Missouri lawmakers say water has almost always been plentiful in their state, giving no reason to think twice about a concept known as riparian rights — the idea that, if you own the land, you have broad freedoms to use its water. But that could change under a bill advancing quickly in a state legislature that is normally sharply divided. The measure would largely forbid the export of water across state lines without a permit, even though there is no evidence that is happening on any large scale.
Just the specter of water scarcity is inspiring bipartisan support. Besides persistent drought in parts of the state and plummeting Mississippi River levels in recent months and years, lawmakers are wary of the West, and the chance that thirsty communities facing dwindling water supplies will look east for lakes and rivers to tap…
“They’re not being real responsible,” state Rep. Jamie Burger (R), one of the bill’s lead sponsors, said of states like California and Arizona. “We feel like we need to be responsible in Missouri and protect what we have.”
If passed, the new limits would be the latest domino to fall as climate change makes droughts more frequent and intense across huge swaths of the United States, and threatens to exhaust water supplies in some parts of the West within the foreseeable future. States including Oklahoma, Iowa and Nebraska already have similar safeguards on water exports in place, while a compact among Great Lakes states has largely banned exports beyond the limits of their watershed since 2008.
The next coordination meeting for the operation of the Aspinall Unit is scheduled for Thursday, April 18th 2024, at 1:00 pm.
This meeting will be held at the Western Colorado Area Office in Grand Junction, CO. There will also be an option for virtual attendance via Microsoft Teams. A link to the Teams meeting is below.
The meeting agenda will include a review of operations and hydrology since January, current soil and snowpack conditions, a discussion of hydrologic runoff forecasts, the weather outlook, and planned operations for this water year.
Handouts of the presentations will be emailed prior to the meeting.
Pretty much every time I write about the amount of Colorado River water that is consumed to irrigate alfalfa and hay, readers respond with a comment or question about how much of the alfalfa — and therefore Colorado River water — is shipped overseas.
And then, sometimes, Teal Lehto, a.k.a. westernwatergirl, uses one of my pieces on alfalfa and water to do one of her cool and informative Instagram videos:
And that’s when the comments really start to fly, e.g.:
“… pretty much all of that alfalfa doesn’t stay in the United States and is grown by Saudi Arabia …”
“… Saudi Arabia is using most of the land and water to grow the alfalfa…”
“The #$% kicker is that most of the alfalfa is being sold to foreign countries like China.”
Let’s look into this a bit.
The value of U.S. hay exports totaled about $1.3 billion last year, with China the largest buyer, followed by Japan. Source: USDA Foreign Agricultural Service.
It is true that Western farms export alfalfa to foreign countries. And it’s also true that Saudi Arabia-based food giant, Almari, owns at least one farm in Arizona where it grows alfalfa that is shipped overseas to feed its massive herd of dairy cattle. While Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs cancelled some of the company’s state land leases, thereby ending groundwater pumping at those locations, the company still has other holdings in the state where it presumably continues to farm. A United Arab Emirates companyand a major global hay exporter also operates farms in Arizona and California.
But there’s a big caveat here: Many farms in Arizona — and most if not all of the Saudi Arabia owned ones — irrigate with groundwater, not with water diverted from the Colorado River. While groundwater pumping ultimately has an effect on surface waters, the water these farms pump is not counted against Arizona’s Colorado River use. So shutting down these farms’ groundwater spigots is unlikely to have much bearing on the Colorado River crisis.
And, similarly, the data below show each states’ total hay exports, because the Foreign Agricultural Service does not break it down by county. So some of the exported hay from California may be grown in, for example, the Central Valley, which would not be irrigated by Colorado River water. So while this is not an accurate representation of how much Colorado River water is exported in the form of hay, it does give a general sense of things. I took a look at stats from all seven Colorado River Basin states. But I didn’t include Colorado, Wyoming, or New Mexico in the charts because their export amounts were almost zero.
Graphic credit: The Land Desk
These four states exported about $1 billion worth of hay — alfalfa and other varieties — in 2022. The amount dropped significantly, mostly due to a cutback from California, in 2023. California also produced far less hay that year, most likely due to water shortages. It’s still a lot of hay. But how does it compare to totals?
Graphic credit: The Land Desk
Unfortunately, the FAS only supplies the value of the exports, not tonnage, which makes the comparison a bit squishy, it seems (since producers may fetch more or less per ton for exports). But as far as total value goes, it looks as if about 30% of the hay produced in the main exporting states of the Colorado River Basin is shipped overseas.
As you can see, hay, in general, is pretty big business in the West, with a value of more than $2.5 billion from these four states alone, about $2 billion of which is alfalfa.
And where does each state’s hay go?
Graphic credit: The Land Desk
Graphic credit: The Land Desk
Graphic credit: The Land Desk
Graphic credit: The Land Desk
Overall, most Western U.S. hay exports are China-bound. But Arizona hay is most likely to be on its way to Saudi Arabia for the aforementioned reasons. It will be interesting to see if that changes this year as Almari cuts back farming in the state.
Horses. Southeastern Utah. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.
Earth’s worrisome warming trajectory continued unabated last month, with March marking the 10th month in a row that the planet has broken global heat records, international climate officials announced this week. With an average surface temperature of 57.45 degrees Fahrenheit, last month was warmer globally than any previous March on record, according to the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service. The month was about 0.18 of a degree warmer than the previous hottest March, in 2016, the service said.
“March 2024 continues the sequence of climate records toppling for both air temperature and ocean surface temperatures, with the 10th consecutive record-breaking month,” read a statement from Samantha Burgess, Copernicus’ deputy director. “The global average temperature is the highest on record, with the past 12 months being 1.58 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Stopping further warming requires rapid reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.”
Indeed, March was well above the 1.5-degree Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) international target for limiting the worst effects of climate change. The global average temperature measured about 3 degrees, or 1.68 degrees Celsius, warmer than the designated 1850 to 1900 preindustrial reference period. What’s more, the global average temperature for the last 12 months — April 2023 through March 2024 — is the highest on record, at 2.8 degrees, or 1.58 degrees Celsius, above the preindustrial average.
Kayakers, bird watchers, trail hikers and parents with energetic toddlers were some of the first to visit Lake Nighthorse on opening day of the spring season Friday. The waters of Lake Nighthorse reflected pleasant, blue skies, although the reflection was elusive because there was hardly a trace of clouds above. Lake Operations Supervisor Sean Willis said six or seven vehicles were lined up at the entrance when the lake opened at 9 a.m. By 10:30 a.m., between 30 and 35 people had crossed the entrance.
Amanda White, co-vice president of Durango Bird Club, stood by a pier near the designated swim beach with her weighted tripod and spotting scope. She looked over the lake through the lenses with narrowed eyes with her dog Josie by her side.
She said the lake is a “spectacular” resource for migratory birds.
The inlet works to fill Lake Nighthorse under construction along the Animas River March 2014. Water is pumped to the reservoir from the Animas River. Photo credit: Greg Hobbs
Click the link to read the article on the Inkstain website (John Fleck):
April 3, 2024
With the submission of two additional proposals last week, we now have five major proposals for post-2026 Colorado River management.
The folks at the Water and Tribes Intitiative have helpfully organized them in a single place. (Click on the “Proposed Alternatives for Post-2026 Operating Guidelines” bubble.)
TRIBAL PRINCIPLES
A set of guiding principles proposed by 17 of the basin’s sovereign indigenous communities. (click here)
UPPER BASIN PROPOSAL
What the label says, you already know about this one. (click here)
The “Big Seven” Colorado River Basin environmental groups (click here)
LAKE POWELL/GRAND CANYON/LAKE MEAD ECOSYSTEM PROPOSAL
A proposal from Jack Schmidt, Eric Kuhn, and John Fleck suggesting ways to manage the storage and distribution of water to provide more flexibility for environmental and other non-water supply benefits. (click here)
Great Sage-Grouse. Photo: Evan Barrientos/Audubon Rockies
Click the link to read the release on the Audubon website (Jason Howe):
(Washington, DC-April 12, 2024) – The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) today announced a rule updating the cost of doing business on public lands and helping to balance the extraction of natural resources with the conservation of wildlife habitat and the preservation of landscapes sacred to Indigenous peoples.
In addition to siting oil and gas development away from wildlife habitat and cultural resources, the new regulations increase fees – including royalty and rental rates, and minimum bids associated with oil and gas development – bringing them in line with what many states require; and reduce so-called “speculative leasing”, where companies hold leases on land with little potential for development.
The BLM manages 245 million acres, nearly 40 percent of U.S. public lands. The agency is charged with balancing the protection of America’s natural legacy with managing the 30 percent of the nation’s mineral wealth that lies beneath the surface. But over the past 50 years, the agency has mainly focused on extractive uses (coal, and oil and gas), applying rules governing that extraction that have been unchanged for decades. An estimated 300 bird species spend at least part of their lives there, including Burrowing Owls and the Greater Sage-Grouse, which is already under stress across much of its range.
“When BLM oil and gas leasing policy was last updated, Gerald Ford was in the White House, the Bee Gees were on the radio and a gallon of gas cost an average of 59 cents,” said Christopher Simmons, senior manager of public lands policy for the National Audubon Society. “The BLM’s approach to oil and gas leasing has been the equivalent of a polyester leisure suit – painfully outdated. This is a big step forward towards the BLM fulfilling its mission, delivering common-sense policies that balance responsible development with land and wildlife conservation.”
For decades, oil and gas policies prioritized development on public lands over activities like hunting, fishing, birding, hiking, grazing and restoration. When oil and gas companies left behind a mess on public lands, American taxpayers were previously forced to foot the bill. Before today’s update, taxpayers could have been responsible for as much as $15 billion in clean-up costs.
Bob Martin, who manages hydropower at Glen Canyon Dam, shows the effects of cavitation on a decommissioned turbine on Nov. 2, 2022. When air pockets enter the dam’s pipes, they cause structural damage. Water managers recently discovered similar damage in a little-used set of tubes that carry water to the Colorado River. Photo credit: Alex Hager/KUNC
Click the link to read the article on the KUNC website (Alex Hager):
April 12, 2024
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.
Conservation groups are calling for changes to the management of Lake Powell, the nation’s second largest reservoir, after the discovery of damaged plumbing within the dam that holds it back.
The damage is to Glen Canyon Dam’s “river outlet works,” a critical set of small tubes near the bottom of the dam that were originally intended to release excess water when the reservoir is nearing full capacity.
The reservoir is currently only 32% full, beleaguered by climate change and steady demand. Water experts think the river outlet works may soon become the only way to pass water from Lake Powell, situated in far northern Arizona, to the Colorado River on the other side. Experts worry that damage to those tubes could impede the ability to use them regularly.
It’s the latest twist in the saga of Glen Canyon Dam, which has been at the center of recent concern about the shrinking Colorado River, even before news of the damaged pipes came to light. Water experts fear Lake Powell could drop so low that water would be unable to pass through hydropower turbines that generate electricity for about 5 million people across seven states. If it falls even lower, water would be unable to pass through the dam at all, keeping it out of the Grand Canyon just downstream of Lake Powell.
A high desert thunderstorm lights up the sky behind Glen Canyon Dam. Glen Canyon Dam holds back Lake Powell on Nov. 2, 2022. As water levels drop to historic lows, conservation groups are highlighting infrastructure issues inside the dam and calling for new water management policies that bypass the dam entirely. — Photo USBR
The threat of that reality has led nonprofit advocacy groups to sound the alarm.
“I think it’s really important for people to recognize how much of a threat this is to our water delivery system,” said Eric Balken, executive director of the Glen Canyon Institute. “This is a really big infrastructure problem, and it has a big impact on how water is managed throughout this whole basin.”
The recent damage to the outlet works is the product of a process called “cavitation.” It happens when small air bubbles in the water pop while passing through the dam’s plumbing. That implosion is strong enough to create shock waves that tear away small chunks of protective coating on the insides of pipes.
In recent years, the outlet works has been used to release temporary bursts of water designed to boost ecosystems in the Grand Canyon. The cavitation damage was discovered during inspections of the pipes after a series of those planned water bursts in April 2023.
In an informational webinar on Monday, Reclamation officials explained the damage and said it was not the result of one specific event, but has occurred over time.
Nick Williams, Upper Colorado River power manager for the Bureau of Reclamation said cavitation damage is more likely when reservoir levels are low.
The river outlet works can still carry water, but will require repairs – such as a fresh coating of epoxy that is scheduled for either later this year or early 2025.
Legal risk and harm to fish
Even with a fully functioning river outlet works system, those pipes are only capable of carrying a relatively small amount of water. If the outlet works become the only means of passing water through the dam, the Colorado River’s Upper Basin states – Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, and Utah – could fail to meet a longstanding legal obligation to pass a certain amount of water to their downstream neighbors each year.
