San Juan Chama project in New Mexico, which provides water for Albuquerque, Santa Fe and agriculture, received 31% of its normal Colorado River supply, a 69% reduction.
In southwestern Colorado, farmers that use Dolores Water Conservancy Districtโs water have dealt with shortages in five out of the last eight years. In early June, water users were set to receive 30% of their usual water supply. That increased to 56% in part because of a better-than-expected June runoff, Ken Curtis, general manager of the Dolores Water Conservancy District, said.
Because of the shortages, farmers in Dolores County, Montezuma County and the Ute Mountain Ute Farm and Ranch have stopped growing crops on thousands of acres of land and struggled to bring fallowed land back into production as dry conditions continue.
โOur farmers are left with year-by-year gambles with last-second planning going late into May and limiting farmersโ abilities to make long-term, successful crop rotation planning,โ Curtis said in the news release. โThe Dolores snowpack is disappearing, and the historic runoff has dropped by even greater magnitudes. Water is no longer reliably available.โ
The Ute Mountain Ute Tribeโs Farm and Ranch Enterprise, one of Coloradoโs largest farming operations, stopped irrigating 60% of their land and laid off farm workers. The crop plan for 2025 only included the existing, high-value alfalfa needed to sustain the farm and ranch.
โWe are merely surviving, not adapting,โ Michael Vicente, the enterpriseโs irrigation manager, said about the historic drought.
These shortages are uncompensated and involuntary, the Upper Colorado River Commission pointed out. Thatโs a sticking point for the Upper Basin states in the interstate discussions over how to manage the river.
The Lower Basin states proposed a plan that includes mandatory water cuts in every basin state in the riverโs driest years.
Upper Basin officials say they should not have to make mandatory cuts. Each year, farmers and ranchers receive less than their legal allocation of water because of natural fluctuations in precipitation, temperature and other environmental factors.
For decades, Upper Basin water users have handled these fluctuating water supplies without getting paid for the losses, officials say.
โAs Colorado River negotiations continue, Upper Basin leaders are clear,โ the Upper Colorado River Commission news release said. โRiver operations must adapt to the actual supply and prioritize rebuilding storage to restore resiliency.โ
โWhoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster himself. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.โ
After 20 years of organizing in rural Colorado, Iโve learned that lasting results come from supporting rather than opposing, from building bridges not tearing them down, from identifying shared solutions, not only pointing at problems.
This is the Ditch Principle: Your ditch neighbor may disagree with you about everything except keeping the water running โ so you start there. The neighbor who might pull you out of a snowbank doesnโt stop being your neighbor when you disagree about politics. Rural communities practice interdependence because isolation kills.
Friedrich Nietzscheโs warning about monsters isnโt just stale philosophy โ itโs practical advice that seems freshly relevant. As authoritarianism rises in America, we face a choice: resist by becoming what we oppose, or demonstrate something better.
As a longtime climate activist, the current anti-science stance is infuriating and deeply disappointing. But wildfire preparedness is critical right now, and community-wide planning helps everyone regardless of how they understand climate science.
Instead of doom-scrolling at the edge of the abyss, we should respond by restoring what matters most in the spaces and relationships we maintain, leading forward from the ground up.
This is a necessity, not idealism. When fire ignites or search and rescue is called, people put down their projects and differences to pull together. We have to get along or nothing gets done. People who honor these expectations are accepted, our contrary politics notwithstanding.
The damage to both our planet and our institutions is real, extreme and unabated. Two-thirds of Americans recognize weโve become too polarized and no longer believe partisan politics is capable of solving our problems, according to a recent New York Times poll. Here in western Colorado, the largest voting bloc isnโt Republican or Democratic โ itโs unaffiliated voters who want problem-solvers, not partisans.
Anti-science is a hallmark of authoritarian regimes. The erasure of climate data and the dismissal of inconvenient facts to protect powerful interests is a current case in point. But rural communities include practical people. Farmers experience drought, higher temperatures, and climate weirding. Homeowners fear wildfire and feel the risk.
History shows proven strategies to oppose authoritarianism. And rural communities are naturally situated to lead these approaches and reclaim our democratic foundations.
Build alternatives, donโt just oppose. No one asks who voted for whom when the irrigation ditch needs cleaning. They show up with shovels. This is constructive organizing โ demonstrating how things work when people focus on shared needs rather than manufactured divisions. Cooperation is a bulwark against authoritarianism.
Include everyone, abandon no one.ย We donโt start with politics when defending vulnerable community assets. Everyone depends on reliable water supply and safe evacuation routes, regardless of where they land on climate policy. We protect those needs notwithstanding the connections between climate, wildfire and drought.ย Navigating diverse perspectives, complicated relationships, and competing interests are not only challenges but tactics in resistance. Authoritarianism wins when we sacrifice groups one by one, including those we find disagreeable. Democracy wins when we expand the circle of concern.ย
Practice the democracy you want to see. Itโs not only about fighting monsters, itโs about listening and working authentically even when it challenges us. Fair decisions, transparent communication, everyone gets heard โ unlike cable politics, we donโt need leaders playing gotcha for narrow advantage. We change minds by creating shared experiences of things working better, solving problems that help everyone prosper.
The power of rural communities lies in quietly building resilience through relationships spanning decades. With steady focus on what we can control, these relationships outlast any political cycle. The infrastructure that serves everyone endures.
Authoritarianism requires division to survive and cannot withstand this approach. It needs us to see neighbors as threats, demands we choose ideology over community, that we abandon democratic norms in the name of winning.
When we refuse that bargain โ when we bridge differences rather than divide, include rather than exclude, practice democracy and not just preach it โ we make authoritarianism irrelevant.
The work to restore will outlive us. The best way not to become monsters is to stay neighbors. The ditch still needs clearing. A wildfire needs containing. When someone falls or is lost, it takes teamwork and a broad set of skills to get people out of rugged backcountry and back home to their families. So start there. Build from there.
E pluribus unum. In shared purpose we remember: The strongest defense against those who would divide us is simply refusing to be divided.
A rainstorm moves across Weld County on July 16, 2025. Cloud seeding technology could add more rain to farm fields in the area. Colorado officials said it will be the first time warm-weather cloud seeding is deployed in the state. Lucas Boland/KUNC
Click the link to read the article on the KUNC website (Alex Hager):
October 10, 2025
This story is part of ongoing coverage of water in the West, produced by KUNC in Colorado and supported by the Walton Family Foundation. KUNC is solely responsible for its editorial coverage.
A technology to increase rainfall is coming to Colorado for the first time.
A Florida-based company is setting up cloud seeding equipment to add water to some fields in Weld County. The company behind the project โ and the state agency that permits it โ hope that this rollout of what’s known as warm-weather cloud seeding is the beginning of a larger trend.
Andrew Rickert, weather modification program manager with the Colorado Water Conservation Board, called this cloud seeding project a โtrial run.โ
โWe’ll see how the locals like it,โ he said. โIf theyโre getting more rainfall and getting more crops, I can see this definitely catching on and spreading around the state, especially in these times of drought.โ
Rickert said the technology can increase annual rainfall by 15 percent to 17 percent.
While the work to boost rainfall is new, according to Rickert, Colorado has run cold-weather cloud seeding technology for years. By adding snow in the stateโs mountains, that work is aimed at increasing the amount of water in rivers during the spring melt. It is funded by the state and is only possible when temperatures are below freezing.
Warm-weather cloud seeding uses technology that originated in the 1950s and has been deployed in countries such as China, Jordan and Oman, as well as the state of Texas. It does not use chemicals or aircraft, like some forms of cold-weather cloud seeding. Instead, it sends out an electrical charge from the ground that can cause small, naturally-occuring particles to ascend into clouds and make water condense and fall as rain.
