Can beavers help heal burn scars after wildfires? #Colorado researchers built their own dams to find out — The #Denver Post

A beaver dam analog in Rocky Mountain National Park’s Kawuneeche Valley. Photo by Eric Brown, courtesy of Northern Water

Click the link to read the article on The Denver Post website (Elise Schmelzer). Here’s an excerpt:

December 30, 2025

High in the mountains west of Fort Collins, teams of scientists and engineers are pretending to be beavers.

They may not be swimming or chewing trees, but researchers with the U.S. Forest Service and Colorado State University are building [beaver dam analogs] in burn scars to study how wetlands created by the dams impact ecosystem restoration and water quality after wildfires. The research led by Tim Fegel is some of the first of its kind, he said. Scientists have studied how meadow and wetland restoration affects wildlife habitat, but thereโ€™s been little exploration of how wetlands created by beaver dams could change water quality post-wildfire, said Fegel, a biogeochemistry lab manager with the Forest Service who is leading the project.

โ€œItโ€™s kind of a brave new world for us with this type of work,โ€ said Fegel, who is also a doctoral candidate at Colorado State University.

Wildfires destabilize soils and make them less capable of absorbing rain and snowmelt, resulting in higher runoffs and increased flood probability. High volumes of water, combined with a lack of vegetation roots to hold soil in place, mean that more sediment and debris travel downstream, impacting water quality and water treatment systems.

A burnt sign on Larimer County Road 103 near Chambers Lake. The fire started in the area near Cameron Peak, which it is named after. The fire burned over 200,000 acres during its three-month run. Photo courtesy of Kate Stahla via the University of Northern Colorado

Five years ago,ย the Cameron Peak and East Troublesomeย wildfires ripped through Coloradoโ€™s northern mountains, charring more than 620 square miles across watersheds that provide water for hundreds of thousands of people who live along the Front Range. Thatโ€™s where Fegel and other researchers think the [beaver dam analogs] can help. Fegel hopes the work will provide land managers and water utilities with more data and, potentially, another water-quality tool. The team installed beaver-style dams across the Cache la Poudre and Willow Creek watersheds โ€” both burned in the 2020 wildfires โ€” to help slow water flow and instead spread the water over a floodplain. Engineers designed the dams, which are generally made of large logs hammered into the earth with branches and other material.

Ash and silt pollute the Cache la Poudre River after the High Park Fire September 2012. Photo credit: USDA

Gross Damโ€™s successful year: Dam raise 95% complete — Jay Adams (DenverWater.org) #BoulderCreek #FraserRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #SouthPlatteRiver #aridification

Click the link to read the article on the Denver Water website (Jay Adams):

December 12, 2025

Workers raise dam 109 feet in 2025. Next yearโ€™s goal: Reaching the top.

The Denver Water team working on Gross Dam in Boulder County is celebrating a successful year after the dam raise is 95% complete.

โ€œIn 2025, we raised the height of the dam by 109 feet above the original structure,โ€ said Jeff Martin, Denver Waterโ€™s program manager for the Gross Reservoir Expansion Project. โ€œWe have 22 feet left to go to reach the new height and weโ€™re on track to reach that in 2026.โ€

The dam-raising aspect of the Gross Reservoir Expansion Project wrapped up for the season on Nov. 14, due to the drop in temperatures. The project is designed to nearly triple the water storage capacity of Gross Reservoir.

In 2025, workers raised the height of Gross Dam by 109 feet. The final 22 feet will be completed in 2026 to reach the damโ€™s new height of 471 feet. Photo credit: Denver Water.

“We have to stop placing roller-compacted concrete when the temperatures drop below freezing,โ€ said Casey Dick, deputy program manager for the Gross Reservoir Expansion Project.

โ€œTo prepare for winter, we put blankets on top of the new concrete to keep it from getting too cold. Thatโ€™s because if the concrete freezes while it is still curing, it can lead to a weakened final product.”

Work associated with the dam raise will resume in spring 2026, when the weather warms up enough to complete the final 22 feet.

Protective โ€œblanketsโ€ were placed on top of the dam to insulate the new concrete, so it does not fully cure over the cold, winter months. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Once that work is complete, the dam will be 471 feet tall, which is 131 feet higher than the original. The completed dam also will be longer across its crest, or top. The original crest was 1,050 feet long; the higher dam will have a crest that stretches 2,040 feet from one side of the canyon to the other.


Learn more about theย Gross Reservoir Expansion Project.


This year marked the second year of dam raising construction work at Gross.

As of December 2025, workers had placed more than 730,000 cubic yards of concrete. To put that in perspective, Empower Stadium at Mile High, where the Denver Broncos play their home football games, required just 29,000 cubic yards of concrete to build, about 4% of the concrete placed so far on Gross Dam.

Protective โ€œblanketsโ€ were placed on top of the dam to insulate the new concrete, so it does not fully cure over the cold, winter months. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Roller-compacted concrete is a special mix of concrete that allows crews to place it on the dam and then spread it out. The concrete is firm enough to be able to drive machinery on top of it. The process is a fast and efficient method of raising the dam. During the construction work, crews raised the height of the dam by about 1 foot per day.

Construction crews use GPS technology and survey equipment to keep track of how high theyโ€™ve raised the dam.

โ€œThe way we keep track of the elevation gain is that the bulldozers are equipped with GPS-grade control technology, which ensures that each layer of concrete is spread to the correct thickness,โ€ Dick said.

โ€œOnce the concrete is rolled and vibrated into place, each layer ends up being 1 foot thick. It’s then checked by surveyors with their equipment to verify the exact elevation.โ€

The bulldozers are equipped with GPS-grade control technology to monitor the height of the concrete as it is spread across the top of the dam and keep track of the elevation. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Work wonโ€™t completely stop over the winter.

Mechanical and pipe work will be done inside the dam, and crews will build a stilling basin at the base of the dam. The basinโ€™s function is to slow the speed of water coming down the damโ€™s spillway and safely redirect the water into South Boulder Creek.

Work on the stilling basin at the base of the dam will continue over the winter. The stilling basin is designed to slow the flow of water coming down the spillway and channel it into the creek. Photo credit: Denver Water.

โ€œThis season was a huge success, and our team met a ton of challenges in raising Gross Dam,โ€ Martin said. โ€œWe had legal challenges and adverse weather challenges. We also had wildfire safety operation challenges that shut down our power supply up here. Despite all those setbacks, the dedicated team of 500 men and women rose to the challenge. I’d just like to thank everybody who committed themselves to this project and helped us make 2025 a success.โ€

Jeff Martin, Denver Waterโ€™s program manager for the Gross Reservoir Expansion Project, stands at the south side of the dam. Once completed, the dam will reach up to white line on the rock wall. Photo credit: Denver Water.

A private water company is leading a $150 million rush for Northern Colorado #groundwater — Jerd Smith (Fresh Water News) #SouthPlatteRiver

Via the VitaH20 Project website.

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Jerd Smith):

December 23, 2025

A private development company is investing $150 million in an ambitious plan to harvest groundwater lying beneath sprawling northern Colorado ranches to serve fast-growing towns along the Interstate 25 corridor.

FrontRange H2O, backed by a Texas oil and real estate company, is behind the venture. The firm has been operating in Colorado for more than 20 years, treating and delivering wastewater from oil wells for oil industry reuse on the West Slope, and overseeing extensive real estate holdings in Denver and elsewhere, according to Brent Waller, who is president of the Loveland-based company.

โ€œWe were recycling produced water before it was cool,โ€ Waller said. Produced water describes wastewater that is generated through oil production.

Experts say the large-scale, private urban water development  is the first of its kind in Colorado and could help  thirsty towns like Fort Collins and Loveland shore up their water systems.

But others worry that the privatization of water in the state could lead to price hikes and might also, because of its reliance on nonrenewable groundwater, undermine the stateโ€™s future water security.

Still, Front Range H20 believes its system will deliver water at less cost and sooner than other government-backed projects.

Until now, Colorado communities have relied on water that is captured, stored and treated by public, nonprofit water utilities, such as Denver Water. The agency is an independent entity governed by commissioners who are appointed by the Denver mayor. In other cases, cities operate their own water systems. Public entities such as these are required by law to regulate water rates, to issue bonds to finance their work, and they are subject to oversight by elected or appointed bodies.

But FrontRange H2O is a private company that is using millions of dollars in private financing to secure the water rights, obtain state permission to drill the groundwater wells, and to build a water treatment system and pipeline to carry the water. Although it must obtain state permission to drill the wells and build the water treatment plant, it is not subject to the same public oversight as a public government system would be.

โ€œThis kind of thing is common in Texas and Arizona, particularly with groundwater, but it is unique in Colorado,โ€ said Adam Jokerst, Rocky Mountain regional director for WestWater Research, based in Fort Collins. Jokerst is a groundwater expert who has consulted with Front Range H2O on its northern Colorado plans.

FrontRange H2O refers to its current project as VitaH2O. Nine wells drilled into the aquifer are expected to generate up to 5,000 acre-feet of water initially, Waller said. An acre foot equals nearly 326,000 gallons of water and is eough to serve to two to four urban households for one year. The waterย  will be treated at a new plant north of Nunn and then delivered down to Cobb Lake, a reservoir owned by the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District, or FCLWD.

The district was in the news earlier this year when it opted out of a large-scale water and reservoir project run by Northern Water known as NISP, the Northern Integrated Supply Project. It will instead partner with VitaH2O.

Typical water well

As the project moves forward, Waller said FCLWD will contribute an additional $150 million to help complete the new water supply project. Chris Pletcher, general manager of FCLWD, declined an interview request. The water district was NISPโ€™s largest customer and was on track to pay $400 million to help build the giant system.

Colorado derives most of its water supplies from melting snows that fill its streams and rivers, but large swaths of the state, including Douglas County, rely heavily on wells drilled deep into aquifers, many of which are not recharged through rain and snow.

As the state grows, the pressure to tap these nonrenewable waters is growing as well.

According to the Colorado Division of Water Resources, interest in drilling high producing groundwater wells in northern Colorado is growing.

โ€œThere has been more activity in this area in the last 10 years,โ€ said Tracy Kosloff, deputy state engineer at Coloradoโ€™s Division of Water Resources.

Major players in the area include Front Range H2O and the city of Greeley, among others.

The interest in nonrenewable groundwater worries people like Steve Boand, a former Douglas County commissioner and water consultant who has watched his regionโ€™s nonrenewable groundwater supplies shrink as they are used by fast-growing towns like Parker and Castle Rock.

Any project that relies on nonrenewable groundwater is problematic, Boand said.

โ€œIn general, sustainable water supplies are the preferred source,โ€ Boand said, noting that Douglas County water providers are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to recycle water and tap rivers and streams to wean themselves off nonrenewable groundwater. Their hope is, eventually, to use their aquifers only in drought years when surface supplies are scarce.

And that is part of the plan with VitaH2O, Waller said. The project will use surface supplies that the Fort Collins-Loveland district already owns to recharge the aquifers they plan to withdraw water from, in hopes that the treated water being pumped back into the ground in wet years will extend the life of the nonrenewable aquifers.

Under Colorado water law, groundwater can be drilled by whomever owns the land above the aquifer, but they must demonstrate that they are extracting water gradually and must prove it will last at least 100 years.

Waller said he believes the surface supplies that VitaH2O will inject back into the aquifers in wet years will extend the life of the system beyond 100 years, to 300 years or more.

The location of the wellfield as seen in a PDF provided by the Vita H20 Project.

East of Wallerโ€™s development, the city of Greeley has already invested $85 million in developing an aquifer system under the Terry Ranch that will supply water in drought years and will also store treated water, according to Sean Chambers, Greeleyโ€™s director of water and sewer utilities.

โ€œWhat you are seeing now is a new approach to diversifying surface water supplies with this deep aquifer, nonrenewable groundwater โ€ฆ and there is a rush on that,โ€ Chambers said.

Looming in the background is Northern Waterโ€™s NISP project. It was originally designed to serve 15 entities, but three have already pulled out, including the largest, the Fort Collins-Loveland district. Waller said he is in talks with several other communities, including Wellington and Eaton, who are looking for an alternative to the costly $2.7 billion NISP, which will rely on renewable water supplies from the Poudre and South Platte rivers.

Brad Wind, general manager of Northern Water, said NISPโ€™s growing cost is prompting long-time supporters to rethink their participation and that some will inevitably go with other providers, such as VitaH2O.

โ€œPeople have some hard choices to make,โ€ Wind said.

How much water is available to be mined from these aquifers isnโ€™t clear yet, though developers such as Waller and Greeley have invested heavily in doing the hydrological analysis that gives them an estimate of what is available.

But overuse is a major concern and Chambers says that is a key issue the city is addressing as it develops its system.

โ€œCollectively we will have to find ways over time to make sure that northern Colorado and other communities that rely on this water donโ€™t just mine it to extinction โ€ฆ Greeley goes into this effort with our eyes very wide open about that,โ€ Chambers said.

โ€œThis is a resource that should last for 10 generations or longer and provide a runway for public officials to figure out how to build resilience into all of our sources of supply,โ€ he said.

Boand isnโ€™t convinced that the recharge technologies and state rules designed to make the water last longer are going to be enough to protect the aquifers.

โ€œRecharge has been somewhat successful but everybody has talked about it as if it is the great salvation, even though it is very much in the testing phase,โ€ Boand said. โ€œAnd it takes the same attention to detail that running a nuclear power plant takes โ€ฆ lots of engineers and lots of scientists.โ€

Another concern with having a private company develop a major public water supply is the stability of the company and the water system if the company should fail.

Waller says his companyโ€™s contracts provide protection for that possibility.

โ€œIf we go belly up, five years or 10 years down the road, the water districts and participants have the right to step in and take over the system. There are controls in place,โ€ Waller said. They expect to deliver water in the first quarter of 2029.

As with most new water projects, developers go through a special court review where they must prove their water estimates are accurate and that their water use wonโ€™t harm others. Waller said his companyโ€™s water court application was filed in October.

And it is being closely watched.

Chambers, with the city of Greeley, is concerned that the VitaH2O project may impact the Terry Ranch project, which lies nearby. He said he expects to fight to defend Greeleyโ€™s rights and will object to anything he sees as threatening.

โ€œWe intend to be an objector in the water court process to protect our decree and our investments,โ€ he said.

Via the VitaH20 Project website.

North Weld County Water District Rate Increase 2026 Among Lowest in Northern #Colorado

North Weld County Water District Service Area. Graphic via NWCWD.

Here’s the release from the North Weld county Water District:

December 10, 2025

North Weld County Water District implements modest 4% rate increase for 2026 โ€“ still among lowest in region 

WELD COUNTY, COLORADO (Dec. 10, 2026) โ€“North Weld County Water District (NWCWD) announced a comparatively modest 4 percent rate increase for 2026 โ€“ which is less than the previous year and significantly lower than the surrounding region.  

โ€œMaintaining our water service infrastructure continues to be a priority for the district and one that we balance with our fiduciary responsibility to our rate payers,โ€ said Eric Reckentine, General Manager, North Weld County Water District.

A diligent infrastructure improvement plan is highlighted in these key District projects designed to ensure a clean, robust, and affordable water supply:

  • Weld County West Transmission Line:ย The District will start construction of the Weld County west 42-inch transmission line and new 6 million gallon treated water tank in 2026 with a project cost of $20 million dollars.
  • Eastern Zone Distribution Line:ย The District will continue construction of the eastern zone 30-inch distribution line with the projectโ€™s third phase starting in 2026 and to be completed in 2027.
  • Soldier Canyon Water Treatment Plant Expansion:ย The SCWTP treatment plant capacity was expanded from 60 million gallons per day to 68 million gallons in 2025. In collaboration with the Soldier Canyon Water Treatment Authority and nearby District partners (such as Fort Collins-Loveland Water District and East Larimer County Water District), NWCWD is finalizing the Soldier Canyon Filter Plant Master Plan, and will begin design on a plant expansion for additional treatment capacity for the District to begin in 2029.

With these improvements, the district says it can meet growth needs well into the future.

โ€œUpgrades to our aging water delivery system allow the District to meet new treatment standards and accommodate the record-breaking growth in Northern Colorado,โ€ Reckentine said. โ€œA stable revenue stream from water rates enables us to accomplish that.โ€

About North Weld County Water District:

Weld County is the fastest growing in the state.  North Weld County Water Districtโ€™s cities, residents, and businesses rely on the safe, reliable, and affordable water we have been delivering for over 64 years. The District constantly plans for growing communities, which now span from agricultural to rural to urban, ensuring that all future water needs are met and we can continue to deliver the highest quality water in the growing region for decades to come. To learn more, visit NWCWD.org.

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

Northern Water again delays filling Chimney Hollow Dam over uranium issues — Michael Booth (Fresh Water News)

Chimney Hollow Dam construction site. Photo credit: Northern Water

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

November 13, 2025

Northern Water will further delay an initial partial filling of its new Chimney Hollow Reservoir into next year to allow time for expanded groundwater tests in the area to make sure unexpected uranium leaching inside the planned pool would not migrate to other supplies.

After spending years permitting and constructing the dam west of Loveland, Northern Water was surprised in June that routine water quality tests ahead of the filling go-ahead found natural uranium leaching out of rocks exposed from a quarry used for dam fill. Initial water fill-up was then delayed for testing, to see how long the leaching might last, and how the uranium would be diluted when water diverted under the Continental Divide by the Colorado-Big Thompson system eventually fills Chimney Hollow.

Now Northern Water says it needs more time to test groundwater outside the reservoir to provide background levels of naturally occurring uranium, and determine whether a filled reservoir would โ€œinfluenceโ€ nearby groundwater with uranium-tainted water. A Northern Water spokesperson used โ€œinfluenceโ€ rather than โ€œleakingโ€ to describe what engineers would be watching.

โ€œInfluence or mixing of surface and groundwater can vary greatly, depending on many factors, scenarios and even locations,โ€ spokesperson Amy Parks said. โ€œWithout adequate baseline data, we are not able to assess those future conditions, so this short delay allows us to do that work.โ€

Map from Northern Water via the Fort Collins Coloradan.

Similar-sized Carter Lake Reservoir is just over a ridge that makes up the east edge of Chimney Hollow.

โ€œAt this time, due to the existing bedrock, we do not think that migration of water from Chimney to Carter is likely. However, additional monitoring will help us ensure that can be detected in the future,โ€ Parks said.

Filling of a small portion of the reservoir had been planned for this month, but now is โ€œexpected in early 2026,โ€ according to the agency.

The 12 Northern Water members that bought into the project, including the cities of Broomfield and Loveland, are already paying for construction bonds through their rates. The delay in filling the reservoir is not expected to affect their finances, the utility said.

Members were not scheduled to receive Chimney Hollow water for years. โ€œThis doesnโ€™t affect water deliveries or anything that project participants have been expecting, so itโ€™s a good timeโ€ to widen testing protocols,  Parks said in an interview.

โ€œItโ€™s really just an abundance of caution and making sure weโ€™re putting the health and safety of our public and neighbors into priority, and making sure weโ€™re crossing our tโ€™s and dotting our iโ€™s before we take that step of adding water,โ€ she said.

What mitigation is necessary remains unknown

Northern Water still does not know the scale of mitigation required to keep uranium in Chimney Hollow water at safe levels. The agency earlier this year said it believed uranium leaching would decrease over time as stored water stopped penetrating farther into the naturally occurring seams. Excavators have now capped some unused construction materials that will eventually be underwater with a clay layer that will prevent some leaching.

If uranium levels in the filled pool do not drop far enough, other mitigation measures could include a water treatment plant or system below the reservoir, Parks said. Northern Water does not yet have a cost estimate on how much the testing, delays or treatment will cost, until more testing is complete, she said.

Engineering and testing teams decided โ€œitโ€™s best to delay this for a few months to make sure that we have the groundwater samples from the reservoir, from around the reservoir, before that water goes in there,โ€ Parks said. โ€œWe just want to make sure that any water that goes into the reservoir now doesnโ€™t influence groundwater around it.โ€

Chimney Hollow was built to store 90,000 acre-feet of water for 11 northern Colorado communities and water agencies and the Platte River Power Authority. The project was meant to โ€œfirmโ€ or store water rights Northern Water owns in the Windy Gap project near Granby, which collects and pumps Colorado River water into the Adams Tunnel for Front Range buyers. Windy Gap and Chimney Hollow allow the Front Range communities to take advantage of their water rights in wet years when Lake Granby is too full to contain their portion of the river. Northern Water has also suffered setbacks this year on its other major project, the proposed $2.7 billion twin-reservoir Northern Integrated Supply Project. Some members of NISP, a slightly different list than Chimney Hollow members, are warning they will pull out of the two-dam and pipeline construction plan after decades of permitting because costs have risen too high and delays raise uncertainty.

More by Michael Booth

How is #Coloradoโ€™s response to invasive mussels going? Funding and public education are key, experts say — Shannon Mullane (Fresh Water News)

Adult Zebra mussel. Photo credit: Colorado Parks and Wildlife

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

October 23, 2025

Colorado is in its first year of responding to a zebra mussel infestation in a big river, the Colorado River. State staff say they have what they need to handle the high-priority needs โ€” they just need their funding to stay off the chopping block.

The fast-reproducing mussels, or their microscopic stage called veligers, were first detected in Colorado in 2022. Since then, the stateโ€™s aquatic nuisance species team and its partners have been working to monitor water, decontaminate boats, and educate the public to keep the mussels from spreading. That effort logged a serious failure this summer when state staff detected adult zebra mussels in the Colorado River, where treatment options are limited.

CPW sampling on the Colorado River found zebra mussel veligers. The river is now considered โ€œpositiveโ€ for zebra mussels from its confluence with the Roaring Fork River to the Utah state line. CREDIT: PHOTO COURTESY OF COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE

โ€œWeโ€™re continuing to sample the Colorado from below the Granby Dam all the way out to the [Utah-Colorado] state line,โ€ said Robert Walters, who manages the invasive species program for Colorado Parks and Wildlife.

Adult zebra mussels, about the size of a thumbnail with a zebra-striped shell, reproduce quickly and can clog up pipes, valves and parts of dams, costing millions of dollars to remove. They also suck up nutrients, out-eating other native aquatic species, and their razor sharp shells cause headaches for beachgoers.

The stateโ€™s first adult zebra mussel showed up in Highline Reservoir near Grand Junction in 2022. But even after the lake was drained and treated, the mussels appeared again.

Then this year in July, the mussels showed up in a private reservoir in Eagle County near the Colorado River. And in September, specialists found adult zebra mussels in a stretch of the Colorado River itself.

Colorado has been working to keep these invasive species out of its waters since 2007, when a task force was created to coordinate management efforts.

In 2008, Colorado approved a law that makes it illegal to possess, import, export, transport, release or cause an aquatic nuisance species to be released.

Now, the program completes over 450,000 inspections each year, according to Colorado Parks and Wildlifeโ€™s website. The teams have intercepted 281 boats with zebra or quagga mussels attached.

But their treatment options are limited on the Colorado River. CPW does not intend to treat the main stem of the Colorado River due to multiple factors, including risk to native fish populations and critical habitat, the length of the potential treatment area and complex canal systems, the agency said in a mid-September news release.

The goal continues to be educating the public โ€” including lawmakers who are scheduled to hear an update on the zebra mussel issue during the Oct. 29 Water Resources and Agriculture Review Committee meeting.

โ€œWhat I think that we really need to help us more effectively tackle this issue is a higher level of public awareness,โ€ Walters said.

The first year of infestations

For invasive species teams, the first year involves a lot of monitoring, according to Heidi McMaster, the invasive species coordinator for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

Sheโ€™d know: She has helped Reclamation with its response to invasive species, like quagga mussels.

Quagga mussels were discovered in Lake Mead, Lake Mojave and Lake Havasu on the Colorado River in January 2007. The mussels were later confirmed in Lake Powell in 2013, according to the Bureau of Reclamation.

Hoover Dam with Lake Mead in the background December 3, 2024.

Colorado River water from Coloradoโ€™s mountains eventually collects in Lake Powell before flowing through the Grand Canyon to downstream states, Lake Mead and Mexico.

โ€œI would think that the first response is probably panic, especially if people are not prepared for it,โ€ McMaster said. โ€œOnce that initial panic wears off, it is tapping into the existing resources, the preparedness plans that state or managers have on how to deal with it.โ€

During the first year, specialists are looking at existing rapid response plans, vulnerability assessments and communication plans. They take samples and track life cycles to try to understand how the mussels reproduce, how environmental conditions impact breeding and what kinds of treatments might work to stop the spread.