The Colorado River Compact, a 1922 legal agreement that forms the foundation of modern water management in the arid West, requires the Upper Basin to pass 7.5 million acre-feet of water to the Lower Basin states of California, Arizona and Nevada each year.
An acre-foot is the amount of water needed to fill one acre of land to a height of one foot. One acre-foot generally provides enough water for one to two households for a year.
Lake Powell is often described as the Colorado River’s “savings account,” where the Upper Basin states stash water to make sure there’s always enough to meet their legal requirement to send some downstream. Then, the Lower Basin stores those water deliveries in Lake Mead, its “checking account.” Mead, he nation’s largest reservoir, holds water that will eventually flow to cities such as Las Vegas, Phoenix and Los Angeles, as well as sprawling farm fields in California and Arizona.
The back of Glen Canyon Dam circa 1964, not long after the reservoir had begun filling up. Here the water level is above dead pool, meaning water can be released via the river outlets, but it is below minimum power pool, so water cannot yet enter the penstocks to generate electricity. Bureau of Reclamation photo. Annotations: Jonathan P. Thompson
Conservation groups have cited the limited capacity of the outlet works in previous calls to change the way Lake Powell is managed. The recent damage, they said, could make the outlet works unusable, only worsening the challenge of keeping water flowing downstream from Lake Powell.
“If you lose your job, you don’t go out and buy yourself an elaborate dinner, justifying it by saying, ‘I still have money in my checking account,’” said Zach Frankel, executive director of the Utah Rivers Council. “You go, ‘Wow, I lost my income. I better look at my expense budget and see if it’s time to tighten my belt.’ The Colorado River Basin has not yet learned to do that.”
In recent years, Lake Powell has barely stayed high enough for water to pass through hydropower turbines. That’s the result of a shell game by water managers, who have shuffled water into Lake Powell from upstream reservoirs on an emergency basis.
Damage to the outlet works also raises concern about invasive fish entering a section of the Colorado River that flows through the Grand Canyon. Dropping water levels have allowed invasive smallmouth bass to swim through to the other side, where they can eat native humpback chub, a species protected by the Endangered Species Act.
Recently, federal water managers released plans to help protect those at-risk chubs. Those plans partially hinge on the ability to release cold water through the river outlet works and into the Grand Canyon. Wildlife advocates criticized those plans even before the news of damage to the river outlet works, which could further jeopardize native fish conservation efforts.
Fixes for the future
The seven states which use the Colorado River are currently caught in a standoff about how to cut back on water demand. They are currently negotiating a new set of rules for sharing the river, designed to replace the current guidelines that expire in 2026—but are stuck at an ideological impasse.
That new set of rules could theoretically introduce a long-term plan for managing the West’s major reservoirs sustainably, allowing water managers to move on from a patchwork of emergency measures that have only temporarily staved off problems at Glen Canyon Dam.
Glen Canyon Dam has four bypass tubes, also referred to as river outlet works (ROWs) that can draw water from Lake Powell around elevation 3,370 feet, bypassing the powerplant and sending the water downstream. To send water from the new intake to the city of Page, the bypass tube’s valve is closed, allowing the pipe to fill with water, creating enough head pressure to send the water through the connected piping leading to Page’s water treatment facility. could soon be the only way for water to make it through Glen Canyon Dam. Recently-discovered damage to those tubes has raised questions about their role going forward.
Balken, with the nonprofit Glen Canyon Institute, said policymakers should consider major changes to how the dam is operated.
“If we’re going to update this river system to be climate resilient, and if we’re going to upgrade our infrastructure to deal with what climate change is handing us, we really have to take a hard look at bypassing Glen Canyon Dam,” Balken said.
In March, Upper Basin and Lower Basin states each released competing plans for post-2026 river management. Later a coalition of environmental nonprofits released their own. A group of tribes that use the Colorado River has issued a set of principles it hopes will be incorporated into future water management.
The Biden administration is urging states to find compromise before the end of 2024, in hopes of averting any complication that could be brought on by a change in presidential administration following the November election.
“New plot using the nClimGrid data, which is a better source than PRISM for long-term trends. Of course, the combined reservoir contents increase from last year, but the increase is less than 2011 and looks puny compared to the ‘hole’ in the reservoirs. The blue Loess lines subtly change. Last year those lines ended pointing downwards. This year they end flat-ish. 2023 temps were still above the 20th century average, although close. Another interesting aspect is that the 20C Mean and 21C Mean lines on the individual plots really don’t change much. Finally, the 2023 Natural Flows are almost exactly equal to 2019. (17.678 maf vs 17.672 maf). For all the hoopla about how this was record-setting year, the fact is that this year was significantly less than 2011 (20.159 maf) and no different than 2019” — Brad Udall
Click the link to read the article on the Oceanography website (Stefan Rahmstorf). Here’s an excerpt:
DRASTIC PAST AMOC CHANGES
Based on this understanding of AMOC instability mechanisms, we can examine some dramatic climate changes that have happened in the recent past—“recent,” that is, from a paleoclimate perspective, namely in the last 100,000 years.
In 1987, Wally Broecker published a now famous article in the journal Nature titled “Unpleasant surprises in the green- house?” (Broecker, 1987). In it, he dis- cusses data from deep-sea sediment cores and holes drilled into the Greenland ice cap, noting that these data reveal that “climate changed frequently and in great leaps” rather than smoothly and gradu- ally. Given the regional patterns of these changes, he identified the AMOC (at the time referred to as the “Atlantic conveyor belt”) as the culprit. He warned that by releasing greenhouse gases, “we play Russian roulette with climate [and] no one knows what lies in the active cham- ber of the gun.”
In the decades since then, we have come to distinguish two types of abrupt climate events that repeatedly occurred during the last Ice Age, centered around the northern Atlantic but with global repercussions (Rahmstorf, 2002).
The first type is Dansgaard-Oeschger (DO) events, named for Danish ice core researcher Willy Dansgaard and his Swiss colleague Hans Oeschger. More than 20 events prominently show as abrupt warming spikes of 10°–15°C within a decade or two in Greenland ice core data (Dansgaard et al., 1982). They can be explained as sudden start-ups of ocean convection in the Nordic Seas when Ice Age convection was mostly only occur- ring in the open Atlantic to the south of Iceland (Figure 5). The warm ocean cir- culation configuration that reached far north was apparently not stable under Ice Age conditions: it gradually weakened, until after some hundreds of years, the convection and warm event ended again. It is thus an example of a convective flip- flop as discussed above, with the Nordic Seas convection turning on and off.
The second type is Heinrich events, named for the German scientist Hartmut Heinrich (Heinrich, 1988). It involves huge masses of ice that episodically slid into the sea from the thousands of meters thick Laurentide Ice Sheet that covered northern America at that time. These iceberg armadas drifted out across the Atlantic, leaving behind telltale layers of ice-rafted debris on the ocean floor and adding fresh meltwater to the ocean sur- face. This led to even more dramatic cli- mate changes, linked to a complete break- down of the AMOC. So much ice entered the ocean that sea levels rose by several meters (Hemming, 2004). Evidence that this amount of freshwater entering the northern Atlantic shut down the AMOC is found in the fact that Antarctica warmed while the Northern Hemisphere cooled (Blunier et al., 1998), indicating that the AMOC’s huge heat transport from the far south across the equator to the high north had essentially stopped.
Both the Dansgaard-Oeschger events and the Heinrich events, although strongest around the northern Atlantic, had major global climate repercussions even far from the Atlantic as they affected the tropical rainfall belts that result from the rising motion of warm air above the “thermal equator.” During the warm Dansgaard-Oeschger events, these rain- fall belts shifted north, leading to warm and humid conditions in the north- ern tropics as far as Asia. But during Heinrich events, the rainfall belts shifted south, leading to catastrophic drought in the Afro-Asian monsoon region (Stager, 2011). Could similar shifts in tropical rainfall belts be in store for us in future?
THE “COLD BLOB”: AN OMINOUS SIGN OF A SLOWING AMOC?
Let us look how the AMOC is already responding to ongoing global warm- ing, which has already pushed Earth’s cli- mate outside the envelope of the stable Holocene (Osman et al., 2021) in which Homo sapiens developed agriculture and started to build cities.
Unfortunately, AMOC data only go back a few decades, drawn from just a handful of cross-Atlantic cruises since the 1950s and the RAPID-AMOC array of stations that has collected continuous measurements of salinity and current velocities from the near surface to the seafloor across the Atlantic at 26°N since 2004 (Smeed et al., 2020). Therefore, we must turn to indirect evidence. Exhibit No. 1 is the “warming hole” or “cold blob” found on maps of observed global tem- perature change (Figure 6). While the entire globe has warmed, the subpolar North Atlantic has resisted and even cooled. This is exactly the region where the AMOC delivers much of its heat, and exactly the region where climate models have long predicted cooling as a result of the AMOC slowing down.
A seminal study by Dima and Lohmann (2010) analyzed global pat- terns of sea surface temperature changes since the nineteenth century and con- cluded “that the global conveyor has been weakening since the late 1930s and that change (Caesar et al., 2018). This result confirms that on longer timescales, the AMOC is the dominant factor, allowing the conclusion that the cold blob so far corresponds to about 15% weakening of the AMOC.
The cold blob is not just a surface phenomenon; it is also clearly vis- ible (Figure 8) in the trend of ocean heat content of the upper 2,000 m (Cheng et al., 2022).
But apart from the cold blob, AMOC slowing has another telltale effect.
A SHIFTING GULF STREAM
Fluid dynamics on a rotating globe like Earth has some peculiar effects that are not intuitive. They result from the fact that the Coriolis force changes with latitude. In 2007 and 2008, two studies conducted by AMOC researcher Rong Zhang demonstrated how a basic law of physics, angu- lar momentum conservation, acting at the point where the deep south- ward AMOC flow crosses under the Gulf Stream, makes the Stream shift closer to shore when the AMOC weakens (Zhang and Vallis, 2007; Zhang, 2008). Her studies describe a “fingerprint” of a weakening AMOC that not only includes the cold blob but also a sea surface temperature anomaly of opposite sign off the American Atlantic coast north of Cape Hatteras.
Caesar et al. (2018) compared this fingerprint to observed sea surface temperature changes since the late nineteenth century and found strong agreement (see Figure 9). The observational data are much less detailed because they rely on relatively sparse ship measurements, but more detail is in the satellite data. Although the time periods for the observed and the satellite data are different, the trends are divided by the global
mean temperature change to make them roughly comparable in magnitude. Thus, for the relatively short satellite period there is much stronger random variabil- ity relative to the signal (“noise”), and the signal-to-noise ratio declines from top to bottom in the three images. Despite the differences in other variability, the finger- print of AMOC decline is very clear in all three Figure 9 plots.
As a side note, all three diagrams show a warming patch in the Arctic off Norway; in the model, this is due to increasing ocean heat transport from the Atlantic into the Arctic Ocean (Fiedler, 2020). This flow may be unrelated to the AMOC, or possibly anti-correlated to the AMOC and thus a third part of its fingerprint.
The strong warming off the North American Atlantic coast is again not caused by surface heat fluxes, as the reanalysis data show the surface heat flux has changed in the opposite direction, toward increasing heat loss (Figure 7). Also, the current generation of climate models (CMIP6) indicate a clear correla- tion of AMOC strength with this finger- print pattern of sea surface temperatures, including both the cold blob and the warming part (Latif et al., 2022).
Furthermore, a recent study using the three-dimensional observational ocean data collected by Argo profil- ing floats (https://argo.ucsd.edu/) shows that the Gulf Stream has shifted about 10 km closer to shore since the beginning of this century (Todd and Ren, 2023). From the RAPID array we know that the AMOC has indeed weakened during this time span. In addition, there has been a “robust weakening of the Gulf Stream during the past four decades observed in the Florida Straits” (Piecuch and Beal, 2023), which, although not necessarily linked to an AMOC weakening, is at least consistent with it.
Additional evidence consistent with AMOC slowing also comes from salin- ity changes. The northeastern subpolar Atlantic is freshening (Figure 10), likely through a combination of increased as well as the melting of sea ice and the Greenland ice sheet, plus the effect of ocean circulation changes bringing less salty subtropical waters to the north. The Iceland Basin registers the lowest salinity in 120 years of measurements (Holliday et al., 2020).
At the same time, salinity is increasing in the subtropical South Atlantic, which is considered an AMOC fingerprint less affected by short-term variations than the northern Atlantic temperature fingerprint; this suggests an accelera- tion of AMOC slowdown since the 1980s (Zhu et al., 2023).
Yet more evidence comes from analysis of seawater density in the upper 1,000 m in the subpolar gyre region, which cor- relates closely with the AMOC and shows a decline over the past 70 years. This decline implies an AMOC weakening of ~13% over this period (Chafik et al., 2022), consistent with the 15% weaken- ing suggested by the cold blob data.