Rain falls in Summit County, Colorado on August 26, 2025. Colorado officials and the Florida-based company installing the cloud seeding equipment hope this Weld County trial run will be the beginning of more rain enhancement around the state. Alex Hager/KUNC
Some programs to add more snow have received backlash related to their use of silver iodide, which experts say has been proven safe through decades of testing. Randy Seidl, CEO of Rain Enhancement Technologies, said warm-weather cloud seeding does not use any chemicals and may be quicker to catch on.
โWeโre hoping to show some success and then expand,โ Seidl said.
The demo program run by Seidlโs company would be different from snow cloud seeding programs in Colorado, which are generally funded and operated by a branch of the state government.
โWe’ve never had anything like this where a company comes in fully funded, just to demonstrate their technology and hope it catches on in the future,โ Rickert said.
These new rain enhancement operations will target an area below Colo. Highway 14 and above County Road 16 ยฝ , and between Weld County Road 55 and Weld County Road 63.
Despite the fact that the cloud seeding will be run by a private company, operations will still be strictly regulated by the state, which is in the process of issuing permits for Rain Enhancement Technologies.
That includes a provision meant to prevent cloud seeding from making flooding worse if thereโs a big storm on the way.
โWe automatically turn down, turn off our device right away,โ Seidl said. โSo if there’s going to be excessive rain, we can’t make it worse.โ
1. Ionization emits negative ions with electrical charge to create cloud condensation nuclei, which stimulates growth of water droplets 2. The system is powered by a solar panel array, which uses minimal energy to operate 3. Ionization is an existing technology with proven significant rainfall generation results over lengthy trial periods 4. It serves many with minimal costs and minimal environmental impact
A seventh climate monitoring station in the Yampa Basin Atmosphere and Soil Moisture Integrated Network was dedicated on Oct. 6, 2025, near the Colorado Mountain College campus in Steamboat Springs. Colorado Mountain College/Courtesy photo
Land above the Colorado Mountain College campus buildings in Steamboat Springs is now home to the latest climate monitoring station in the Yampa Valley.
The new station site, valued at $115,000 including all equipment and installation costs, was dedicated during a ribbon-cutting ceremony on Monday. The new site represents a growing network of hydro-meteorological stations in the Yampa River basin that are beneficial for the study of and tracking climate resiliency factors.
The station is the seventh installation in the YBASIN network, or the Yampa Basin Atmosphere and Soil Moisture Integrated Network. The goal of organizers is to eventually complete 30 stations spanning the Yampa River watershed from the headwaters of the Bear River in the Flattop Mountains to Fortification Creek west of Craig. Site investigations for two additional stations targeted for 2026 are underway.
YBASIN is a project of nonprofit Yampa Valley Sustainability Council and the Center for Western Weather and Water Extremes, or CW3E, which is part of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California in San Diego. The center is a key partner in managing the network and analyzing the data collected.
โWe are working hard to steadily grow YBASIN in order to monitor changing conditions in our region connected to our changing climate,โ said Jayla Poppleton, YVSC resilient water and watersheds director. โItโs critically important that we understand how aridification and dry soils are impacting runoff and water availability for our communities, agricultural producers and ecosystems.โ
The new station is the first in the network to be placed within Steamboat city limits. The new location fills a data gap for a portion of the watershed that lacked existing measurement and provides hands-on learning opportunities for CMC students.
โThe goal of YBASIN is to establish long-term soil moisture data to better understand how dry soil conditions impact snowmelt runoff across the watershed,โ CW3E Director Marty Ralph said. โAs extremes continue to impact precipitation โ and correspondingly spring runoff and water availability โ a continuous record will support more accurate water supply forecasting and help inform critical management decisions.โ
The first station was installed near Stagecoach Reservoir in 2022. During 2023 and 2024, the network grew by five additional stations including in the Trout Creek basin, lower Elk River watershed, along the Yampa River at Carpenter Ranch near Hayden and the Elkhead Creek drainage. A sixth station, known as Red Creek, was installed south of Steamboat Lake in August.
Funding for the network was provided by the Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District, Colorado River District and Colorado Water Conservation Board.
โThe YBASIN network is a critical investment in the effective management of local water resources,โ said Andy Rossi, general manager of the conservancy district. โBy enabling direct data collection in the Yampa Valley, it will enhance forecasting capabilities for water managers. These improved forecasts will benefit agricultural producers, municipalities and the ecosystems that rely on dependable water supplies.โ
Itโs the beginning of a new water year, and to mark the occasion, Great Basin Water Network and its partners, including the Glen Canyon Institute and Living Rivers, released a list of recommendations for how to โlimit the Colorado River Conflict.โ
The primary โconflictโ in this case is the growing rift between supply and demand: The Colorado Riverโs collective users are pulling more water out of the system than the system can supply. That leads to other conflicts, most notably between the Upper and Lower Basins and between the states within each basin, over who should bear the brunt of the necessary cuts in consumption of at least 2 million to 4 million acre-feet per year. The states have until mid-November to come up with a post-2026 plan, though itโs not clear what will happen if they miss the deadline.
It may seem like a straightforward mathematical problem with a simple solution: Divide the necessary cuts up proportionally between all seven states. For example, if all seven states cut their 2022 consumptive use by 15%, it would add up to about 1.57 million acre-feet and seems equitable. But the history of consumption and diversion, along with the so-called Law of the River, made up of the 1922 Colorado River Compact and other subsequent compacts, agreements, and legal decisions, thoroughly muddy the water, so to speak.
Letโs go through the proposed solutions and Iโll elaborate a bit more there:
Recommendation 1: Forgo New Dams and Diversions
This is a no-brainer. Reality and nature are forcing the Colorado Riverโs users to pull less water out of the river, not more, and every dam and diversion built upstream of Lake Powell will result in less water reaching the reservoir, which is currently less than one-third full.1
And yet, there are myriad proposals for new dams and diversions in the Upper Basin, from the Lake Powell Pipeline to the Green River Pipeline. (Check out GBWNโs interactive map here). While some of these projects are, pardon the pun, mere pipe dreams, others are serious proposals.
The projectโs proponents justify them by pointing out that the Colorado River Compact allocated the Upper Basin 7.5 million acre-feet of water from the river each year (or half of the presumed 15 MAF in the river2), yet together those states use only about 4.5 MAF annually, meaning, in theory, they have another 3 MAF at their disposal. Furthermore, the Upper Basin has complied with another Compact provision requiring them to โnot cause the flow of the river at Lee Ferry to be depleted below an aggregate of 75,000,000 acre-feet for any period of ten consecutive years.โ3
Thing is, thereโs not 15 MAF of water in the river, nor was there even back when the Compact was signed, so the 7.5 MAF figure is essentially meaningless. Furthermore, the Upper Basin has met its downstream delivery obligations only by significantly draining Lake Powell, so it isnโt by any stretch of the imagination sustainable.
Rec. 2: All States Need Curtailment Plans
The Lower Basin has a curtailment schedule, or a plan for when cutbacks need to be made, by how much, and who needs to make them, all based on the Law of the River and water right priority dates. For example, when Lake Meadโs surface level falls below 1,050 feet, releases from the dam are reduced, and the Lower Basin goes to Tier 2a cutbacks, which includes Arizona giving up 400,000 acre-feet, Nevada forgoing 17,000 acre-feet, and so on. Californiaโs cuts donโt kick in at this level because it has the most senior rights.
The Upper Basin doesnโt have this sort of curtailment schedule. Again, they can justify this by saying they arenโt using their legal allocation, and they are meeting downstream delivery obligations, so why bother with curtailment? In fact, current Upper Basin plans call for more consumption, not less. But again, consumption is exceeding supply, period, so everyone is going to need to cut back. Best to do it in an orderly fashion.
Rec. 3: The โNatural Flowโ Plan Wonโt Work Until There Are Better Data
Federal and state officials need to bolster data collection on the Colorado River and more precisely monitor consumption. Without that, thereโs no way that the โSupply Drivenโ or โNatural Flowโ plan will work.