In the Southwest and along the Colorado River, the temperature of the water allows invasive species to breed multiple times a year, McMaster said. Each one can produce a million larvae. Not all survive: There are turbulent waters, areas with fewer nutrients, and other threats, like predators. But if they grow to adulthood they can layer on top of each other on underwater surfaces.

If left unchecked, invasive mussels could clog up pipelines that carry cooling water to turbines used to generate hydroelectric power. Without the cooling effect of the water, the turbine would โ€œburn upโ€ and power generation would shut down, McMaster said.

The goal at the end of the first year is mainly to inform the public. That means repeating the โ€œclean, drain, dryโ€ refrain as often as possible to anyone moving watercraft from one body of water to another, she said.

After that, a successful first-year response will also include setting up inspection and decontamination stations. Then, specialists move onto treatment options, McMaster said.

At Hoover Dam and Lake Mead, on the Nevada-Arizona border, managers took an aggressive treatment approach to avoid damage to the dam, she said. They used UV lights to stun and temporarily paralyze the microscopic veligers so they cannot attach inside the dam.

โ€œPrevention is still the No. 1 goal,โ€ McMaster said.

Itโ€™s the cheapest and least risky option, she said. Once an invasive mussel species arrives in an area, however, the costs can ramp up exponentially into the millions of taxpayer dollars. The goal is always to keep them at bay as much as possible, she said.

โ€œThey might be in the state of Colorado,โ€ McMaster said, โ€œbut if you look at the overall percentage of uninfested areas, thatโ€™s still a lot of maintenance thatโ€™s not having to happen.โ€

Pest control on a private lake

On July 3, Colorado Parks and Wildlife staff discovered adult zebra mussels in a privately owned lake in western Eagle County, according to a news release.

CPW also identified additional zebra mussel veligers in the Colorado River near New Castle, Highline Lake and Mack Mesa Lake at Highline Lake State Park, the release said.

There were too many mussels in the Eagle County lake to count, Walters said in late August. Any hard structure in the lake and any underwater rocks were relatively covered in adult mussels, he said.

An invasive species specialist said in July that they believed the lake was an upstream source of the mussels in the Colorado River, and that an outlet from the lake was bringing zebra-mussel-infested water into the Colorado River, according to news reports.

Walters said that has not been confirmed.

โ€œWe are just continuing to try to monitor,โ€ Walters said during an interview Aug. 29. โ€œWhat I can say is that, to the best of our knowledge, there currently is no connection from this privately owned body of water into any of the river systems of the state.โ€

The stateโ€™s team spent about eight hours on Aug. 25 treating the lake with a copper-based molluscicide, a substance used to kill mollusks, he said.

Staff also sampled the private lakeโ€™s water Aug. 27 to make sure the treatmentโ€™s concentration was at the right level and planned to continue monitoring and treating the water throughout September, Walters said.

No boats or other watercraft were entering or exiting the lake, he said.

โ€œItโ€™ll be a long time before we know if it was truly effective at eradicating the zebra mussels,โ€ he said.

Zebra mussels. Photo credit: Colorado Parks & Wildlife

The state focuses its monitoring efforts on public waters, mainly those with high recreational use. Motorboats and other types of boats are the main way the mussels spread, he said.

However, that doesnโ€™t mean the teams donโ€™t survey private ponds and lakes, Walters said.

After the state discovered zebra mussel veligers in the Colorado River and Grand Junction area, they started asking landowners if they could survey private lakes, ponds, gravel pits and more near the river. They often survey privately owned recreational areas, like water skiing clubs, he said.

โ€œWe have been trying to work with those private landowners to allow us access to come out and sample them for invasive species,โ€ Walters said.

We need to keep our existing funding

But with thousands of private and public water bodies in the state, CPW alone is never going to be able to monitor all of them as frequently as the high-risk water bodies, he said.

The staff normally work in teams of two to inspect reservoirs and lakes. They pull fine mesh nets through the water to try to find microscopic veligers. They do shoreline surveys to look for razor sharp shells and other signs of invasive species.

On a small pond, the process can take one to two hours. On a big reservoir like Blue Mesa, Coloradoโ€™s largest reservoir, it would take six to eight hours, he said.

โ€œI donโ€™t think that there is ever going to be capacity to monitor every public and private body of water in the state of Colorado. And I donโ€™t think that thatโ€™s ever going to be our expectation,โ€ Walters said.

The aquatic nuisance species program has more resources than ever, but thereโ€™s always room for more, Walters said.

โ€œAt this time, we feel like we do have a good amount of resources to be able to sample the waters that we consider to be the highest priority,โ€ he said.

Formerly, the team was based in Denver. Now, the state has established a traveling team to cover the Western Slope and another focused on the Grand Junction area.

They donโ€™t need more authority to monitor private water bodies, he said.

โ€œWhat we need is to continue to receive the funding that we are receiving today, and hope that does not get threatened if thereโ€™s any sort of budget cuts that are considered,โ€ Walters said.

Aquatic nuisance species stamp sales cover about $2.4 million, or 50%, of the programโ€™s annual funding needs. All motorboats and sailboats must have this stamp before launching in state waters, according to the CPW website.

Colorado state law calls on federal agencies, like the Bureau of Reclamation and U.S. Forest Service, to cover the other half of the funding needs since many high-risk waters in Colorado are federally owned or managed.

How are other water providers responding?

Zebra mussels go with the flow. They naturally move downstream with the riverโ€™s current, but boats traveling from one lake to another can carry them upstream.

That has upstream water managers, like Northern Water and Denver Water, keeping a close eye on developments along the Colorado River.

The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District works with the federal government to transfer Colorado River water on the Western Slope through a series of reservoirs, pump stations and tunnels โ€” called the Colorado-Big Thompson Project โ€” to farmland and over 1 million residents from Fort Collins across northeastern Colorado.

Horsetooth Reservoir looking west from Soldier Dam. Photo credit: Norther Water.

Zebra mussels are such prolific reproducers they can clog up water delivery pipelines, the main concern for a water manager like Northern Water, spokesman Jeff Stahla said.

The C-BT project is no stranger to invasive species. In 2008, quagga mussels showed up in several reservoirs, including Grand Lake, Lake Granby and Shadow Mountain Reservoir. Another reservoir, Green Mountain, was also positive for quagga mussels in 2017.

All of the lakes are mussel-free and delisted, Stahla said. Now theyโ€™re tightening up security.

โ€œThe biggest task we can right now is to inspect those boats going into the reservoirs to make sure that theyโ€™re not going to be causing the problem,โ€ he said.

Dillon Reservoir in Summit County is Denver Waterโ€™s largest reservoir. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Denver Water, which serves 1.5 million people in Denver and nearby suburbs, is also focused on inspecting and decontaminating boats.

โ€œItโ€™s a little unnerving. Thatโ€™s for sure,โ€ Brandon Ransom, recreation manager for Denver Water, said. โ€œItโ€™s certainly not welcome news that anybody in the state wants to see.โ€

The water provider also transfers Colorado River water through mountain tunnels and ditches to Front Range communities. Not only are the invasive mussels a concern for gates, valves, pipes and tunnels, they also cause problems for recreation. The shells are sharp enough to cut feet and the decaying mussels and old shells โ€œsmell to all heck,โ€ Ransom said.

They havenโ€™t launched new prevention efforts in response to zebra mussels reports, but thatโ€™s because the provider and its partner agencies already had fairly controlled boat launch and inspection procedures, he said.

A view of part of Eleven Mile State Park in Park County, Colorado. The view shows the Eleven Mile Canyon Dam and part of the Eleven Mile Canyon Reservoir. By Jeffrey Beall – Own work, CC BY 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=154086653

They already intercepted adult zebra mussels on boats this year, he said. The latest catch was at Eleven Mile Reservoir in early October.

Theyโ€™re trying to get the word out to people to make sure their boats and gear are clean, drained and dry. The zebra mussels like to hide in dark cavities, particularly around motors.

The good news is that Denver Waterโ€™s reservoirs, pipelines and tunnels on the Western Slope are upstream from the main infested areas, Ransom said.

โ€œIt doesnโ€™t help me sleep at night, letโ€™s put it that way,โ€ he said. โ€œWe know that itโ€™s closer and closer, and weโ€™re trying to be extra vigilant when it comes to prevention in our waters.โ€

More by Shannon Mullane

Colorado Rivers. Credit: Geology.com

Uranium Monitoring, Testing and Modeling Continue — Northern Water E-Waternews October 2025

Map from Northern Water via the Fort Collins Coloradan.

From email from Northern Water:

Northern Water and Chimney Hollow participants are committed to keeping our customers, stakeholders and end users, as well as the general public, informed as we gather additional information on the discovery of uranium at the Chimney Hollow Reservoir construction site. Collecting data and modeling are crucial steps in the development of mitigation strategies, and we are actively working to learn more by evaluating test results from field investigations and modeling scenarios.   

Before making mitigation decisions, we want to make sure we have all the information to evaluate operational and treatment options. We are following a rigorous process, starting with geochemical characterization and scoping studies, to inform mitigation alternatives analyses and ultimately select a final approach. Following these steps allows us to make informed decisions, evaluate trade-offs and determine the best path forward.โ€ฏ  

Northern Water has been testing how the uranium minerals leach into water and what concentration to expect when the reservoir fills and its operation begins. To allow time for additional data collection and investigations to advance, we have elected not to fill the reservoir as quickly as initially planned. A small amount of water (less than 2 percent of total capacity) will be moved into Chimney Hollow Reservoir in November 2025. During this time, additional water quality data will be collected and used to evaluate the performance of model simulations, and required dam safety monitoring will begin. Even as the reservoir fills, no water will be released as further assessments are underway and mitigation options continue to be evaluated.  

Because the mineralized uranium is coming from materials quarried at the site, excess (unused) rock from construction has been buried under a layer of water-sealing clay. The clay cap will effectively minimize uranium leaching from these materials.  

We expect uranium leaching from the dam to decrease over time because there is a finite quantity of soluble uranium at the site. The duration of the leaching process is not yet fully understood and will depend on how the reservoir is operated over time. While the discovery of mineralized uranium has caused Northern Water and the Chimney Hollow participants to modify our plans, it is an issue that can be safely managed. The new reservoir remains an important part of securing water supply needs for Northern Colorado and its future. Please visit the Water Quality page on our website for more information and a list of Frequently Asked Questions.

Snowmaking off to a fast start, even as Mother Nature takes her time: Ski resorts crank up the snow guns, thanks to โ€˜wet-bulbโ€™ weather and Denver Water

Click the link to read the article on the Denver Water website (Todd Hartman):

October 27, 2025

The snow season in Coloradoโ€™s high country is off to a slow start, but snowmaking at the ski resorts? Thatโ€™s going gangbusters.

As October draws to a close, ski resorts are cranking out the snow due to a combination of the resortsโ€™ annual race to opening day, this yearโ€™s unusually compressed window for the right meteorological conditions, and long-standing water supply agreements with Denver Water.

Snowmaking underway on the slopes at Breckenridge Ski Resort, one of six ski resorts in Denver Waterโ€™s watershed with agreements in place to use some of the utilityโ€™s water to make snow in the winter. Photo credit: Denver Water.

This yearโ€™s race to be the first ski resort to open ended over the weekend, when Keystone opened Saturday for three hours of afternoon skiing, followed by Arapahoe Basin, which opened for a full day of skiing on Sunday. 

Denver Water collects water from across 4,000 square miles of mountain watershed, an area thatโ€™s also home to six major ski resorts: Arapahoe Basin, Breckenridge, Copper Mountain, Frisco Adventure Park, Keystone and Winter Park.

And stream gauges operated by Denver Water act as a proxy measure for snowmaking activity. 

For example, the gauges monitoring streams affected by snowmaking at Winter Park and Keystone showed big overnight dips in recent days, as the resorts diverted water from the streams to their snowmaking equipment to get a head start on the ski season.

โ€œThe snow guns are blasting โ€” and we can really see it reflected in those stream gauges,โ€ said Nathan Elder, manager of water supply for Denver Water. โ€œThis appears to be one of the bigger starts to snow-making at the resorts as they gear up for opening day.โ€

The series of big drops in the amount of water flowing through the Moffat Tunnel last week indicates water being diverted to make snow at Winter Park Resort. Image credit: Colorado Water Conservation Board, Division of Water Resources.

The snowmaking boom can also be credited to something called โ€œwet bulbโ€ temperatures, a concept explained by 9News meteorologist Cory Reppenhagen in a story that aired Oct. 23.

Itโ€™s a reference to the impact of evaporative cooling in the dry Colorado air. In essence, the low humidity of the cold and dry air allows resorts to make snow even if the actual air temperature is above freezing. 

โ€œThese โ€˜wet bulbโ€™ conditions that are ideal for snowmaking have come later in the year than usual, so the resorts have had less time to make snow and are going strong now,โ€ Elder said.

Water managers can see the activity in places like gauges on the Snake River, where overnight on Oct. 21, the stream that was flowing at 21 cubic feet of water per second plunged down to 6 cubic feet per second for several hours, then jumped back up to 32 cfs when the snowmaking at Keystone stopped the next day.

Importantly, the snowmaking machines couldnโ€™t work their magic without the water the ski resorts are able to divert from high country streams. And the resorts can do that thanks to agreements with Denver Water that get the most use out of every drop of water.

Denver Water has very senior water rights in Grand and Summit counties, dating back to the 1920s and 1940s, before the ski resorts were open or made snow.

Agreements between Denver Water and the six ski resorts โ€” Arapahoe Basin, Breckenridge, Cooper Mountain, Frisco Adventure Park, Keystone and Winter Park โ€”allow the resorts to capture and use water for snowmaking, helping get the ski season off to an earlier start than they likely would be able to do otherwise.

The resorts use water that would otherwise get collected and stored in Denver Water reservoirs.

But it all evens out in the end. When the machine-made snow melts, it will flow downstream and wind up in the utilityโ€™s reservoirs on its way to customer taps next spring and summer.

Providing water for snowmaking is just one way Denver Water helps improve recreation in our collection system.

Watch a video on how Arapahoe Basin makes snow

And those agreements are crucial this year, due to a late start to the snowfall season.

The average amount of snow measured at mountain tracking sites (called SNOTELs) as of Oct. 23 was 0 inches.  There have only been seven other years, in the 46 years since SNOTELs began tracking data in 1979, when the average measurement was zero that late in October.

However, says Elder, do not despair.

A slow October roll-out does not automatically translate to a bad snow year overall.

โ€œA slow start does not mean the peak snowpack in April will be low,โ€ he said. โ€œIn some of those years the peak was well above average.โ€

And forecasts indicate that โ€˜wet-bulbโ€™ temperatures are looking good for the remainder of this week, meaning more snowmaking will be underway.

So, if you havenโ€™t already, get ready to break out those skis.

Denver Water relies on a network of reservoirs to collect and store water. The large collection area provides flexibility for collecting water as some areas receive different amounts of precipitation throughout the year. Image credit: Denver Water.

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

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

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

October 24, 2025

Key Points

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

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

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

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

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

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

October 23, 2025

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

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

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

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

Denver Water’s collection system via the USACE EIS

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

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

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

Denver Water declined comment Tuesday on the mediation order.

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

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

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

More by Michael Booth

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

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

October 22, 2025

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

New rates for 2026

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

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

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

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

The more you use, the more you pay

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

  • The first tierย is charged at the lowest rate and covers essential indoor water use for bathing, cooking and flushing toilets. Each customer has their individual first tier determined by the average of their monthly water use as listed on bills that arrive in January, February and March โ€” when there is very little or no outdoor watering.
  • The second tierย is for water consumption, typically used for outdoor watering, that is above the customerโ€™s first tier and up to 15,000 gallons of water per month. Water use in this tier is considered to be an efficient use of water outdoors.
  • The third tierย is for water use of more than 15,000 gallons per month. It is priced at the highest level to signal potentially excessive water use and encourage conservation efforts by larger-lot customers.

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

Need help? 

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

What customers can do to save water, money

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

South Platte River south of Brush. Photo/Allen Best

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

October 16, 2025

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Colorado wants to avoid this battle.

Coyote Gulch’s VW Bus South Park 1973.

A hard-working river

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

What exactly is this dispute about?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What is this dispute about?

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

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

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

Platte Valley Water Partnership project overview. Credit: Parker Water

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Who will this contest between Colorado and Nebraska?

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

Whooping Crane. Photo: Kenton Gomez/Audubon Photography Awards

A legal wildcard

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

October 15, 2025

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Colorado Drought Monitor map October 7, 2025.

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

October 7, 2025

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


About Colorado Water Trust

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

Just Add Water: The Jasper Lake Donation and a New Model for Water #Conservation in the West — Kate Ryan & Matt Moseleyย (#Colorado Water Trust)

Jasper Reservoir from dam. Photo credit: Colorado Water Trust

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Water Trust website (Kate Ryan & Matt Moseley):

September 16, 2025

Introduction

In an era where climate change and overconsumption threaten our waterways, a remarkable act of generosity and foresight has emerged from the Indian Peaks Wilderness area of Colorado. On August 29, 2024, an anonymous donor gifted Jasper Lake, including the parcel of land surrounding it and the senior water rights it stores, to the Colorado Water Trust. This marked the largest water donation in Coloradoโ€™s history.  This act ensures the protection of 37 miles of Boulder Creek, safeguarding its flow, ecosystems, and recreational value for generations to come.  Since 2024, 100 million gallons of water have been restored to the river as a result of this donation, and the annual benefit will continue to accrue to Boulder Creek streamflow indefinitely.  A warming climate will continue to put pressure on Boulder Creek, but this source of water will be protected forever.

Over the past 25 years, the Colorado Water Trust has restored 27 billion gallons of water to 814 miles of rivers and streams throughout Colorado.  Here is how it works: Much like a land trust can invest in conservation easements to protect property for future generations, the Colorado Water Trust invests in water rights to protect streamflow in our rivers. Water in Colorado is not only the lifeblood of our state and economy, but the right to use it can also be bought and sold.  Instead of diverting water out of the river, the Water Trust uses water rights to protect that water in the river.

In the western United States, where water scarcity is an ever-pressing reality and climate change threatens to exacerbate hydrological extremes, the permanent donation of storage water from Jasper Lake to environmental benefit marks a profoundly important milestone.  This is not merely a gift of water; it is a precedent-setting, visionary act that fuses water law ingenuity, ecological foresight, and an ethic of stewardship.  In an era dominated by competing interests and escalating scarcity, the Jasper Lake donation offers a replicable path forward for other Western states grounded in cooperative frameworks, legal adaptability, and the kind of selfless generosity that serves the public interest.

Jasper Lake Donation

In 1890, nearly a century before Congress designated the Indian Peaks Wilderness as a part of the nationโ€™s Wilderness Preservation system, the Boulder High Line Canal Company constructed Jasper Reservoir.  Known to hikers and wilderness visitors as Jasper Lake, the reservoir has been a source of agricultural water in Boulder County and areas east of the mountains since that time. Nestled just east of the Continental Divide, this enclave for cold-water fish, moose, and backpackers doubled in purpose. Irrigation companies and the Colorado Power Company operated the reservoir over the next century.

Since the 1890s, Jasper Lake has been in a series of private ownerships, having been bought and sold multiple times. In recent years, the City of Boulder leased Jasper Lake water from private owners and provided that water to various Boulder County irrigators.  During that time, the Colorado Water Trust worked with the owners of Jasper Lake to craft a plan for its use for environmental improvements and public benefit.  As these conversations progressed, the owners generously offered Jasper Lake as a donation to the Water Trust.

The Water Trust then sought out a steward for the reservoir with both the capacity and knowledge necessary to manage and maintain the reservoirโ€™s infrastructure. While the Water Trust owns multiple water rights, it focuses its time and energy on transactions that boost streamflow.  Finding the right stewardโ€”one who would commit to using Jasper Lake water in environmentally-compatible operationsโ€”would free the nonprofit from the burden of operating a high-hazard dam while meeting its mission to add water to Coloradoโ€™s rivers. Accordingly, the Water Trust sought a partner with a desire to uphold the environmental and community values vital to operating Jasper Lake in a way that complements the mission of the Water Trust. Luckily, the nonprofit found such a willing steward and partner in the Tiefel Family.

The Tiefel Family, long-time residents of Colorado, have a deep-rooted connection to the stateโ€™s natural landscapes and water resources. Known for their unwavering commitment to environmental preservation, the Tiefel Family has dedicated themselves to protecting Coloradoโ€™s vital water ecosystems. With a passion for ensuring that future generations can enjoy the natural beauty of Boulder Creek and its surrounding areas, the Tiefel Family established 37-Mile LLC. Named after the length of protected streamflow from Jasper Lake through the wilderness and down Boulder Canyon, 37-Mile LLC is a testament to its mission of safeguarding the regionโ€™s water resources from development pressures while promoting sustainable agricultural and irrigation practices.

โ€œOur stewardship of Jasper Reservoir aligns with our broader vision of environmental conservation and community enrichment,โ€ said Doug Tiefel of 37-Mile LLC. โ€œThe family is honored to partner with the Colorado Water Trust to ensure that the reservoirโ€™s water continues to benefit the local ecosystems and communities, reinforcing our legacy of environmental responsibility.โ€

Jasper Reservoir/Boulder Creek. Credit: Colorado Water Trust

With the support of the Tiefel Family and 37-Mile LLC, the Colorado Water Trust entered into an arrangement that benefits all involved.  After the Water Trust accepted the reservoir donation, 37-Mile LLC entered into a purchase agreement to acquire the reservoir subject to a public access easement and a set of restrictive covenants that permanently protect public access to the reservoir and ensure that water released from Jasper Lake will continue to provide environmental benefits well into the future. As an additional benefit, once the water has traveled through Boulder Canyon and to the plains, agricultural producers can then use the water downstream.

The Jasper Lake water donation is truly exceptional in its structure and intent. The reservoir is ideally positioned at high elevation with a long carriage distance, benefiting stream flow in a highly visible and environmentally conscious area like Boulder Creek.  The ability for a secondary use downstream for agricultural benefit further enhances its value.  Most environmental water transfers have historically involved direct flow rightsโ€”typically less reliable and subject to seasonal variability.  What makes Jasper Lake unique is that it involves the donation of storage water, which is highly reliable and valuable.  Unlike junior water rights that may or may not be available in a dry year, this donation ensures actual wet water in the stream, when and where it is needed.

Through a uniquely cooperative agreement involving the Water Trust, a generous donor, a family with strong farming and ranching ties to the region, and planning support from the City of Boulder, this donation not only protects two critical componentsโ€”agricultural heritage and instream ecological healthโ€”but also creates a new archetype for interagency collaboration.  The result is a permanent, flexible, and legally sound environmental asset that will benefit both the creek and downstream users in perpetuity.

This project involving Jasper Lake and its water rights represents a new concept in water management, one that the Water Trust hopes to replicate many times in the future. It proves out the potential for the prior appropriation system to rise to meet environmental challenges without the application of an administrative public trust regulatory layer. The biggest challenge is financial. These are market-based transactions and so the Water Trust must either accept donations or be prepared to make competitive offers to be able to acquire permanent public access, remove development potential, and safeguard environmental benefits.

How the Water Trust was Formed; Colorado Water Law 101

Some of the best legal minds in Colorado and the West meticulously brewed the initial notion for a nonprofit trust that would utilize water rights for environmental benefit. The Water Trust was founded in 2001 by water rights scholar David Getches and now-retired water attorneys Michael Browning and David Robbins.  Browning, who was the first chair of the board credits the initial concept being introduced by fellow law colleague Larry McDonnell, who was also on the faculty at the University of Colorado Law School.  With early guidance from David Harrison, the Water Trust has grown from a fledgling nonprofit to a respected water rights innovator, facilitating over sixty transactions that have restored millions of gallons to rivers and streams across Colorado.

The Water Trust emerged from the recognition that the prior appropriation doctrine, often seen as rigid and zero-sum, could be creatively applied to benefit rivers.  The Water Trust set out to proactively secure senior water rights for instream flows in collaboration with the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB), a state agency that holds the exclusive authority to place water to the beneficial use of instream flow in the State of Colorado as a way to preemptively address concerns about the future of the doctrine.  Colorado has been a pure prior appropriation state since even before the 1873 Centennial State ensconced the practice in its constitution. Known as the โ€œColorado Doctrine,โ€ a set of laws that the Territorial legislature passed in the 1860s established that:

  1. The stateโ€™s surface waters and groundwaters constitute a public resource for beneficial use by public agencies, private persons and entities;
  2. A water right is a right to use a portion of the publicโ€™s water supply;
  3. Water rights owners may build facilities on the lands of others to divert, extract, or move water from a stream or aquifer to its place of use;
  4. Water rights owners may use streams and aquifers for the transportation and storage of water.