This map shows the pattern of thermohaline circulation also known as “meridional overturning circulation”. This collection of currents is responsible for the large-scale exchange of water masses in the ocean, including providing oxygen to the deep ocean. The entire circulation pattern takes ~2000 years. By Robert Simmon, NASA. Minor modifications by Robert A. Rohde also released to the public domain – NASA Earth Observatory, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3794372
The more scientists learn about the health risks of PFAS, found in everything from nonstick cookware to carpets to ski wax, the more concerning these “forever chemicals” become.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency now believes there is no safe level for two common PFAS – PFOA and PFOS – in drinking water, and it acknowledges that very low concentrations of other PFAS present human health risks. The agency issued the first legally enforceable national drinking water standards for five common types of PFAS chemicals, as well as PFAS mixtures, on April 10, 2024.
I study PFAS as an environmental health scientist. Here’s a quick look at the risks these chemicals pose and efforts to regulate them.
What exactly are PFAS?
PFAS stands for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. This is a large group of human-made chemicals – currently estimated to be nearly 15,000 individual chemical compounds – that are used widely in consumer products and industry. They can make products resistant to water, grease and stains and protect against fire.
Waterproof outdoor apparel and cosmetics, stain-resistant upholstery and carpets, food packaging that is designed to prevent liquid or grease from leaking through, and certain firefighting equipment often contain PFAS.
In fact, studies have found that most products labeled stain- or water-resistant contain PFAS, and another study found that this is even true among products labeled as “nontoxic” or “green.” PFAS are also found in unexpected places such as high-performance ski and snowboard waxes, floor waxes and medical devices.
Firefighters are concerned that PFAS in firefighting foams and protective gear could be a reason cancer rates are rising. AP Photo/Steven Senne
At first glance, PFAS sound pretty useful, so you might be wondering what’s the big deal?
The short answer is that PFAS are harmful to human health and the environment.
Some of the very same chemical properties that make PFAS attractive in products also mean these chemicals will persist in the environment for generations. Because of the widespread use of PFAS, these chemicals are now present in water, soil and living organisms and can be found across almost every part of the planet, including Arctic glaciers, marine mammals, remote communities living on subsistence diets and in 98% of the American public.
Once people are exposed to PFAS, the chemicals remain in their bodies for a long time – months to years, depending on the specific compound – and they can accumulate over time.
Research consistently demonstrates that PFAS are associated with a variety of adverse health effects. A review by a panel of experts looking at research on PFAS toxicity concluded with a high degree of certainty that PFAS contribute to thyroid disease, elevated cholesterol, liver damage, and kidney and testicular cancer.
Further, they concluded with a high degree of certainty that PFAS also affect babies exposed in utero by increasing their likelihood of being born at a lower birth weight and responding less effectively to vaccines, while impairing women’s mammary gland development, which may adversely affect a mom’s ability to breastfeed.
The review also found evidence that PFAS may contribute to a number of other disorders, though further research is needed to confirm existing findings: inflammatory bowel disease, reduced fertility, breast cancer, and an increased likelihood of miscarriage and developing high blood pressure and preeclampsia during pregnancy. Additionally, current research suggests that babies exposed prenatally are at higher risk of experiencing obesity, early-onset puberty and reduced fertility later in life.
Collectively, this is a formidable list of diseases and disorders.
Who’s regulating PFAS?
PFAS chemicals have been around since the late 1930s, when a DuPont scientist created one by accident during a lab experiment. DuPont called it Teflon, which eventually became a household name for its use on nonstick pans.
Decades later, in 1998, Scotchgard maker 3M notified the Environmental Protection Agency that a PFAS chemical was showing up in human blood samples. At the time, 3M said low levels of the manufactured chemical had been detected in people’s blood as early as the 1970s.
The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry has a toxicological profile for PFAS. And the EPA had issued advisories and health-based guidelines. But despite the lengthy list of serious health risks linked to PFAS and a tremendous amount of federal investment in PFAS-related research in recent years, PFAS hadn’t been regulated at the federal level in the United States until now.
The new drinking water standards set limits for five individual PFAS – PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHxS and HFPO-DA – as well as mixtures of these chemicals. The standards are part of the EPA’s road map for PFAS regulations.
The back of Glen Canyon Dam circa 1964, not long after the reservoir had begun filling up. Here the water level is above dead pool, meaning water can be released via the river outlets, but it is below minimum power pool, so water cannot yet enter the penstocks to generate electricity. Bureau of Reclamation photo. Annotation credit: Jonathan P. Thompson
Click the link to read the article on the 8NewsNow.com website (Greg Haas). Here’s an excerpt:
April 12, 2024
Nearly a year ago, the Colorado River was raging through the Grand Canyon, carrying enough water to raise Lake Mead by an astonishing 2½ feet in just five days. The surge that began on April 25, 2023, was part of a “High Flow Experiment” release from Glen Canyon Dam, churning up sediment to rebuild beaches and sandbars through the canyon. But the pipes used to send that gush of water from Lake Powell through Glen Canyon Dam are in trouble, a memo produced by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation reveals.
“In summary, at reservoir levels below the minimum power pool (elevation 3,490 ft), there are concerns with relying on the river outlet works as the sole means of sustained water releases from Glen Canyon Dam,” the memo said.
The “river outlet works” is a backup system at Glen Canyon, used infrequently because Reclamation needs to generate as much electricity as possible by sending water through the hydropower penstocks, a much larger set of tubes higher up…A special inspection that happened around last year’s High Flow Experiment found erosion within the four 8-foot pipes of the river outlet works. The evidence of “cavitation” is being described by conservation groups as a new part of the “spectacular water crisis” that demonstrates the magnitude of problems with the dam. Cavitation produces shock waves that are powerful enough to damage steel, according to David Wegner, who worked 20 years as an engineer for Reclamation. He was lead scientist for environmental impact studies of Glen Canyon Dam, and a founding member of the Glen Canyon Institute. Wegner is now a senior staff member for the U.S. House of Representatives Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee. He is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences Water Science and Technology Board.
Following the El Nino winter and an active early spring pattern, drought coverage is at its lowest since the spring 2020. A strengthening low pressure system and trailing cold front progressed east from the Mississippi Valley to the East Coast at the beginning of April. This storm brought heavy snow (6 to 18 inches, locally more than 2 feet) to the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Wisconsin, and northern New England. The recent precipitation (rain and snow) during the past few weeks continued to ease drought conditions across the Upper Midwest. From April 5 to 7, a strong storm system tracked east from the Rockies to the Great Plains. Heavy snowfall (6 to 12 inches, locally more) occurred across parts of Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. Total precipitation amounts of 1 to 2 inches, liquid equivalent, resulted in drought improvement from the north-central Rockies to western South Dakota. Drought continued to develop or intensify across parts of the southern Great Plains and lower Ohio Valley along with Hawaii. Please note that heavy rainfall across the South, occurring after April 9th at 8am EDT, will be considered in next week’s U.S. Drought Monitor…
Widespread rain and snow (1 to 2 inches of precipitation, liquid equivalent) on April 7 led to a 1-category improvement across parts of northeastern Wyoming and western South Dakota. Despite the recent heavy precipitation, 6-month SPI along with 28-day average streamflow support a continuation of moderate drought (D1) across the High Plains. Following another week of precipitation along with considerations of soil moisture and SPI values of neutral to positive, abnormal dryness (D0) coverage was reduced throughout the Dakotas. A strengthening low pressure system on April 6 and 7 brought high winds to the Great Plains which dried out topsoil especially across Kansas and southeastern Colorado. A reassessment of SPIs at various time scales and given snow water equivalent is slightly above average, D1 coverage was reduced for southern Colorado…
Colorado Drought Monitor one week change map ending April 9, 2024.
As a low pressure system shifted inland, widespread precipitation (rain and high-elevation snow) overspread the West from April 3 to 6. Heavy precipitation (more than 1.5 inches, liquid equivalent) along with snow water equivalent (SWE) amounts near average supported a 1-category improvement to western Idaho and northeastern Oregon. Parts of western Montana also had a 1-category improvement due to a wet week and considerations such as SWE and SPIs at various time scales. The current depiction of moderate to severe drought across Idaho and western Montana lines up well with the 6 to 9-month SPI. On April 5 and 6, a major storm developed across the northern Rockies and high Plains with precipitation amounts exceeding 1.5 inches (liquid equivalent) across southern Montana. Based on this heavy precipitation and lack of support from SPIs at various time scales, a 1-category improvement was made to this region. Neutral to positive SPIs at multiple time scales and SWE near to slightly above normal supported the removal of D0 (abnormal dryness) from western Nevada and adjacent areas of California. Farther to the north, low snowpack resulted in a second week of D0 and D1 expansion across north-central and northeastern Washington. Although it was a mostly dry week for the Southwest, a reassessment of SPIs at various time scales led to targeted improvements for parts of New Mexico.
Major drought relief, associated with El Nino, occurred this past winter across the lower Mississippi Valley. Precipitation from April 2-8 led to a small decrease in abnormal dryness (D0) and moderate drought (D1) to parts of this region. Heavy precipitation that occurred after 7am CT Tuesday, April 9th, will be factored into next week’s depiction. A strengthening low pressure system on April 6 and 7 brought high winds and elevated wildfire danger to the southern Great Plains which dried out topsoil, especially across northwestern Oklahoma. 30 to 90-day SPEI along with the lack of vegetation green up supported an expansion of D0 and D1 across parts of Oklahoma. Northern Arkansas and northwestern Tennessee also had an increase in D0 and D1 coverage as short-term precipitation deficits became larger dating back to 60 days.
Looking Ahead
During the next five days (April 11-15, 2024), a low pressure system and trailing cold front will move offshore of the East Coast on April 11th. Locally heavy rainfall (more than 1 inch) is forecast to accompany this cold front. From April 12 to the 14th, much drier weather is forecast throughout the eastern and central U.S. By April 14th, another low pressure system is expected to track inland to the West with additional rain and high-elevation snow. Later on April 15th, another round of wet weather is anticipated for the northern Great Plains and Midwest.
The Climate Prediction Center’s 6-10 day outlook (valid April 16-20, 2024) favors above-normal temperatures across the eastern and southern contiguous U.S. (CONUS) with below-normal temperatures most likely across the northern Great Plains, northern to central Rockies, and Pacific Northwest. Increased above-normal precipitation probabilities are forecast for most of the eastern and central CONUS excluding Florida where below-normal precipitation is slightly favored. Below-normal precipitation is also more likely along the West Coast.
US Drought Monitor one week change map ending April 9, 2024.
Straight line diagram of the Lower Arkansas Valley ditches via Headwaters Magazine
Here’s the release from Southeastern Water (Chris Woodka):
April 9, 2024
The impending purchase of an Otero County farming operation by the city of Aurora violates the 2003 Intergovernmental agreement between the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District and Aurora, according to a resolution passed unanimously Tuesday, April 9, 2024 by the District’s Board of Directors.
The action came after Marshall Brown, General Manager of Aurora Water explained details of the purchase and Aurora’s interpretation of the IGA to the Southeastern Board. Aurora intends to spend $80.4 million to buy 5,200 acres of land and the water used to irrigate 4,806 acres. Most of the water used to irrigate the land is through Catlin Ditch shares, along with other water rights in the Arkansas Valley.
Aurora would use the water three years out of every 10 and lease water back to a farming company, C&A Companies, in seven years out of every 10. Brown stressed that Aurora wants to keep farming alive in the Arkansas Valley.
Southeastern claims the sale violates an IGA signed in 2003 that cleared the way for Aurora to use Fryingpan-Arkansas Project facilities to move water out of the Arkansas River basin into the South Platte River basin under a 40-year contract with the Bureau of Reclamation. The IGA also is the foundation for a series of other agreements over the next eight years with other major water providers in the Arkansas basin, including Colorado Springs Utilities, Pueblo Water, the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District, Fountain, the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District and Fountain.
The major points made in the resolution include:
The central purpose of the 2003 IGA is to prevent Aurora from purchasing any additional agricultural water rights and permanently transferring those rights out of the basin for permanent use.
The provision in the agreement to transfer water when Aurora’s storage is below 60 percent refers to storage that was available in 2003, rather than additional storage Aurora may have gained since then or is contemplating building.
The purchase of additional Arkansas River basin water rights to transfer out of the basin for municipal use in Aurora violates the 2003 IGA, and the Board urges Aurora to refrain from or cease all violations.
The 2003 IGA is a foundational and beneficial document for the Arkansas River basin and in order to maintain regional cooperation and relationships with water rights owners and entities within the basin, both the District and Aurora must remain in compliance with the IGA.