What that proposal does, by the way, is divide the river up according to whatโs actually in the river. The Upper Basin would release from Glen Canyon Dam a percentage of the rolling three-year average of the โnatural flowโ โ an estimate of what flows would be without any upstream diversions โ at Lee Ferry. While this plan has been deemed โrevolutionaryโ and a major โbreakthrough,โ there are still a lot of sticking points, like what percentage would each basin receive, and whether there would be a minimum delivery obligation and what that might be.
But none of that matters without an accurate estimate of the natural flow.
One of the biggest data gaps concerns evaporation. While evaporation from Lake Powell and a handful of other reservoirs is estimated and factored into the Upper Basinโs consumptive use, the same is not true for the Lower Basin โ or for many other sources of evaporation.
The report says:
Rec. 4: Alter Glen Canyon Dam to Protect the Water Supply of 25 Million People
Virtually all of the water released from Glen Canyon Dam currently goes through the penstocks and the hydroelectric turbines, thereby generating power for the Southwestโs grid. That becomes no longer possible when the reservoirโs surface level drops below 3,490 feet, or minimum power pool. In that event, water could only exit through the lower river outlets, which are not designed for long-term use, and could fail catastrophically.
The groups call on the feds to alter the dam to remedy the situation, and specifically suggest drilling bypass tunnels around the dam to release water, which effectively would turn the dam into a โrun-of-the-riverโ facility, meaning reservoir outflows would equal inflows and there would be no storage capacity.
Other possibilities include operating the dam as a โrun-of-the-riverโ facility when its surface drops to 3,500 in elevation (thus allowing the turbines to continue operating), or re-engineering the river outlets for long-term use and possibly to feed into the turbines.
Rec 5: Curtailing Junior Users to Serve Tribes
This is not a radical concept by any means. It simply is saying that the 30 some tribal nations in the Colorado River Basin should get the water to which they are entitled, just like any other senior water rights holders.
Rec. 6: Tackle Municipal Waste and Invest in Reuse Basinwide
Another pretty obvious one. The report recommends following Southern Nevada Water Authorityโs lead on this, which makes sense, given that theyโve managed to cut overall consumptive use even as the Las Vegas-area population has boomed.
Native fish populations, including the humpback chub, Colorado River pikeminnow, and razorback sucker, have declined significantly in the age of large-scale dams and diversions and mass non-native fish stocking. Theyโve avoided extinction, in part thanks to federal programs (funded in part by revenues from Glen Canyon Dam hydropower sales), thus far, but remain imperiled. The humpback chub, in particular, is threatened by smallmouth bass escaping from Lake Powell due to lower water levels; the non-natives prey on the native fish below the dam and in the Grand Canyon.
The report calls on federal agencies to consider abandoning storage in Lake Powell, drilling diversion tunnels, and going to a run-of-the-river scenario. Short of that, they urge management changes, including fish screens and sediment augmentation.
Rec. 8: Make Farms Resilient to New Realities
It might surprise some observers that this report never once mentions hay, alfalfa, livestock, or even golf courses, and does not suggest banning any specific crops. Rather, it calls for agricultural adaptation, economic diversification (including installing solar on some fields), and building more resilience and demand flexibility into operations.
The report recognizes the important role farms play in the Colorado River Basin. They are the largest consumers of water with some of the most senior water rights, meaning they will be โvital for stabilizing water supplies in times of drought and feeding the nation in the winter months for decades to come.โ But also, wildlife and ecosystems such as the Salton Sea have come to depend on agricultural runoff and even leaky ditches. Shutting off irrigation altogether will have potentially dire environmental consequences.
Farmersโ adaptation must be supported by federal, state, and local governments, and, โthese farmers must be able to choose how to adapt for the future themselves. They know their land and business models the best.โ
This is a big one, but also a very difficult issue, because as Colorado River consumption is reduced, farmers and cities and other users tend to turn to groundwater pumping. And, since groundwater and surface water are intimately connected, this can lead to further declines in the Colorado River system (along with other impacts such as the earth actually sinking as aquifers are depleted). A study from earlier this year found that groundwater supplies in the Colorado River Basin are declining by about 1.3 million acre-feet per year.
The report urges state and federal governments to put a tighter leash on groundwater pumping โ in parts of Arizona it goes unregulated and virtually unmonitored โ and begin managing it โwith the understanding that it is all one conjunctive source.โ
I asked Glen Canyon Institute Executive Director Eric Balkan whether adopting these suggestions would require tossing the Colorado River Compact into the rubbish bin of history. โI donโt think this means throwing out the compact,โ he replied. โBut it does mean adapting to the river we have, not the one assumed in the compact.โ
And that means changing or throwing out many of the terms of the compact. The 7.5 MAF division becomes obsolete, as does the 75 MAF-every-ten-years downstream delivery obligation. In fact, itโs hard to see how a fixed downstream delivery obligation is possible under the new reality; rather it would be a percentage of the natural flow. And without that sort of delivery obligation, Glen Canyon Dam loses one of its primary purposes.
โGlen Canyon Dam was built in the era of excess water to meet a specific accounting obligation,โ Balkan said. โToday, there is no more excess water and the accounting obligation is going away. So letโs start the conversation about the post Lake Powell future.โ
Screenshot from Carbon Mapperโs carbon dioxide and methane plume visualizer. This shows the north side of Bloomfield, New Mexico, and the methane plumes (blue) and carbon dioxide plumes (red) emanating from the Blanco Hub Complex, a major natural gas processing, refining, pipeline, and storage network.
๐บ๏ธ Messing with Maps ๐งญ
Todayโs featured cartography is a fascinating and alarming interactive mapvisualizing methane and carbon dioxide emissions from oil and gas wells, coal power plants, coal mines, cattle feedlots, landfills, and, sometimes, from the bare ground.This one is unique because it shows the actual plumes, not just symbols representing emissions, which somehow makes it more real and scary.
Itโs a bit frightening not only because it reveals so many sources of greenhouse gases, but also because we know that if a leaky oil and gas well is oozing methane, itโs also probably emitting volatile organic compounds and other nasty pollutants that can harm human health. The map includes the date(s) the images were made along with the rate of emissions.
Cattle feedlots and methane plumes in Californiaโs Central Valley. Source: Carbon Mapper.
โ๏ธ Wacky Weather Watchโก๏ธ
Last month, the skies opened up over Globe and Miami, Arizona, dumping nearly four inches of rain and triggering calamitous flash-flooding that killed three people, wrecked homes, and carried away cars and multiple propane tanks from an LP gas distribution facility.
Miami and Globe are dyed-in-the-wool mining towns. Miamiโs little downtown seems on the brink of being swallowed up by Freeport-McMoranโs massive Miami copper mine, while Globe, with its stately brick and stone buildings, was clearly the more prosperous of the two sister communities. Theyโre both pretty gritty in an appealing (to me) way in that they defy the manicured suburban sprawl ubiquitous on the other side of the Superstitions. They sit down in drainages that are almost always dry, except when a lot of rain falls on the arroyo-etched, sparsely vegetated hills. In this case, the flooding was made worse by a nearby wildfire burn scar.
Pinal Creek, which runs through Globe, ballooned from a dusty trickle to a 5,670 cfs torrent on Sept. 27. The San Carlos River east of Globe did much the same thing after nearly a year of complete dryness. The big water wreaked havoc, destruction, and death. Adding to the tragedy: Many residents reportedly didnโt have flood insurance.
1 One might argue that dams merely store excess water from wet years so that it can be used in dry years and so they donโt really count as a diversion or an increase in consumption. The problem on the Colorado River, however, is not a lack of storage, itโs a lack of water. Even huge water years like 2023 failed to even get close to filling up the systemโs two largest reservoirs: Lakes Powell and Mead. If you build more upstream dams, then even less water will reach those reservoirs.