The Water Trust operates squarely within the strict prior appropriation structure that the Colorado Doctrine established. In some western states, such as California, the public trust doctrine has been recognized to create an affirmative duty of state government to act as legal guardian for natural resource assets, including streams and rivers. Colorado, however, has remained a pure prior appropriation state since the 1800s.

The creation of the CWCB instream flow program in 1973 was an environmental era attempt to address streamflow issues without creating an exception to prior appropriation.  As the federal government legislated into law environmental measures including the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, the State of Colorado ensured that water right administration and the practice of prior appropriation would remain untouched by federal environmental measures. However, the initial CWCB instream flow program was not effective enough in protecting streamflow. At the outset, the CWCBโ€™s instream flow program could only appropriate junior water rights and acquire senior water rights at minimum stream flow rates โ€œnecessary to preserve the environment to a reasonable degree,โ€ which were often insufficient for genuine environmental protection. This shifted in 2002 when the legislature enabled the CWCB to acquire senior water rights and change their use to instream flow in water court, achieving more reliable priorities and stream flow rates โ€œto improve the environment to a reasonable degree.โ€

Still, by the turn of the Century, the CWCB had acquired only a handful of senior water rights for instream flow use, and consequently, not all Coloradans found the state instream flow program to be satisfactory. Citizen-led groups had proposed multiple ballot initiatives, but each had failed to recognize one form or another of public trust in Colorado.  Michael Browning explained that the Water Trustโ€™s formation in 2001 was partly a response to concerns surrounding the public trust doctrine and its potential impact on established water rights in Colorado. The founders of the Water Trust aimed to acquire senior water rights voluntarily and work with the CWCB to convert them to instream flow use, preserving their priority dates. The founders understood that acquiring senior priorities for instream flow water rights was key to both meeting environmental priorities and safeguarding the prior appropriation system in an era where many people value sustainability and recreation equally with consumptive water use.

Key early strategies involved acquiring agricultural water rights and partnering with the CWCB for holding and applying them to instream flow use. Browning described the initial concept of purchasing existing water rights for agriculture and converting them to instream flows.  The founders sought input from environmental and agricultural groups to ensure they wouldnโ€™t be seen as a threat and engaged with the CWCB to navigate the politics of instream flows.  Over time, the Water Trust strategy has expanded to include acquisition of reservoir rights like Jasper Lake and exploring ancillary uses such as downstream agricultural application, with environmental benefits accruing on a stream reach but no instream flow use per se.

It has always been crucial for the Water Trust to be perceived as working within the prior appropriation water rights system and not as a radical group trying to undermine it.  From the outset, the Water Trust has committed to voluntary transactions and working through water courts. The initial board consisted of water engineers and lawyers, with an effort to include representatives from agriculture. Browning noted that there were initial fears from some in the water community, but the boardโ€™s credibility helped alleviate opposition.  Over time, the Water Trust has grown from a small, Denver-based nonprofit to an influential statewide organization, with staff in the Upper Arkansas Basin and southwest Colorado, establishing roots in the communities where it has the greatest impact.

The first Water Trust acquisition of the Moser Water Rights on Boulder Creek near the Blue River was instructive.  A retiring ranching couple wanted to protect their land under conservation easements, but then discovered they could also protect their senior water rights to benefit the environment.  Their senior water rights gained a dual-purpose when the Mosersโ€™ collaborated with the Water Trust:  CWCB-facilitated instream flow for the creek, and downstream augmentation supply for the Colorado River District, stored in Wolford Mountain Reservoir.  The initial funding for the first water right purchase was primarily private, with the water right costing around $15,000. A significant turning point was the involvement of the Walton Family Foundation, which provided substantial grants allowing the Water Trust to grow and hire staff, including Amy Beattie as its first full-time executive director. Linda Bassi, Chief of the Instream Flow program for the CWCB, was also a key supporter, recognizing the opportunity to enhance the seniority of instream flow rights. The Water Trust developed a partnership with the CWCBโ€”the Water Trust would work with water right owners to purchase water rights and develop streamflow restoration projects, and the CWCB would hold and operate the acquired water for instream flows.

Case studies such as the Little Cimarron River transfer further highlight the Water Trustโ€™s innovative model.  In that project, water rights were split to allow both early-season irrigation by the landowner and late-season instream flow use by the CWCB, satisfying both agricultural and environmental needs without the typical winner-takes-all approach.  This was the first โ€œsplit-seasonโ€ use of water for both irrigation and instream flow approved in Colorado water court. Nuanced arrangements like this have allowed the Water Trust to earn the confidence of landowners, water users, and government entities alike.

How the Water Trust has Adapted; Water Law 201

Under the Prior Appropriation Doctrine, water rights are governed by โ€œfirst in time, first in right.โ€ While this doctrine has often been characterized as overly rigid, seasoned attorneysโ€”such as the late Colorado Supreme Court Justice Greg Hobbs and othersโ€”have long shown how water rights can be changed for new uses while maintaining senior priority. As Hobbs is purported to have said, and as board members and staff attorney for the Water Trust have expressed: Weโ€™ve done this forever for our clientsโ€ฆ now letโ€™s do it for our rivers.

Colorado law permits changes of use to be decreed by its water court, provided thereโ€™s no injury to other vested and decreed water rights.  Changing a water right requires limiting the use to historical consumption and diversion patterns in time, place, and amount.  The change process is cumbersome, often requiring tens of thousands of dollars in legal and engineering fees in addition to multiple years to usher a water court application from start to finish.  However, the end result is essential for water users who need a reliable supply, because the seniority, or date of appropriation assigned to a water right originally, is maintained throughout the change of use process.  Historically, an overwhelming proportion of these transfers have involved shifting water from agriculture to municipal or industrial uses.  In recent years, and thanks in part to the fortitude of the Water Trust and the CWCB, instream flow rights transfers have grown to become 1% of water right changes statewide.  While the shift is small, it has transformed rivers like the Little Cimarron and the Alamosa, adding flowing water back into riverbeds that were once unseasonably dry.  It signals that environmental uses are not second-class claims but essential components of modern water management.

The Jasper Lake donation exemplifies this principle.  The donor, instead of selling the valuable storage water on an open market, permanently gifted it for environmental useโ€”a use now recognized and legally protected under Colorado law.  And it was not only the generous donor who has supported their local stream systemโ€”37-Mile LLC as the buyer agreed to a set of strict covenants, essentially stripping the Jasper Lake water right of its development potential. This donation operates within the same legal framework as the early consumptive use transfers, including the Moser and Little Cimarron water rights, proving that environmental values can thrive without rewriting the rulebook.

Borrowing from Land Conservation Practices to Save Rivers

The water from Jasper Lake is not just turned loose; it is released into Jasper Creek, from which point it flows down 37 miles of Middle Boulder Creek and Boulder Creek before the Tiefel Family diverts it back out of the stream system for irrigation use. Unlike many Water Trust projects, there is no CWCB instream flow use of the water. Instead, the Water Trust ensured that the water would remain in Boulder Creek by choosing to partner with 37-Mile and requiring, as a condition of their partnership and sale, that 37-Mile would agree never to redivert the water until it reaches that 37-mile point, in addition to several other restrictions.

The restrictions that the Water Trust imposed include restrictive covenants and a public access easementโ€”legal constructs adopted from land use law.  Applying these principles, the property and water rights are permanently tied to ecological and public uses, while still respecting historical agricultural use for the Jasper Lake water. This flexibility was a key component that made the donation viable and attractive, and avoiding water court for a change of use enabled the participants to save on costs and time. The protections that the Water Trust tied permanently to Jasper Lake, the parcel of land surrounding it, and the water rights stored in it include the following:

  1. An easement allowing the public to access Jasper Lake and the parcel of land surrounding it. Colorado law limits the liability of landowners who hold title to inholdings on public lands provided there is signage, which was key to the ability of 37-Mile to take on this responsibility;
  2. Jasper Lake water must be stored until at least August 15 of each year, which provides the public with an opportunity to enjoy the beauty of its waters;
  3. The owner of the Jasper Lake water right must take water deliveries beginning on or after August 15 of each year, which ensures that flows in the Boulder Creek drainage are boosted after snowmelt, when fish and the environment need it most;
  4. The owner of Jasper Lake must take steps to avoid abandonment of the water right;
  5. The owner of Jasper Lake must allow Colorado Parks and Wildlife to stock the lake with fish; and
  6. Finally, if the owner of Jasper Court ever goes to water court, they must consult with the CWCB regarding the possible addition of instream flow use to the water right.

The covenant model ensures that the ecological intent of the donation is locked in perpetuity, regardless of future ownership changes.  This legal durability is critical in an age of shifting climate variability and volatile hydrology.  Moreover, the Jasper Lake donation includes an engineering-informed management plan that allows for strategic releases during critical low-flow periods, providing adaptive benefits for aquatic species, riparian vegetation, and downstream users. It is this combination of legal permanence and operational flexibility that makes the model so powerful.

Why Storage Matters: True Volume, True Impact

Storage rights, especially those high in the drainage area like Jasper Lake, offer great flexibility in release and can be timed to supplement flows when needed most. The long carriage distance of Jasperโ€™s releases down Boulder Creek allows for significant stream flow restoration. Storage water can be released during dry seasons when streamflow is lowest, directly improving water quality, mitigating temperature spikes, and sustaining aquatic life. As the old adage goes, โ€œThe solution to pollution is dilution.โ€ More water in the stream doesnโ€™t just benefit fish and bugs; it improves drinking water quality for downstream communities and strengthens overall watershed health.

This is a crucial point: while senior direct flow rights can sometimes provide benefit when left in the stream, they often do so inconsistently.  Stored water, by contrast, provides discretely measurable volumes that can be scheduled and managed.  This transformed the Jasper Lake donation from a gesture to a guaranteed outcome.  Drinking water providers, such as those in the Boulder and Denver metro areas, depend on baseflows to keep treatment costs low.  High-quality source water means fewer chemicals and less energy to meet Safe Drinking Water Act standards.  In this way, streamflow restoration becomes an upstream investment in downstream public health.

Perhaps most importantly, leaving water in the river should be understood not as a passive default, but as an affirmative beneficial use.  Traditionally, beneficial use has been defined through diversionโ€”water being taken out of the river for agriculture, industry, or municipal supply.  But Colorado law now affirms that instream flows can meet the beneficial use standard when they are legally protected and used to preserve the natural environment.  This conceptual shift is profound.  It re-centers the health of the river itself as a priority, recognizing that a flowing stream provides ecological services, supports recreation economies, enhances water quality and sustains life throughout the basin.

Why Permanence Matters: Creative and Collaborative Solutions

What makes the Jasper Lake donation especially promising is its emphasis on collaboration.  Governments, nonprofits, agricultural stakeholders and local communities worked in unison to ensure the projectโ€™s success.  Each party brought their priorities to the tableโ€”agricultural heritage, legal acumen, ecological resilienceโ€”and emerged with a better outcome than any could have achieved alone.

There are few other legal mechanisms in Colorado to protect water for the environment: RISIDS (Recovery Implementation for Endangered Species), Wild & Scenic River designation (with only one such stretch in Colorado), or narrowly focused instream flow rights used by the CWCB.  The Jasper Lake project expands this limited toolbox, showing that partnerships and legal creativity can yield conservation outcomes without requiring federal mandates.

Another instructive comparison is the Water Trustโ€™s work on the Yampa River system, where cooperative agreements among the CWCB, environmental organizations, and agricultural users have led to temporary instream flow leases and beneficial use deliveries to preserve flows during dry years.  These leases, though helpful, are inherently limited by duration and uncertainty.  That uncertainty is, at least to some extent, mitigated by the existence of the Yampa River Fund, an endowed and locally-managed fund that pays for water leasing and sponsors other work to improve the Yampa River and its tributaries.  Jasper Lake moves even beyond that, embedding conservation in perpetuity.

A Model for the West

Twenty-nine states operate under some form of the prior appropriation doctrine.  The Jasper Lake donation stands as a model that others can emulate.  Michael Browning said he still sees great opportunities for similar initiatives in other western states, especially those in the Colorado River Basin, emphasizing the role of nonprofits in adapting the water rights system to recognize environmental and recreational values.  By demonstrating that private rights can be permanently converted to public goodsโ€”without litigation, without legislative overhaul, and without harming other usersโ€”this project charts a replicable path forward.

While unique in the seven states of the Colorado River Basin, the Water Trust is not alone. The Oregon Water Trust, founded in 1994, and the Washington Water Trust, founded in 1998, are similar organizations.  There is an Arizona Water Trust that primarily focuses on land donations that may include water rights.  Montana, New Mexico, and Utah have all explored instream flow programs, but few have integrated storage donations.  In the Upper Snake Basin of Idaho, a pilot effort to lease stored water for environmental flows is promising, but still temporary.  Jasper Lake shows that permanent storage donations are possible, legal, and immensely beneficial. Especially in the seven basin states, the Colorado Water Trust serves as a useful model and tool for others to replicate.

Lessons Learned

Perhaps the most profound lesson from Jasper Lake is the value of permanence. One-time leases and short-term mitigation projects are common, but they do not provide the stability or reliability that rivers need.  Permanency ensures predictability.  It signals to ecosystems and economies alike that someone is planning for the long term.

Moreover, the donation sets a precedent that stored water can and should be used for instream benefitโ€”and that such uses are not just legally viable but deeply beneficial to the broader hydrological system.  As we consider future projects, the importance of true volume, collaborative administration, and permanence cannot be overstated.

Another key takeaway is the importance of patience.  Water transactions require timeโ€”not just to navigate the legal and engineering hurdles, but to build the trust among stakeholders that makes such projects durable.  Funders, partners, and policymakers must embrace this long view.  Water transactions require the same patience and investment mindset we bring to ski areas, resorts, transportation, reservoirs or other large infrastructure projects.  But the payoffโ€”cleaner rivers, healthier ecosystems, and stronger communitiesโ€”is well worth it.

Gratitude and Foresight

As Michael Browning said, โ€œProgress is possible with goodwill and a shared need.โ€  The Jasper Lake donation is more than a gift.  It is a template, a catalyst, and a moral benchmark.  It shows that with legal creativity, trust among partners, and courageous donors, we can build a more resilient and ecologically rich future.

As the West grapples with aridification and changing demands, projects like Jasper Lake shine like beacons.  They show us what is possible when we work together and think beyond ourselves.  None of this would be possible without the extraordinary foresight and generosity of the donor.  In a market where water rights fetch increasingly high prices, the choice to donateโ€”permanently, and without reservationโ€”is not only rare but deeply courageous.  It reflects an ethic of care that transcends personal gain and speaks to a commitment of legacy, community, and the natural world.

The success of the Colorado Water Trust also reflects gratitude for the legislative frameworks that made it possible.  Coloradoโ€™s instream flow program, the CWCBโ€™s administrative role, and the legal structure built into prior appropriation water law all played essential roles. The Jasper Lake project didnโ€™t require new laws; it simply needed the right vision and the will to collaborate. All it required was to Just Add Water. 

Jasper Lake is truly a remarkable and historic gift.

The Water Report
Written by: Kate Ryan & Matt Moseley 
Read the original article here.

Author Bios: 

Kate Ryan is a water lawyer who joined Colorado Water Trust in 2018 and was appointed as Executive Director in 2023. Her past clients included farmers, ranchers, municipalities, landowners, and the CWCB. Before going to Berkeley Law she obtained a masterโ€™s degree in geography at the University of Colorado. Kate does her work at the Colorado Water Trust in order to support that which she holds most dearโ€“our incredible state and the people within, the beautiful rivers and mountains we explore, and a future for her kids where they can experience a continuation of it all.

Matt Moseley is a communication strategist, author, speaker and world-record adventure swimmer. He is the principal and CEO of the Ignition Strategy Group, which specializes in high-stakes communications and issue management. As the author of three books and is the subject of two documentaries, he uses his swimming around the world to bring raise awareness about water issues. He is the co-chair of the Southwest River Council for American Rivers and is a member of the Advisory Board for the Center for Leadership at the University of Colorado at Boulder. He lives in Boulder with his wife Kristin, a water rights attorney and their two children.

Colorado Rivers. Credit: Geology.com

#Hartsel Water seeks to raise funds for Community Water Station Project — The Park County Republican & #Fairplay Flume

Hartsel Community Center at 80 Valley Drive in Hartsel. Photo courtesy of the Hartsel Community Center.

Click the link to read the article on The Park County Republican & Fairplay Flume website (Meryl Phair). Here’s an excerpt:

October 2, 2025

A new nonprofit in Hartsel is seeking to raise funds to support a Community Water Station Project that would benefit area residents who struggle with water access. Recently formed this May, the community-driven initiative is rallying residents to support its ongoing efforts through monthly community meetings and an upcoming family-friendly Fall Festival Fundraiser in October.ย  Angie Mills, Vice President of Hartsel Water, explained that the organization will be applying for funding from the Park County Land and Water Trust Fund (LWTF) with an ask of $2 million, 10% of which would be covered by Hartsel Water. โ€œWeโ€™re currently working on trying to raise $200,000,โ€ said Mills. โ€œThatโ€™s our primary focus right now.โ€ย Mills stressed the strong need for the local water station in Hartsel, as many residents are unable to drill their own wells. โ€œWhether it is for financial reasons or their location,โ€ said Mills. โ€œCloser to town, thereโ€™s a lot of hard water, and unless you put it in an expensive filtration system, it makes things tough.โ€ย As a result, Mills said that most residents use cisterns, water totes, or drive to other cities to retrieve their water resources, which is not always convenient or even feasible in the rural mountain town.ย Currently working with an engineer on technicalities, Mills said Hartsel Water has a few potential plots for the station in mind, ideally close to Highway 24 and Highway 9, conveniently located close to town.

Gross Dam construction making steady progress: Dam is now 60 feet taller after busy summer of work — Jay Adams (DenverWater.org)

Click the link to read the article on the Denver Water website (Jay Adams):

September 18, 2025

Denver Waterโ€™s Gross Dam in Boulder County continues to rise after a busy summer of construction.

Hundreds of workers are taking part in the Gross Reservoir Expansion Project, which will raise the height of Gross Dam by 131 feet.

As of Sept. 5, crews had raised the dam by 60 feet. The project is designed to increase the water storage capacity of Gross Reservoir, which supplies water to 1.5 million people in the Denver metro area.

โ€œOver the past two years, weโ€™ve been working on the original dam to prepare it for the enlarged height and width,โ€ said Casey Dick, Denver Waterโ€™s deputy program manager for the project.

โ€œAt the end of June, the concrete work reached the original crest, so now all the concrete placements are above the existing structure.โ€

A dump truck fills up with concrete at the top of Gross Dam. The trucks drive across the top of the dam and place the concrete in layers to raise the dam higher. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Once completed, Gross Dam will be 471 feet tall and around 2,000 feet wide.

As the dam has gone up, it has become easier to see some of the differences between the original dam, which was completed in the 1950s, and the newly renovated structure.

For instance, the original surface of the downstream side of the dam was smooth. Now, the downstream side of the dam is a series of stair steps. The steps were an integral part of the construction process and supported the trucks that deposited layers of concrete onto the original structure of the dam.

This picture was taken from roughly the crest of the original dam. The dam has been raised 60 feet as of Sept. 5. The new face of the dam features a stepped design, which was needed for the construction process. Photo credit: Denver Water.

The renovated dam will also take on a new shape.

โ€œThe original structure was built as a โ€™curved gravityโ€™ dam,โ€ Dick said. โ€œNow, weโ€™re taking advantage of that curved geometry in the middle portion of the dam to create whatโ€™s called a โ€˜thick archโ€™ dam in the center of the canyon.โ€

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

Arches are used in dam construction because the force of the water in the reservoir pushes up against the arch and into the canyon walls. This gives an arched dam more strength compared to a flat structure.

โ€œWeโ€™ve also built what are called โ€™thrust blocksโ€™ on the sides of the original dam,โ€ Dick said. โ€œThese give the dam additional support by essentially extending the canyon walls upward to support the arch.โ€

The โ€œthrust blocks,โ€ highlighted in red, extend out from the canyon wall. The blocks provide additional strength where the arch of the dam meets the rock. Photo credit: Denver Water.

As work has risen above the original crest of the dam, workers have built formwork, or temporary molds, on both the upstream and downstream sides of the dam. The temporary structures hold the freshly placed concrete in the proper shape until it hardens and cures.

Workers build formwork, or temporary molds, on the top of the dam. The forms hold new concrete in place until it cures. Photo credit: Denver Water.

With the new added concrete added during the project, Gross Dam is now much steeper than the original structure. At the base, the dam is 300 feet thick, but it gets skinnier as it goes up. At the top, the dam will be just 25 feet thick. Crews have had to adjust to the smaller work area to maneuver their equipment as the project progressed.

Work to raise the dam will continue as late as possible into 2025, until weather conditions make it too cold to place concrete.

โ€œWeโ€™d like to thank all the men and women out here from Kiewit-Barnard and the other contractors out here,โ€ Dick said. โ€œThey are working around the clock and as fast as they can to complete this project.”

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

#Arvada buys property for new water treatment plant: 25-acre property purchased for $5.7 million is located just west of existing plantย — The Arvada Press

The site for the new water treatment plant, marked โ€œWestโ€ on the map. Courtesy City of Arvada.

Click the link to read the article on The Arvada Press website (Rylee Dunn). Here’s an excerpt:

September 25, 2025

The city of Arvada is one step closer to replacing its aging water infrastructure, as city council unanimously approved the purchase of a 25-acre plot of land located at 6809 State Highway 93 for $5.7 million at the Sept. 16 city council meeting.ย The land is located just west of the existing Arvada Water Treatment Plant, which was built in 1979 and is nearing the end of its life, according to Arvadaโ€™s Communications Manager for Infrastructure, Katie Patterson. Arvada purchased the property from the Keller family. The city plans to annex the site, which is currently located in unincorporated Jefferson County, into Arvada as part of its next steps, the cityโ€™s Director of Infrastructure Jacqueline Rhoades said…The project is being funded by bond funding, customer rates and fees and development charges, not by general tax dollars. The city is utilizing bonds in an effort to curb rate increases by spreading out the cost of the project over time.ย Patterson said that once the new plant is operational, the old Arvada Water Treatment Plant will be decommissioned. That plan is still in the works, as some facilities at that site will remain in service after the plant is shut down…According to the Department of Infrastructure, the new site is ideal for a few reasons, including lower potential for groundwater, a property shape that allows for easier construction and an efficient site layout, minimal disruption to the natural views of the area, better terrain for construction and operation, a property size that allows for future expansions if needed and elevation that allows water to be delivered by gravity to most of the city.

Competing interests debate sale of historic #ColoradoRiver rights during marathon hearing — Shannon Mullane (Fresh Water News) #COriver #aridification

This historical photo shows the penstocks of the Shoshone power plant above the Colorado River. A coalition led by the Colorado River District is seeking to purchase the water rights associated with the plant. Credit: Library of Congress photo

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

September 18, 2025

State water officials debated a controversial proposal to use two powerful Colorado River water rights to help the environment, weighing competing interests from Front Range and Western Slope water managers.

Almost 100 water professionals gathered in Durango this week for a 14-hour hearing focused on the water rights tied to the Shoshone Power Plant, owned by an Xcel Energy subsidiary. Members of the Colorado Water Conservation Board were originally set to make their final decision on the proposal this week, but an eleventh-hour extension pushed their deadline to November. 

Board members peppered presenters with questions during the hearing, weighing thorny issues like who has final authority to manage the environmental water right and how much water is involved.

Their decision could make a historic contribution to the stateโ€™s environmental water rights program and impact how Colorado River water will flow around the state long into the future. 

โ€œItโ€™s pretty hard to anticipate all of the ways that โ€˜in perpetuityโ€™ may play out,โ€ said Greg Felt, who represents the Arkansas River on the board. โ€œBuilding in representation for flexibility โ€ฆ is not a bad idea for an acquisition like this.โ€

The Shoshone Power Plant, next to Interstate 70 east of Glenwood Springs, has used Colorado River water to generate electricity for over a century. 

Graphic credit: Laurine Lassalle/Aspen Journalism

In May, the Colorado River District, representing 15 counties on the Western Slope, shared a proposal to add another use to the water rights: keeping water in the Colorado River channel to help the aquatic environment.