The 2003 IGA was written following Aurora’s second purchase of Rocky Ford Ditch shares and required payments of $25.5 million to the Southeastern District over 40 years as compensation for the loss of agricultural land. It also allows Aurora to lease water in dry years, and only when Aurora’s reservoirs are less than 60 percent full – so-called “Category 2” water.
During a question-and-answer session, Southeastern Board members sparred with Brown over several topics, including whether Aurora would be willing to put conservation easements on its farmland to assure that irrigation would occur in perpetuity, how Aurora would account for the 60 percent storage requirement, if agricultural conservation and rotating fallowing would be used and why Aurora believes the current IGA has limited its ability to move water.
For the most part, those questions were left unresolved, and Brown indicated Aurora is open to more negotiations. Southeastern Board President Bill Long reminded Brown of the importance of the 2003 IGA: “We have taxpayers who have been part of the District since 1958. … It was this basin who developed the project for the people of this basin. We have people asking, ‘Why are we diverting water out of our basin to build houses in Northern Colorado?’ So, we have issues in this basin we have to work through. The Project absolutely is not being utilized for what its original purpose is for. … This Board will comply with the IGA and defend the IGA on behalf of our constituents, and our view of the agreement may be a bit different than yours.”
Reservoir storage on New Mexico’s Rio Grande and Rio Chama on April 1, 2024. Credit: John Fleck
Click the link to read the article on the Inkstain website (John Fleck):
April 1, 2024
Inspired by Jack Schmidt’s monthly “how much water is in Colorado River storage” posts (see here for last month’s), I’ve been playing with a similar tool to help me think about the status of our reservoirs on the Rio Grande system here in New Mexico.
The graph above helps me with two important intuitions about how the system is functioning.
At the decadal scale, the water management shift in the early 2000s from a time of plenty to a time of not plenty is dramatic.
At the interannual scale, the decline in water kept in storage upstream of the middle valley (the red line above) goes from bad to worse beginning in the late teens.
Data choices
NORTH AND SOUTH
Based on a useful conversation with Jack about this, it makes sense here to split things up into two bins – the northern reservoirs (which hold the water available for our use here in New Mexico’s Middle RIo Grande Valley) and the southern reservoirs (which hold storage for the Elephant Butte Irrigation District, El Paso and surrounds, and Mexico).
TIME SERIES
Because of a quirk in the data I have access to, and because I am too lazy to do the work to overcome the quirk, it makes sense to start the time series at 1980. But that also makes conceptual sense in terms of how I think about the system – our “modern era” of water management includes these two broad multi-decadal periods – the wet stuff 1980-2000, and the dry stuff ever since.
TIME STEP
I find it most helpful to plot this at an annual time step. How does storage right now compare to last year at this time? So the graph above is the storage as of April 1 (actually March 31). I’ve plotted it both ways (daily as well), but the interannual ups and downs make it harder for me to see what’s going on.
2024 v. 2023
After last year’s unusually wet year:
Northern reservoirs are up ~27,000 acre feet on April 1
Southern reservoirs are up ~95,000 acre feet.
The Loss of El Vado
Summer maximum versus end of year storage in El Vado Reservoir. Credit: John Fleck
The loss of El Vado Reservoir, currently under repair, is striking. But what’s also striking is how significantly we were draining it in recent years, before the current repairs started in 2022.
The Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District built El Vado in the 1930s (with an under-appreciated amount of federal subsidy) to extend the irrigation season, capturing spring runoff for use in the dry months of late summer and fall. (“Canals move water in space, dams move water in time.”)
I’m still playing with how best to illustrate this. The graph above shows how full El Vado gets each year as it swells with spring runoff (blue dot) and how far we’ve drained it by the end of the year (red dot).
Let’s play a game, the climate-change game that every living thing on Earth has no choice but to play, starting … now.
The game is called Adapt/Move/Die, and the rules are simple. The object of the game is not to die. And the winners, well, the winners get to keep playing the game.
You may say wait, what about Solve? Isn’t solving the climate crisis an option? Yes, of course, and a worthy goal.
But even if humanity somehow musters the now-lacking resolve to rapidly phase out fossil fuels, greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere are higher than at any time in hundreds of thousands of years. The effects on climate will continue to unfold for centuries.
Adapt/Move/Die used to have another name: Evolution. But Evolution was played without a time clock over centuries or millennia. Adapt/Move/Die is customized for our fast-paced world. Every round is a lightning round, and there are no time-outs.
Let’s get started! Who’s on Team Adapt? You already know some of them well because they are all around us — pigeons and rats, cockroaches and coyotes, dandelions and thistles. No matter how the climate changes, these adapters will find a way, and a place, to survive.
Under the old evolution rules, most species belonged to Team Adapt. But the pace of the new game has changed everything.
Just take a look at your local forest. Its trees were once adapted, attuned to the temperature, soil, patterns of rain and snow and natural pests.
But now, every forest is full of dying trees. A report from the Forest Service estimated that over 36 million, yes, million, trees died in 2022 just in California.
For many plants facing rapid climate change, their only choices are Team Move, or Team Die. It is an unanswered and existential question whether the plants that support the biosphere can move fast enough.
And what of people? As befits our huge numbers and our great cleverness, it is likely that no species on Earth will show such complicated game play.
Team Adapt will mostly be drawn from the global North, where climate extremes may (repeat, may) be somewhat buffered, and where great economic resources can be brought to bear in the name of adaptation.
Here, we hope, coastal cities can be protected behind seawalls and levees. Infrastructure can be strengthened or moved or repaired. Some emergency assistance will be available for victims of “natural” disasters.
Tragically, none of these fixes will be available, or be enough, for huge numbers of people. The United Nations estimates that extreme weather caused 2 million deaths in the past 50 years, but that pales in comparison to what’s coming.
The World Health Organization predicts that climate change will cause an estimated 250,000 additional deaths per year between 2030 and 2050 from disease, starvation and heat stress.
If true, Team Die will claim 5 million members over that 20-year span. Many of those deaths will come from the poorest countries, where people lack even the resources to join the last team: Team Move.
“Move” will, in fact, be the most disruptive play in the game. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees estimates that between 2008 and 2016, an average of 21.5 million people per year were displaced by climate-related events like floods, storms and wildfires.
But again, that is just a mild preview of what could be coming. The same report concludes that 1.2 billion people, or over 10% of the world’s population, could be displaced globally by 2050.
When playing “Move” involves crossing national borders, it often has another name: illegal immigration. From the United States to Europe to Australia, illegal immigration is already considered to be a crisis, and has been a key factor in the rise of right-wing political parties. Given the harsh response to the existing level of illegal immigration, it is frightening to imagine what the future flood of climate refugees could face.
Pepper Trail
There is only one way to win the game of Adapt/Move/Die. That is to recognize that we all share this critically damaged planet. To succeed, adaptation will require cooperation. To survive, those who must move will require help and compassion.
We can play the game together and win the right to keep playing, that is, to live. Or we can enlist in Team Die by choosing isolation and conflict.
Anyone want to roll the dice?
Pepper Trail is a contributor to Writers on the Range, writersonthernage.org, an independent nonprofit dedicated to spurring lively conversation about the West. He is a conservation biologist who has written widely on evolution and climate change. He lives in Ashland, Oregon.
The snowpack for the Aspen-area mountains was about 46% below the 30-year median after a dry November and was about 35% below in December, according to Sam Collentine, a Basalt-based chief operating officer and meteorologist for OpenSnow.com. Conditions improved slightly in January when the snowpack ended up 3% above the 30-year median for the month, despite a dry stretch for a good share of the month. Conditions finally flipped in February, when the snowpack was 20% above median, and especially in March, which ended at plus 74%…The season started with a lot of promise with two big snowstorms in October that established an impressive base. But, as is typical for Colorado, conditions dried out in November and into December…
Snowmass collected 94.6 inches of snow in March, or 172% of normal. Aspen Mountain recorded just shy of 86 inches or 175% of normal, according to Aspen Weather…OpenSnow’s Collentine took a look for snowfall at the Aspen-Snowmass ski areas for Oct. 1 into early April and found Aspen Highlands nosed out Snowmass with 312 inches to 310 inches. Highlands finished the season at 105% of the 30-year median while Snowmass was at 101%. Aspen Mountain recorded 257 inches or 107% of median while Buttermilk was at 161 inches and 106%…
As a whole, the Roaring Fork basin’s snowpack was at 115% of median on Tuesday. Collentine noted that conditions around Aspen were similar to those in the Upper Colorado River Basin and the state as a whole. The Upper Colorado Basin, which the Roaring Fork is part of, is at 106% of the 30-year median and the statewide snowpack is at 108%.
Shoshone Hydroelectric plant. Photo credit: The Colorado River District
Click the link to read the article on the Summit Daily website (Robert Tann). Here’s an excerpt:
April 9, 2024
During a Tuesday, April 9, Summit Board of County Commissioners meeting, river district General Manager Andy Mueller told officials that his organization’s efforts to acquire water rights along a segment of the Colorado River “is vital to the health of all of our rivers in the Western Slope.”
Western Slope communities aren’t the only beneficiaries of the current system, with the [Shoshone Hydroelectric] plant’s water rights strengthening flows in Grand, Summit and Eagle counties, providing security to areas that depend on the Colorado River for a host of economic and environmental reasons. If the current water rights were not in place, the main beneficiaries would be Denver Water and other trans-mountain diverters which would experience increased yield through their respective collection systems, according to the river district…
In order to keep the same volume of downstream flow under new ownership, the river district will need to secure a water right for an instream flow, which can only be operated by the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The river district is currently in talks with the board to create a contract to do just that. But the crux of the river district’s deal is the water right’s $99-million price tag.
Sediment forms when rocks and soil weather and erode. We think of rivers as something that moves water, but just as important is its ability to move and shape the earth.
One of the primary concerns when planning for dam removal is the impact of sediment transport on water quality, river health, and the communities that depend on healthy rivers. Sediment forms when rocks and soil weather and erode. We think of rivers as something that moves water, but just as important is its ability to move and shape the earth. Sediment comes in all shapes and sizes—everything from silts and clays to coarse sand and gravel. Each of these kinds of sediment mean different things for rivers and aquatic life. Coarser material like gravel and sand often makes up the bed of the river and help create and maintain complex habitat upon which many aquatic communities depend. The presence of dams can starve downstream reaches of sediment, which can lead to increased bank erosion.
Dams create reservoirs and reservoirs accumulate sediment over time—more than 100 years in the case of the four dams being removed from the Klamath River. The degree of sedimentation downstream following a dam removal depends on multiple factors, such as sediment volume, sediment management plans (i.e., phased removal of a dam and passive release of material, dredging), the river’s geomorphology, and the composition of the sediment itself (e.g., fine grain, mud, or coarse). Studies of previous dam removals have shown the resilience of rivers following dam removals. Rivers have the capacity to recover from the influx of sediment after dam removal within a period of days to a few years and tend to thrive afterward. After an initial phase of disturbance following a large removal, the geomorphology of the river stabilizes as the river begins to heal.
We can get a sense sense of how one day the Klamath River will thrive again by looking to other successful removals. The removal of Edwards Dam on the Kennebec River in 1999 is a story of restoration and revitalization. Its removal reconnected migratory corridors that had been cut off for 162 years, improving habitat for Sturgeon, alewife, eagles, and osprey. Millions of alewife now return to the Kennebec.
Edwards Dam on Kennebec River Pre-Removal | Photo by American Rivers
Another high-profile dam removal where passive release of sediment was utilized is the Condit Dam on the White Salmon River in Washington State. The 125-foot-tall Condit Dam impounded 2.4M cubic yards of sediment, 59% of which was comprised of silt, clay, and very fine sand. More than 60% of the reservoir sediment eroded within 15 weeks of breaching the dam Salmon and steelhead have rapidly recolonized the White Salmon River mainstem and tributaries thanks, in part, to natural river dynamics that allow these systems to recover quickly. In fact, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, redds were found throughout the former lake area less than a year after the dam was initially breached.
The 2018 Bloede Dam removal on the Patapsco River in Maryland serves as another useful case study. The 34-foot-tall dam impounded approximately 186,600 m3 of stored sediment, 50% of which eroded within the first six months following removal. River herring were documented (via eDNA) upstream of the former dam site within the first year following removal, and American eel populations skyrocketed from 36 in 2018 to more than 36,500 in 2022. Like the Klamath River dam removals, each of these removals entailed a period of recovery and depended on cross-sector collaboration and advocacy.