2 The Colorado River Compact actually assumes that there is an average of 18 million acre-feet per year, and allocates 7.5 MAF to the Upper Basin and 7.5 MAF to the Lower Basin, but also adds the option of increasing the Lower Basinโs allocation to 8.5 MAF. This still leaves room, theoretically, up to 2 MAF for Mexico. Even back in 1922, however, the river didnโt actually deliver that much water.ย
3 During the 10-year period from 2015 to 2024, the Upper Basin delivered about 84 MAF to the Lower Basin, meaning theyโve lived up to their obligation and then some.
A line of national flags waves in the arctic wind. 15 Institutes from 14 different countries participate in research at the East Greenland Ice-Core project. Photo courtesy of Tyler Jones.
A new study analyzing chemical traces in the growth rings of clam shells reinforces growing concerns about the stability of a key North Atlantic Ocean current that helps keep the global climate livable.
The findings, published on Thursday in Science Advances, examined changes in the ocean south of Greenland during the last 150 years and found that the inflow of freshwater has been disrupting the subpolar gyre, which distributes ocean heat, since the 1950s.
The research is another sign that climate heating caused mainly by fossil fuel pollution is pushing the climate toward dangerous tipping points, out of the โsafe operating spaceโ for humans, said lead author Beatriz Arellano-Nava, a University of Exeter climate researcher.
A weakening or shutdown of the subpolar gyre and related currents would weaken the northward transport of ocean heat from the tropics to higher latitudes, with different impacts by region. The tropics would experience more extreme heat on land and even worse ocean heatwaves than those already killing billions of marine organisms, from sea stars to sea birds. Sea level rise in most of the tropics would also accelerate from thermal expansion, with warming oceans swelling higher onto shorelines.
Meanwhile, there would likely be regional cooling in the North Atlantic, Arellano-Nava said, and more extremes in Europe: hotter summers, colder winters and worse flooding and droughts, as well as shifts in global precipitation patterns.
The full range of impacts is not well studied, and the intensity would depend on how much the various parts of the current system weaken. A 2024 study raised the stakes, showing that the impacts of a full-scale shutdown of the heat-carrying currents in the North Atlantic could unleash climate chaos in the Northern Hemisphere.
Several of Arellano-Navaโs recent research projects, including the new study, focus on identifying early warning signs of climate tipping points, which are basically irreversible changes to Earthโs systems such as ocean currents, glaciers, coral reefs or forests. Trying to find early warning signs is crucial because once major tipping points are breached, itโs too late to take action, she said.
The research focused on the North Atlantic Ocean southeast and southwest of Greenland, known as a subpolar gyre. There, winds drive a large, โthree-dimensional circulation structure in which water is transported down into the deep ocean in a spiral,โ said Anders Levermann, head of complexity science at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.
The gyre, he said, โis a central part of the deep water formation that keeps the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Current (AMOC) running.โ The AMOC is a complex system of currents that shunts warm and cold water horizontally and vertically between the Arctic and Antarctic.
The Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation carries cold water from near Greenland (blue line) southward along the seafloor toward Antarctica, while currents nearer the surface transport warmer water northward. Credit: NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center Scientific Visualization Studio
Levermann was not an author on the new study, but he contributed to key tipping-point research in 2007 showing that, โtheoretically, the subpolar gyre in the North Atlantic can tip from a strong state to a much weaker one, which is basically off.โ
The new study confirmed these findings through an analysis of the width and chemical composition of growth rings in clams and other bivalves.
โIn response to anthropogenic climate change, both systems are at risk of passing a tipping point,โ the authors of the new paper wrote, noting that the collapse would weaken the northward transport of ocean heat with regional cooling in the north Atlantic, more frequent weather extremes in Europe and shifts in global precipitation patterns.
โBivalve records are really amazing,โ Arellano-Nava said. โThey are like the tree rings of the sea. They offer a continuous, annually resolved record of ocean conditions.โ
Varying oxygen isotopes show changes in seawater linked to temperature and the influence of different water masses, which helps show the changes in ocean circulation, she said. The width of the growth rings tells scientists about temperature, the supply of food to the seabed and circulation dynamics that bring nutrients, she added.
The changes in the rings are clear once a tipping point has been crossed, she said, explaining that during a transition to a colder climate period in the Northern Hemisphere a few hundred years ago, the shift of oxygen isotope values reflected colder conditions and a stronger influence of Arctic waters. And the growth bands became narrower, indicating both lower temperatures and reduced food availability.
Levermann, the Potsdam Institute researcher, said the new paper is remarkable because it provides direct evidence that vital ocean circulations can shift into a new state under current oceanic and atmospheric conditions, not just in a theoretical model or under vastly different ancient climate conditions.
โTo find such recent evidence for tipping in a large oceanic system is worrisome and supports the increasingly large literature on tipping points from Antarctica to Greenland and the Amazon rain forest,โ he said.
Tim Lenton, director of the Global Systems Institute at the University of Exeter, is a co-author of the new study and a longtime tipping points researcher. He said a collapse of deepwater formation in the subpolar gyre โcould itself be seen as an early warning of a tipping point in the AMOC.โ
In a paper published Wednesday in the journal Nature Geoscience, Lenton and co-authors documented destabilization toward tipping points in several other vital systems, including the Greenland ice sheet, the Amazon rainforest and the South American monsoon system.
Adding the subpolar gyre to the list means yet more potential for significant impacts to communities and ecosystems that havenโt really been examined yet, Arellano-Nava said.
โWhatโs the impact for food security, for how our societies are organized at the moment, because we know that a shutdown of the subpolar gyre could cause more extreme weather events in Europe and surrounding regions, and also changes in global precipitation patterns that we havenโt really studied in detail,โ she said.
โThe problem with tipping points is that you may not observe any noticeable changes until an abrupt transition occurs, and then itโs too late.โ
American beaver, he was happily sitting back and munching on something. and munching, and munching. By Steve from washington, dc, usa – American Beaver, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3963858
State Departmentโs โAmerica Firstโย global health strategyย does not directly mention water, sanitation, or hygiene.
EPA extends deadline forย coal power plantsย to comply with water pollution standards.
USGS investigates howย beaversย change a watershed in northwest Oregon.
And lastly, a North Carolina senator urges Congress to fund FEMAโs disaster response.
โBut for every community that is back on its feet, there are still several communities that are on their knees or flat on their back. In fact, there are some communities that we wonder whether or not they ever will come back.โ โ Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) speaking on the Senate floor on October 1 to mark the one-year anniversary of Hurricane Helene, which wreaked the western part of his state.
The state budget office for North Carolinaย estimatedย that the record-breaking storm caused at least $53.8 billion in direct and indirect damage. Tillis complained that Congress was not adequately funding recovery efforts through FEMA. The current government shutdown, he said, added an obstacle just when hurricane risk is peaking. โFEMA simply doesnโt have the funding needed to respond to a major disaster.โ
By the Numbers
$1.4 Billion: FEMAโs account balance for major disasters, as of August 31.
News Briefs
Shutdown The federal government closed its operations on October 1, except for those necessary for public safety or funded outside the annual budgeting process.
Agencies have posted their shutdown plans. The Bureau of Reclamation notes that dam operators and water treatment plant operators are exempted from furloughs.
Coal Help During an event to promote the most polluting fossil fuel for generating electricity, Lee Zeldin, the EPA administrator, announced several measures to help the coal industry, which is having trouble competing with cheaper, cleaner power sources.
A final rule gives coal plants six more years to decide whether they will stop operating by the end of 2034. Once they decide, they are allowed to continue operating under less-strict pollution standards.
The agency justified the extensions by pointing to rising electricity demand due to AI. โA significant number of facilities need more time to understand how their operations fit within a changing landscape of local and regional demand,โ the agency wrote. Zeldin has made AI promotion a pillar of his term as EPA administrator.
Studies and Reports
Extreme Heat Disasters A U.S. president has never declared an extreme heat disaster, the GAO reports.
But such a declaration is allowed under the Stafford Act, the federal statute that governs disaster response.