The change requires approval from the Colorado Water Conservation Board, which runs the stateโ€™s environmental water rights program, and other entities like water court and the stateโ€™s Public Utilities Commission.

The Colorado River District wants to add the environmental use as part of a larger plan to maintain the โ€œstatus quoโ€ flow of water past the power plant, regardless of how long the power plant remains in operation.

Western Slope communities, farms, ranches, endangered species programs and recreational industries have become dependent on those flows over the decades. 

โ€œWhat weโ€™re presenting here today is an offer of a historic partnership,โ€ Andy Mueller, Colorado River District general manager, said. โ€œWe believe that this sets the state up for a truly collaborative future on the Colorado River.โ€

But any change to Shoshoneโ€™s water rights could have ripple effects that would affect over 10,000 upstream water rights, including those held by Front Range water groups, like Denver Water, Northern Water, Colorado Springs Utilities and Aurora Water. 

These water managers and providers are responsible for delivering reliable water to millions of people, businesses, farms and ranches across the Front Range. 

They raised concerns in the hearings about how their water supply could be impacted by the Western Slopeโ€™s proposal. 

For board member John McClow, who represents the Gunnison-Uncompahgre River, one key question came down to authority.

โ€œI just want to make sure we have adequate legal justification for doing what you suggest we should do,โ€ McClow told CWCB staff during the hearing. 

When the Colorado River is too low to meet Shoshoneโ€™s needs, its owner, Public Service of Colorado, a subsidiary of Xcel Energy, can call on upstream water users with lower priority water rights to cut back on using their water so that Shoshone has enough. 

Whoever manages this โ€œcallโ€ impacts thousands of upstream users, including Front Range providers. 

Under the proposal, the Colorado River District will own the water rights. The district has an agreement with Xcel to buy the rights for about $99 million. 

Generally, the Colorado Water Conservation Board is supposed to be the sole manager of environmental water rights under state law. 

The Colorado River District says it should have a say, giving examples of other agreements with similar arrangements between the water board and water rights owners. 

Northern Water said the state should have exclusive authority. This is the most important issue for the conservation district, Kyle Whitaker, water rights manager for Northern Water, said Thursday. 

If the state agency hands over any amount of control, then the district would push for the water court to approve a smaller amount of water available to Shoshone. That would send less water to Western Slope communities.

If the River District controlled the environmental right, they could conceivably max out the amount of water passing by the power plant year-round, which would impact upstream water rights.

โ€œWe have to protect our systems under all future potentialities,โ€ Whitaker said. โ€œThis will have a chilling effect on collaboration and cooperation amongst all involved and is likely to result in an outcome that is not only less desirable but also less beneficial to the Colorado River.โ€

The River District has said it plans to maintain these flows without changing how other water users are impacted.

For board members, this question of authority is just one of many sticky legal and management issues they have to weigh as they make a decision about the Shoshone water rights while tasked with representing the interests of the entire state. 

โ€œAs far as Iโ€™ve been able to understand it, I agree with you about what the statute and the rules say we may do,โ€ Felt told CWCB staff. โ€œI believe weโ€™re here to determine what we should do.โ€

This is a developing story and may be updated.

More by Shannon Mullane

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

Why declining aquifers in #Colorado matter: #ColoradoRiver rightfully gets attention. So should the #groundwater depletion underway in the #RepublicanRiver and other basins — Allen Best (BigPivots.com)

San Luis Valley center pivot August 14, 2022. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots

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

September 12, 2025

Woes of the Colorado River have justifiably commanded broad attention. The slipping water levels in Lake Powell and other reservoirs provide a compelling argument for changes. How close to the cliffโ€™s edge are we? Very close, says a new report by the Center for Colorado River Studies.

But another cogent โ€” and somewhat related โ€” story lies underfoot in northeastern Colorado. Thatโ€™s the story of groundwater depletion. There, groundwater in the Republican River Basin has been mined at a furious pace for the last 50 to 60 years.

Much of this water in the Ogallala aquifer that was deposited during several million years will be gone within several generations. In some places it already is. Farmers once supplied by water from underground must now rely upon what falls from the sky.

In the San Luis Valley, unlike the Republican River Basin, aquifers can be replenished somewhat by water that originates from mountain snow via canals from the Rio Grande. The river has been delivering less water, though. It has problems paralleling those of the Colorado River. Changes in the valleyโ€™s farming practices have been made, but more will be needed.

In a story commissioned by Headwaters magazine (and republished in serial form at Big Pivots), I also probed mining of Denver Basin aquifers by Parker, Castle Rock and other south-suburban communities.

Those Denver Basin aquifers, like the Ogallala, get little replenishment from mountain snows. Instead of growing corn or potatoes, the water goes to urban needs in one of Americaโ€™s wealthier areas.

Parker and Castle Rock believe they can tap groundwater far into the future, but to diversify their sources, they have joined hands with farmers in the Sterling area with plans to pump water from the South Platte River before it flows into Nebraska. This pumping will require 2,000 feet of vertical lift across 125 miles, an extraordinary statement of need in its own way.

Like greenhouse gases accumulating in the atmosphere, these underground depletions occur out of sight. Gauges at wellheads tell the local stories, just like the carbon dioxide detector atop Hawaiiโ€™s Mauna Loa has told the global story since 1958.

Coloradoโ€™s declining groundwater can be seen within a global context. Researchers from institutions in Arizona, California, and elsewhere recently used data from satellites collected during the last two decades. The satellites track water held in glaciers, lakes, and aquifers across the globe. In their study published recently in Science Advances, they report that water originating from groundwater mining now causes more sea level rise than the melting of ice.

โ€œIn many places where groundwater is being depleted, it will not be replenished on human timescales,โ€ they wrote. โ€œIt is an intergenerational resource that is being poorly managed, if managed at all, by recent generations, at tremendous and exceptionally undervalued cost to future generations. Protecting the worldโ€™s groundwater supply is paramount in a warming world and on continents that we now know are drying.โ€

This global perspective cited several areas of the United States, most prominently Californiaโ€™s Central Valley but also the Ogallala of the Great Plains.

In Colorado, the Ogallala underlies the stateโ€™s southeastern corner, but the main component lies in the Republican River Basin. The river was named by French fur trappers in the 1700s, long before the Republican Party was organized. The area within Colorado, if unknown to most of Coloradoโ€™s mountain-gawking residents, is only slightly smaller than New Jersey.

A 1943 compact with Nebraska and Kansas has driven Coloradoโ€™s recent efforts to slow groundwater mining. The aquifer feeds the Republican River and its tributaries. As such, the depletions reduce flows into down-river states.

Farmers are being paid to remove land from irrigation with a goal of 25,000 acres by 2030 to keep Colorado in compliance. So far, itโ€™s all carrots, no sticks. Colorado is also deliberately mining water north of Wray to send to Nebraska during winter months. This helps keep Colorado in compact compliance. So far, these efforts have cost more than $100 million. The money comes from self-assessments and also state and federal grants and programs.

In some recent years, more than 700,000 acre-feet of water have been drafted from the Ogallala in the Republican River Basin. To put that into perspective, Denver Water distributes an average annual 232,000 acre-feet to a population of 1.5 million.

Hard conversations are underway in the Republican River Basin and in the San Luis Valley, too. They will get harder yet. Sixteen percent of all of Coloradoโ€™s water comes from underground.

The Colorado River has big troubles. Itโ€™s not alone.

For stories in the series, see:

Part I: Hard questions about groundwater mining in Colorado: Itโ€™s going fast! What needs to be done in the Republican River Basin?

Part II: South Metro cities starting to diversify water sources: Castle Rock and Parker 25 years ago were almost entirely dependent upon groundwater. They are diversifying, and one plan is to import water from far down the South Platte River Valley.

Part III: 20th century expansions and 21st century realities in the San Luis Valley: The solutions seem fairly obvious. Executing them is another matter.

Part IV: Balancing demands of today and tomorrow:  Are we doing better than kicking the can down the road?

How much water remains in Baca County?: Study commissioned by legislators uses newer techniques than were available in 2002.

Efforts underway to return greenback cutthroat trout to headwaters of #Colorado Rivers: Native species to be restocked after brook trout are poisoned away — Sky-Hi News

The greenback cutthroat trout is a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. Biologists are hoping to return the species to the Colorado River headwaters in the Kawuneechee Valley. Kevin Rogers/U.S. Forest Service

Click the link to read the article on the Sky-Hi News website (Izzy Wagner). Here’s an excerpt:

September 9, 2025

13 years ago, Coloradoโ€™s state fish could only be found in a single stream in the entire state. Today, a coalition of agencies and experts are working to change that.ย  The Poudre Headwaters Project is a 10 to 12-year effort led by Rocky Mountain National Park and Colorado Parks and Wildlife, among other organizations, to restore the greenback cutthroat trout to its native waters โ€” about 40 miles of streams in parts of Rocky Mountain National Park and the Arapaho National Forest…

For decades, the National Park Service and state fisheries stocked millions of fish, mostly brook trout, in the native waters of the greenbacks. But once brook trout have established themselves in a stream, they will outcompete greenbacks for food and habitat, Clatterbuck said. Restoring native greenbacks requires killing off the non-native brook trout that have long threatened their survival. To kill the fish, crews must apply the pesticideย rotenoneย to streams with invasive brook trout and other non-natives. Rotenone is a dangerous chemical in high concentrations, but it has beenย widely usedย by fisheries for decades and is carefully managed when applied to streams…The pesticide specifically targets aquatic species, making it the ideal treatment method for fish removal. Consuming rotenone-treated fish is unlikely to poison a mammal, Clatterbuck said…

A map of the Poudre Headwaters Project area. U.S. Forest Service, J.Scott/Courtesy photo

Once the areas are confirmed to be free of non-native trout, biologists will reintroduce the native greenback cutthroat trout to its original habitat in the headwaters of the Cache la Poudre River, according to park officials…Colorado State University Professor Robert Behnke reported that once brook trout gained access to streams,ย greenback cutthroat trout were virtually goneย within five years. In the 1960s, Behnke spearheaded efforts to restore greenback cutthroat trout to streams of their native range east of the Continental Divide. Since then, fisheries have worked to build fish barriers, often in the form of small dams, near the downstream ends of headwater streams to protect native fish while applying chemicals to kill off brook trout upstream. However, none of these projects have been able to prevent non-native trout invasion long term. Clatterbuck is hopeful that with time and collaboration, this new restoration project will build a metapopulation, or a network of connected subpopulations that can strengthen the speciesโ€™ genetic diversity and resilience.

Cutthroat trout historic range via Western Trout

Douglas County water projects could receive $2.75 million in federal funding — #Colorado Politics

Douglas County.

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Politics website (Noah Festenstein). Here’s an excerpt:

September 4, 2025

Select Douglas County water districts are poised to receive up to $2.75 million combined for projects dealing with sustainable drinking water or new pipelines. Thatโ€™s on top of $20 million in American Rescue Plan Act funding already allocated for a wastewater project in northwest Douglas County. Back in May, U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert of Coloradoโ€™s 4th Congressional District, had requested $9 million in federal funding for the Louviers Water & Sanitation Districtโ€™s drinking water distribution replacement and Castle Rock Waterโ€™s Plum Creek to Reuter-Hess Reservoir pipeline projects. On July 22, the federal House Appropriations Committee advanced a bill that included $1.75 million specifically for Castle Rockโ€™s project. The panel also advanced $1 million for the Louviers project, according to county officials…The funding still needs the full approval of Congress, which is expected later in the year…

Castle Rock Water officials said the $1.75 million is likely the most the project has ever received in outside funding. The money is needed for a new transmission water pipeline and pump station from Plum Creek in Castle Rock to the Reuter-Hess Reservoir in Parker, a roughly a seven-mile stretch. The $24.8 million project had earlier been โ€œput on hold until additional funding could be secured,โ€ according to Castle Rock Assistant Director Mark Henderson…A major water project aims to replace about 12,000 feet of aged galvanized steel pipe, including 86 service lines and 15 fire hydrants, in a small northwest Douglas County town. The project, called the Louvierโ€™s Water & Sanitation District Water Distribution Replacement, will provide residents with โ€œcleaner drinking water, increase system reliability, and enable better fire flow capacity,โ€ Douglas County officials said in a news release…Meanwhile, near Louviers, a new million wastewater treatment facility near Chatfield Reservoir seeks to improve water quality in the area. The $20 million facility is funded with American Rescue Plan Act dollars. The project would benefit five nearby communities, according to Dominion Water & Wastewater officials, who oversee the project.

White Hawk Fire: A near disaster that didnโ€™t happen, decade-old fire mitigation project saves the day for Conifer homeowners — The Canyon Courier

A Douglas County firefighting helicopter brought members of its helitack team to help fire the fire and made multiple drops of water on the late July blaze. Fran and Terry Haury

Click the link to read the article on the Canyon Courier website (Jan Reuter). Here’s an excerpt:

August 13, 2025

Fran and Terry Haury were eating lunch in their mountaintop Conifer-area home July 22 when thunder and lightning struck.

โ€œIt was so instantaneous, and the noise was so loud, we didnโ€™t even realize there was a light flash,โ€ Terry Haury said. โ€œI didnโ€™t see any smoke, but another neighbor called and said they had. Sure enough, a tree was on fire. Then it just blew up, and the fire was higher than the trees.โ€

That was the start of the White Hawk fire. Due to the steep, rocky terrain and that dayโ€™s windy conditions, the blaze had the potential to be disastrous. Instead, just more than a single acre burned…Neighbors, firefighters and state officials attribute its minimal impact to two factors: mitigation and a swift attack…

A decade before, eight neighboring landowners used a grant and pooled their funds to pay the balance forย the Jefferson Conservation Districtย to mitigate 235 acres. JCD assists private landowners with planning and implementing forest and noxious weed management projects to restore ecosystems and mitigate wildfire hazards…Firefighter response was also crucial. Elk Creek Fire, the Conifer Wildland Division, the Jefferson County Sheriffโ€™s Office and a Douglas County helicopter equipped with a water tank joined forces at the site…The JCDโ€™s efforts, which also include a slash program, are voluntary. It exists to help private landowners address resource concerns about wildlife habitat, wildfire, water and invasive species…JCDโ€™s preference is to mitigate across multiple landowner boundaries to make a treated area as large as possible. That magnifies the positive impact on wildlife and wildfire mitigation, Stephens said.

Dog days a drag for Dillon Reservoir: Tough combination of conditions force Denver Water to lean heavily on its Summit County workhorse for summer water supply — Todd Hartman (DenverWater.org)

Click the link to read the article on the Denver Water website (Todd Hartman):

August 28, 2025

The dog days of summer have been draining for Dillon Reservoir.

Up until late August, this summer has been particularly dry, both for the Denver region and for the West Slope, the source of half of Denver Waterโ€™s supply. And that combination has translated into a heavy workload for the utilityโ€™s largest reservoir, the 257,000-acre-foot Dillon Reservoir in Summit County.

Dillon Reservoir in Summit County is Denver Waterโ€™s largest reservoir. Photo credit: Denver Water.

A summer largely bereft of the monsoon rains (which bolster our water supply and reduce water use by our water-smart customers) combined with long stretches of days above 90 degrees pushed up demand among the 1.5 million people Denver Water serves.

The dry summer situation also triggered calls for more water from farmers and ranchers who have senior water rights that put them at the front of the line for receiving water from the South Platte River system. Denver Waterโ€™s supplies are also constrained on the north side of its system, as ongoing work on the Gross Reservoir Expansion Project requires the utility reduce the amount of water it stores in that reservoir during the project. 

Dillon Reservoir provides Denver Water with a supplemental supply to use when the amount of water available from its south system source, the South Platte River, is not enough to meet demands. 

That all combined to make Denver Water more heavily reliant on Dillon Reservoir than usual, forcing the utility to push higher volumes from Dillon through the Roberts Tunnel to the Front Range.

โ€œA lot of factors combined to see us lean hard into our Dillon supplies this summer,โ€ said Nathan Elder, manager of supply for Denver Water. โ€œWe know this impacts recreation, both what we release into the Blue River below the reservoir and the water levels for the marinas at Dillon Reservoir. We try very hard to maintain good conditions for recreation at Dillon, but this summer posed challenges.โ€

The Dillon Marina at Dillon Reservoir. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Adding to the mix: Lower inflows into the reservoir

Overall, the amount of water flowing into Dillon was at just 70% of normal in the April-through-July stretch. July alone saw just 48% of typical flows into the reservoir โ€” thatโ€™s 20,000 acre-feet below average, about the capacity of Antero Reservoir west of Fairplay.

The situation serves as a reminder for Denver Water customers to stay smart about water use. 

Especially amid a hot, dry summer, customers should make sure to follow watering rules and skip irrigation during rainy periods. And they should consider landscape changes that replace thirsty turfgrass with plants that need less water.

Yet, despite relentless dry periods covering July and most of August, Denver Water customers did a good job managing irrigation. They used water at a rate of just about 2% above the five-year average, and just 1.6% above the longer term, 2000-2024 average.

These plants from Resource Centralโ€™s Garden In A Box program are water-wise and interesting throughout the year. Photo credit: Denver Water.

But even as Denver Water customers kept demands low by historical standards, the combination of conditions saw water levels in Dillon fall below levels optimal for the marinas at the reservoir by the end of August.

Typically, Denver Water tries to keep the surface of Dillon Reservoir at 9,012 feet in elevation through Labor Day. But this year, levels will fall a few feet below that. 

And water volumes flowing out of Dillon into the Blue River โ€” flows important to rafters and anglers โ€” also fell significantly. Since late July, those outflows were about 100 cubic feet per second, about half of normal for this time of year. In August they dropped even further, to 75 cubic feet per second.

The overall picture began to improve slightly in late August, as the state benefited from a cooling trend and bursts of rainfall. The cooler, wetter weather in the metro area cut Denver Water customersโ€™ demand for water in the Denver region, easing the need to pull as much water from Dillon. 

Even so, the tough summer means Denver Water will likely enter the new, 12-month water year, which begins Oct. 1, with its reservoirs, including Dillon, at below-average elevations.

That puts the onus on the upcoming winter season to come through with a good snowpack, never a sure thing. 

โ€œWeโ€™ll hope to see water demands fall in September and then look to a good snowpack in the winter and spring,โ€ Elder said. 

โ€œBut weโ€™ll be starting from behind. We hope we can make up the gap in reservoir storage with a wet winter and spring. And weโ€™ll need our customers to help us with smart water practices.โ€

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

Save The Poudre won’t try to stop #Thornton from finishing water pipeline — The #FortCollins Coloradoan #PoudreRiver

The black line shows the preferred route of the pipeline as of November 2023. Credit: City of Thornton

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

August 18, 2025

Key Points

  • Save The Poudre will not appeal a judge’s ruling allowing Thornton’s pipeline project to proceed.
  • The environmental advocacy group focused on the Poudre River contends Colorado water law, created more than 100 years ago, is not in line with public values today.
  • Save The Poudre urges Thornton to take a more active role in protecting and restoring the Poudre River

The environmental advocacy group that seeks to protect the Poudre River says it will not appealย a judge’s ruling that allowed the project to proceed. Theย project is set to bring water from the Poudre to Thornton via a pipeline running through Larimer, Weld and Adams counties.,Larimer County commissioners, and the planning commission before them, approved the pipeline permit in 2024. Then Save The Poudre sued, saying the board of commissioners exceeded its jurisdiction and abused its discretion when it granted the permit…

In announcing the decision not to appeal the judge’s ruling, Save The Poudre Executive Director Gary Wockner said Colorado’s water law gives agencies the right to drain rivers, and it doesn’t seem like a wise use of resources to appeal when a challenge would likely fail…

Todd Barnes, communications director for the city of Thornton, noted the deadline to appeal is still ahead, on Aug. 21. He said Thornton doesn’t plan to issue a statement about the development as of now…Thornton and Northern Water have planned to co-locate a few miles of their pipelines to reduce disruption. But Barnes said Thornton has heard nothing concrete from NISP. Regardless, he said, the city will follow through with all of the requirements of its permit, which includes co-location.

Here’s the statement from Save the Poudre:

As Gross Reservoir rises, Boulder County residents grapple with projectโ€™s legal turmoil — The Water Desk #BoulderCreek

Cranes and construction equipment line the shore at Gross Reservoir on June 19, 2025 in Boulder County, Colorado. The construction is part of an expansion project that will supply water to Denverโ€™s residents. (Cassie Sherwood/The Water Desk)

Click the link to read the article on The Water Desk website (Cassie Sherwood):

July 23, 2025

Pieter Strauss used to love hosting stargazing parties at his house in the Lakeshore Park neighborhood up Flagstaff Road southwest of Boulder. The hobbyist astronomer would fire up the barbecue and spend hours showing his neighbors the night sky through his observatory and telescopes. 

Straussโ€™s house sits looking directly over Gross Reservoir, which provides water to Denver residents.

But when a project to significantly raise the reservoirโ€™s dam began construction in 2022, those moments of neighborhood tranquility were lost for some residents. For Strauss the biggest impact was the bright construction lights used to keep work moving overnight. 

โ€œIt became impossible to sit on the deck before sunrise and after sundown, astrophotography was impossible. They lit up the skies,โ€ with powerful floodlights, Strauss said. 

For over 20 years, residents and various environmental groups have protested the project, which suffered a series of legal blows this year. Construction on the massive dam ground to a halt in April amidst the courtroom wrangling, and subsequent decisions have cast a new level of uncertainty over large-scale water projects that propose to draw on the beleaguered Colorado River.  

However, by the end of May, federal courts ruled that construction could continue due to concerns surrounding uncompleted construction and potential flooding possibilities, but that the reservoir could not be filled. 

The Gross Reservoir Expansion Project involves raising the height of the existing dam by 131 feet. The dam will be built out and will have โ€œstepsโ€ made of roller-compacted concrete to reach the new height. Image credit: Denver Water

Raising the dam 

Gross Reservoirโ€™s dam is owned and operated by Denver Water. The utility built it in the 1950s, with two other building phases planned to accommodate future water needs. The current dam expansion will raise the height of the dam 131 feet, tripling the current capacity of the reservoir, and providing more water for Denver Water customers. 

The construction was spurred by โ€œa combination of demands in our system, as well as concerns about climate and concerns about the needs for greater resilience in our system,โ€ said Jessica Brody, general counsel for Denver Water. 

The need for the expansion is similar to a bank savings account, Brody said. Tripling the capacity of the reservoir is a savings account that can be drawn on in circumstances of an emergency.

โ€œIf we have an extreme drought event, we want to have more water banks that we can help smooth the impacts to our customers,โ€ Brody said. 

When the utility initially announced plans to begin moving forward with a dam expansion, residents of the area were concerned. Environmental threats and the disruptions from the massive construction project topped the list of worries. They attended meetings at town halls with county commissioners. They organized with other residents in and around Coal Creek canyon.

While some residents fought the expansion, others anticipated it. When the dam was initially constructed, the utility planned to expand further down the line. 

Since construction began in 2022, residents have experienced noise and light pollution. Five neighbors have moved from the Lakeshore Park neighborhood. Pieter Strauss, at whose house they once held stargazing gatherings, was among them. 

Beverly Kurtz, member of TEG, on Pieter Straussโ€™s former porch overlooking Gross Reservoir on June 19, 2025. Once construction began, Strauss was no longer able to host neighborhood stargazing parties due to light pollution. (Cassie Sherwood/The Water Desk)

โ€œThe most valuable thing to all the people who have moved up here is that they had a quiet nature sanctuary. But then when you take that away, is it worth it?โ€ said Anna McDermott, another resident of the area. 

โ€œWe sleep with our windows open. Not one house has air conditioning, so you sleep with your windows open in the summer months,โ€ she said.  โ€œYou hear these giant backup beepers crashing, grinding all night long. Even with earplugs, I canโ€™t sleep.โ€ 

The Environmental Group (TEG) is an organization of residents in the Lakeshore Park neighborhood and surrounding residents, focused on engaging the community in action when environmental issues arise. Along with Save the Colorado, The Sierra Club, and other environmental organizations, TEG has fought the expansion. Beverly Kurtz, former president of TEG, has worked to hold Denver Water and the companies working on the dam, Kiewit Corp. and Barnard Construction Company Inc., accountable during construction. 

Heavy duty trucks are required to use a different road to access the dam rather than the paved road up Flagstaff Mountain due to fire concerns. Large semi-trucks have slid off the road due to the steep grade, which can cause traffic jams and road closures. 