Bloede Dam before removal on the Patapsco River | Jessie Thomas-Blate
Bloede Dam after removal on the Patapsco River | Jessie Thomas-Blate
While the impacts of dam removals vary significantly, the evidence of the last 20 years points to the effectiveness of dam removal and the long-term benefits for communities, fish, and wildlife. With more than 91,000 dams inventoried by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and several hundred thousand more low-head dams, aquatic ecosystems in steep decline (freshwater ecosystems are dealing with extinction at twice the rate of terrestrial ecosystems), and the impacts of climate change altering weather and precipitation patterns threatening the stability and durability of water infrastructure, dam removal has become an increasingly urgent priority in terms of ecological health, community safety, and climate resilience. Simply put, the fastest way to heal a river is to remove a dam.
As state negotiators haggle over who will reduce their use of the over-allocated Colorado River, the farmers who ultimately have to implement the inevitable cuts to water consumption are strategizing how to meet that challenge. Why aren’t farmers just planting crops that use less water? That’s what Greg Peterson, executive director of the Colorado Agriculture Water Alliance called “the big question” during a panel on innovative solutions for agriculture Wednesday at the Southwestern Water Conservation District’s 40th annual water seminar…
But large-scale crop-switching “ain’t pretty.” New crops demand new labor skills, expensive new equipment and different processing facilities. And the market for new, water-efficient crops might be small or nonexistent.
“(It’s a) misconception that farmers are market-makers,” said Perry Cabot, a research and extension leader with Colorado State University. “Farmers are market-takers.”
Greg Vlaming runs a soil health consulting business in Lewis, north of Cortez, and works with farmers to take advantage of some of the state’s incentives. Farmers who install soil moisture sensors see the water-saving benefits of improved soil health, he said. The programs help purchase new equipment that minimize the number of passes a farmer must make over a field, or introduce diverse crops with different rooting characteristics…
“You’re wasting everybody’s time if you’re saying, ‘Hey all of you, let’s go grow some Kernza,’” he said.
Instead, the entities pushing for the adoption of more drought-resistant crops need to teach farmers how to farm them. Peterson points to Colorado Mills in Lamar as an example. The company struggled for five years to teach producers to grow sunflowers for sunflower oil before the operation really succeeded.
A bumblebee pollinates a prairie clover. (Erin Anfinson/NPS/Public domain)
Here’s the release from the Colorado Farm & Food Alliance:
Paonia, CO. (April 9, 2024) – The Colorado Farm & Food Alliance is kicking off our Spring Workshops just as the growing season begins, this weekend (April 13) at our new learning center on Lamborn Mesa, just outside Paonia, Colorado.
Miles Filipeli will lead the inaugural offering this Saturday – Natural Farming with Local Amendments, April 13 – provided to the community by the CO Farm & Food Alliance on a gift model by donation with $20 suggested but none required. The following Saturday will showcase Building Soil and Families: Holistic Grazing, April 20, with Jason Wrich of Wrich Ranches.
Workshops continue May 4 with Cover Crops with Jon Orlando of Rock n Roots Farm and Colorado Farm & Food Alliance’s Elizabeth Agee, May 18 with Native Pollinators in the Market Garden with Paige Payne of Online Landscape Design, and May 25, with our final offering, Alley Cropping with Elizabeth Agee. Information on the series and the full schedule can be found at colofarmfood.org/blog.
Colorado Farm and Food Alliance is excited to bring this series to the Regenerative Agriculture Gardens and Classroom, which is back at its new location in partnership with our host, Arbol Farm, a working farm with a multi-generational legacy of hosting educational events as well as the early days of the local farmers market on-site. (The market has since moved but has kept the Arbol name).
The practices these workshops cover, and that will be demonstrated at our Gardens & Classroom, can offer many benefits to Colorado’s producers. These include market benefits like improved yields and nutrition, as well as more system resilience, habitat enhancements and boosted ecosystem services, and increased adaptation to and mitigation of the effects of climate change.
The Regenerative Ag Gardens and Classroom is the centerpiece of our Just Good Food program, and includes both an indoor and outdoor learning space. Workshops mostly feature a classroom component followed by a hands-on project or planting to solidify the learning in action. The Just Good Food program works to teach, model and advance practices and to promote engagement to further food security, farm resilience, and rural equity. Through these workshops, participants can creatively engage with and explore ways to incorporate some of these practices in their operations.
Colorado Farm and Food Alliance is grateful to continue the educational legacy of Arbol Farm by offering a fun and engaging space for learning, with demonstration and food gardens, workshops of regenerative agriculture principles, movie nights and pizza parties this summer, and more!
Click the link to read the release on the NRCS website:
Current snowpack stands at 114 percent of median. As Colorado welcomes the spring season, a review of March storms reveals that late-season snowstorms and consistent precipitation have led to a significant boost in snowpack and precipitation numbers across most major river basins.
Denver, CO – April 8th, 2024 – Current snowpack stands at 114 percent of median. As Colorado welcomes the spring season, a review of March storms reveals that late-season snowstorms and consistent precipitation have led to a significant boost in snowpack and precipitation numbers across most major river basins. The state experienced a marked increase in snow water equivalent (SWE) in March, ending the month at 112 percent of median snowpack. Statewide, precipitation for March was 155 percent of median and water year-to-date precipitation stands at 103 percent of median. These conditions have improved streamflow volume forecasts statewide, currently standing at 103 percent of median.
Credit: NRCS
From March 13-15, an impactful upslope storm shrouded the Front Range with SNOTELS reporting one to nearly four feet of new snow in the South Platte basin. Snowpack in the South Platte improved from 93 percent at the start of March to 115 percent by mid-March and ended the month at 121 percent. “This mid-March storm propelled many sites within this basin into the upper decile. Not only did Niwot SNOTEL receive five inches of SWE and a 41-inch increase in snow depth, ranking it third highest in its 44-year record, but this storm also mirrored these exceptional increases at numerous SNOTEL sites,” comments Nagam Gill, NRCS hydrologist. The Upper Rio Grande basin shows similar improvements and boosted snowpack at the start of the month from 84 to 96 percent mid-month.
As Colorado surpasses the historical peak SWE date, typically in early April, our focus shifts from accumulating snowpack to the streamflow forecasts. The April 1 forecasts show improvement with most basins above median. Notably, 43 out of 87 streamflow monitoring stations have forecasted streamflow volumes above median. In the combined Yampa-White-Little Snake River basin streamflow volumes are forecasted at 120 percent and have all nine streamflow monitoring stations anticipating above median flows. Despite these positive developments, certain basins have not fully rebounded from the earlier deficits in the water year. “Statewide precipitation from October to December 2023 was at 80 percent, ranging from 59 to 87 percent across basins,” says Gill. “This below-median precipitation early in the water year could mean drier soils which would need to absorb more snowmelt, potentially affecting streamflow efficiency.” The combined San Miguel-Dolores-Animas-San Juan River basin, while receiving above median March precipitation at 145 percent, stands at 82 percent of median streamflow forecasts, reflecting a water year-to-date precipitation of 92 percent of median. The South Platte River basin benefitted from upslope storms, enhancing precipitation medians, and echoing this uptick in the streamflow volumes, with all 12 stations reporting near or above median 50% exceedance forecasts. Streamflow forecasts in the Upper Rio Grande and the Arkansas River basins are anticipating 96 and 107 percent, respectively. The Colorado Headwaters and Gunnison River basins are both forecasted above median streamflow at 105 and 104 percent, respectively.
Although we await more detailed reservoir data, preliminary figures at the end of March indicate that storage levels have generally kept pace with historical medians ranging from 86 to 116 percent of median. The Yampa-White-Little Snake and South Platte River basins are maintaining near normal reservoir storage at 103 and 99 percent of median, respectively. The combined San Miguel-Dolores-Animas-San Juan River basin is at 86 percent with Navajo Reservoir at 82 percent of historical capacity.
View of West Tennessee Creek from Northern Lode inholding. Photo credit: USFS
From email from the USFS:
LEADVILLE, Colo., April 9, 2024 – The Leadville Ranger District of the Pike-San Isabel National Forests & Cimarron and Comanche National Grasslands in partnership with the Wilderness Land Trust, announce the acquisition of the 10.2 acre Northern Lode inholding located in Lake County near Leadville, Colorado. The entire property is within the boundary of the Holy Cross Wilderness. Acquisition of the inholding is under the authority of the Organic Act of August 3, 1956. Under the Wilderness Act of September 2, 1964, this parcel will be automatically designated as wilderness and will be precluded from development.
Wilderness areas provide a natural environment for plant and animal species, protect watersheds that provide clean drinking water to surrounding communities, filter and clean the air, sequester carbon and offer opportunities for solitude and recreation in a place mostly undisturbed by modern human development. The acquired parcel is only accessible by foot or horse travel and does not have any roads or trails. It has scenic views of the West Tennessee Creek drainage and the Continental Divide. Part of it straddles the ridgeline that runs between Galena Mountain and Homestake Peak, about a half mile from the West Tennessee Creek Lakes Trail #1499 and 3.25 miles from National Forest System Road 131. Historically, this parcel was utilized for mining and mineral exploration consisting of prospecting pits and horizontal passages for the purposes of access or drainage.
“The Wilderness Land Trust worked with the landowner for over a year before we were able to acquire the property in February 2022. This property was important for us to pick up firstly because it was a true wilderness inholding,” said Kelly Conde, lands specialist with Wilderness Land Trust. “It is located on a very steep slope, just below 13,000-foot Homestake Peak. Any mineral development would have had a big impact on the landscape. Secondly, this was the second to last private inholding on the Pike-San Isabel side of the Holy Cross Wilderness. As an organization that is dedicated to filling in the holes in our wilderness areas, it was exciting to be able to pick up and transfer the inholding to the U.S. Forest Service.”
“This is a great acquisition because wilderness inholdings can change the character and solitude of an area if developed,” said Leadville District Ranger Patrick Mercer. “Just by consolidating the land ownership, current and future preservation of the Holy Cross Wilderness takes a big step forward. I’m really pleased that the team was able to get this across the finish line.”
The acquisition of the parcel falls within one of the categories that may be excluded from documentation in an Environmental Impact Statement or Environmental Analysis. A project or case file and decision memo are not required under 36 CFR 220.6(d)(6). Through the process of scoping and interdisciplinary review, no extraordinary circumstances significantly affecting the environment were found to exist.
One soldier with team of six dogs and sled at foot of Homestake Peak. Wikane, J. Harry (John Harry), 1915-1999. Date: 1943 via Denver Public Library Digital Collections
As part of the Administration’s commitment to combating PFAS pollution, EPA announces $1B investment through President Biden’s Investing in America agenda to address PFAS in drinking water
April 10, 2024
WASHINGTON – Today, April 10, the Biden-Harris Administration issued the first-ever national, legally enforceable drinking water standard to protect communities from exposure to harmful per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as ‘forever chemicals.’ Exposure to PFAS has been linked to deadly cancers, impacts to the liver and heart, and immune and developmental damage to infants and children. This final rule represents the most significant step to protect public health under EPA’s PFAS Strategic Roadmap. The final rule will reduce PFAS exposure for approximately 100 million people, prevent thousands of deaths, and reduce tens of thousands of serious illnesses. Today’s announcement complements President Biden’s government-wide action plan to combat PFAS pollution.
Through President Biden’s Investing in America agenda, EPA is also making unprecedented funding available to help ensure that all people have clean and safe water. In addition to today’s final rule, EPA is announcing nearly $1 billion in newly available funding through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to help states and territories implement PFAS testing and treatment at public water systems and to help owners of private wells address PFAS contamination. This is part of a $9 billion investment through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to help communities with drinking water impacted by PFAS and other emerging contaminants – the largest-ever investment in tackling PFAS pollution. An additional $12 billion is available through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for general drinking water improvements, including addressing emerging contaminants like PFAS.
EPA Administrator Michael Regan will join White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair Brenda Mallory to announce the final standard today at an event in Fayetteville, North Carolina. In 2017, area residents learned that the Cape Fear River, the drinking water source for 1 million people in the region, had been heavily contaminated with PFAS pollution from a nearby manufacturing facility. Today’s announcements will help protect communities like Fayetteville from further devastating impacts of PFAS.
“Drinking water contaminated with PFAS has plagued communities across this country for too long,” said EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan. “That is why President Biden has made tackling PFAS a top priority, investing historic resources to address these harmful chemicals and protect communities nationwide. Our PFAS Strategic Roadmap marshals the full breadth of EPA’s authority and resources to protect people from these harmful forever chemicals. Today, I am proud to finalize this critical piece of our Roadmap, and in doing so, save thousands of lives and help ensure our children grow up healthier.”
“President Biden believes that everyone deserves access to clean, safe drinking water, and he is delivering on that promise,” said Brenda Mallory, Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. “The first national drinking water standards for PFAS marks a significant step towards delivering on the Biden-Harris Administration’s commitment to advancing environmental justice, protecting communities, and securing clean water for people across the country.”