GAO, the watchdog arm of Congress, assessed FEMAโs role in assisting states and tribes with extreme heat.
The report found โlimited assistance.โ Less than 1 percent of FEMAโs climate resilience grants from 2020 to 2023 were directed to projects addressing extreme heat.
If a disaster declaration were requested and approved, FEMA could provide bottled water or set up cooling shelters.
Beavers in Oregon The U.S. Geological Survey published a multi-part study that examined how beavers influence water quality and hydrology in the Tualatin River basin of northwest Oregon. More than 600,000 people live in the basin.
The studies found that beaver dams trap sediment, can increase water temperatures in unshaded ponds, and in some cases dampen stream flows during small storms. The findings are important for water managers, whose treatment processes are affected by water quality changes.
On the Radar
Global Health Strategy Missing WASH The State Department published an โAmerica Firstโ global health strategy โ but it does not directly mention water, sanitation, or hygiene.
A foundation for public health, the WASH trio is absent from the 40-page strategy, which emphasizes instead American safety and prosperity.
An overriding goal is to prevent disease outbreaks abroad from reaching U.S. soil. Yet the strategy also acknowledges that disease outbreaks can cause political instability in their country of origin. Good health, in this sense, makes for good politics.
โGiven that instability can be a breeding ground for national security threats, targeted U.S. health foreign assistance has helped preempt those threats from emerging.โ
Federal Water Tap is a weekly digest spotting trends in U.S. government water policy. To get more water news, follow Circle of Blue on Twitter and sign up for our newsletter.
Click the link to read the article on the KUTV website (Samantha Hoffman & Liv Kelleher). Here’s an excerpt:
October 2, 2025
After a dismal snowpack, sustained drought conditions, and a relatively weak monsoon season, southern Utah is preparing for the possibility of a water shortage. A newly proposed conservation plan outlines what the county will require municipalities to do should reservoirs run low. Washington County is experiencing its second driest year in over 130 years, according to the Washington County Water Conservancy District. 2025 was just .2 inches of rainfall above the driest year on record in 1956.
Zachary Renstrom, the general manager of WCWCD, said they put this plan together proactively in case drought or other emergencies threaten reservoir levels. The water shortage contingency plan, released Wednesday, would require each city to decrease its water use by a set percentage. Local leaders would individually decide how to accomplish this reduction. If municipalities fail to reach that reduction rate, they could face punitive pricing, ranging from a 300% to 500% increase from the standard.
โWe are just preparing for a hotter, drier environment to make sure that we always have safe drinking water,โ Renstrom said.
The plan is currently being reviewed by leaders within the countyโs eight municipalities for approval. It would be implemented only in the case of a severe water shortage in the county…The Washington County Water Conservancy District will present the contingency plan in a public meeting on Oct. 28.
As five staff members clad in Colorado Parks and Wildlife gear departed from the swim beach area [October 4, 2025], it didnโt take long for the answer to be revealed. Once the first buoy was pulled from the water, two adult mussels were found. They were sent to the lab to confirm whether they are zebra or quagga mussels. It was a bummer of a day for CPW staff.
โWe did expect to see some mussels but pulling that very first buoy out and seeing the big mussel on the bottom was really disheartening,โ Highline Lake State Park Manager Ashlee Wallace said. โEspecially, after working so hard over the past two years.โ
[…]
The discovery of the two mussels came after more than two years of various attempts to eradicate the invasive species from the lake, which had become the first and only body of water in the state to be infested with mussels in October 2022. That started a series of moves that included chemical treatments to the lake, lowering the water level 27 feet to do more chemical treatments, then during those routine end-of-season tasks, more mussels were found in October 2023. Thatโs when CPW made the decision to completely drain the lake in hopes of eradicating the mussels for good. With Saturdayโs discovery, itโs clear that all the previous moves were for naught.
Adult Zebra mussel. Photo credit: Colorado Parks and Wildlife
Water sits low behind Glen Canyon Dam near Page, Arizona, on November 2, 2022. A new report calls for urgent changes to Colorado River management, including modifications inside the dam. Alex Hager/KUNC
Click the link to read the article on the KUNC website (Alex Hager):
October 1, 2025
This story is part of ongoing coverage of the Colorado River, produced by KUNC in Colorado and supported by the Walton Family Foundation. KUNC is solely responsible for its editorial coverage.
A new report from a coalition of environmental nonprofits is calling for changes to Colorado River management and urging policymakers to act more quickly in their response to shrinking water supplies.
The reportโs authors stress a need for urgent action to manage a river system that they say is โon the cusp of failure.โ
โWe are looking at serious, chronic shortages,โ said Zach Frankel, executive director of the Utah Rivers Council. “And we don’t just mean one day in a couple of decades. We could see a crash on the Colorado River as soon as two years from now, or less.โ
A crash, they said, could mean water levels so low in the nationโs largest reservoirs that major dams areย rendered inoperable, leaving some cities and farms withย less water than they are legally owed. To stave off that crash,ย the reportย includes nine recommendations, including calls for major cutbacks to water demand.
Its authors focused largely on three things: reducing water use, modifying the plumbing inside Glen Canyon Dam, and changing the process by which new rules for sharing water are decided.
State leaders throughout the Colorado River basin seem to agree that significant cutbacks are needed, but conversations about who exactly should make those cutbacks often devolve into finger pointing. The nonprofits behind this new report say each state needs to be more specific and come up with a โcurtailment planโ about how it could use less water within its borders. They acknowledge that drawing up those cuts will likely be a complicated and painful process, but a necessary one.
โYes, it’s bad, but there’s a path through it,โ said Eric Balken, executive director of the Glen Canyon Institute. โThe solution to this problem is actually simple. It’s not going to be easy, but it is simple. Don’t pull more water from the river.โ
Their suggested approach also means hitting the brakes on new dams and diversions. The report tallied 30 proposals for new water development in the riverโs Upper Basin states of Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico. Now, its authors say, is not the time to stretch an already-strained river system even further.
The back of Glen Canyon Dam circa 1964, not long after the reservoir had begun filling up. Here the water level is above dead pool, meaning water can be released via the river outlets, but it is below minimum power pool, so water cannot yet enter the penstocks to generate electricity. Bureau of Reclamation photo. Annotations: Jonathan P. Thompson
The reportโs second major proposal is to re-engineer Glen Canyon Dam, which holds back Lake Powell. The nationโs second-largest reservoir has dropped to record lows in recent years, and itโs currently about a quarter full. If water levels drop much further, they could fall below the intake for hydropower generators inside the dam. Further, they could drop below any pipes that allow water to pass through the dam. That could jeopardize the ability to send water to major cities downstream, like Los Angeles, Phoenix and Las Vegas.
In years when reservoir levels threaten to drop that low, federal water managers have shuffled water into Lake Powell from other upstream reservoirs. The new report says more permanent fixes, like the construction of new pipes inside the dam, are needed.
โThose reservoir levels are not a conspiracy,โ Frankel said. โThere’s not really any debate about whether there’s water in those reservoirs. A solution of, โHey, let’s just keep the reservoirs higher and avoid having to deal with this epic plumbing challengeโ is absurd.”
The Colorado River flows through Grand County, Colorado on Oct. 23, 2023. A new report calls for states to plan for curtailments to water use as the river shrinks. Alex Hager/KUNC
The reportโs authors did not mince words in their critiques of the current system for agreeing on new water management rules.
โWe’re so far away from meeting the moment right now,” said Kyle Roerink, executive director of the Great Basin Water Network. โThe moment might as well be on another planet.โ
Negotiations about sharing the river are stuck. The current rules for managing Colorado River water expire in 2026, and the seven states that use it are on the hook to come up with new ones. Negotiators from those states have been meeting for years now, and donโt appear to be close to a deal despite mounting calls for new policies, a steadily shrinking river and a fast-approaching deadline.