โ€œAt one point they had one of the two roads down this mountain closed for five months,โ€ Kurtz said. โ€œIt wasnโ€™t until we called the sheriff out here and he realized the safety concern that they opened the road back up.โ€

Legal snares slow construction

In October 2024, two years after construction began, Save the Colorado, along with other environmental groups, won a lawsuit against Denver Water. U.S. District Court judge Christine Arguello found the utilityโ€™s dam construction permit violated the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. At the time, construction was able to continue and Arguello ordered the groups to work out an agreement regarding damages. 

In April 2025, the judge ordered a temporary halt on construction. The initial lawsuit argued that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, who provided the project permitting, did not fully consider climate change impacts when it approved the damโ€™s expansion. 

A month later, Arguello ruled that Denver Water could finish construction on raising the dam, but that the reservoir could not be filled until the Army Corps reissued the permits.

โ€œIf you stop the construction of a dam when it is partially built, the dam doesnโ€™t function as it was ultimately designed to function,โ€ said Denver Waterโ€™s Brody. โ€œThat was a big concern of ours and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.โ€

The utility has also been ordered to not remove any additional trees surrounding the dam until the proper permits are obtained. The project proposes the removal of over 200,000 trees. 

Arguelloโ€™s opinion also called into question the underlying water rights Denver Water would rely on to fill the newly enlarged reservoir when construction finished. Gross Reservoir is filled with water from the headwaters of the Colorado River, which has experienced steep declines in water supply amid a long-term warming and drying trend in the Rocky Mountains. 

โ€œThe Environmental Impact Statement didnโ€™t even look at the fact that the flows of the Colorado River are in decline. Most of the science suggests they will continue to decline further,โ€ said Doug Kenney, Western Water Policy Program director at the University of Colorado Boulderโ€™s Natural Resources Law Center. Acquiring new permits will require Denver Water to redefine the projectโ€™s purpose and evaluate the environmental damage, he said.

The case is more than a local water project. Diverting more water across the western slope of Colorado has created concerns for ecosystems throughout the overappropriated watershed and for communities downstream in California, Nevada and Arizona. 

โ€œIt makes it more difficult to ensure that thereโ€™s sufficient flow downstream as a result,โ€ Kenney said. โ€œWe have got to stop this practice of taking more and more water out of the upper reaches of the Colorado River because it just increases the stress on a river that is already under a tremendous amount of stress.โ€

By calling into question the projectโ€™s potential to have downstream impacts, the decision could add a new legal hurdle future water development infrastructure will have to clear. 

โ€œHistorically, agencies in recent decades have not done enough to consider climate change in decisions,โ€ Kenney said. Cases like this one need to happen in natural resource law more generally, he said, as they help establish precedents for future projects that could potentially put the environment at risk. 

Denver Water is appealing the court decisions that bar the expansion. That could result in a reissue of the permits with a redefined purpose or a dismissal of the court rulings made earlier this year. 

โ€œWe think that the district court made some misjudgements or misinterpretations when it found the Army Corps committed these errors,โ€ Brody said. 

Learning to live alongside it

Amid the stops and starts of Gross Reservoir construction, nearby residents are not ready to let go of what they used to have. 

Kurtz and McDermott recall their old activities along the reservoirโ€™s north shore. A handful of neighbors would walk their dogs everyday along the hiking trail that connected the reservoir to their neighborhood. The trail has since been widened significantly, to allow for excavating equipment. They would host Memorial Day parties along the waterโ€™s edge.ย 

Beverly Kurtz and Anna McDermott, longtime residents of the Lakeshore Park neighborhood pose in front of Gross Reservoir on June 19, 2025. They are members of TEG, an environmental group involved in a lawsuit against Denver Water. (Cassie Sherwood/The Water Desk)

Now they minimize their excursions to the shore as much as they can. At this point theyโ€™re more than ready for construction to be completed, exhausted from the daily disruptions, explosions and drilling. 

โ€œNow clearly, when the work is done, the things which negatively impacted my life would go away. But I couldnโ€™t last them out,โ€ Strauss said. He recently relocated to the Boulder area. โ€œIt was just my bad luck that my golden years coincided with the worst effects of the project.โ€ 

Some residents found that the expansion project has renewed their sense of community in Lakeshore Park.

โ€œIn a weird way a lot of us have gotten even closer because we were in the battle together,โ€ Kurtz said. โ€œWe feel like at this point we won the battle, but weโ€™ve lost the war.โ€

โ€œThey will get the permits to eventually fill this reservoir following the expansion,โ€ she said. 

However, federal courts requiring the proper permits to continue construction is a win in her and TEGโ€™s book, as it sets a precedent for any large construction processes that occur in the future. It will ensure that the proper environmental permits are obtained before construction can begin on a project. 

โ€œIf nothing else, we hope that precedent still stands. Because it will help somebody else,โ€ she said. 

This story was produced by The Water Desk, an independent journalism initiative at the University of Colorado Boulderโ€™s Center for Environmental Journalism. 

This week in history, Larimer County experienced 2 of its worst floods — The #FortCollins Coloradoan

Big Thompson Flood, Colorado. Cabin lodged on a private bridge just below Drake, looking upstream. Photo by W. R. Hansen, August 13, 1976. Photo via the USGS.
Big Thompson Flood, Colorado. Cabin lodged on a private bridge just below Drake, looking upstream. Photo by W. R. Hansen, August 13, 1976. Photo via the USGS.

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

July 29, 2025

Fort Collins, Spring Creek flood July 28, 1997
  • Heavy rainfall in late July in Colorado’s past caused two of the state’s worst floods, the Spring Creek Flood and the Big Thompson Flood.
  • The 1997 Spring Creek Flood resulted in five deaths and over $200 million in damages in Fort Collins.
  • The 1976 Big Thompson Flood led to 144 fatalities and $35 million in damages.

Twenty-eight years ago this week, 14 inches of rain fell on Fort Collins in just over a day, overwhelming the Spring Creek and leading to the deaths of five people.

And 49 years ago this week, more than a foot of rain fell on the Big Thompson River west of Loveland in about four hours, creating a wall of water that swept away and killed 144 people. It’s not a coincidence that both events happened in the same week of July, though they were years apart. It’s flash-flood season in Colorado, and three of the state’s worst floods occurred from mid-July through mid-September, which is also the state’sย monsoon season.

‘We’re very proud of what we do’: #Colorado State University students help test dam safety on Halligan Reservoir model — Alex Hager (KUNC.org) #PoudreRiver

Engineering students take measurements from a scale model of the dam at Halligan Reservoir in a lab at Colorado State University in Fort Collins on July 15, 2025. Their data will help make the soon-to-be-built dam safer in the real world. Alex Hager/KUNC

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

July 15, 2025

This story is part of ongoing coverage of water in the West produced by KUNC and supported by the Walton Family Foundation.

If youโ€™re going to build a new reservoir, you better be dam sure itโ€™s safe.

Engineers at Colorado State University are doing exactly that by running tests on a giant model of a dam that will soon be built near Fort Collins. In an airy warehouse at CSUโ€™s foothills campus, theyโ€™re sending water through a 24:1 scale mockup of the dam that will hold back an expanded Halligan Reservoir.

โ€œIt just gives us assurances on so many different levels that our design is sound, that it is going to be constructable, and that it is going to perform when itโ€™s built, as expected,โ€ said Darren Parkin, Halligan Water Supply Project Manager with the City of Fort Collins.

Water flows through a scale model of the area surrounding Halligan Reservoir in a lab at Colorado State University on July 15, 2025. The model was built to precisely mimic conditions at the actual reservoir. Alex Hager/KUNC

The new dam will be built to survive a one-in-ten-million year precipitation event โ€” or 72 inches of rain โ€” which is required to get building permits. For comparison, the devastating Spring Creek flood of 1997 was caused by 14.5 inches of rain.

Running that test, even on a dam thatโ€™s a fraction of the size of the real one, requires a huge pulse of water. It tumbles and whooshes through the manmade river with so much force that itโ€™s hard to hear the person standing next to you.

When engineering students switch on the model, a large tank fills behind the dam. First, it spills down the stairstep-like face of the structure with a gentle trickle. Before long, itโ€™s hitting the base as roiling whitewater. Thatโ€™s exactly where most of this teamโ€™s research has been focused.

They built a series of โ€œbafflesโ€ to slow that water down and prevent it from bashing the dam and eroding its base. They are essentially large blocks that change the speed and direction of water cascading over the dam. The engineers working on the dam say they were able to figure out precisely the best place to put those baffles, how many to install, and how far apart they should be because they were running tests on this model instead of a computer program.

A Colorado State University student monitors data at a scale model of the Halligan Reservoir dam in Fort Collins on July 15, 2025. Alex Hager/KUNC

โ€œWe can easily change things in a physical model,โ€ said Jeff Ellis, who manages the hydraulics lab where the model is housed. โ€œWe can move things by an inch and just keep on retesting, and it’s really optimizing performance.โ€

The City of Fort Collins is nearing construction on the dam, which will enable them to expand Halligan Reservoirโ€™s storage capacity. City officials say that itโ€™s necessary to supply water to the growing city in the future. Work on the new dam, about 25 miles northwest of Fort Collins, is expected to start in early 2027 and finish in late 2029 or early 2030.

Ellis said the project serves another function, too. Itโ€™s giving engineering students a new kind of experience.

โ€œItโ€™s super rewarding,โ€ he said. โ€œA lot of time in class, youโ€™re doing a lot of theoretical work, itโ€™s not hands-on. Where this, theyโ€™re actually doing design and theyโ€™re helping solve these real world problems.โ€

Water tumbles over a model of the Halligan Reservoir dam in a lab at Colorado State University in Fort Collins on July 15, 2025. Students tested different baffles at the base of the dam to help prevent erosion during times of excess flow. Alex Hager/KUNC

Students helped build the intricate model, which is shaped exactly like the area around Halligan Reservoir, and they operate the data-gathering equipment that helps engineers form conclusions from their testing. Catherine Lambert, an undergraduate senior studying Environmental Engineering, said the experience was fun and exciting, but would also help prepare her for a career.

โ€œIt’s really cool to see all of our hard work actually translate into the real world,โ€ she said, โ€œWe’re very proud of what we do here.โ€

Halligan Reservoir aerial credit: City of Fort Collins

Part II: South Metro #Denver cities starting to diversify water sources: #CastleRock and #Parker 25 years ago were almost entirely dependent upon #groundwater. They are diversifying, and one plan is to import water from far down the #SouthPlatteRiver Valley — Allen Best (BigPivots.com)

Castle Rock. Photo credit: Allen Best

Click the link to read the series on the Water Education Colorado website. Click the link to read the article on the Big Pivots website (Allen Best):

July 20, 2025

This is Part II of a four-part series about groundwater basins in Colorado. The story was commissioned by Water Education Colorado and appears in a variant form in the summer 2025 issue of Headwaters magazine. Photos by Allen Best unless otherwise noted.

Unlike the sparsely populated Republican River Basin, the south metro area of the Denver Basin has large and still-growing cities. Most of the south metro area lies within Douglas County, whose population ballooned between 1980 and 2025 from 25,200 to nearly 400,000.

Castle Rock, the countyโ€™s largest city, has 87,000 residents. Based on approved development, the city expects to grow to a population of 120,000 to 140,000. Parker, the second largest city, has 68,000 residents and has zoning for 80,000. Utilities serving these two cities in 2005 were almost 100% dependent upon extractions from the underlying Dawson, Denver, Arapahoe and Laramie-Fox Hills aquifers. Both cities as well as other jurisdictions have lessened their dependence, but they have much work to do.

How much water remains? Thatโ€™s not an easy answer to deliver, as a consultant told the Castle Rock City Council in 2005. A council member asked him: โ€œJust how much water remains?โ€ Perhaps leery of trying to offer easy answers that required a half-hour explanation, he simply smiled and said: โ€œItโ€™s dark down there.โ€

That absence of total certainty was at the heart of a Colorado Supreme Court decision handed down in late 2024. Parker Water and Sanitation District, Castle Rock Water and others had squared off in water court beginning in 2021 with the Colorado Division of Water Resources. Parker Water has 33 wells that are 515 to 2,745 feet deep. State-issued permits for the newest five wells limit the volumes to what could be withdrawn during 100 years at a rate of 1% a year. Parker Water and several other south-metro jurisdictions disputed the stateโ€™s authority to attach this stipulation.

The stipulation was premised on a 1973 law in which state legislators ordered a โ€œslow sipโ€ of Denver Basin aquifers. Later legislation and rulemaking clarified that withdrawals were not to exceed 1% of total recoverable water in that portion underlying the land of the permitteeโ€™s well in any given year.

Castle Rock believes it has underlying water in the Denver Basin aquifers to satisfy its needs for 300 years but is also making efforts to reduce per-capita use while also diversifying sources. It has 87,000 residents now but expects to grow to between 120,000 and 140,000. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots

This dispute is about the future. When the cities reach those 100-year limits and the total volumetric limits associated with their wells, will they be able to continue pumping. Must they cease pumping even if water remains in the aquifer?

Aurora, which lies within a half-mile of Parker Water wells, argued its water rights could be harmed if Parker pumped more than the total volume of water found to be available for its wells.

Itโ€™s crucial to understand that water underground knows no property lines, no signs saying โ€œWelcome to Parker.โ€ Water could, in theory, flow from below Auroraโ€™s land to Parkerโ€™s wells. Underground, there are no fences.

Colorado Supreme Court justices, in their November 2024 majority opinion, warned of a โ€œrace to the bottom of the aquifer, with earlier permittees receiving a significant head start.โ€ What would happen if Parker Water, Castle Rock Water and others had their druthers? โ€œAbsent a total volumetric limit, a permittee who continues to pump at the maximum permitted rate for more than 100 years would end up pulling water to its well that would not otherwise be underlying its land,โ€ said the justices in their majority opinion.

In his dissent, Justice Brian Boatright came to the opposite conclusion, siding with the south-metro jurisdictions.

A study by the U.S. Geological Survey published in 2011 used a model that found 1% to 2% of precipitation becomes water in the bedrock aquifers and 7% in the alluvial aquifer. For urban irrigation, such as at the Watercolor subdivision in Castle Rock, 2.5 inches of water makes it back to underlying aquifers each year. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots

Some south-metro entities may seek state legislation that reflects what they believe is the best policy. As it stands now, a permit-holder that has withdrawn the total volumetric amount identified on a well permit must cease pumping, says Jason Ullmann, the state engineer and director of the Colorado Division of Water Resources. He has authority to notify users in writing of their violations. Could he shut down wells? They would be given โ€œtime as may reasonably be necessary to correct deficiencies,โ€ he says. But yes, they would be โ€œsubject to enforcement.โ€

Just how much water remains in the Denver Basin aquifers? The Division of Water Resources issues well permits, and in doing so, estimates the potential volume of water underlying the applicantโ€™s parcel. But the state agency does not track changes in volume over time, nor does it track the amount of water that wells pump. It requires well owners to maintain pumping records.

When asked how much water remains in Castle Rockโ€™s wells, Mark Marlowe, director of the cityโ€™s water utility, suggested consultation of a hydrogeologist, perhaps from the U.S. Geological Survey. Pressed further, he said Castle Rockโ€™s groundwater supply will last more than 300 years โ€œfrom a legal standpointโ€ based on current rates of use.

The practical effect of the Supreme Court ruling on Castle Rock? Very little in the short term, Marlowe says. In 2005, Castle Rock set out to create a pathway to dramatically lessen groundwater dependence. โ€œWeโ€™ve been headed down this road for a long time,โ€ he says. So why participate in Parkerโ€™s lawsuit? Because, he replied, the city wants to make long-term use of its investment in groundwater extraction. And as a practical matter, the city commonly extracts less than the 1% allowed annually.

Marloweโ€™s answer is not totally satisfying, but the work done by Castle Rock since 2005 must be acknowledged. It was 100% dependent on groundwater extraction then. It is adding new impoundments to store surface water, pumping water upstream from Chatfield Reservoir, and doubling the daily capacity for treating wastewater. Castle Rock already has lessened its dependence on groundwater to less than 69% over the last four years and Marlowe says heโ€™s confident that by 2050 it will lessen to 25%.

Several of Castle Rockโ€™s successes have involved working with other south-metro jurisdictions, including the Parker Water and Sanitation District. In 2013, when Ron Redd was hired by Parker Water as general manager, the utility was still 90% groundwater reliant. He was given a mission: transition to renewable sources.

A key project has been water reuse. Water introduced into the South Platte River from other basins or from groundwater can be reused. Aurora Water set out to do so in 2003. The $680 million Prairie Waters Project pumps water from the river-side aquifer near Fort Lupton to a reservoir in the southeast metropolitan area. From there, in 2010, Parker Water, Castle Rock and eight other south-metro communities joined Denver Water and Aurora Water in a partnership called WISE (Water Infrastructure and Supply Efficiency) to further manage infrastructure cooperatively and deliver the reclaimed water to their members.

Making this possible was a new 75,000-acre-foot impoundment called Rueter-Hess Reservoir. Completed in 2012, it is a core asset for Parker Water and three other utilities who share its use.

Jim Yahn, left, manager of the Prewitt Reservoir, which might become part of the Platte Valley Water Partnership, speaks with Ron Red, manager of Parker Water and Sanitation District, and Joe Frank, general manager of the Lower South Platte Water Conservancy District, which is part of the proect. There is still hope that Prewitt would be part of the plan,โ€ says Yahn. โ€œThe decree that Parker and Lower South Platte are seeking still has Prewitt Reservoir as a component of the plan.โ€ Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots

The Platte Valley Water Partnership is even more ambitious. Parker Water and Castle Rock Water have joined with the Lower South Platte Water Conservancy District.

They plan to detain South Platte River water that currently flows downstream into Nebraska during winter and spring runoff. The South Platte River Compact allows the use of this water. Little excess exists in many years, but when there is, such as in 2023, no place exists to store that water. The project plans to use Prewitt Reservoir and a new reservoir northwest of Akron in the capture and storage of those flows before pumping some of that water 125 miles to Rueter-Hess Reservoir.

Farmers will also have access to a cut of this โ€œnewโ€ water โ€” with agricultural users receiving 50% of the captured water and municipalities receiving 50%. Construction is set to begin around 2035, at an anticipated cost of $780 million.

As of mid-July, itโ€™s not clear how the Nebraska lawsuit against Colorado involving water for Nebraskaโ€™s proposed Perkins Canal might affect this project.

A final important component of the path forward for the water utilities who mine Denver Basin aquifers lies in conservation, particularly for outdoor landscaping. The prevailing theme at one time was use as much as you want โ€” but pay for it. That thinking has shifted to limits and goals of reduced use.

Parker has reduced groundwater dependence to 60% and has goals to reduce it to 25%. Might that be achieved in tapping the aquifers of the San Luis Valley? The idea has provoked outrage for more than 30 years.

โ€œThanks, but no thanks,โ€ is how Redd describes Parkerโ€™s response to the idea of a lengthy straw sucking water from two river basins away.

โ€œWe have our project, and financially it makes a lot more sense to go that route.โ€

For that matter, the San Luis Valley aquifers have their own problems.

Part III: Declines in flows of the Rio Grande parallel those of the Colorado River during the 21st century. There were problems anyway for the potato and other growers around in the eponymously named San Luis Valley farm community of Center. Simply put, less water must be pumped from underground. Easier said than done.  You can also download the entire story here in a magazine format.

Colorado Rivers. Credit: Geology.com

#Nebraska sues #Colorado over construction to pull water from #SouthPlatteRiver — Parker Yamasaki and Olivia Prentzel (WaterEducationColorado.org)

The confluence of the Big Thompson and South Platte rivers near Greeley. Credit: Westervelt Ecological Services

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Parker Yamasaki and Olivia Prentzel):

July 16, 2025

against the state of Colorado to clear the way for construction of the Perkins County Canal, a contentious proposal to divert water from the South Platte River in Sedgwick County to a storage facility on the Nebraska side of the state line.

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday and claims Colorado is threatening Nebraskaโ€™s water supply through โ€œunlawful water diversionsโ€ that have deprived Nebraskaโ€™s farmers of water.

Nebraskaโ€™s Western Irrigation District, a beneficiary of the compact, was recently forced to shut off the majority of its surface water irrigation due to lack of supply from the South Platte River, according to the lawsuit.

โ€œThese breaches have harmed Nebraska and pose a significant, ongoing threat to Nebraska, from its agricultural economy to the water security of its major population centers,โ€ the lawsuit said.

Perkins County Canal Project Area. Credit: Nebraska Department of Natural Resources

The complaint also alleges Colorado is obstructing Nebraskaโ€™s efforts to build the Perkins County Canal.

In February, landowners in Sedgwick County, where the river leaves Colorado and flows into Nebraska, received notices of condemnation, giving them 90 days to accept a buyout from the state of Nebraska or face eminent domain.

The letters escalated what was until then a simmering disputebetween the states over enforcement of the South Platte River Compact, an agreement ratified by the governors of Colorado and Nebraska in 1923.

The compact guarantees Nebraska a flow of 120 cubic feet per second from April 1 to Oct. 15 where the South Platte leaves Colorado just northeast of Julesburg. For the other half of the year, the compact allows Nebraska 500 cubic feet per second through a canal that would pull from the river near Ovid. Without a canal, Colorado gets first dibs on the South Platteโ€™s winter flow.

Historically Colorado has sent significant winter water across the state line, but the stateโ€™s rapid development in recent years spooked officials in Nebraska.

The century-old compact permits Nebraska to use eminent domain to build the canal, but is unclear about whether eminent domain can be used in another state.

The lawsuit said the states are at an impasse about key terms in the compact.

Earlier this year, Attorney General Phil Weiser called the move onto Colorado soil โ€œnovelโ€ and said that he was willing to challenge the move by Nebraska in court.

It appears he will get his chance.

In an emailed statement Wednesday, Weiser said that the lawsuit is โ€œunfortunate and predictable given the misguided effort driving the proposed canal.โ€

โ€œNebraska has now set in motion what is likely to be decades of litigation. And if, after decades of litigation, the court allows Nebraska to move forward with its wasteful project, Nebraskaโ€™s actions will force Colorado water users to build additional new projects to lessen the impact of the proposed Perkins County Canal,โ€ Weiser wrote.

Nebraska has been inching toward building the canal since April 2022, when the state legislature approved the $500 million project, citing fears about Coloradoโ€™s increased water use.

At that point, Weiser started making trips to the northeastern corner of Colorado to brief people about the project, under the impression that it was unlikely to move forward based on the cost, the cross-border dealings and evaluations by a state water engineer.

โ€œI also said I think this feels more like a political stunt. It doesnโ€™t make sense,โ€ Weiser told The Colorado Sun in February.

Nebraska hopes to complete the Perkins County Canal by 2032.

More by Parker Yamasaki and Olivia Prentzel

The Platte River is formed in western Nebraska east of the city of North Platte, Nebraska by the confluence of the North Platte and the South Platte Rivers, which both arise from snowmelt in the eastern Rockies east of the Continental Divide. Map via Wikimedia.

Reservoirs almost fill, fall short of (predicted) spill: An abrupt dry spell in the high country shriveled the spring #runoff, a reminder to conserve precious water supplies — Todd Hartman (DenverWater.org) #SouthPlatteRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Click the link to read the article on the Denver Water website (Todd Hartman):

July 8, 2025

In early July, Denver Waterโ€™s reservoirs filled nearly to the brim, holding the most water theyโ€™ll hold this year. 

Nearly full reservoirs are certainly good news for Denver Water and the 1.5 million people who rely on the water stored in them every day. But for the utilityโ€™s water watchers, 2025โ€™s โ€œpeak storageโ€ moment was a letdown โ€” and even a warning of sorts.

Dillon Reservoir, Denver Waterโ€™s largest reservoir is a popular spot for recreation. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Why?

Initial forecasts had suggested more water might run downhill, enough to fill the reservoirs and also provide extra water that could spill and boost river flows. But dry conditions in Coloradoโ€™s high country during April, May and June sapped that extra runoff, as drier soils and warmer air soaked up the potential excess.

โ€œWe thought we were going to have some excess water to play with this year,โ€ said Nathan Elder, Denver Waterโ€™s manager of water supply. โ€œBut as it turned out we just barely saw enough runoff to fill our reservoirs.โ€

This yearโ€™s quick turn from abundant supplies to just-enough-to-almost-fill is another reminder that even in years when overall snowpack is reasonably good, such as this past winter, we canโ€™t take water supplies for granted. Thatโ€™s even more apparent in an era of climate change, when warming temperatures and longer dry spells can quickly shrink projected water supplies. 