“Under President Biden’s leadership, we are taking a whole-of-government approach to tackle PFAS pollution and ensure that all Americans have access to clean, safe drinking water. Today’s announcement by EPA complements these efforts and will help keep our communities safe from these toxic ‘forever chemicals,’” said Deputy Assistant to the President for the Cancer Moonshot, Dr. Danielle Carnival. “Coupled with the additional $1 billion investment from President Biden’s Investing in America agenda to help communities address PFAS pollution, the reductions in exposure to toxic substances delivered by EPA’s standards will further the Biden Cancer Moonshot goal of reducing the cancer death rate by at least half by 2047 and preventing more than four million cancer deaths — and stopping cancer before it starts by protecting communities from known risks associated with exposure to PFAS and other contaminants, including kidney and testicular cancers, and more.”
EPA is taking a signature step to protect public health by establishing legally enforceable levels for several PFAS known to occur individually and as mixtures in drinking water. This rule sets limits for five individual PFAS: PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHxS, and HFPO-DA (also known as “GenX Chemicals”). The rule also sets a limit for mixtures of any two or more of four PFAS: PFNA, PFHxS, PFBS, and “GenX chemicals.” By reducing exposure to PFAS, this final rule will prevent thousands of premature deaths, tens of thousands of serious illnesses, including certain cancers and liver and heart impacts in adults, and immune and developmental impacts to infants and children.
This final rule advances President Biden’s commitment to ending cancer as we know it as part of the Biden Cancer Moonshot, to ensuring that all Americans have access to clean, safe, drinking water, and to furthering the Biden-Harris Administration’s commitment to environmental justice by protecting communities that are most exposed to toxic chemicals.
EPA estimates that between about 6% and 10% of the 66,000 public drinking water systems subject to this rule may have to take action to reduce PFAS to meet these new standards. All public water systems have three years to complete their initial monitoring for these chemicals. They must inform the public of the level of PFAS measured in their drinking water. Where PFAS is found at levels that exceed these standards, systems must implement solutions to reduce PFAS in their drinking water within five years.
The new limits in this rule are achievable using a range of available technologies and approaches including granular activated carbon, reverse osmosis, and ion exchange systems. For example, the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority, serving Wilmington, NC – one of the communities most heavily impacted by PFAS contamination – has effectively deployed a granular activated carbon system to remove PFAS regulated by this rule. Drinking water systems will have flexibility to determine the best solution for their community.
EPA will be working closely with state co-regulators in supporting water systems and local officials to implement this rule. In the coming weeks, EPA will host a series of webinars to provide information to the public, communities, and water utilities about the final PFAS drinking water regulation. To learn more about the webinars, please visit EPA’s PFAS drinking water regulation webpage. EPA has also published a toolkit of communications resources to help drinking water systems and community leaders educate the public about PFAS, where they come from, their health risks, how to reduce exposure, and about this rule.
“We are thankful that Administrator Regan and the Biden Administration are taking this action to protect drinking water in North Carolina and across the country,” said North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper. “We asked for this because we know science-based standards for PFAS and other compounds are desperately needed.”
“For decades, the American people have been exposed to the family of incredibly toxic ‘forever chemicals’ known as PFAS with no protection from their government. Those chemicals now contaminate virtually all Americans from birth. That’s because for generations, PFAS chemicals slid off of every federal environmental law like a fried egg off a Teflon pan — until Joe Biden came along,” said Environmental Working Group President and Co-Founder Ken Cook. “We commend EPA Administrator Michael Regan for his tireless leadership to make this decision a reality, and CEQ Chair Brenda Mallory for making sure PFAS is tackled with the ‘whole of government’ approach President Biden promised. There is much work yet to be done to end PFAS pollution. The fact that the EPA has adopted the very strong policy announced today should give everyone confidence that the Biden administration will stay the course and keep the president’s promises, until the American people are protected, at long last, from the scourge of PFAS pollution.”
“We learned about GenX and other PFAS in our tap water six years ago. I raised my children on this water and watched loved ones suffer from rare or recurrent cancers. No one should ever worry if their tap water will make them sick or give them cancer. I’m grateful the Biden EPA heard our pleas and kept its promise to the American people. We will keep fighting until all exposures to PFAS end and the chemical companies responsible for business-related human rights abuses are held fully accountable,” said Emily Donovan, co-founder of Clean Cape Fear.
More details about funding to address PFAS in Drinking Water
Through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, EPA is making an unprecedented $21 billion available to strengthen our nation’s drinking water systems, including by addressing PFAS contamination. Of that, $9 billion is specifically for tackling PFAS and emerging contaminants. The financing programs delivering this funding are part of President Biden’s Justice40 Initiative, which set the goal that 40% of the overall benefits of certain federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities that have been historically marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution.
Additionally, EPA has a nationwide Water Technical Assistance program to help small, rural, and disadvantaged communities access federal resources by working directly with water systems to identify challenges like PFAS; develop plans; build technical, managerial, and financial capacity; and apply for water infrastructure funding. Learn more about EPA’s Water Technical Assistance programs.
More details about the final PFAS drinking water standards:
For PFOA and PFOS, EPA is setting a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal, a non-enforceable health-based goal, at zero. This reflects the latest science showing that there is no level of exposure to these contaminants without risk of health impacts, including certain cancers.
EPA is setting enforceable Maximum Contaminant Levels at 4.0 parts per trillion for PFOA and PFOS, individually. This standard will reduce exposure from these PFAS in our drinking water to the lowest levels that are feasible for effective implementation.
For PFNA, PFHxS, and “GenX Chemicals,” EPA is setting the MCLGs and MCLs at 10 parts per trillion.
Because PFAS can often be found together in mixtures, and research shows these mixtures may have combined health impacts, EPA is also setting a limit for any mixture of two or more of the following PFAS: PFNA, PFHxS, PFBS, and “GenX Chemicals.”
EPA is issuing this rule after reviewing extensive research and science on how PFAS affects public health, while engaging with the water sector and with state regulators to ensure effective implementation. EPA also considered 120,000 comments on the proposed rule from a wide variety of stakeholders.
Background:
PFAS, also known as ‘forever chemicals,’ are prevalent in the environment. PFAS are a category of chemicals used since the 1940s to repel oil and water and resist heat, which makes them useful in everyday products such as nonstick cookware, stain resistant clothing, and firefighting foam. The science is clear that exposure to certain PFAS over a long period of time can cause cancer and other illnesses. In addition, PFAS exposure during critical life stages such as pregnancy or early childhood can also result in adverse health impacts.
Across the country, PFAS contamination is impacting millions of people’s health and wellbeing. People can be exposed to PFAS through drinking water or food contaminated with PFAS, by coming into contact with products that contain PFAS, or through workplace exposures in certain industries.
Since EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan announced the PFAS Strategic Roadmap in October 2021, EPA has taken action – within the Biden-Harris Administration’s whole-of-government approach – by advancing science and following the law to safeguard public health, protect the environment, and hold polluters accountable. The actions described in the PFAS Strategic Roadmap each represent important and meaningful steps to protect communities from PFAS contamination. Cumulatively, these actions will build upon one another and lead to more enduring and protective solutions. In December 2023, the EPA released its second annual report on PFAS progress. The report highlights significant accomplishments achieved under the EPA’s PFAS Strategic Roadmap.
Products that contain PFAS. Graphic credit: Riverside (CA) Public Utilities
Click the link to read the article on the NOAA website:
April 8, 2024
Severe storms brought large hail and tornadoes to portions of the Midwest; blizzard buried parts of California under feet of snow
Key Points:
March 12–15 saw the most intense severe weather outbreak of the year through March 31 after powerful storms brought baseball-sized hail and more than 20 tornadoes to portions of the Midwest, resulting in significant damage and loss of life.
A blizzard blasted parts of California’s Sierra Nevada with gusts of up to 190 mph and more than 10 feet of snow at the beginning of March.
March 2024 was the 17th-warmest March on record for the nation and precipitation ranked in the wettest third of the historical record for the month.
Other Highlights:
Temperature
The average temperature of the contiguous U.S. in March was 45.1°F, 3.6°F above average, ranking 17th warmest in the 130-year record. March temperatures were above average across much of the contiguous U.S., while below-average temperatures were observed in small pockets of the West and Southwest.
The Alaska statewide March temperature was 14.1°F, 3.3°F above the long-term average, ranking in the warmest third of the 100-year period of record for the state. Above-average temperatures were observed across much of the state with near-normal temperatures in parts of the North Slope, Interior, Southwest and parts of the Aleutians and Panhandle.
For January–March, the average contiguous U.S. temperature was 39.4°F, 4.2°F above average, ranking fifth warmest on record for this period. Temperatures were above average across most of the contiguous U.S., while record-warm temperatures were observed in parts of the Northeast. Wisconsin, Michigan, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine each ranked second warmest for the January–March period.
The Alaska January–March temperature was 9.4°F, 3.5°F above the long-term average, ranking in the warmest third of the historical record for the state. Much of the state was above normal for the three-month period while temperatures were near average across the eastern portions of the state and in parts of the Aleutians and Panhandle.
Precipitation
March precipitation for the contiguous U.S. was 2.85 inches, 0.34 inch above average, ranking in the wettest third of the historical record. Precipitation was above average across much of the West, in the Great Lakes and along the Gulf and East coasts and in parts of the northern Plains. Conversely, precipitation was below normal across much of the Ohio Valley, the Plains, and in parts of the Northwest and Florida. Maine and Rhode Island each had their second-wettest March on record.
Alaska’s average monthly precipitation ranked in the middle third of the historical record. Precipitation was above average in parts of the North Slope, West Coast and Southeast, while below-normal precipitation was observed in parts of the central Interior, south-central Alaska and in parts of the Panhandle during the month.
The January–March precipitation total for the contiguous U.S. was 8.15 inches, 1.19 inches above average, ranking 10th wettest in the 130-year record. Precipitation was above average across much of the contiguous U.S., with Rhode Island having its second-wettest year-to-date period on record. Conversely, precipitation was below average across much of the northern Plains and in small parts of the Northwest, central and southern Plains, Ohio Valley and Southeast during the January–March period.
The January–March precipitation for Alaska ranked in the wettest third of the 100-year record, with above-average precipitation observed in parts of the North Slope, West Coast and Southeast, while below-normal precipitation was observed in parts of the central Interior and south-central Alaska, as well as southern portions of the Panhandle during this period.
A map of the U.S. plotted with significant climate events that occurred during March 2024. Please see the story below as well as more details in the report summary from NOAA NCEI at http://bit.ly/USClimate202403 offsite link. (Image credit: NOAA/NCEI)
Billion-Dollar Disasters
One new billion-dollar weather and climate disaster was confirmed in March 2024 after a severe weather event impacted the central and southern U.S. during mid-March, with the most severe weather occurring on March 13–15. The U.S. has sustained 378 separate weather and climate disasters since 1980 where overall damages/costs reached or exceeded $1 billion (including CPI adjustment to 2024). The total cost of these 378 events exceeds $2.675 trillion.
Other Notable Events
Five wildfires, including the Smokehouse Creek wildfire, were finally contained in the Texas Panhandle, the largest cattle-producing region in the world. The wildfires resulted in approximately 1.1 million acres scorched, hundreds of destroyed structures, hundreds of miles of ruined fencing and more than 7,000 dead cattle.
Winter did not bring heavy snowfall to Wisconsin nor the temperatures necessary to maintain the snow, allowing fires to begin early and in high numbers. Between January–March 2024, there have been more than 220 fires across Wisconsin. A 5.25-inch diameter hail stone fell in Ada, Oklahoma on March 14, which is the largest stone reported in Pontotoc County since 1950, as well as the largest to fall in the state in nearly 13 years.
A state of emergency was declared for Ohio as several tornadoes struck the state, resulting in 3 fatalities on March 14 when an EF-3 tornado crossed Auglaize and Logan Counties.
US Drought Monitor map April 2, 2024.
Drought
According to the April 2 U.S. Drought Monitor report, about 18% of the contiguous U.S. was in drought, down about 3.6% from the end of February. Drought conditions expanded or intensified in portions of the Plains and in parts of the Northwest, central Mississippi Valley, northern Great Lakes and Hawaii this month. Drought contracted or was reduced in intensity across much of the Mississippi Valley, Puerto Rico and the West, and in parts of the Plains, Great Lakes and Carolinas.
Monthly Outlook
Above-average temperatures are favored to impact much of the central U.S., Northwest and Northeast in April while above-average precipitation is likely from much of the Plains to parts of the East Coast and in much of the Southwest. Drought is likely to persist along portions of the Northern Tier, the Southwest, Hawaii and Puerto Rico. Visit the Climate Prediction Center’s Official 30-Day Forecasts and U.S. Monthly Drought Outlook website for more details.