โWe’re so clearly not addressing the depth of challenge we’re facing,โ Frankel said of the negotiators. โAnd what we’re asking is, is it because of the process?โ
Under the current structure, the reportโs authors say, those negotiations lack transparency. Environmental groups, farmers, city leaders, Native American tribes and others who will have to deal with the consequences of negotiatorsโ decisions have mostly been left on the outside looking in.
โWhat we want is honest debate and discussion,โ Roerink said. โThere’s not even a meaningful regulatory process going on where we can debate, scrutinize, vet, and provide meaningful ideas about how we’re going to manage the nation’s two largest reservoirs.โ
The coalition of nonprofits that co-signed the report includes Glen Canyon Institute, Great Basin Water Network, Living Rivers, Utah Rivers Council and Save the Colorado.
Their work joins a number of similar calls for action that have been released in recent months. A September letter from former officials and academics said urgent changes are needed to protect Glen Canyon Dam. That same group released a memo in May calling for states to embrace some โshared painโ and agree on cutbacks.
Other outside groups โ including a coalition of Native American tribes and a large collection of environmental nonprofits โ have made their own suggestions for the next phase of river management. It is yet to be determined how or if their ideas will influence those closed-door negotiations.
Map of the Colorado River drainage basin, created using USGS data. By Shannon1 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0
The recent pattern of numerous changes in the USDM continued with this weekโs map release. Continued dry weather in the Northeast led to widespread worsening of drought and abnormal dryness there. From Missouri northward to the Great Lakes states, many locations saw drought or abnormal dryness worsen. In particular, intense short-term drought continued to worsen in parts of Missouri, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio. However, in southeast Missouri and in the Ohio River Valley and some parts of the Mississippi River Valley, welcome rains fell, locally over 3 inches, leading to widespread improvements in ongoing drought and abnormal dryness in these areas. Much of Alabama, the Carolinas and Georgia saw drier weather, with local exceptions. As such, drought and abnormal dryness also expanded across portions of these states and a few spots in nearby Florida. Very heavy rain fell in southeast Louisiana; one area received over 5 inches of rain, leading to a 2-category improvement in the USDM, surrounded by nearby 1-category improvements after the heavy rain. In west Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas, dry weather this week led to many degradations as primarily short-term dryness intensified. A few areas of central and southwest Texas are also seeing long-term dryness and drought and saw some intensification this week. Drier weather this week in northeast Montana led to the development of moderate drought there. Recent heavy precipitation and reassessment of recent conditions led to widespread improvements in parts of the western United States, especially the Las Vegas area, northern areas of Nevada and Utah, Oregon and southwest Idaho, southeast Wyoming and a few spots in the Colorado Rocky Mountains. A wetter month of September also led to localized improvement away from abnormal dryness on the northeast coast of Kauai, though ongoing drought conditions remained unchanged elsewhere in Hawaii after a mainly drier week…
Temperatures this week across the High Plains region were mostly 5-15 degrees above normal, with parts of central Colorado and southern and western Wyoming seeing closer to normal temperatures. Moderate to locally heavy precipitation fell in parts of the San Juan Mountains in southwest Colorado, the Rocky Mountains of northern Colorado and across much of Wyoming, northwest South Dakota and central to north-central North Dakota. Precipitation this week added to a generally wetter recent pattern in the San Juans, north-central Colorado and southeast Wyoming. In these areas, short- and medium-term precipitation deficits lessened and soil moisture conditions improved, allowing for some improvements to ongoing drought and abnormal dryness. In north-central Kansas, moderate drought improved in some areas where locally over 2 inches of rain fell. In eastern Kansas, short-term abnormal dryness and moderate drought worsened in spots where streamflow and soil moisture levels dropped along with growing precipitation shortages. In northeast Nebraska and southeast South Dakota, dry weather over the past couple of months continued this week, leading to a large expansion in abnormal dryness that also extended further into northwest Iowa and southwest Minnesota…
Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending October 7, 2025.
Cooler-than-normal temperatures prevailed in much of Oregon, California and Nevada, while the rest of the region was mostly 1-5 degrees above normal. Scattered heavy precipitation fell this week across much of the central and northern half of the region, with notable exceptions in central and eastern Washington and Oregon, southwest Wyoming, and north-central and northeast Montana. In northeast Montana, drier weather this week and temperatures that were 5-15 degrees above normal led to the development of moderate drought where short-term precipitation and soil moisture deficits grew. Recent precipitation, either from this week or the weeks preceding, led to improvements in streamflow and soil moisture and lessening precipitation deficits across much of northern and southern Nevada (and immediately adjacent parts of California and Arizona). Similarly improving conditions also occurred in northern Utah, south-central and southwest Idaho, Oregon and the Olympic Peninsula of Washington, leading to improvements in the USDM depiction in parts of these areas…
Short-term dryness continued to intensify in south-central and west-central Louisiana and across much of Texas and parts of Oklahoma, all of which largely saw a mostly dry and warmer-than-normal week. Very dry weather over the last month continued in parts of Oklahoma, especially from the Oklahoma City area north and in southwest Oklahoma, where adverse impacts to agriculture were reported. In central and southwest Texas, recent dry weather compounded impacts from long-term dryness and drought…
Looking Ahead
The National Weather Service Weather Prediction Center (WPC) forecast covering the period from the evening of October 8 to the evening of October 13 calls for an inch or more of precipitation from northwest California northward through northwest Washington. The WPC is also forecasting areas west of the Continental Divide in New Mexico and Colorado, as well as much of Arizona and Utah, to receive over 1 inch of precipitation, with some areas in Arizona and southwest Colorado forecast to receive over 3 inches. Forecast precipitation amounts dwindle north of Utah, though portions of Idaho and Montana may receive a half inch or more during this period. Heavy rain amounts are possible from the east coast of Florida northwards through the Atlantic Coast to southern New England. As of the afternoon of Wednesday, October 8, the east coast of Florida and the coasts of North Carolina and Virginia, as well as the Delmarva Peninsula, New Jersey appear most in line to receive at least 1.5 inches of rain, with higher amounts possible. However, given the forecasted tight gradient in rainfall amounts, small shifts in the track of the storm system may significantly impact how much rain falls in any particular location along or near the East Coast. Meanwhile, across most of the Great Plains, Midwest and South, mostly dry weather is forecast.
Looking ahead to October 14-18, the National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center forecast favors warmer-than-normal weather across most of the central and eastern Contiguous U.S., especially in the southern Great Plains and Lower Mississippi River Valley. Colder-than-normal weather is favored across much of California, Nevada, Oregon, Idaho, Washington and western Montana. Above-normal precipitation is favored across most of the West (except for northwest Oregon and most of Washington) and into the northern half of the Great Plains and western Great Lakes states. Above-normal precipitation is slightly favored in most of New England, while below-normal precipitation is slightly favored in northwest Washington. Below-normal precipitation is favored in the south-central and southeast U.S., with a slight lean toward below-normal precipitation extending northward to Lake Erie. Above-normal temperatures are strongly favored in most of Alaska, with above-normal precipitation also favored across most of the state. In far southeast Alaska, near- or below-normal precipitation is more likely. Above-normal precipitation and warmer-than-normal temperatures are favored across Hawaii.
US Drought Monitor one week change map ending October 7, 2025.
Just for grins here’s a slideshow of early October US Drought Monitor maps for the past few years.
The Colorado River District (CRD) hosted its annual Water Seminar on Friday [October 3, 2025], bringing together water leaders, politicians and city officials for a variety of discussions and activities. The seminar, titled โAcross Dividesโ, was held at Colorado Mesa University, focusing on candid conversations and solution-focused dialogue to address water issues. The audience included agricultural producers, water providers, local and state government leaders, non-profit representatives, community members and CMU students.