And as the hot summer irrigation season begins on the Front Range, itโ€™s a reminder to residents to be thoughtful with outdoor water use: Adhere to watering rules, turn off irrigation systems during wet stretches, and think about changes to your landscape that, over time, will reduce watering needs.

And, keep in mind, half of Denver Waterโ€™s supply comes from the West Slope, where a dry spring is making supplies tight.

โ€œBack on April 1, we thought we were going to be โ€˜filling and spilling,โ€™โ€ Elder said. โ€œBut we saw streamflow forecasts really drop and even in the Colorado River Basin, where we had a solid snowpack, it did not translate into the supplies we expected.โ€

The Snake River as it flows through Keystone toward Dillon Reservoir. Photo credit: Denver Water.

At least one key reason for the swift turn from a forecast for “filling and spilling” to just enough runoff to fill Denver Waterโ€™s reservoirs was lack of precipitation โ€” just 50% to 70% of normal โ€” in April, May and June in the mountainous counties of Park, Grand and Summit where Denver Water collects supplies.

That dry spell helped drive runoff down, especially in the South Platte Basin. The amount of spring runoff flowing to Strontia Springs southwest of Denver has been only 46% of normal, below an already weak forecast of 60%. Inflows into Dillon have also been lower than expected, just 75% of normal after forecasts of 100%.

As a result, Denver Waterโ€™s supply reservoirs peaked July 1, at just 95% of capacity and are now being drawn down as summer watering season gets into full swing. (One caveat: The peak storage number would have been a bit higher, closer to 97%, but for a storage limitation at Gross Reservoir while construction activities continue on the expansion project there.)

Denver Water hopes to see its reservoirs hit 100% of their storage capacity every year. This yearโ€™s shortfall across the reservoir system was about 7,500 acre feet, enough water to supply more than 15,000 households for a year.

โ€œWe missed filling by a relatively small amount, but we never know if this is a short-term situation or the start of the next drought,โ€ Elder said. โ€œWe have filled up those saving accounts and now our reservoirs only go down from here with the peak of the heat season. So, we ask customers to stick to our rules and water with care.โ€

In addition to the lower-then-expected peak storage numbers, Denver Water also faces another โ€œsubstitution yearโ€ on the West Slope. 

That is a technical way of saying Denver Water must release water from its West Slope reservoirs to make up for a shortage of water in the federally operated Green Mountain reservoir downstream from Dillon Reservoir. The water will serve downstream water users on the Colorado River.

Substitution years are uncommon, usually required once or twice per decade. But, at least in recent years, thatโ€™s changing, with such โ€œwater refundsโ€ from Denver Water required in 2021, 2022 and now, 2025.

โ€œThat is another thing that, like the spring dry-up in the mountains, we didnโ€™t expect this year,โ€ Elder said. 

But other aspects of the stateโ€™s weather in recent months have been more positive.

Big rains in the metro region in May and June kept water usage down and sent a lot of water down the South Platte River to farmers and communities. That supply boost helped reduce calls for Denver Water to bypass additional water, leaving it in the streams, to meet those downstream demands. 

โ€œThose storms really helped us out; we havenโ€™t had to run big exchanges and send our reservoir water down to meet those needs,โ€ Elder said.

The wet weather locally also cut down on outdoor watering, as customers paid attention to weather and shut off sprinklers. June water use in Denver Waterโ€™s service area was just 94% of average, a system-wide water savings of 1,600 acre feet compared to anticipated demands during June. 

Finally, as water watchers do every year about this time, we look to the monsoon season to bring helpful afternoon rainstorms in July and August, which can also drive down water demand.

โ€œThe less we can draw on our reservoirs,โ€ Elder said, โ€œthe better chance we can fill up again next season.โ€

#Nebraska state leaders filed a lawsuit against #Colorado on Wednesday seeking to have the U.S. Supreme Court assert Nebraskaโ€™s century-old water rights to the #SouthPlatteRiver that crosses state lines — Zach Wendling (ColoradoNewsline.com)

Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers, at center, and Gov. Jim Pillen, at right, announce a lawsuit against Colorado before the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to assert Nebraska’s water rights to the South Platte River that crosses state lines. At left is Jesse Bradley, director of the Nebraska Department of Water, Energy and Environment. July 16, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner)

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Newsline website (Zach Wendling):

July 16, 2025

This story was originally published by the Nebraska Examiner.

LINCOLN, Nebraska โ€” Nebraska state leaders filed a lawsuit against Colorado on Wednesday seeking to have the U.S. Supreme Court assert the Cornhusker Stateโ€™s century-old water rights to the South Platte River that crosses state lines.

Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen, announcing the legal action at a news conference with Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers and other state and local officials, said, โ€œEvery drop of water matters.โ€

Pillen and Hilgers accused Colorado officials of siphoning off more and more water every day, even as Nebraska had been โ€œniceโ€ with Colorado, which has seen increases in housing, agricultural and business development along the waterway.

โ€œWeโ€™re here to put our gloves on,โ€ Pillen said, to defend what he called a โ€œmulti-generation investmentโ€ afforded under the South Platte River Compact that took effect in 1926.

โ€œWeโ€™re going to fight like heck. Weโ€™re going to get every drop of water,โ€ Pillen continued Wednesday. โ€œWeโ€™ve been losing to Colorado on this issue for too long. Itโ€™s time we win.โ€

Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser called Wednesdayโ€™s lawsuit โ€œunfortunateโ€ and said Pillen and Hilgers โ€œput politics above farming communities and the regional agricultural economy.โ€

โ€œThe failure to look for reasonable solutions and to turn to litigation is both unfortunate and predictable given the misguided effort driving the proposed canal,โ€ Weiser said in a statement.

โ€˜They want everythingโ€™

Hilgers said his team had exercised all options in communications with Weiserโ€™s office before filing the 55-page complaint before the U.S. Supreme Court.

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

The complaint accuses Colorado of violating the interstate compact between Colorado and Nebraska, which was ratified in the states in 1923 and enacted federally in 1926. Under the agreement, Nebraska is entitled to at least 120 cubic feet of water per second each day of the summer, during irrigation season.

State Sens. Kathleen Kauth, Carolyn Bosn, Jana Hughes, John Fredrickson and Dave Murman tour part of what could be part of the proposed Perkins County Canal in western Nebraska on Monday, May 1, 2023. (Courtesy of State Sen. Carolyn Bosn)

Hilgers said itโ€™s hard to say precisely how long more water than allowed has been taken and that itโ€™s getting worse, an assertion Colorado officials denied in 2022. So far this summer, Hilgers said, Nebraska has gotten its mandated water flows about half the time, averaging 75 cubic feet per second of water daily.

Nebraskaโ€™s Western Irrigation District was also recently forced to shut off the majority of its surface water irrigation due to a lack of water from the South Platte River, despite the compact, according to the lawsuit.

Pillen said Colorado is storing more water for its โ€œupstream economy,โ€ which he said comes at the expense of Colorado and Nebraska farmers, with Nebraskaโ€™s western neighbors having โ€œno interest in anything being fair and just.โ€

โ€œThey want absolutely everything, theyโ€™re even stealing the water from their own farmers, for crying out loud,โ€ Pillen told reporters.

โ€˜All-front warโ€™

The interstate compact also allows Nebraska to construct the โ€œPerkins County Canal,โ€ a major water project through Keith County and into Colorado that would allow Nebraska to divert at least 500 cubic feet of water per second in the winter, during non-irrigation season.

Nebraska is also afforded โ€œeminent domainโ€ over some Colorado land to build the canal, meaning the state could seize private land if needed.

Work on the Perkins County Canal near Ovid, Colorado, began in 1894, but the project halted after running out of money. (Courtesy of the Perkins County Historical Society)

State lawmakers, to the tune of more than $600 million, have approved funding to build a canal up to 1,000 cubic feet of water per second to capture more water flow in above-average water years. Nebraska officials say newly captured water would flow statewide and is not just focused on western Nebraska.

According to the court filing, Nebraska officials in January tried to purchase land from landowners in Sedgwick County, Colorado, at 115% of fair market value, deals that ultimately fell through. Nebraska pledged to take land โ€œonly if the parties failed to reach amicable terms.โ€

Hilgers said the situation escalated to an โ€œall-front warโ€ in the past year, with Hilgers and Pillen accusing Colorado officials of stepping up opposition, including through local Colorado landowners.

Nebraska-Colorado โ€˜impasseโ€™ reached

Hilgers said he and his team have had many conversations with their Colorado counterparts but are at an โ€œimpasse,โ€ largely over the projectโ€™s scope, including canal size, location and Nebraskaโ€™s eminent domain rights, a provision Weiser has said he is ready to challenge Nebraska on.

The eminent domain provisions are believed to be one of a kind among any interstate compacts in the nationโ€™s history, according to Hilgers.

โ€œThere is no alternative forum capable of fully resolving the claims Nebraska asserts against Colorado, which are of such seriousness and dignity as to justify the exercise of the courtโ€™s jurisdiction,โ€ the complaint to the Supreme Court states.

Weiser said that if the Supreme Court does greenlight the โ€œwasteful project,โ€ it will force Colorado water users to build additional projects to lessen the impact of the canal. He encouraged โ€œcollaboration and collaboration, rather than litigation,โ€ which could lead to a โ€œdurable and thoughtful solutionโ€ that increases regional resiliency and agricultural strength.

In 2022, a spokesperson for Colorado Gov. Jared Polis called the project a โ€œcanal to nowhereโ€ and a โ€œboondoggle.โ€

Polis on Wednesday called the lawsuit โ€œmeritlessโ€ and said the state had continued to meet with Nebraska in โ€œgood faithโ€ despite its efforts to intimidate some Colorado landowners. He reasserted that his state has always complied with the South Platte River Compact.

โ€œThis escalation by Nebraska is needless, and Colorado will take all steps necessary to aggressively defend Colorado water users, landowners, and our rural economy,โ€ Polis said in a statement.

Pillen, asked whether he had talked to Polis about the canal or lawsuit, said plainly: โ€œNo.โ€

โ€œThe bottom line: He and I do not agree one iota. And thereโ€™s no sense in further conversations,โ€ Pillen said. โ€œIโ€™m not playing goober politics on this. Weโ€™re going to fight for Nebraska.โ€

Then-Gov. Pete Ricketts joined other state officials in an unannounced visit in September 2022 to the area of the proposed Perkins County Canal. (Courtesy of Nebraska Governorโ€™s Office)

Former Gov. Pete Ricketts, now a Republican U.S. senator for Nebraska, unearthed and reinvigorated the compact in 2022 with Hilgers, the then-speaker of the Legislature.

Hilgers said it was probably always โ€œinevitableโ€ that the U.S. Supreme Court would decide the issue. He acknowledged that while a minority of state senators have tried to claw back funding for the Perkins County Canal, he anticipated that future efforts to do so would continue to fail.

โ€˜The future of Nebraskaโ€™

Jesse Bradley, director of the newly merged Nebraska Department of Water, Energy and Environment as of July 1, said his team would continue to move forward with the project, parallel to the litigation, estimating that permitting and design would finish by 2028 for construction to begin.

The hope is that water will flow through the new canal no later than 2032.

โ€œThis is critical to the future of Nebraska,โ€ Bradley said. โ€œWe will continue to push forward aggressively.โ€

Also joining Wednesdayโ€™s news conference were representatives of the Nebraska Public Power District, Central Platte Natural Resources District, Central Nebraska Power and Irrigation District, Twin Platte Natural Resources District, the Nebraska Western Irrigation District, the South Platte Natural Resources District and the stateโ€™s chief water officer, Matt Manning.

Hilgers estimated the state lawsuit could cost a couple of million dollars, including hiring outside experts or legal counsel, and take three to five years before the Supreme Court decides.

Pillen said Nebraska would not โ€œsave penniesโ€ on the project and would have the โ€œA Team 100% of the timeโ€ to win, โ€œnot a shadow of a doubt.โ€

Weiser estimated that โ€œwhen the dust finally settles,โ€ more than a billion dollars would be spent over a possible decade of litigation, and โ€œno one in Nebraska or Colorado will be better off.โ€

Hilgers said heโ€™s thankful the U.S. Supreme Court will decide the issue.

โ€œWe could maybe not get everything we want in front of the Supreme Court. But if we donโ€™t file, we will lose. Period, full stop,โ€ Hilgers said. โ€œAnd what we will lose will so far outstrip the cost of this particular project that will really be a โ€˜shame on usโ€™ moment if we donโ€™t actually follow through.โ€

Nebraska Examiner is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Aaron Sanderford for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com.

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

$4 million in federal funds restored for Upper #ColoradoRiver Basin watersheds damaged by fire, overgrazing — Jerd Smith (Fresh Water News) #COriver #aridification

Lands in Northern Water’s collection system scarred by East Troublesome Fire. October 2020. Credit: Northern Water

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Jerd Smith):

July 10, 2025

Millions of dollars in federal funding has been released to continue restoring lands and streams in the fire-scarred Upper Colorado River Basin watershed in and around Grand Lake and Rocky Mountain National Park.

The roughly $4 million was frozen in February and released in April, according to Northern Water, a major Colorado water provider and one of the agencies that coordinates with the federal government and agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service to conduct the work. 

Esther Vincent, Northern Waterโ€™s director of environmental services, said the federal government gave no reason for the freeze and release of funds.

The amounts and timing of the freeze and release are being reported here for the first time.

U.S. Congressman Joe Neguse, who represents Grand County, did not respond to a request for comment regarding the funds.

The news comes as tens of millions of dollars in federal grants and budget allocations are being cut in Colorado and across the country as part of the Trump administrationโ€™s reorganization of federal agencies and associated budget cuts.

In June, Gov. Jared Polisโ€™ office released an accounting of federal money that has flowed to state agencies. That analysis showed the agencies were able to retain $282 million in funding, but that $76 million had been lost, and another $56 million is at risk.

Itโ€™s unclear how much funding that flows through federal agencies to other Colorado entities and nonprofits such as those in the Upper Colorado River Basin, has been lost.

The U.S. Forest Service did not respond to a request for comment. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation declined to comment on the funding actions.

In Grand County, $761,000 has been released from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to help move forward on a broad-based effort by the Kawuneeche Valley Restoration Collaborative, according to Northern Water. The valley has been damaged by drought, failing irrigation systems and overgrazing by wildlife and is a critical piece of the Colorado Riverโ€™s upper watershed. The collaborative, established in 2020, is a major partnership of seven entities, including Northern Water, Grand County, the Nature Conservancy and Rocky Mountain National Park. 

East Troublesome Fire. Photo credit: Northern Water

The $3.3 million in East Troublesome fire funding that has been released through the U.S. Forest Service will help restore the watershed around Grand Lake and land in Rocky Mountain National Park. The fire began in October 2020 and burned nearly 200,000 acres, making it the second largest fire in Colorado history.

The fire burned land that constitutes a sprawling water collection area for Northern Water, a major water provider that pipes Colorado River water from Grand County, under the Continental Divide and east to the Front Range, where it serves roughly 1 million residents of northern Colorado and hundreds of farms.

Steve Kudron, former mayor of Grand Lake who now serves as its town manager, said restoration work in both projects is critical to the economy and health of the historic tourist town, which lies at the western edge of Rocky Mountain National Park.

โ€œThe biggest concerns that we had were closing parts of the forest because there hasnโ€™t been sufficient cleanup. Some mountainsides are unstable,โ€ he said. โ€œItโ€™s the funding that makes it safe for the public to go into those areas. Thatโ€™s why it was important to get the funding back.โ€

More by Jerd Smith

Colorado-Big Thompson Project map. Courtesy of Northern Water.

Judge’s ruling keeps #Thornton water pipeline project moving forward — The #FortCollins Coloradan #PoudreRiver #SouthPlatteRiver

Thornton Water Project preferred pipeline alignment November 16, 2023 via ThorntonWaterProject.com

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

July 7, 2025

Key Points

  • A Larimer County judge ruled in favor of Larimer County commissioners, upholding their approval of a permit for Thornton’s 10-mile pipeline project.
  • Save The Poudre, an environmental group, sued the county, arguing the commissioners didn’t properly consider the ‘Poudre River option.’
  • Save The Poudre is considering an appeal, while Thornton says it continues to focus on providing water to its residents.

The city of Thornton is the true winner in a recent court ruling focused on the pipeline it’s planning to build in Larimer County to bring more water to its residents. The lawsuit was filed a year ago by Save The Poudre,ย an environmental advocacy group. Its target was theย Larimer County commissioners, who had approved a permit for construction of the pipeline.

On July 3, Larimer County District Court Judge Michelle Brinegar ruled that commissioners were justified in their decision to approve the application for 10 miles of pipeline through the county…In its lawsuit, Save The Poudre asked the judge to vacate the board’s decision to approve the pipeline. The nonprofit alleged that commissioners didn’t adequately follow the county’s standards for these kinds of applications. Specifically, Save The Poudre contends that commissioners should have required Thornton to present a plan for the so-called Poudre River option, which would have conveyed the water through the Poudre River downstream of Thornton’s current diversion point…But commissioners concluded that while they could encourage the Poudre River option, they couldn’t require it. Brinegar sided with commissioners, saying they can’t compel Thornton to present all possible alternatives, only those that are reasonable.

Project Managers to Investigate Uranium Mitigation Strategies at Chimney Hollow reservoir site — Northern #Colorado Water Conservancy District

Chimney Hollow Dam construction site. Photo credit: Northern Water

Click the link to read the release on the Northern Water website:

June 11, 2025

Chimney Hollow Reservoir Project managers are investigating strategies to mitigate the presence of mineralized uranium that is anticipated to be present in the first fill of the reservoir. 

Mineralized uranium was detected in water samples taken from behind the cofferdam at the site following a series of major precipitation events in summer 2023. Further testing through 2024 identified the source of the minerals as being the granitic rock being quarried on the west side of the reservoir for placement in the rockfill shell of the asphalt-core dam. The low-level uranium minerals detected were not anticipated to be the result of leached material at the site. 

During dam testing and first fill of the reservoir starting later this summer and continuing through 2027, no releases of water from Chimney Hollow Reservoir are expected. Ongoing monitoring of water quality at the reservoir will help managers develop a mitigation strategy that could include treatment and dilution with the significant sources of other water present in the infrastructure nearby. 

As more information becomes available, Northern Water will share it with project participants, partner agencies and the public. 

Federal judge permits completion of #Denver Water dam work, citing safety concerns: Senior Judge Christine Arguello backed off of her prior rhetoric and acknowledged safety reasons for permitting the dam’s construction to proceed — #Colorado Politics

Workers from Denver Water and contractor Kiewit Barnard stand in front of Gross Dam in May 2024 to mark the start of the dam raise process. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Politics website (Michael Karik). Here’s an excerpt:

Although she stood by her prior determination that the project permit was unlawful, a federal judge last week decided construction on a major Denver Water infrastructure project should continue for safety reasons…Earlier this spring, U.S. District Court Senior Judge Christine M. Arguello found that, as a result of federal law violations,ย the expansion of Gross Reservoir and Dam should cease permanentlyย and any further construction on the ongoing project would stop temporarily. The pause on construction, Arguello explained, would give her time to hear from engineers and determine what work would need to occur to make the dam safe…

However, on May 29, Arguello retreated from her prior bellicose tone.

“There is a risk of environmental injury and loss of human life if dam construction is halted for another two years while Denver Water re-designs the structure of the dam,” she wrote in her latest order. “Furthermore, the evidence shows that enjoining dam construction would harm Denver Water and the general public by requiring Denver Water to lay off much of its specialized workforce (which also harms those workers), as well as interfere with Denver Waterโ€™s contracts with contractors supplying materials and labor for the Project, which in turn, would significantly increase the costs.”

Gross Reservoir dam construction can resume, but federal judge says key environmental permits must be redone — Jerd Smith (Fresh Water News) #BoulderCreek #SouthPlatteRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

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

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Jerd Smith):

June 5, 2025

Afederal judge will allow Denver Water to continue work on a $531 million project to raise a dam in Boulder County, dealing a blow to environmentalists who had hoped to stop the construction.

However, Senior U.S. District Judge Christine Arguello in her ruling May 29 prohibited Denver Water from filling Gross Reservoir until federal environmental permits can be rewritten by the Army Corps of Engineers.

โ€œThere is no evidence that there would be additional environmental injury resulting from completion of the dam construction. In fact, the opposite is true,โ€ Arguello wrote. โ€œThere is a risk of environmental injury and loss of human life if dam construction is halted for another two years while Denver Water redesigns the structure of the dam and gets that re-design approved byโ€ the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

FERC is involved because of the hydroelectric plant at the base of the dam.

Denver Waterโ€™s general counsel, Jessica Brody, said Friday her agency was pleased the judge recognized the safety issues in leaving the dam half-built.

โ€œWeโ€™re relieved that the judge understood and appreciated the safety issues. We are relieved as well that she understood the impact to Denver Waterโ€™s customers,โ€ Brody said.

The construction is expected to be completed this year, she said. In the meantime, she said, her agency will move forward in asking a federal appeals panel to rule on whether key environmental permits need to be rewritten, as Arguello has ordered.

If the permits are redone, it could mean that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will determine that the metro Denver water provider, which serves 1.5 million people, needs less water from the Fraser River to fill an expanded Gross Reservoir than the original permit authorized.

The judge initially shut the project down April 3, saying that the Army Corps and Denver Water had violated the federal Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act when the Gross Reservoir expansion permits were issued in 2017.

Save The Colorado, one of the plaintiffs in the case, said Friday morning that it will defend the portion of the Thursday ruling that could prevent or reduce additional diversions from the Fraser River, a key tributary in the Upper Colorado River system.

โ€œImportantly,โ€ said Save The Coloradoโ€™s Gary Wockner, โ€œher original 86-page ruling still stands โ€ฆ so they canโ€™t cut trees and they canโ€™t put water in it until it is all resolved.โ€

Denver Water is helping ensure its future water security with the Gross Reservoir Expansion Project. When the project is complete, it will nearly triple the Boulder County reservoirโ€™s capacity to 119,000 acre-feet. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

How the case progressed

In her April 3 ruling, Arguello said Denver Water had acted recklessly in proceeding with construction in 2022, knowing that important legal questions were being challenged by Save The Colorado, the Sierra Club and others.

The massive construction project to raise the dam 131 feet and triple the capacity of Gross Reservoir has sparked fierce opposition in Boulder County and prompted several legal challenges from Save The Colorado, a group that advocates on behalf of rivers. Though its early lawsuits failed, the group in 2022 won an appeal that put the legal battle back in play. Despite months of settlement talks, no agreement was reached.

Denver Water first moved to raise Gross Dam more than 20 years ago when the water provider began designing the expansion and seeking the necessary federal and state permits. Denver Water has said raising the dam and increasing capacity of the reservoir is necessary to ensure it has enough water throughout its delivery system and to help with future water supplies as climate change continues to reduce streamflows.

After years of engineering, environmental studies and federal and state analyses, Denver received a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and construction began in 2022.

Arguelloโ€™s April 3 ruling said, in part, that the Army Corps should have considered whether ongoing climate change and drought would leave the Colorado River and Western Slope waterways too depleted to safely allow transfer of Denver Waterโ€™s rights into a larger Gross Reservoir for Front Range water users.

At the same time, she ordered a permanent injunction prohibiting enlargement of the reservoir, including tree removal and water diversion, and impacts to wildlife.

Almost immediately, Denver Water filed for temporary relief from the order, saying, in part, that it would be unsafe to stop work as the incomplete concrete walls towered above Gross Reservoir.

Arguello granted that request, too, allowing Denver to continue work on the dam considered necessary for safety.

More by Jerd Smith

Moffat Water Tunnel

Scanning the snow from the sky: Planes, lasers will provide critical data to water managers statewide — Jay Adams (DenverWater.org) #snowpack #runoff

The Airborne Snow Observatories plane prepares for takeoff at the Eagle County Regional Airport in April 2023. Photo credit: Mark Schwab, Airborne Snow Observatories Inc.

Click the link to read the article on the Denver Water website (Jay Adams):

May 28, 2025

If you want to know about the snow, the sky is the limit when it comes to collecting data about the mountain snowpack. 

Thatโ€™s why Denver Water, the Colorado Water Conservation Board and other water providers across the state are investing in a high-tech program to measure snowpack using lasers from a plane. 

And in mid-May, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis signed a bill to formally incorporate the program into the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The boardโ€™s mission is to conserve, develop, protect and manage Colorado’s water for present and future generations.

Monitoring the mountain snowpack is critical for Denver Water because once the snow melts, it becomes the water supply for the 1.5 million people the utility serves in Denver and surrounding suburbs.