Significant wildland fire potential for April is above normal across much of the Upper Midwest and in parts of the central and southern Plains. For additional information on wildland fire potential, visit the National Interagency Fire Center’s One-Month Wildland Fire Outlook.
This monthly summary from NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information is part of the suite of climate services NOAA provides to government, business, academia and the public to support informed decision-making. For more detailed climate information, check out our comprehensive March 2024 U.S. Climate Report scheduled for release on April 11, 2024. For additional information on the statistics provided here, visit the Climate at a Glanceand National Maps webpages.
The National Weather Service Colorado Basin River Forecast Center on Friday estimated that Lake Powell will receive 5.7 million acre-feet of water between April and July as snow melts off the mountains…That volume is 89% of the normal runoff for that time period recorded between 1991 and 2020…
Three factors determine how much water ends up in Lake Powell: the amount of snowpack on Western mountains, spring temperatures (warmer weather can cause snow to melt faster) and soil moisture (dry soil absorbs melting snow, leaving less water for reservoirs)…Snowpack jumped in March throughout the Upper Colorado River Basin, the portion of the river basin that lies above Lake Powell and includes Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming…
(Colorado Basin River Forecast Center) This graph depicts snowpack in the Upper Colorado River Basin, which includes Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming. SWE stands for snow water equivalent, which is the measure of how much water is in snow. As of April 1, snow water equivalent in the Upper Basin is 113% of the median snow water equivalent recorded between 1991 and 2020.
Last month, the Upper Basin saw 130% of average precipitation, bringing precipitation above Lake Powell to 102% of average for October 2023 through March 2024. But an above-average year for snow doesn’t guarantee an above-average runoff, given the forecast of warm spring temperatures and dry soil conditions. Right now, forecasters say, soil moisture across the entire Colorado River Basin — which includes Arizona, California and Nevada as the Lower Basin — is close to below normal. Soil moisture is better in the Upper Basin than in the Lower Basin. When forecasting how much water Lake Powell will get, hydrologists release three possible scenarios. On Friday, forecasters reported that there is a 10% chance that the reservoir could receive as much as 8.3 million acre-feet of water or more from April through July. In a drier scenario, there is a 10% chance that runoff could drop to 4.4 million acre-feet of water or below. The most likely case is that Lake Powell sees about 5.7 million acre-feet of water.
A bird perches upon towering mud banks left behind by a shrinking Lake Powell on July 5, 2022. A new proposal for managing the Colorado River and its reservoirs encourages states to include environmental protections as they draw up water sharing plans. Photo credit: Alex Hager/KUNC
Click the link to read the article on the KUNC website (Alex Hager):
This story is part of ongoing coverage of the Colorado River, produced by KUNC and supported by the Walton Family Foundation. It was produced in partnership with The Water Desk, an independent initiative of the University of Colorado Boulder’s Center for Environmental Journalism.
April 1, 2024
A coalition of environmental groups is proposing a new set of rules for managing the Colorado River after 2026, when the current guidelines expire. Their proposal, which aims to weave environmental protections into river management policy, comes amid heated negotiations about how the shrinking river should be shared in the future.
In March, the seven states which use the river found themselves divided into two camps, each faction publishing its own proposal for managing water. The two groups have promised to work towards consensus and are aiming to agree on a singular plan before 2026. The authors of the new environmentally-focused proposal — a group of seven conservation nonprofits — say they don’t expect their own plan will be adopted in full, but hope to encourage state and federal water managers to consider plants, animals and ecosystems while drawing up their own Colorado River policies.
“If you integrate these ideas into those annual operations, you can have your water security — which the states want — but then you also get these environmental benefits that make sure that you do have a healthy flowing river that is the foundation for the entire system,” said John Berggren, a water policy expert at Western Resource Advocates, one of the conservation groups that co-signed the proposal.
All seven of the organizations that crafted the river management proposal receive funding from the Walton Family Foundation, which also supports KUNC’s Colorado River coverage.
“New plot using the nClimGrid data, which is a better source than PRISM for long-term trends. Of course, the combined reservoir contents increase from last year, but the increase is less than 2011 and looks puny compared to the ‘hole’ in the reservoirs. The blue Loess lines subtly change. Last year those lines ended pointing downwards. This year they end flat-ish. 2023 temps were still above the 20th century average, although close. Another interesting aspect is that the 20C Mean and 21C Mean lines on the individual plots really don’t change much. Finally, the 2023 Natural Flows are almost exactly equal to 2019. (17.678 maf vs 17.672 maf). For all the hoopla about how this was record-setting year, the fact is that this year was significantly less than 2011 (20.159 maf) and no different than 2019” — Brad Udall
Current negotiations about how to share the Colorado River are driven by one defining fact: The water supply for 40 million people across the Southwest is shrinking due to climate change. Talks about how to rein in demand accordingly have been contentious since states are reluctant to cut into water supply for the cities, farms and ranches within their borders.
Fish biologist Dale Ryden holds a razorback sucker on Jan. 26, 2024. The native fish species is one of many in the Colorado River protected by the Endangered Species Act. Photo credit: Alex Hager/KUNC
The “Cooperative Conservation Alternative,” as dubbed by the environmental proposal’s authors, offers a series of ideas on how to make sure decisions about the water supply for people and businesses don’t leave the environment behind.
The first idea outlined in the proposal is the implementation of a new way of measuring how much water is stored in reservoirs along the Colorado River, with water releases adjusted accordingly. Among other tweaks to measuring reservoir storage, the proposal suggests adjusting reservoir releases according to recent trends in climate conditions. For example, the new method would take into account snowmelt lost to dry, thirsty soilswhen determining release levels following particularly dry years.
The environmental groups also want to see fish habitats considered as a factor when determining how much water is released from major reservoirs. The proposal cites the health of aquatic ecosystems in the Grand Canyon, where native fish are threatened by predatory invasive species that have been able to travel downstream due to dropping water levels in Lake Powell – the nation’s second largest reservoir.
The proposal also suggests the creation of a “Conservation Reserve,” a program that would allow water users to store some of their supply in major reservoirs. That stored water would be used to help avoid low reservoir levels that could damage infrastructure– including hydropower generators – but would not be counted when determining how much water is released from major reservoirs in a given year. The “Conservation Reserve” would replace the existing “Intentionally Created Surplus” program.
The conservation groups say the ideas in their proposal are designed to benefit the environment, but shouldn’t be seen as objectionable by the water users along the Colorado River or the states which ultimately have the most say in the river’s fate.
“That water supply is available to all of us because of the function of the river as an ecosystem itself,” said Jennifer Pitt, Colorado River program director at the National Audubon Society. “If we ignore that entirely, and the system that sustains that functioning waterway erodes and breaks down, we may lose some of its ability to deliver us water in the first place.”
Pitt also said more robust ecosystem protections can occasionally help water users stay in legal compliance with environmental rules. There are 27 species covered by the Endangered Species Act in the lower Colorado River basin, and water users can face penalties if they’re unable to leave enough water in the river to maintain healthy habitatsfor those protected species.
A toad climbs a rock in a canyon near Lake Powell on July 6, 2022. The authors of a new proposal to protect ecosystems along the Colorado River said a healthy flowing river would benefit human water users as well as plants and animals. Photo credit: Alex Hager/KUNC
The environmental proposal joins prior suggestions from the Colorado River’s upper basin states of Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico, and a competing proposal from the lower basin states of California, Arizona and Nevada.
Native America in the Colorado River Basin. Credit: USBR
A number of the 30 federally-recognized Native American tribes that use the Colorado River may also be working on water management proposals. The Gila River Indian Community in Arizona, which has positioned itself as a major tribal player in water management talks, said it did not support the lower basin states’ plan released in March and will soon release its own suggestions for managing the river.
A separate group of 16 tribes sent a letter to the Bureau of Reclamation – the federal agency that manages Western dams and reservoirs – outlining a series of “principles” the tribes want to see reflected in final Colorado River management plans.
While the current rules for sharing the river are set to expire in 2026, the Biden administration’s water officials want to arrive at a final set of replacement rules by the end of 2024 to avoid any complication that could come from a change in presidential administration after the November election.
“The idea that we would allow this archaic little water right to disappear and watch it get siphoned off to benefit someone else’s future is really hard to take if you live and thrive here in Western Colorado.” — Colorado River District General Manager Andy Mueller
The city of Grand Junction became the latest entity to contribute to an effort to preserve a senior water right on the Colorado River Wednesday after City Council voted unanimously to pledge $1 million to the cause. The water right is from the Shoshone power plant in Glenwood Canyon, and provides 1,250 cubic feet per second under the senior right, and 158 cubic feet per second under the junior water right.
“It’s one of the oldest, largest rights on the Colorado River within our state,” said Colorado River District General Manager Andy Mueller said at Wednesday’s meeting. “It’s very unique in that it’s a non-consumptive water right built and first decreed in 1902 to generate hydroelectic power.”
In December, Xcel Energy and the river district agreed on a sale of the water rights for $99 million…Mueller said communities have relied on this water right for recreation, agriculture and development.
The White River National Forest hired two interns with funds from Pitkin County Healthy Rivers and Streams to study beaver utilization of Roaring Fork Watershed headwaters. U.S. Forest Service/Courtesy photo
The White River National Forest and Pitkin County Health Rivers and Streams gathered habitat data on the native keystone species in the Roaring Fork watershed throughout the summer of 2023.
“We didn’t have a huge sample size, but we feel like we learned enough to take some stabs at things. My impression is that there is some greater capacity on the landscape than what we have at the moment,” said Clay Ramey, a wildlife biologist with the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). “And there are places on the landscape that we might be able to make a little better by putting posts or BDAs, or structures in the creek, that beavers can glom on to, we could put beavers in those places and they might be likely to do well.”
[…]
At the random sites, they identified 47 dams and 6 lodges. Only about half, 53 sites, showed signs of current or past beaver utilization, through damns, chewed trees, and other evidence. The team concluded that the dispersion of beavers in the subwatersheds was wide and sparse. Vegetation at the sites varied if the site was occupied or unoccupied by beavers. Aspens, willows, and cottonwoods were prevalent on occupied sites. Conifers were more prevalent on unoccupied sites…Occupied sites were flatter with wider banks, flatter slopes, and lower elevation, but Ramey said that these high-elevation beavers did not always avoid high elevation…
[Lisa] Tasker and Ramsey said that a long-term goal of this study is to help the public learn to live among beavers, while also identifying potential relocation spots as necessary.
American beaver, he was happily sitting back and munching on something. and munching, and munching. By Steve from washington, dc, usa – American Beaver, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=3963858
Beavers have constructed a network of dams and lodges on this Woody Creek property. Pitkin County is betting big on beavers, funding projects that may eventually reintroduce the animals to suitable habitat on public lands. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISMBeaver. Photo credit: Oregon State UniversityA beaver dam on the Gunnison River. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen JournalismNorth American beaver (Castor canadensis)
Beaver dam analog on the Smith Fork of the Gunnison River. Screenshot from Tales on the Smith Fork — Colorado Farm & Food
Tales on th Smith Fork tells the story of a project to rehabilitate a riparian area along a stream at a ranch in western Colorado using low-tech process-based restoration and the installation of beaver dam analogs. Produced by the Colorado Farm & Food Alliance and filmmaker David Jacobson, this film was made possible with a grant from the LOR Foundation: “We work with people in rural places to improve quality of life.” Thank you Rancho Largo, David and the LOR Foundation for making this work possible.
Click the link to read the article on the Sky-Hi News website (Elliot Wenzler). Here’s an excerpt:
April 8, 2024
Conservationists point to graywater uses as a way to cut down on water consumption in the West
A bill that would allow graywater systems to be included in new homes throughout Colorado received rare unanimous approval from the Colorado House on Friday…The bipartisan House Bill 2024-1362 (Measures to Incentivize Graywater Use) is sponsored by Rep. Meghan Lukens, D-Steamboat Springs, and Rep. Marc Catlin, R-Montrose, Sen. Dylan Roberts, D-Frisco, and Sen. Cleave Simpson, R-Alamosa…Currently, local governments are permitted to opt into graywater programs. Under the bill, the whole state would be automatically allowed to include graywater systems in new constructions, but local governments could choose to opt their community out…
Since the state gave initial approval for local governments to opt into graywater programs in 2013, only six jurisdictions have chosen to do so including Pitkin County, Grand Junction, Denver, Castle Rock, Fort Collins, Broomfield and Golden. If approved by the Senate and signed by the governor, the bill would go into effect at the start of 2026.
Graywater is mentioned in the Colorado Water Plan as a possible tool for the state to meet current and future water needs. It notes there are challenges with the technology, including the effort of retrofitting existing buildings with the systems. It also includes a “general lack of interest on the part of local governments to enact local graywater ordinances,” a “lack of interest from developers” and “concerns that property owners could be resistant to operating and maintaining a graywater system within their residences” as challenges.