โOver the course of today, weโve leaned into the conference theme of โAcross Divides.โ Weโve explored spaces where perspectives donโt always align, where there are divides in language, where there are divides in theory, where there are divides in practice,โ said CRD Chief of Strategy Amy Moyer during her closing remarks…
The keynote address was given by CRD General Manager Andy Mueller, who discussed the challenges facing the Western Slope and Colorado River Basin as well as the work being done by the district and its local partners and the Shoshone water rights situation. He also discussed the impact of shrinking supplies and interstate pressures on Colorado…The โLost in Translation: Interstate Divideโ panel represented agriculture, drinking water, tribal nations and environmental interests from the Upper and Lower Basins, examining how the new supply-driven model proposal could shape the future of the Colorado River…
Moyer encouraged attendees to implement three actions in their lives to make sure the seminar leads to positive results.
โFirst, follow up with the contacts that you made with the people at your table, with the presenters here today…. Find somebody you havenโt had the chance to talk to,โ she said. โThe second thing is to apply one new idea that you learned from today, whether itโs in your personal life or your professional life…. Lastly, stay engaged with us at the Colorado River District. Look for the events and conversations that we hold throughout the year.โ
A child amid the splish-splashes of water at Denverโs Union Station on June 21, 2025. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots
Click the link to read the article on the Big Pivots website (Allen Best):
October 2, 2025
New report says the story is not near as complicated as some would have you believe. It identifies nine areas of focus for using less water.
A few hours before I read a new Colorado River Basin report this week, I was at a neighborhood meeting in the metropolitan Denver municipality where I live. A sustainability plan is being worked up. The water component will encourage conservation.
I said that the messaging on this, unlike some other components of sustainability, should be relatively easy. After all, 75% of this municipalityโs water arrives from the headwaters of the Colorado River through the Moffat Tunnel.
Udall/Overpeck 4-panel Figure Colorado River temperature/precipitation/natural flows with trend. Lake Mead and Lake Powell storage. Updated through Water Year 2024. Credit: Brad Udall
And most everybody at this point understands that the Colorado River is in trouble. For more than 20 years we have seen the photos of the bathtub rings of the reservoirs and the water levels far below. So many years have yielded below-average runoffs, a 20% reduction altogether in the 21st century. The number of broken hottest-ever temperature records have vastly dwarfed the coldest-ever records.
Understanding the intricate efforts to better align the political governance of the river with the physical reality is a far more difficult story to tell, but it has not been for absence of effort in Big Pivots and hundreds of other outlets. Scores of stories have been written in just the last month or more about the seeming inability of negotiators from the seven basin states to come to agreements in advance of a November deadline set by the federal government.
Now comes a new report, โThereโs No Water Available,โ from Great Basin Water Network and partners. It offers nine recommendations under the subtitle of โCommonsense Recommendations to Limit Colorado River Conflict.โ
If longer-term drought is one component of the declined flows, the science is now firm that the warming climate is a reality that will remain and with it more erratic precipitation, surprising shifts in temperature, dry soils and many other factors. โIt is clear that the future will be about adapting to hydrologic extremes. It is also clear that the water laws and hydraulic engineering developed in the 20th century did not foresee the realities we face today,โ says the report.
Then there is this arresting statement:
โThe supply-focused approaches during the last 120 years โ i.e. encouraging use โ has landed us in crisis. Itโs time for a fresh, modernized approach. Nevertheless, we believe that the necessary change isnโt as complicated as people in power want us to believe.โ
Simply put, say the authors from the Glen Canyon Institute, Sierra Club and other organizations, we must use less water. โWe can do so in an equitable way that does not involve foot-dragging and finger-pointing.โ
Who needs to budge? Well, almost everybody โ the historically shorted Native Americans being the exception. โAll parties currently using water must commit to using less water than they have in the past,โ says the report.
The area around Yuma, Ariz., and Californiaโs Imperial Valley provide roughly 95% of the vegetables available at grocery stores in the United States during winter months, February 2017, The report calls for more resilience built into agriculture. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots
Upper basin states โ Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming โ come in for special mention. Perhaps itโs a negotiating tactic, but they have continued to maintain detailed estimates of how much more water they want to use. โRather than planning on using more, we need states to plan on cutting,โ says the report.
They call for all states to have curtailment plans. โHaving a clear-cut understanding of what entities have to cut during shortages is something thatโs already in place in the lower Basin. The upper basin must develop a similar system of cuts predicated on water availability and delivery obligations that consider downstream use and upper basin water availability.โ
Andy Mueller, general manager of the Colorado River Water Conservation District, the lead water agency for much of Coloradoโs Western Slope, made that call at the districtโs annual meeting in 2024. Some agreed. See: โHeading for the Colorado River cliff.โ Big Pivots, Oct. 20, 2024. However, Jim Lochhead, a former Western Slope resident and then Denver Water CEO, said he believed that the process of preparing for a compact curtailment was too difficult, too messy, until the clear need arrives. See: โBone-dry winter in the San Juans,โ Big Pivots, Jan. 28, 2025.
The upper basin states have argued that they never used the water allocated under the Colorado River Compact of 1922, while the lower-basin states did โ and then some. Only lately have the lower-basin state tightened their belt. The upper basin states donโt want to be restricted โ not, at least, to the same degree.
This position was explained in a forum during May by Becky Mitchell, Coloradoโs representative in the negotiations. She talked about how the upper-basin had developed more slowly and still has not used its full allocation. See: โSharing risk on the Colorado River,โ Big Pivots, May 29, 2025.
โThe main thing that we got from the compact was the principle of equity and the ability to develop at our own pace,โ said Mitchell. โWe shouldnโt be punished because we didnโt develop to a certain number.โ The conversation, she added, is โwhat does equity look like right now?โ
Upper-basin states want a willingness in this settlement for agreement that focuses on the water supply, not the demand, she said. โCommon sense would tell you, maybe Mother Nature should drive how we operate the system.โ That, she said, is the bedrock principle of the proposal from the upper division.
The Colorado River at Silt looked healthy in early June, and indeed runoff from the riverโs headwaters in northern Colorado was near normal. The overall runoff, though, was far, far below average โ what is becoming a new norm. Photo/ Allen Best
This new report rejects this โnatural flowโ plan. โAgencies do not yet have the means to quickly and accurately measure natural flow data, a measurement metric that tracks water as if there were no human usage and infrastructure. Thatโs because the basin at-large is missing key data points.โ
The report also argues that any new dams and diversions need to be off the shelf, cities can do a better job of conservation, and Glen Canyon Dam needs work to allow it to be functional at lower water levels. The report also recommends making farms resilient to new realities.
Some elements of the Colorado River conversations have shifted dramatically. One of them is the new insistence of the last 10 years that the water rights of tribes be honored. Representatives of tribal nations now are almost always on the agenda at water conferences in Colorado. Twenty years ago? No, they were not. Lorelei Cloud, the chair of the Colorado Water Conservation Board since May, is a member of the Southern Ute Reservation.
Of the basinโs 30 tribes, 22 have recognized rights to 3.2 million acre-feet of Colorado River system water annually. Thatโs approximately 25% of the basinโs average annual water supply. Twelve tribes have still-unresolved claims. It is estimated that 65% of tribal water is unused by tribal communities (but in many cases consigned to other users). Junior users would be curtailed in order to honor those tribal rights, says the report.
The connection between declines in groundwater and surface flows is also part of a broader shift in the conversation. A May 2025 study that groundwater supplies in the Colorado River Basin are shrinking by nearly 1.3 million acre-feet per year. Excessive groundwater depletion had surfaced as a surrogate water supply to satisfy surface water deficits.
In the upper basin, half the water we see at the surface comes from groundwater, according to research from the U.S. Geological Survey. โThis seminal USGS analysis underscores that as temperatures rise and evapotranspiration rates increase, there will be less groundwater entering surface water systems.โ
There are obvious limitations to a short report, and I found the agriculture and municipal sections too shallow. The bibliography of sources, though, was quite valuable.