Traditionally, Denver Water has tracked the snowpack by sending crews to collect and measure snow samples on the ground and monitoring data from automated backcountry weather stations called SNOTELs. 

In 2019, to help improve water supply forecasts, Denver Water began working with Airborne Snow Observatories Inc., or ASO for short, to gain a fuller picture of the snowpack. The company uses advanced technology developed at NASA to measure the snowpack that’s built up across entire watersheds. 

“Getting this high-tech information about the snowpack from ASO before the snow starts to melt improves the accuracy of our spring runoff and water supply forecasts for the coming year,โ€ said Nathan Elder, Denver Waterโ€™s manager of water supply. 

โ€œHaving the ASO information in the spring helps us manage our water resources and gives us a better idea of if weโ€™ll need to have watering restrictions for our customers in the summer. The data also gives us a very good idea of how the spring runoff in the rivers could impact aquatic habitat and recreation.โ€

Space age tech

ASO planes fly with two key pieces of technology and equipment onboard: a lidar and an imaging spectrometer.

The ASO plane uses lidar (the front laser beam under the wings) to measure the depth of the snow. The spectrometer (the rear beam near the tail) measures the amount of solar energy that is reflected by the snowpack. Image credit: Airborne Snow Observatories.

The spectrometer measures how much solar energy is reflected by the snow. This information is used to help determine how fast the snowpack will melt.

Lidar, which stands for light detection and ranging, uses beams of light to measure distance. To determine snow depth, the plane flies over a watershed in the summer and uses lidar to scan the earthโ€™s surface when it’s free of snow.

Then in the spring, when the landscape is covered with snow, the ASO team flies over the same territory again and measures the distance from the plane to the snow surface below. By comparing the differences in elevation, the ASO team can accurately calculate the depth of the snow. 

Digging it old school

To supplement the data collected from the plane, ASO also incorporates three โ€œold-schoolโ€ sources of data. It uses information collected by automated weather stations called SNOTELs, from snow samples collected and measured by crews at predetermined locations in watersheds, and data from samples collected by the ASO team or partners from snow pits dug in the same watersheds the plane flies over. 

Denver Water crews use a special tube [Federal Sampler] to gather snow samples near Winter Park as part of pre-set snow courses. ASO uses these ground measurements to supplement data collected from the planes to determine how much water is in a watershed. Photo credit: Denver Water.

This ground-based data helps to verify the airborne snow-depth measurements. The ground data also provides snow density information, which is used to calculate the volume of water in the snowpack, called the snow water equivalent, or SWE. 

โ€œWeโ€™re able to use the traditional methods in combination with our next generation technology to measure the mountain snowpack to an accuracy that has never before been possible,โ€ said Jeffrey Deems, ASO’s co-founder.

Cara Piske, an ASO operations scientist, collects a sample of snow from a pit dug in Mayflower Gulch near Copper Mountain in Summit County. The sample is weighed to determine its density, which is used to calculate the amount of water frozen in the snow, called the snow water equivalent. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Deems said the data from the ASO flights is incredibly valuable because the plane can accurately measure the snow across an entire watershed and at high elevations that donโ€™t have automated weather stations and are inaccessible to people.

ASO snow depth measurements in the Blue River Basin above Dillon Reservoir in April 2021. Photo credit: Jeffrey Deems, Airborne Snow Observatories.

In 2023, ASO flew over eight regions in Colorado (including Denver Waterโ€™s watersheds in the Upper South Platte, Blue, Fraser and South Boulder Creek river basins.)

During the first set of flights in April, which aimed to capture the peak snowpack, the ASO team calculated that there was 108,000 acre-feet of water packed into the snow in the Upper South Platte Basin, 175,000 acre-feet of water in the Blue River Basin which feeds into Dillon Reservoir, and 104,000 acre-feet of water in Denver Waterโ€™s Moffat Collection System located in the Fraser River Basin. 

A second round of flights were conducted in late May and early June to capture any new snow and to see how fast the snow melted. 

Elder said the ASO snowpack estimates in 2023 turned out to be a very strong prediction of the actual streamflow during that yearโ€™s spring runoff.

The ASO plane flew over the Blue River Basin in Summit County in early May. Scanning the entire watershed takes three to six hours. Photo credit: Kat McNeal, Airborne Snow Observatories.

โ€œHaving ASO really helps reduce uncertainty and improve decision making for our water planning, and each flight uncovers new insight into the snowpack that is otherwise unmeasurable,โ€ Elder said. โ€œOur first charge is to ensure we have an adequate water supply for our customers, and the sooner we can make that determination the better.โ€

Having the additional data helps water planners because traditional snowmelt forecasts can have significant errors or wide ranges, which makes it more challenging to manage water supplies.

Building a statewide program

Recognizing the value of building a statewide ASO effort, in 2021, Denver Water helped coordinate and develop the Colorado Airborne Snow Measurement program or CASM. 

The CASM program includes agricultural and municipal water providers such as Denver Water, as well as environmental groups and nonprofits with support from the Colorado Water Conservation Board and federal agencies. 

In 2025, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis signed H.B. 1115 into law, which formally integrated the CASM program into the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The bill created a dedicated staff member to administer the program to help coordinate ASO flights, distribute data and manage funding statewide.

ASO flew over eight regions in 2023 as part of the Colorado Airborne Snow Measurement, or CASM, program. Two rounds of flights were conducted in April, May and June. Image credit: CASM.

“Having accurate water supply data helps all water users,โ€ said Taylor Winchell, climate adaptation specialist at Denver Water. โ€œOur goal with CASM has always been to create a sustainable statewide program, and this new legislation is a major step in making that goal a reality.โ€

The Colorado Water Conservation Board will formally coordinate CASMโ€™s planning team, which includes Denver Water, Colorado River District, San Luis Valley Water Conservancy District, Northern Water, St. Vrain & Left Hand Water Conservancy District, Upper Gunnison Water Conservancy District, and the Dolores Water Conservancy District, along with ASO and LRE Water.

Benefits today and tomorrow

Winchell said one of the big benefits of the ASO flights is that the data is available within a few days of collecting it, so water managers have a better estimate of how much water supply theyโ€™ll have for the coming year โ€” and when to expect the water to end up in mountain streams.

The other benefit is having a wealth of high-quality data covering thousands of square miles to monitor the effects of climate change.

โ€œAs our snowpack changes with the changing climate, being better able to measure that snowpack becomes more important as more snow falls as rain, as the timing of the spring melt changes and as snow falls at ever-higher elevations because of warming,โ€ Winchell said.

โ€œWe canโ€™t rely as much on historical snowpack datasets to understand the new snowpack reality.โ€

ASO, which also conducts data collection flights in California, Wyoming, Oregon and internationally, also continues to develop its technology and modeling to help water providers get the information they need.

โ€œWe’re really proud of what weโ€™re doing,โ€ Deems said. โ€œWe love the snow and feel like we’re making a difference in helping our society better understand our mountain snowpack reservoir.โ€

Members of the ASO team, (left to right) Jeffrey Deems, Kate Burchenal and Cara Piske, teamed up with Denver Waterโ€™s Taylor Winchell (in the black jacket) to dig a snow pit in Summit County. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Opinion: Protecting Northeastern #Coloradoโ€™s Water Supply Requires Cooperation, Transparency — Brad Wind (Northern Water) #NISP #PoudreRiver #SouthPlatteRiver

The Northern Integrated Supply Project, currently estimated at $2 billion, would create two new reservoirs and a system of pipelines to capture more drinking water for 15 community water suppliers. An environmental group is now suing the Army Corps of Engineers over a key permit for Northern Waterโ€™s proposal. (Save the Poudre lawsuit, from Northern Water project pages)

Click the link to read the column on the Northern Water website (Brad Wind):

May 20, 2025

You might have read recently about how the Northern Integrated Supply Project, or NISP, is contributing $100 million to a fund for projects to improve the Cache la Poudre River in northeastern Colorado. That funding is part of an agreement between the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, known as Northern Water, and the nonprofit group Save the Poudre that will conclude a federal lawsuit against the project.

Itโ€™s an outcome that both sides can accept because of the importance of both the Poudre River and a much-needed water supply to communities throughout the region.

The agreement should catch the attention of Denver metro-area water providers that are looking to export existing irrigation water supplies out of northeastern Colorado to serve their future customers. 

Brad Wind of Loveland is the general manager of Northern Water, which supplies water to more than 1 million people in northeastern Colorado.

For background, NISP was conceived in the 1990s and early 2000s to provide water to the emerging communities of the northern Front Range. The project will consist of two off-channel reservoirs, one located northwest of Fort Collins and one north of Greeley. It also anticipates exchanges of water with nearby farmers eliminating the dry-up of some agricultural land in the future. 

Throughout the lengthy permitting process for NISP, the public has had many opportunities to offer comments and concerns to federal, state and local officials. Some of the concerns were incorporated into mitigation and improvement requirements associated with the project, and all written comments were addressed specifically in the final Environmental Impact Statement produced by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

The $100 million settlement of the federal litigation identifies even more improvements that can be made in the region beyond those required by permitting agencies.

Unfortunately, actions by certain Denver metro-area water providers that anticipate removing water from northeastern Colorado do not undergo such robust scrutiny. Oftentimes, advocates for water resources in the region learn about potential water transfers only when an item appears on a meeting agenda of a metro-area water provider. By then it is too late to consider the regional economic, environmental and social impacts that such a change could produce.

Frequently, these water deals are brokered by third parties who quietly accumulate water and land assets to present them behind closed doors in neat and tidy packages to thirsty cities. There are few, if any, opportunities to discuss how these water transfers will impact local communities in northeastern Colorado or how these impacts could be mitigated by those who seek to move water to the Denver metro area.  

The half-million residents who receive water from NISP participants are going to pay billions of dollars to develop water resources for their communities while addressing concerns in the Poudre River watershed. At the same time Denver metro communities are working to undercut the existing supplies that previous northeastern Colorado residents have invested in and relied upon for decades. 

Water providers in the Denver area need to be part of the long-term solution to how our northeastern Colorado communities remain vibrant, not distant parties to single point-in-time transactions that provide a perpetual benefit to communities beyond the horizon. 

If native water supplies must depart for the Denver metro area from northeastern Colorado, it is appropriate that the new water user should not just pay for the costs to acquire water but also offset the impacts to northeastern Coloradoโ€™s degraded quality of life, and diminished regional economy. 

All of our futures are diminished by the loss of water from our region. Public processes and mitigation can lessen, to a degree, the perpetual impacts such a loss will endure.

Spring #snowpack: Slightly better than advertised, weak statewide figures obscure more nuanced scenario for Denver Water as we enter runoff season — Todd Hartman (News on Tap)

North Fork Snake River. Melted snow is the primary source of drinking water for the 1.5 million people who rely on Denver Water every day. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Click the link to read the article on the Denver Water website (Todd Hartman):

May 16, 2025

News headlines this spring offered a bleak picture of Coloradoโ€™s snowpack heading into the spring runoff season. But, as always with headlines, it is best to also read the story that follows.

Because the story for Denver Water isnโ€™t quite so dour. 

Snowpack woes hit Coloradoโ€™s southern half hard. For Denver Water, positioned farther north, the water supply looks better.

First, letโ€™s do the numbers. 

Denver Water had a weak showing in the South Platte River Basin, with peak snowpack hitting just 84% of normal and โ€” most unhelpful of all โ€” peaking on April 6, 19 days earlier than typical.

The news was far better in the Colorado River Basin (north of the South Platte River Basin), which accounts for the other half of Denver Waterโ€™s supply. There, peak snowpack clocked in at 109% on April 25, right on the mark for a typical peak date.

โ€œOverall, not great, but not terrible either,โ€ summed up Nathan Elder, water supply manager for the utility. 

The best news for Denver Water: The utility is starting the runoff and reservoir-filling season with existing storage levels about 2% above average. 

Thatโ€™s a credit to its customersโ€™ efforts to conserve water and translates into a good chance that Denver Water will be able to fill its storage reservoirs that help 1.5 million people get through the summer hot season.

But โ€œfillโ€ doesnโ€™t mean โ€œspill.โ€ That is, there wonโ€™t be excess water to spill into rivers in what can make for dramatic visuals and provide an extra boost to river flows. 

โ€œWe hope to fill our reservoirs right to the brim, but thatโ€™s where it stops,โ€ Elder said.

Denver Waterโ€™s planners are concerned about a hot-and-dry trend taking hold in May, and emphasize the need for residents to adhere to the utilityโ€™s annual summer watering rules that allow irrigation only in the evening and morning hours (between 6 p.m. and 10 a.m.) and limit irrigation to no more than three days a week โ€” preferably just one or two days when springtime temperatures are lower.

And watch the skies. When we do get a good rainstorm, turn your sprinkler dial to โ€œoffโ€ for a few days.

The generally poor snowpack and early runoff in much of the state, including in the South Platte River Basin, also stokes concerns for a rough fire season, as 9News meteorologist Chris Bianchi pointed out in a May 13, 2025, story

โ€œThis yearโ€™s snowpack levels resemble those recorded in 2018, 2012, 2002 and 1992. All of which were marked by intense wildfire activity. Three out of those four years saw large-scale fires, raising concerns that 2025 could follow a similar trajectory unless weather patterns shift dramatically.โ€

And, on a too-long-didn’t-read basis, hereโ€™s Bianchiโ€™s tweet that summed up the story:

Denver Waterโ€™s watershed experts agree that conditions could increase wildfire risk.

โ€œThe risk of wildfire is relatively low when there is snow on the ground. When snowpack melts rapidly, vegetation can dry out quickly and become susceptible to wildfire ignitions,โ€ said Madelene McDonald, a watershed scientist and wildfire specialist for Denver Water.

Though McDonald notes that experts anticipate โ€œaverageโ€ wildfire behavior in Colorado in 2025, that still means thousands of fires that could collectively affect more than 100,000 acres in the state. 

โ€œItโ€™s important to stay vigilant and prepared to experience wildfire under any snowpack conditions or fire outlook scenarios,โ€ she said.

An April pivot

The current outlook is a pivot from what had been looking like a normal year for snowpack as recently as April 1, Elder said.

โ€œFor Denver Water, April is typically a month where we build snow,โ€ he said. 

But that didnโ€™t happen this year, and by mid-May the snowpack had shriveled to half its typical percentage.

The tepid spring in the South Platte River Basin also highlights the importance of Denver Waterโ€™s Gross Reservoir Expansion Project, which recently has been slowed in federal court. (Read Denver Waterโ€™s recent statement on a May 6 court hearing.) 

That project will expand the reservoir and add roughly 80,000 acre-feet of water storage capacity in the utilityโ€™s north system, which gathers snowmelt from the Upper Colorado River Basin. That additional water storage will provide a buffer to protect the utilityโ€™s customers from the effects of years when the snowpack is weaker, like this year, in Denver Waterโ€™s separate and unconnected south system.

โ€œOur system is robust but suffers from significant imbalance,โ€ Elder said. 

โ€œWe rely too heavily on our south system, on the South Platte, which accounts for 90% of our storage,โ€ he said. โ€œIncreasing storage to the north will give Denver Water far more flexibility to handle these weaker snowpack years on the South Platte.โ€

And years marked by a weaker snowpack in the South Platte River Basin have become more common. 

In four of the last five years, the South Platte snowpack above Denver Waterโ€™s collection system has peaked below normal. And in that fifth year โ€” last year โ€” it barely cleared the โ€œnormalโ€ bar at 101%. All of which amplifies the need for the Gross Reservoir Expansion Project.

Raising Gross Dam, seen here on April 8, 2025, will nearly triple the water storage capacity of the reservoir behind it. The project has been in the permitting and review process for 23 years. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Now, as June approaches, water managers will turn their focus to runoff levels, temperatures and fire potential. And come summer, they will once again โ€” as always โ€” hope for a big dose of monsoonal moisture. 

Those big rainstorms not only deliver a boost to rivers and reservoirs but prompt attentive customers to turn off their irrigation system and let their grass and plants drink up natureโ€™s soaking bounty. 

Remember, the less you pour, the more your water utility can store.

And itโ€™s never a bad time to consider transforming your landscape, or even parts of it. 

Denver Water has a new guide to help: the DIY Landscape Transformation Guide, and it includes ways to eradicate grass in the areas where you want to remodel your landscape with native plants and other changes.

Denver Water relies on a network of reservoirs to collect and store water. The large collection area provides flexibility for collecting water as some areas receive different amounts of precipitation throughout the year. Image credit: Denver Water.

Northern #Colorado will soon have new reservoirs, but the cost to build them has skyrocketed — Alex Hager (KUNC.org) #PoudreRiver #SouthPlatteRiver

The Cache la Poudre River flows through Bellevue, Colorado on May 12, 2025. Water from the river will be used to fill the nearby Glade Reservoir once it’s built. The cost to build the new water storage project has grown from $400 million to $2.2 billion. Alex Hager/KUNC

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

May 15, 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.

Thereโ€™s a stretch of highway in Larimer County where prairie grasses sway with each passing vehicle. Cars, horse trailers and semi trucks zip through the valley on their way between Fort Collins and Laramie. Soon, itโ€™ll be under more than 200 feet of water.

U.S. Highway 287 runs through the future site of Glade Reservoir. The Larimer county Board of County Commissioners approved the 1041 Land Use Permit for NISP in September, 2020. Photo credit: Northern Water

Itโ€™s the planned site of Glade Reservoir, the cornerstone of a massive new water storage system designed to meet the demands of fast-growing towns and cities in Northern Colorado. After more than two decades of permitting, planning and environmental lawsuits, itโ€™s closer than ever to breaking ground.

But along the way, some things changed. Over the years, costs to build the reservoir system โ€” and reroute seven miles of U.S. Highway 287 โ€” have ballooned. Price estimates for the Northern Integrated Supply Project, often referred to as NISP, went from $400 million to $2.2 billion. Because of that, some of the towns that signed up to use its water are cutting back on their involvement before the reservoir system stores a single drop.

Northern Water, the agency building NISP, has projected confidence that it will still get built as planned. The long road from idea to construction, and the things that have changed along the way, can tell us a lot about how Northern Colorado uses water, and how much it costs to keep taps flowing.

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

Rising costs

When it was first pitched, in the early 2000s, NISP garnered support as a way to make sure small towns with fast-growing populations could host new housing developments without going dry.

For a tiny town like Severance, that was an attractive proposition. Just 11 years ago, about midway through the NISP planning process, the town had a population of about 3,000. Thatโ€™s when Nicholas Wharton took the job as town manager. Since then, heโ€™s overseen the installation of the townโ€™s first stoplight, the from-scratch development of its own police department and a homebuilding boom that has nearly quadrupled Severanceโ€™s population.

Signing on to NISP, he said, was a way to make sure Severance had enough water for all that growth.

โ€œI think for smaller towns,โ€ he said, โ€œIt was a great idea back when it was affordable to us.โ€

Wesley Lavanchy, the town administrator for Eaton, Colo., poses outside of his office on April 15, 2025. His town is one of four water agencies that reduced the amount of water it would store in NISP, and the amount it would pay to keep it there. Alex Hager/KUNC

Since then, Severance has cut back on the amount of water it will store in NISP, and the amount it will pay to be a part of the project. At one point, the town held 2,000 shares of the project. In 2024, it sold off 1,500 of those shares. Wharton said the town council might try to sell off even more.

And Severance isnโ€™t alone.

Due West, in Eaton, town officials also got cold feet. They were one of four NISP shareholders to offload a portion of their involvement in the new reservoir project on the same day in July 2024.

For years, the water agencies that were part of NISP were mostly focused on paperwork โ€” making sure the project had the permits it needed to get built. Then, there was a lawsuit from environmentalists standing in the way. But after NISPโ€™s proponents were mostly seeing green lights on permits and decided to settle a major lawsuit, the focus shifted to money.

โ€œI think the question for us now is, how do we afford this?,โ€ said Wesley Lavanchy, Eatonโ€™s town administrator. โ€œMoving forward, how much can we afford? It’s like chocolate cake. You like it, it tastes great, but you can’t eat the whole thing.โ€

Ultimately, Eaton decided to sell off more than half of its NISP shares.

โ€œI suspect that more entities would have been able to hold their commitment had the permitting process not drug on so long, the cost escalated, the litigation kind of wrapped things up,โ€ Lavanchy said.

Cheaper alternatives

While the cost to build NISP has gone up, the cost of other water sources has gone down. Eaton and Severance said itโ€™s getting easier to afford shares of the Colorado-Big Thompson project, which was a big motivator in their pullback from NISP.

That project, referred to as CBT, pipes water from the Colorado River across the continental divide. It flows underneath Rocky Mountain National Park and into major reservoirs along the Northern Front Range, such as Horsetooth Reservoir near Fort Collins and Carter Lake outside of Loveland.

Water from the Colorado-Big Thompson project is managed by Northern Water, the same agency building and operating NISP.

Boats cruise across Horsetooth Reservoir near Fort Collins, Colorado on May 12, 2025. The reservoir holds water from the Colorado-Big Thompson project, which has seen prices level off in recent years. Glade Reservoir is expected to be even larger than Horsetooth. Alex Hager/KUNC

For years, the CBT system was the main way for growing cities in Larimer and Weld Counties to get water for residential development. Typically, farms have sold their portion of CBT water to cities, towns, or developers. Occasionally, they are taken to auction, where cities bid against one another for water stored in those big reservoirs.

The cost of that water skyrocketed between 2010 and 2022. Estimated prices, adjusted for inflation, went from less than $20,000 per share, to around $100,000 per share, according to data from the consulting firm Westwater research. Since 2022, that soaring rise has leveled out.

โ€œWe believe that’s largely driven by a softening in the home construction sector,โ€ said Adam Jokerst, a Fort Collins-based regional director for Westwater. โ€œA lot of CBT purchases are by municipalities and developers who dedicate them to municipalities. And when new home construction slows, we see less demand for those shares.โ€

How did NISP get so expensive?

Northern Water said the price to build NISP has been climbing for about 15 years. Brad Wind, the agencyโ€™s general manager, cited inflation and rising interest rates as major drivers. He doesnโ€™t, however, expect that to stop or significantly change the reservoir project.

โ€œIt’s an expensive project,โ€ Wind said. โ€œWe and the participants advancing the project like it was envisioned.โ€

The lengthy process to get the projectโ€™s two reservoirs โ€” Glade, and a smaller one called Galeton reservoir โ€” from concept to construction gave time for the winds of economic change to shift direction. Itโ€™s not uncommon for a massive dam project like NISP to take more than fifteen years to attain a laundry list of environmental permits.

The project also faced opposition from local governments and nonprofits. At one point, Fort Collins voted to oppose the project. The most significant roadblock came from the environmental nonprofit Save the Poudre.

The group rallied local support and took legal action to try and stop NISP. At a 2015 event, Save the Poudre director Gary Wockner told a crowd of supporters that he would โ€œfight to stop the project for as long as it takes.โ€

In late February, Wocknerโ€™s group settled for $100 million dollars. Northern Water will pay that sum into a trust over the course of the next two decades, and the money will be used to fund river improvement projects. In the intervening time, though, the price tag to build NISP likely grew significantly.


New Northern Colorado reservoirs moving ahead after settlement of NISP lawsuitAlex Hager, March 5, 2025.


Wind said Northern plans to hire a contractor that could find ways to bring down the price by changing construction methods, but doesnโ€™t expect โ€œsubstantial reductionsโ€ to building costs, especially with rising prices of imported construction materials.

Over the years, the towns and water agencies that wanted to use NISP signed periodic agreements to stay part of the project. Now, time is ticking for those participants to sign a binding contract.

Eatonโ€™s Lavanchy said that upcoming contract made his town take a harder look at their water needs, and whether those needs would be satisfied by NISP.

โ€œWe’re not dating anymore,โ€ he said, โ€œWe’re getting married, and there’s no way out. Divorce is not an option. So it’s like, โ€˜Let’s be smart and think about, what are these obligations going to run us?โ€™โ€

โ€˜Demand continues to increaseโ€™

Even as some entities cut back on their financial ties to NISP, the project still has momentum.

For one, those towns and water agencies looking to sell their shares found a willing buyer. Eaton, Severance, Fort Lupton and the Left Hand Water District all sold their shares to the Fort Collins Loveland Water District.

Vehicles drive on U.S. Highway 287, near Bellevue, Colo. on May 12, 2025. The highway will be rerouted to make way for a massive new reservoir. Alex Hager/KUNC

The Fort Collins Loveland Water District, which serves an area roughly between Harmony Road and State Route 34, declined to be interviewed for this story.

Second, NISP has a total of 15 participants, and many of them are still on board for the same amount of water they signed up for years ago.

โ€œNo matter what,โ€ Severanceโ€™s Wharton said, โ€œIn one way, you’ll see those 15 probably still continue to be a part of it no matter what, because everybody does realize how precious that water is and how this will be one of the last [big reservoirs.] I don’t think anybody’s discouraged.โ€

Even the towns that reduced the amount of water theyโ€™ll pay to use from NISP are keeping some. Severance and Eaton said they want to make sure theyโ€™re getting water from a diverse group of sources, especially with climate change and political bickering threatening their main source of water โ€” the Colorado River via the CBT.

Ultimately, the fast-growing region served by Northern Water โ€” from Boulder County to Fort Collins, and east to Fort Lupton โ€” will keep needing water for a future that will likely see plenty of new home construction.

โ€œIt doesn’t appear that folks are shying away from moving to Northern Colorado,โ€ Brad Wind said. โ€œEither from within our state or from outside of our state, so the demand continues to increase for a high quality water supply, which NISP will produce.โ€

Update on Gross Reservoir Expansion Project following May 6, 2025, testimony: Denver Water provides statement on the risk presented by delaying construction — News on Tap

Storm pattern over Colorado September 2013 — Graphic/NWS via USA Today

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

May 8, 2025

Following a day of testimony on May 6, Denver Water has been asked by U.S. District Court Judge Christine Arguello to provide the court with the utility’s final summary highlighting its position following the witness testimony and exhibits. There isnโ€™t a specific timetable set for this yet.

The focus of the hearing was for the judge to determine if construction can safely stop while Denver Water moves forward on an additional permitting review as the court ruled on April 3. Here is Denver Waterโ€™s statement on the risk presented by delaying construction:

Denver Water has already started the appeal process with the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. As part of this, the project has been allowed to continue (under a temporary stay) while legal proceedings are underway.

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

Public water systems and wildfires: The fires in LA put a spotlight on fire hydrants; where does #Denver stand? — Jimmy Luthye (News on Tap)

The Palisades Fire, photographed here from Palisades Drive, ignited Jan. 7, 2025, in the Santa Monica Mountains of Los Angeles County. It spread rapidly because of hurricane-force Santa Ana winds, burning for 24 days, consuming more than 23,000 acres and destroying 6,837 structures. Photo credit: Ariam23, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0

Click the link to read the article on the Denver Water website (Jimmy Luthye):

April 2, 2025

One of the initial concerns during the series of tragic Los Angeles wildfires that burned in January 2025 was whether fire hydrants were ready to combat the inferno that left so much destruction in its wake.

The reality is that public water systems arenโ€™t designed to fight wildfires, as High Country News noted in this January 2025 article.

To be clear, and as Denver7 highlighted in January, public water systems are designed to help firefighters battle urban fires.

For instance, Denver Waterโ€™s system includes built-in redundancies to ensure it can meet water demand, and the utility continually invests in the system to keep it that way.

Denver Water’s distribution system includes 31 treated water storage tanks across the metro area (many of which have been upgraded in recent years), more than 3,000 miles of pipe and 22,000 fire hydrants, along with dedicated mechanics who focus on maintaining those hydrants and keeping them in top condition.

During a fire in the Denver Water service area, its operators can analyze and adjust the operation of the distribution system so that firefighters have the water pressure they need to fight the blaze. The utility also will send experts to the scene to help maintain pressure.

The system of hydrants is not designed, however, to provide sufficient flows for a long enough period to effectively battle long-lasting, wind-driven, large-scale wildfires. Hydrants are pressurized and are crucial to fighting structure fires, but they can only do so much. And when many hydrants are in use in the same area at the same time, water pressure is going to weaken.

While Denver Water can store millions of gallons of drinking water in dozens of large water storage tanks around town to accommodate increases in demand, there are limits โ€” like being able to provide enough water to fight a wildfire.

Fortunately, much of Denver Waterโ€™s service area is in a different environment compared to Los Angeles. But that doesnโ€™t mean the area is immune, as there are portions that blend wildland environments with urban communities.

In fact, just last summer aย string ofย wildfiresย ignited during the same week in the foothills along the Front Range. The fires required aggressive coordination from fire departments up and down the corridor, alongside state and federal agencies, to extinguish, with a focus on wildland firefighting. Wildland fire responders cleared fire lines and fought the fires from the air.

A plane pulls in water from Chatfield Reservoir to help fight the Quarry Fire, a wildfire that ignited in summer 2024 in Jefferson County, Colorado. The fire required a multi-jurisdictional effort to extinguish. Photo credit: Colorado Parks and Wildlife.

Urban fire hydrants were not the focus.

Ultimately, when a fire like the tragic blazes in Los Angeles occurs, it is always going to require a coordinated, multijurisdictional effort, often across city, state and even international lines. 

So, what can be done?

Colorado Public Radio in January spoke with Colorado State Forest Service wildfire mitigation program specialist Chad Julian, who discussed the importance of focusing on the right topics when analyzing any fire.

โ€œIf we focus on increasing budgets, more water storage, more fire trucks, it’s not going to change the outcome of the next event. It would take the engagement of homeowners to really work on the resistance to ignition and hardening those buildings, the vegetation and the yards,โ€ he said.

โ€œNinety-five percent of it was likely still caused by land use patterns, how we build, how we interact with the ecosystem, whether we adapt to it or not. And unfortunately, that’s not the focus at the moment,โ€ he said. 

But this was the focus in Colorado after the devastating Marshall Fire of 2021, leading to new legislation: 

  • In Louisville, an โ€ฏordinanceโ€ฏtook effect in December 2024ย requiring implementation of wildfire-resistant measures in buildings. (Boulder is considering something similar.)ย 
  • Many new construction sites in Denver include 5-foot vegetation barriers around new structures in their landscape planning.ย 
  • Theย Wildfire Resilient Homes Grant Program, created by Coloradoโ€™s state legislature, encourages homeowners to make their properties more resistant to wildfire.

Julian says these are the types of changes that can make a real difference. 

And, as the column published in The Denver Post in January from Denver Water CEO Alan Salazar said, now is the time for everyone to come together and to act.

Denver Water has long focused on investing in the resiliency of its watersheds and system, and plans to invest about $1.8 billion over the next 10 years.

When customers pay their water bill, the money goes to building a reliable system, which includes regular infrastructure inspection and maintenance programs to ensure pipes, hydrants and storage tanks are ready to protect communities during urban fires.

Water bills also fund watershed resiliency projects that protect the lands and facilities that collect and store Denverโ€™s drinking water.

The From Forests to Faucets partnership alone has committed more than $96 million to reduce wildfire risk in critical areas, from 2010 through planned work into 2027. Half of that money has come from Denver Water. The risk of wildfire in Denver Water’s watersheds remains the greatest risk to Denverโ€™s water supply, making this investment crucial to the resilience of the system.

A Ponsse tree harvester works to thin a 40-acre section of forest in Breckenridge in August 2020, as part of the From Forests to Faucets partnership. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Denver Water’s 10-year investment plan also includes expanding Gross Reservoir in western Boulder County, which will improve water supplies on the north side of the metro area and make the system more balanced and resilient in the face of increasing impacts from climate change, drought and wildfire.

This improvement on the north side of the metro area will prove pivotal should wildfire inhibit resources that deliver water on the south side of the region, via the South Platte River, where wildfires have struck consistently over the past 20 years.

These are just a few examples of investments and partnerships already underway, but challenges lie ahead.

As Salazar noted in his column published in The Denver Post (which can also be found on Denver Water’s TAP news site), climate change continues to impact the environment and, as the wildland-urban interface continues to merge, even more investment and collaboration will be crucial.

Designer of #Coloradoโ€™s Gross Dam expansion warns of possible flooding if judge halts project — Jerd Smith (Fresh Water News) #ColoradoRiver #SouthPlatteRiver

Denver Water is helping ensure its future water security with the Gross Reservoir Expansion Project. When the project is complete, it will nearly triple the Boulder County reservoirโ€™s capacity to 119,000 acre-feet. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Jerd Smith):

May 8, 2025

Adam engineer who designed a major expansion of Gross Reservoir Dam in Boulder County told a federal judge Tuesday that the raising of the dam, facing a potential halt due to an April federal court ruling, needs to proceed to protect public safety.

Mike Rogers, the civil engineer who designed the $531 million expansion of the dam,  said bad weather could create flood conditions that would lead to a catastrophic failure similar to what occurred with the Oroville Dam failure in California in 2017.

But Stephen Rigbey, a Canadian dam safety expert testifying for Save The Colorado, said any issues with putting the construction project on hold, even in its partially-complete state, could be addressed, and that the risk of a catastrophic failure was โ€œnegligible.โ€

Workers from Denver Water and contractor Kiewit Barnard stand in front of Gross Dam in May 2024 to mark the start of the dam raise process. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Rogersโ€™ and Rigbeyโ€™s testimony Tuesday came during a federal hearing in Denver, after which U.S. District Court Judge Christine Arguello will determine whether to allow construction to move forward on the Denver Water project or whether the construction will be paused until new federal reviews she has ordered are completed and legal questions are answered.

But at the end of Tuesdayโ€™s hearing, Arguello said the parties to the case had not provided enough information for her to make a decision and ordered them to submit more data later this month.

The massive construction project has raised fierce opposition in Boulder County and prompted several legal challenges from Save The Colorado, a group that advocates on behalf of rivers. Though its early lawsuits failed, in 2022 the river defenders won an appeal that put the legal battle back in play. Despite months of settlement talks, no agreement was reached.

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

Boulder County Commissioner Ashley Stolzmann was unmoved by Rogersโ€™ testimony, saying she hopes the judge halts the work to prevent further environmental damage in Boulder County and to protect the Fraser River, a tributary to the Upper Colorado River. The Fraser has served as the source of water for Gross Reservoir since the 1950s, when it was built.

โ€œItโ€™s incredibly disappointing that Denver has chosen to move forward,โ€ Stolzmann said. โ€œWith climate change, it really is a time for different entities to work together to repair the climate. I want to see Denver seek alternative solutions.โ€

Denver Water first moved to raise Gross Dam more than 20 years ago when the water provider began designing the expansion and seeking the necessary federal and state permits. Denver Water has said raising the dam and expanding the reservoir is necessary to ensure it has enough water throughout its delivery system and to help with future water supplies as climate change continues to reduce streamflows.

The Gross Reservoir Expansion Project involves raising the height of the existing dam by 131 feet. The dam will be built out and will have โ€œstepsโ€ made of roller-compacted concrete to reach the new height. Image credit: Denver Water

After years of engineering, environmental studies and federal and state analyses, Denver received a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and construction began in 2022. It has involved taking apart a portion of the original dam and raising its height by 131 feet to nearly triple the reservoirโ€™s storage capacity to 119,000 acre-feet from 42,000 acre-feet.

The case took center stage again April 3, when Judge Arguello put a temporary halt to construction of the higher dam, at Save The Coloradoโ€™s request.

In that high-profile ruling, Arguello said, in part, that the Army Corps should have considered whether ongoing climate change and drought would leave the Colorado River and Western Slope waterways too depleted to safely allow transfer of Denver Waterโ€™s rights into a larger Gross Reservoir for Front Range water users.

At the same time, she ordered a permanent injunction prohibiting enlargement of the reservoir, including tree removal and water diversion, and impacts to wildlife.

Almost immediately, Denver Water filed for temporary relief from the order, saying, in part, that it would be unsafe to stop work as the incomplete concrete walls towered above Gross Reservoir.

Arguello granted that request, too, allowing Denver to continue work on the dam considered necessary for safety.

Denver Water has also filed an appeal with the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of appeals, seeking to permanently protect its right to continue building the dam. The appeals court is expected to wait for the lower court to rule, before considering Denver Waterโ€™s request.

More by Jerd Smith

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

Mrs. Gulch’s landscape April 30, 2025

Mrs. Gulch’s Hawthorn pair April 30, 2025.
Close up of Mrs. Gulch’s Hawthorn April 30, 2025.

And just for grins guess what Coyote Gulch was doing on April 30, 2019?

Farmers Highline Canal near the Tuck Ditch Headgate April 30, 2019. Day 30 of the #30daysofbiking challenge.

Fate of #Littletonโ€™s historic flumes uncertain as City Ditch piping looms: The city grapples with #Englewoodโ€™s plan to pipe the โ€˜oldest working thingโ€™ in Denver — #Colorado Community Media

Smith Ditch Washington Park, Denver

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Community Media website (Isabel Guzman). Here’s an excerpt:

April 24, 2025

Whatโ€™s 4-feet deep, 6-feet wide and 26-miles long? The original City Ditch โ€” one of Coloradoโ€™s earliest and most influential irrigation canals, constructed between 1864 and 1867 by the Capitol Hydraulic Company to bring much-needed water to the dry, dusty lands of the Denver metropolitan area. This hand-dug canal, also known as Smithโ€™s Ditch, was engineered by Richard S. Little and financed by businessman John W. Smith, according toย local historian Larry Borger. It stretched from its headgate near present-day Chatfield Reservoir, above Littleton, and ran roughly 26-to-27 miles northeast to Capitol Hill in Denver, relying solely on a 100-foot drop in elevation to move water without pumps. When it opened in 1867, the ditch enabled the growth of trees, sugar beet crops and neighborhoods, providing Denver with its primary irrigation source for more than 25 years. The ditch also supported a network of more than 1,000 lateral ditches, greening up city parks and supplying water to offshoots that irrigated cropland and street trees. Its construction and operation were so significant that the ditch is often called the โ€œoldest working thingโ€ in Denver, predating paved streets and railroads. Today, the City Ditch is mostly hidden from view. About 2.5 miles of the ditch remain open-channel, while the rest is mostly piped and buried. In Littleton, the portion of the ditch that runs along Santa Fe Drive from Slaughterhouse Gulch Park to the C-470 highway is owned by the City of Englewood. Englewoodย plansย to convert the remaining open channel between Chatfield Reservoir and the Charles Allen Water Treatment Plant into a buried pipe, a move that would end the historic open flow through the area.

The City of Englewoodโ€™s City Ditch Piping Project map. Courtesy of the City of Englewood.

Englewood is giving Littleton a chance to save the historic flume structures โ€” man-made, open channels designed to carry water, usually sloping downward and with raised sides above the surrounding ground โ€” at Lee Gulch and Slaughterhouse Gulch Park. Ryan Germeroth and Brent Soderlin, deputy director and director of Public Works & Utilities presented Littleton City Council with options for the Slaughterhouse Gulch Flume โ€” which Englewood would start construction on first this summer โ€” at theย study sessionย on April 22.

Lots going on in #Kiowa these days: Well project advances — #Colorado Community Media

Kiowa Creek. Photo credit: The Town of Kiowa

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Community Media website (Nicky Quinby). Here’s an excerpt:

April 29, 2025

The Town of Kiowa has good news to report, including a new Main Street Board and progress towards funding the Water Well Redundancy Project…After some starts and stops, theย Kiowa Water and Wastewater Authorityย is making headway on its Water Well Redundancy Project, thanks in part toย Congresswoman Lauren Boebert. On March 20, Boebert visited with Town of Kiowa staff and town trustees…Boebert pledged to write letters supporting road improvement and parks projects, and also agreed to write Kiowa Water and Wastewater Authority a congressional letter of support for the Well Redundancy Project, [Kim] Boyd said. Boyd further explained that the Town of Kiowa currently relies on a single 66-foot alluvial groundwater well to meet the communityโ€™s water needs.

โ€œThis infrastructure is insufficient for current demands and poses a significant risk in the event of mechanical failure or environmental stress,โ€ she shared. โ€œIt limits the townโ€™s ability to grow and sustain essential services, including domestic water supply and fire protection.โ€

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) mandates that municipal water systems maintain at least two wells to ensure redundancy and protect public health.

#Arvada Historical Society plans โ€˜History Speaks: The Ditches of Arvadaโ€™ informative talk: First in planned series of historical forums to focus on Juchem Ditch and Farmers Highline Canal — The Arvada Press

Juchem Ditch Arvada. Photo credit: Arvada Historical Society

Click the link to read the article on the Arvada Press website (Rylee Dunn). Here’s an excerpt:

April 24, 2025

The discussion will focus on the Juchem Ditch and the Farmers Highline Canal and review how early settlers dug ditches by hand to support mining and agriculture. The event is free to the public and is scheduled for 10:30 a.m. to noon on May 17 at the Arvada Elks Lodge in Olde Town, at 5700 Yukon St. Panelists will include local historians Ed Rothschild, Tom Fletcher and Bob Krugmire. The event will be moderated by Arvada City Councilmember Sharon Davis. Arvada Historical Society President Judith Denham said the idea for the first History Speaks lecture โ€” which will potentially be part of a larger series of talks โ€” came when the organization was planning last yearโ€™s Cemetery Tour, which centered on the early pioneers who built the cityโ€™s ditches.

โ€œWe thought it would be a great idea to expand on this story and find a way to talk more about this crucial part of Arvadaโ€™s history,โ€ Denham said. โ€œI think people are going to really enjoy hearing about this large piece of Arvadaโ€™s history. Itโ€™s a panel and weโ€™ve invited water experts and ditch company representatives to talk about how water influenced Arvadaโ€™s early history.

โ€œTheyโ€™re going to tell us the fascinating stories about how early settlers Wadsworth, Swadley and Jochem dug ditches with hand tools and mules so they could provide water for their farms,โ€ Denham continued. โ€œAnd add in the stories about the early conflicts over water usage and how that whole complicated system of water rights and water law started.โ€

Registration for the event can be completed atย historyarvada.org. The Arvada Press and Colorado Community Media are partnering with the Arvada Historical Society for this project.

Farmers Highline Canal near the Tuck Ditch Headgate April 30, 2019. Day 30 of the #30daysofbiking challenge.

Federal judge tells Denver Water to share construction details with challengers of Gross Dam Enlargement project — #Colorado Politics

Workers from Denver Water and contractor Kiewit Barnard stand in front of Gross Dam in May 2024 to mark the start of the dam raise process. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Click the link to read the article on the Colorado Politics website (Michael Karlik). Here’s an excerpt:

April 23, 2025

A federal judge on Tuesday ordered Denver Water to share information with the environmental groups who successfully challenged a reservoir expansion project in Boulder County, as both sides prepare for a hearing to determine how much additional construction is necessary to stabilize the structure…Days later, Arguelloย allowed for necessary constructionย to temporarily resume, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuitย has since extended that windowย while it reviews Arguello’s order. However, last Wednesday, the groups that challenged the project’s legality asked Arguello to intervene on another issue related to the upcoming hearing about how much stabilizing work is warranted…In response to the groups’ questions about risk management plans, spillway capacity and failure modesย โ€” plus a request for project documentsย โ€” Denver Water told the petitioners that disclosure “poses Dam security risks.”

“The fact remains that Denver Water is the only party that currently has available to it extensive documentation that bears directly on the specific safety issues that this Court orderedย allย parties to address at the hearing,” the environmental groups added in their court filing.

Denver Water vows to take Gross Reservoir Dam expansion fight to the U.S. Supreme Court — Jerd Smith (Fresh Water News)

The dam raise process begins at the bottom of the dam using roller-compacted concrete to build the new steps that will go up the face of the dam. Photo credit: Denver Water.

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Jerd Smith):

April 24, 2025

Denver Water vowed this week to take the high-stakes battle over a partially built dam in Boulder County to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary to defend what it sees as its well-established right to continue construction and deliver water to its 1.5 million metro-area customers.

โ€œIt would be irresponsible not to do that,โ€ Denver Waterโ€™s General Manager Alan Salazar said in an interview Tuesday as a tense month of legal maneuvering continued.

Senior U.S. District Court Judge Christine Arguello on April 3 put a halt to construction of the $531 million Gross Reservoir Dam raise nearly four months after Denver Water and the river-defending nonprofit Save the Colorado failed to negotiate a settlement that would add new environmental protections to the project. When settlement talks stalled, Save the Colorado asked for and was granted an injunction.

Almost immediately, Denver Water filed for temporary relief from the injunction, saying, in part, that it would be unsafe to stop work as the incomplete concrete walls towered above Gross Reservoir in western Boulder County.

Arguello granted that request, too.

Now the water agency, the largest utility in the Intermountain West, has filed an emergency request with the federal appeals court, seeking to permanently protect its right to continue construction as the legal battle continues.

A decision could come as early as this week as a 10th Circuit Court of Appeals panel considers Denver Waterโ€™s emergency request, according to environmental advocate Gary Wockner. Wockner leads Save The Colorado, a group that has financed and led litigation against Denver Water and many other agencies seeking new dams or river diversions. Wockner said he is ready to continue the fight as well.

โ€œWe are prepared to defend the district courtโ€™s decision,โ€ Wockner said, referring to the construction halt.

Alan Salazar, who became Denver Water CEO/Manager in August 2023 Photo credit: Denver Water

The high-profile dispute erupted in Denver just weeks after Northern Water agreed to a $100 million settlement with Save The Colorado and its sister group, Save The Poudre, to allow construction of the Northern Integrated Supply Project, or NISP, to proceed.

The money will be used to help restore the Cache la Poudre River, including moving diversion points and crafting new agreements with diverters that will ultimately leave more water in the river. Northern Water, which operates the federally owned Colorado-Big Thompson Project for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, is overseeing the permitting and construction of NISP.

But two years of talks and negotiations between Save The Colorado and Denver Water failed to yield a similar environmental settlement over the Gross Reservoir Dam expansion project. It was after the talks failed that Federal District Court Judge Arguello agreed to halt construction on the dam.

Whether a new environmental deal will be forthcoming now isnโ€™t clear. Both sides declined to comment on whether settlement talks had resumed.

Salazar also declined to discuss whether a deal similar to the $100 million NISP settlement would emerge over the Gross Reservoir lawsuit.

โ€œI donโ€™t want to get into the cost of a settlement,โ€ Salazar said. โ€œBut the impact on ratepayers would beย significant.โ€

Case sets the stage for future water projects in Colorado

Across the state, water officials are closely watching the case play out.

For fast-growing Parker Water and Sanitation, the preliminary injunction to stop construction, though temporary, is worrisome.

Its general manager, Ron Redd, said he wasnโ€™t sure how his small district, which is planning a major new water project in northeastern Colorado, would cope with a similar injunction or a U.S. Supreme Court battle.

โ€œIn everything permitting-wise you need consistency in how you move projects forward,โ€ Redd said. โ€œTo have that disrupted causes concern. Is this going to be the new normal going forward? That bothers me.โ€

Denver Water first moved to raise Gross Dam more than 20 years ago when it began designing the expansion and seeking the federal and state permits required by most water projects.

After years of engineering, studies and federal and state analyses, construction began in 2022. It has involved taking part of the original dam, built in the 1950s, and raising its height by 131 feet to nearly triple the reservoirโ€™s storage capacity to 119,000 acre-feet from 42,000 acre-feet. An acre-foot of water equals 326,000 gallons, enough to serve up to four urban households each year.

The giant utility has said it needs the additional storage to secure future water supplies as climate change threatens stream flows in its water system, a key part of which lies in the Fraser River, a tributary to the Upper Colorado River in Grand County. The expansion was also necessary to strengthen its ability to distribute water from the northern end of its system, especially if problems emerged elsewhere in the southern part of its distribution area, as occurred during the 2002 drought.

And the judge agreed climate change is a factor but she said itโ€™s not clear the water would ever even materialize as flows shrink. She overturned Denver Waterโ€™s permits because she said the Army Corps had not factored in Colorado River flow losses from climate change, and whether Denver would ever actually see the water it plans to store in an expanded Gross. Arguello also ruled the Army Corps had not spent enough time analyzing alternatives to the Gross Reservoir expansion.

Wockner said forcing Denver Water and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to re-analyze water projections under new climate change scenarios, as his group has asked, is critical to helping protect the broader Colorado River and stopping destructive dam projects.

Whether the questions the case raises about permitting and environmental protections ultimately make their way to the U.S. Supreme Court isnโ€™t clear yet.

But James Eklund, a water attorney and former director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the stateโ€™s lead agency on water planning and funding, said Denver Water has the expertise and financial muscle to take it there.

โ€œThey have really sharp people over there,โ€ he said. โ€œI would say they are not only willing, they would have the facts to present a case they believe would be successful.โ€

[…]

More by Jerd Smith

The Gross Reservoir Expansion Project involves raising the height of the existing dam by 131 feet. The dam will be built out and will have โ€œstepsโ€ made of roller-compacted concrete to reach the new height. Image credit: Denver Water