Will we see other reports of a similar nature in coming weeks and months? Quite likely. This conversation is far from over. In some ways, itโs just beginning.
Seven U.S. states and Mexico depend on the Colorado River, shown here in the Grand Canyon. But over the past century, the riverโs flow has decreased by roughly 20 percent. (Bureau of Reclamation)
Click the link to read the article on the E&E News website (Jennifer Yachnin). Here’s an excerpt:
October 3, 2025
Scott Cameron will take over as acting head of the Bureau of Reclamation, shifting titles at the Interior Department while he maintains his role asย the Trump administrationโs lead officialย in negotiations over the future of the Colorado River. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum tapped Cameron for the role on Oct. 1, announcing the decision in aย secretarial orderย that also updated otherย leadership roles recently confirmedย by the Senate. The decision comes in the wake ofย President Donald Trumpโs decisionย on Sept. 30 to withdraw his nomination of Ted Cooke, a former top official at the Central Arizona Project, to be Reclamation commissioner.
Colorado fly fishing, whitewater and other water-related recreational pursuits contribute significantly to Coloradoโs $34.5 billion recreational economy. Photo courtesy of the Winter Park Convention and Visitors Bureau
Click the link to read the article on The Denver Post website (Judith Kohler). Here’s an excerpt:
October 5, 2025
While economists and politicians debate the merits and drawbacks of higher taxes on imports, industry representatives, state officials and business owners say the small and mid-sized companies that make up the bulk of Coloradoโs outdoor business sector are struggling with the fallout. And the new tariffs come on top of duties that have been historically higher than for many other industries. Through the years, outdoor businesses have gone to China, Vietnam and other countries where materials and production facilities for technical gear and equipment are more available. All those factors make it difficult for outdoor businesses to move production to the U.S. At best, they say, it would take a few years to develop the factories and necessary expertise. Michael Mojica began moving some of the manufacturing for his business,ย Outdoor Element, from China to Vietnam in search of lower tariffs. But the shift wasnโt quite fast enough in the quickly changing trade arena. He received word from his logistics company that, even though the shipment was on the water, increase in tariffs on steel and aluminum announced Aug. 18 would pile another 50% onto the 28% rate he already was paying on those goods. Outdoor Element uses the metals for products that include multitool carabiners, stoves, knives and fire-starting equipment.
โI was planning to pay $4,200 for tariffs. I ended up paying $12,600. There went my profit,โ Mojica said.
Outdoor Element, based in Englewood, had its best year in 2024. This year, Mojica is questioning whether heโll be able to stay in business…
The effects of tariffs on outdoor businesses are no small thing for the national or state economy. Theย U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysisย said the outdoor recreation economy accounted for 2.3% of the national gross domestic product in 2023. Theย total economic output was $1.2 trillionย in terms of gross output. In Colorado, the outdoor industry accounted for 3.2% of the stateโs GDP in 2023, according to the federal agency. A study conducted for the stateย found that the economic output associated with outdoor recreation by Colorado residents totaled $65.8 billion in 2023, contributing $36.5 billion to the stateโs GDP. The Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation plan said the economic activity supported approximately 404,000 jobs in Colorado, which represented 12% of the entire labor force, and produced $22.2 billion in salaries and wages. Other economic contributions in 2023 included $11.2 billion in local, state and federal tax revenue, according to the study. Coloradoโs outdoor industry is vulnerable to negative impacts from tariffs because the majority of the goods are produced in Cambodia, Vietnam and other countries with high levies on imports to the U.S.,ย a Sept. 4 report by the Polis administrationย said. The industry is also mostly made up of small businesses.
Colorado Governor Clarence J. Morley signing Colorado River compact and South Platte River compact bills, Delph Carpenter standing center. Unidentified photographer. Date 1925. Print from Denver Post. From the CSU Water Archives
Click the link to read the article on the InkStain website (Eric Kuhn, Anne Castle, John Fleck, Kathryn Sorensen, Jack Schmidt, and Katherine Tara):
October 6, 2025
As negotiators for the seven Colorado River Basin states rapidly approach Reclamationโs November deadline for providing a framework for a seven-state agreement for the Post-2026 Operating Guidelines for Lakes Powell and Mead, a larger threat looms. Reclamationโs recently released September 24-Month study minimum probable projection is consistent with our mass balance analysis of storage in the next year, solidifying the likelihood of critical conditions if the coming winter is dry. Reclamationโs latest analysis predicts that storage at Lake Powell would fall below the 3500-ft elevation as early August 2026 and might continue to be below this critical elevation until March 2028. As we noted in our recent white paper, Reclamation has committed to protecting Lake Powell from going below 3500 ft.
This projection of future conditions in the event of persistent dry conditions poses a conundrumโReclamation could reduce releases from Powell to protect the 3500-ft reservoir elevation, but in doing so, low releases would most likely trigger the dreaded 1922 Colorado River Compact tripwireโthe amount of water delivered from Lake Powell to Lake Mead during a 10-year period that is less than the threshold. The Lower Division states are likely to litigate if the 10-yr average wire is tripped. Under one prevailing interpretation of the Compact, Upper Basin states must not cause the 10-yr flow at Lee Ferry to be depleted to less than 82.5 MAF to deliver water to the Lower Basin and Mexico. As explained in a new white paper, there is a very real chance that the 10-yr running average will be 82.78 MAF, just a hair above the tripwire, one year from now. In alternate scenarios, the 10-yr running average would hit the tripwire in 2027 or 2028. If Reclamation exercises its authority to reduce Lake Powell deliveries to as low as 6 MAF, the tripwire is triggered even earlier. In the face of this imminent possibility, Basin States and the Federal Government must commit to an enforceable agreement to reduce their total consumptive Colorado River uses with an equitable sharing of the burden sufficient to justify a waiver of claims under the Compact for the duration of the agreement. The alternative is a deeply uncertain future for the Basin.
The Colorado National Monument and the Colorado River from the Colorado Riverfront trail October 3, 2025.
Click the link to read the article on the Aspen Daily News website (Austin Corona). Here’s an excerpt:
October 6, 2025
Three months after officials introduced a concept to revive stalled negotiations over the Colorado River, that concept has run into the same pitfalls that sank previous ideas, leaving the river on a course for federal intervention as reservoir levels plunge. Speakers at the Colorado River Water Conservation Districtโs annual water seminar in Grand Junction on Friday [October 3, 2025] said the new concept still falters because it would require Colorado and other upper basin states โ New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming โ to commit to some restrictions on their water use during dry years.
โ(Lower Basin leaders) are insisting that the Upper Basin is the problem in getting to an agreement because weโre refusing to take mandatory cuts,โ said Andy Mueller, general manager of the river district…Upper Basin states argue that their geography and infrastructure already require them to cut their use when the rivers run dry, while downstream states can rely on water stored in large reservoirs to keep themselves wet during droughts. The new conceptโs failure to gain traction means negotiators are still wrangling as the riverโs levels drop further…Becky Mitchell, Coloradoโs negotiator on the river, said the states are still meeting once every other week, but she and other state officials remain mired in many of the same issues that have stalled negotiations for two years.
โWeโre meeting. It is not enjoyable. I want to be perfectly honest,โ Mitchell said.
The Upper Basin argues it should not have to take cuts because it relies on the natural flow of the river, not stored water in large reservoirs like Lake Mead and Lake Powell. That means the Upper Basin canโt use more than what is naturally available in the river and cuts back its use during dry times already. It also means the Upper Basin already feels โpainโ during dry years…
โEvery year, someone in western Colorado โฆ has not had adequate water,โ Mueller said…
…Mitchell said she was โhopefulโ for the negotiations. She said the Upper Basin agrees with the general idea of a supply-driven concept, like the one the Lower Basin has proposed, even if the basins are struggling to work out central issues like cuts in the Upper Basin.
โWe canโt give up โฆ A supply-based proposal is the only way to move forward. We all have to be responding to supply,โ Mitchell said.