The Canyon Country lost an important, fierce, and sometimes curmudgeonly voicelast month when Jim Stiles died at his home in Clearwater, Kansas. Stiles founded the Canyon Country Zephyr in Moab, Utah, in 1989, and continued to publish, edit, and do much of the writing for the publication in its various forms right up to his death.
I didn’t always agree with Stiles. We sparred, sometimes heatedly, over his opposition to the designation of Bears Ears National Monument. I think we felt a similar disappointment in the gentrification of Moab and other parts of the Canyon Country, but disagreed on the causes, and had it out a couple times over that. But I always admired and respected him, his writing, his thinking, and his tenacity in “clinging hopelessly to the past,” as the Zephyr’s tagline reads.
I don’t know what will happen to Zephyr going forward, though it’s hard to imagine it without Stiles’ involvement in some form. But for now the website still exists, with archives going back to 2011. I’d suggest heading over there and checking it out while you still can.
Watch for an essay on Moab, Stiles’ old stomping ground, in next Tuesday’s Land Desk.
🥵 Aridification Watch 🐫
The Upper Colorado River snowpack appears to have peaked a day or two earlier than normal, but 10% higher. We’ll take it.
Just about normal: That sums up snowpack levels across much of the Southwest right now. And you know what? Normal feels like a reason to celebrate following more than two decades of aridification and megadrought. Except for one little thing. As the great Bruce Cockburn sings:
The trouble with normal is it always gets worse.
Okay, when it comes to snowpack it may not always get worse. But since “normal” is a moving average based on 30-year segments, and the current “normal” is pegged to 1990 to 2020 — one of the driest periods in the last 1,200 years or so — then it’s fair to conclude that normal has, indeed, gotten worse.
Note that in the Upper Rio Grande, the current snowpack level (after taking a big drop over the last couple days) is right at the 1991-2020 normal, but still below the period-of-record normal, which extends back into the super-moist 1980s. And normal on the Rio Grande typically means it will run dry through Albuquerque sometime this summer. Bummer.
March was a big one for folks getting caught in avalanches in Colorado, but fortunately there were no fatalities. So far this season avalanches have killed 13 people nationwide.
But even so, this year’s snowpack is a heck of a lot better in most places than it was a few years ago — at least so far. During that 1990-2020 period, the snowpack’s median peak for most watersheds has occurred in early April. Whether the spring runoff is as healthy as the snowpack, though, depends a lot on what happens next. A wet, cool spring could boost the snowpack even more, pushing the peak forward and delaying the peak runoff, which is good for lowland water supplies and could further boost reservoir levels.
Black line = 2024; Purple = 2023; Red = 2021. As you can see, the North Fork is sitting right at normal these days.
Southwestern Colorado’s snowpack appears to have peaked at the usual time, before dropping off rather quickly due to a pair of warm days. Note the big boosts in February and March, saving the region from a disastrous 2021-esque snowpack. Will high April winds and dust melt it off too quickly?
But a warm, windy, dry April and May? Not so good. Warm days and nights will speed up the snowmelt and affect runoff. But the real dastardly culprit is that wind (which is kicking up in the North Fork Valley as I write this), which not only sucks moisture out of the snow, but also lifts up dust from the lowlands and deposits it on the high country snowfields, lending them a reddish brown tint. That, in turn, reduces the snow’s albedo, or ability to deflect the sun’s rays, which causes the snow to melt and evaporate more quickly.
Either way, Lake Powell’s levels will rise somewhat over the next few months. The question is by how much and, more importantly, how significant the summer decline will be. Meanwhile, all that normal-ness should keep the reservoir from dropping to critically low levels for at least another year.
Oof. The snowpack in the Flathead drainage in Montana is at critically low levels right now — near record-low levels, in fact. Yikes.
The same cannot be said for reservoirs further north, however. Snowpack levels in Montana and Wyoming and much of the Northwest are frighteningly low. While those rivers aren’t endangered in the way the Colorado River is, the meagre winter snows are expected to diminish hydropower output from the Northwest’s dams this summer, which will likely force grid operators to rely more heavily on fossil fuel generation.
Dust, snow, and diminishing albedo — Jonathan P. Thompson, May 7, 2021
The McElmo Dome, Mesa Verde, and Ute Mountain, obscured by dust. Heavily grazed lands are in the foreground. The view was blotted out altogether later that day. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.
“Most of us are poor now, like I am. Many of them blame John Collier, who made us reduce our flocks and herds because there was not enough grass for all. But I think the true reason is a change in the climate. When I was a young man this whole country was covered with tall grass. We had rains enough in summer to keep it alive and growing. Now the rains do not come and the grass dies. There are fewer sheep and horses now than when our family claimed this valley, yet all you can see is sand. The grass is gone.
“All we need to be rich again is rain.“
—Navajo elder Hoskannini-Begay, who lived on Naatsis’áán, or Navajo Mountain, near the confluence of the San Juan and Colorado Rivers, to Charles Kelly in 1945
Click the link to read the article on the Big Pivots website (Allen Best):
April 4, 2023
Mike Kruger of the Colorado Solar and Storage Association explains why the big jump now and how storage has become an important component of the trade organization’s agenda.
First, a question for you: What is your first reaction to seeing the chart below. Is it wow! Or had you already realized that this was coming, this break-out year for solar in Colorado?
When I talked with Mike Kruger, who directs Colorado Solar and Storage Association, he assured me that most readers of Big Pivots will not be surprised. Most saw it coming – and, in fact, had it not been for Covid and the supply disruptions, Colorado might have had its big leap during 2021.
The chart comes from the Solar Energy Industries Association report of March 2024. The report — which brims with interesting data — says nearly 40% of Colorado’s 4,112 megawatts of installed solar capacity was installed in 2023. And that Colorado is projected to gain another 2,835 megawatts of capacity in the next five years.
Credit: Solar Energy Industries Association report of March 2024
A full admission: I said wow, and I had been tracking this story since roughly 2016 – which is one place where this story starts. Xcel Energy that year began its electric resource planning cycle. It got bids late in 2017 and announced them just after Christmas. I remember seeing the e-mail distributed by Leslie Glustrom, an Xcel shareholder and watchdog. Wind, especially, but solar, too, had delivered jaw-dropping offers. In that instant it became apparent to me that coal would soon to be in our rear-view mirror.
The Colorado Public Utilities Commission approved Xcel’s plans for a deep investment in renewables in September 2018.
That November Jared Polis was elected Colorado governor after having campaigned on a platform of 100% renewables.
In early December, Xcel Energy announced it planned to achieve an 80% reduction in carbon emissions by 2030 as compared to 2005 levels. Platte River Power Authority announced an even more ambitious goal in December but one festooned with conditions. And by the next May, Colorado had a law that required Xcel and Black Hills Energy to attain 80% decarbonization by 2030.
Kruger had arrived in the midst of this sudden pivot to take the reins of what was then called the Colorado Solar Energy Industries Association. At the time, the staff consisted of Kruger and one other individual. The organization now has six staff members, suggestive of the growth of the solar industry in Colorado.
On a recent Friday, between an emergency discussion about legislative affairs and his next appointment, Kruger talked with Big Pivots for about 25 minutes about the context for this graph and the story that lies beyond.
Big Pivots: What explains this big jump in solar during 2023 in Colorado?
Mike Kruger: We’re finally seeing the fruits of some of our labors here to decarbonize stuff. The big jump is explained largely by Thunder Wolf and Neptune, Xcel’s two big solar projects in Pueblo County. Nearly 500 MWs of new solar and 125 megawatts of battery as well. All are for Xcel Energy. And then we have the projects of the electrical cooperatives, including the 80-megawatt project out by Bennett (east of Denver). Hunter. That power goes to CORE Electric Cooperative and …
Holy Cross Energy.
Yeah. The Hunter project came on in 2023. Multiple other smaller projects entered service in 2023, too.
We’re just seeing the fruits of the labor by COSSA and other advocacy groups to decarbonize. Neptune and Thunder Wolf were a result of the solicitation in 2017 that came online in 2023. So it takes time to build these things. Obviously, we have a pandemic between them, which pushed the timeline even further.
Now that they’ve been set up, these dominoes are going to start falling. We’re going to really see hundreds, if not thousands, of megawatts of solar added to the grid every year through the rest of the decade.
In 2019, when we passed our first decarbonization bill, we had a 15-gigawatt system in Colorado. That was our peak demand. 80% of that is around 12 gigawatts of demand. Through 2019, we had installed about 2 gigawatts of renewables, mostly wind.
So, to meet those decarbonization goals, you have to build a lot of solar farms. You have to put up a lot of wind turbines. For the first time we’re seeing that legislative and policy work finally coming together.
We can only expect it to get bigger. The future now is 25 gigawatts by 2034, according to modeling by the Colorado Energy Office. To hit that we now have to add a gigawatt (of generation) every year for all the 2020s and then need to add two gigawatts a year for the first five years of the 2030s.
It’s a good time to be a solar installer, to be a solar developer. There’s a “gignormous” market in Colorado. It’s heavily competitive, but it‘s a big market.
Mike Kruger, right, and Will Toor, director of the Colorado Energy Office, after a panel discussion about net-metering at the Colorado Solar and Storage Association annual conference in February. Credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots
How deeply is this understood within your industry. And how well do you think the general public understands this?
I suspect the world’s energy geeks recognize where solar is and where it’s going to be. I don’t think they would be surprised. In fact, I think most would be frustrated that the jump didn’t happen in 2021 rather than in 2023.
And I don’t think any Big Pivots readers would be surprised. They might be surprised by the size of the jump, but we are starting from a pretty small base.
As for people writ large, they have no idea that renewables were responsible last year for 30% of Colorado’s electric grid. I think most people would be shocked. If you were an Xcel customer, it was even higher, I think close to 50%.
And you didn’t experience outages, or at least any more outrages than you have experienced previously. You lost power for four hours in 2023, like you did in 2022, like you did in 2021, right? That speaks to how well the utilities are quickly figuring this stuff out. Kudos to them. They have one job, keep the lights on, and they’re doing it with now a much higher carbon-free mix and more intermittent generation.
OK, what we see here was basically an outcome of decisions made in 2017. If memory serves me, for much of that decade prices for solar had come down 10% a year. Although I think the costs have now leveled off.
Some of the best prices we had were in that Xcel RFP from 2017. The prices are up now. They’ve elevated, but they’re still tons cheaper than the alternatives. Go back to Xcel Energy’s most recent 120-day report. Even solar-plus-storage came in cheaper than gas. Nobody bid coal, but solar would come in cheaper than coal, even from the existing coal plants.
Is it as cheap as it ever was? No. But it’s still really cheap. And I think that whether you’re a homeowner or a utility — and increasingly we’re seeing corporate buyers, such as Amazon and Google — it’s a very viable option.
That’s combined with really strong (state) policy support. Our neighbors to the west gutted their efforts on solar support and generally climate friendly policies. And now they don’t have anywhere near the decarbonized electricity system that we do.
The neighbors to the west being Utah?
Yes, specifically Utah. They have one big city, like we do. No offense to our good folks in Colorado Springs and Pueblo. And they have similar geography: lots of mountains and high desert.
Hunter Solar, located east of Denver and south of Bennett, came online in late 2023. CORE Electrical Cooperative has 45 megawatts of the generating capacity and Holy Cross Energy has 30. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots
So your members are not surprised by this. They knew it was coming. They might’ve wished that it had happened earlier, if not for Covid. Is that surge then reflected in your organization? By that, I mean the number of members you have. And I’ve been noticing that you have added staff.
It’s a “virtuous cycle.” When I started, it was me and one other individual, and we had, I think it was, 83 to 85 members. We didn’t exactly know how many we had. This week we crossed 300 members. Now, we’re at almost four times the size. And I’ve gone from me and a single individual to now me and five others. We have six on our staff.
My membership has invested in me and the organization, and we have won a bunch of policy victories, which then opens the market even further. And then that allows those folks to invest further in the policy and advocacy work that we do.
We are getting pretty close to the top. An annual survey of companies doing work in each market shows about 350 in Colorado, and I have 300 of them. Using the kind-of-standard 80-20 rule. I think we’re probably pretty close to the top as far as membership numbers go.
That doesn’t mean those members won’t continue to grow. Part of the point of our work is to ensure that members who are currently doing two rooftop systems a week can, if their customer demand is there, expand to five a week.
Or consider Sandbox Solar in Fort Collins, which started in 2015. They were exclusively a rooftop company. All they did was residential rooftop. Now they’ve expanded into the commercial-industrial market and can be successful with multiple footprints. They’re a different company now than when they started.
If memory serves me, you came on in 2018, right?
Correct. I think my first day was Oct. 1. Then we (his family) moved here right around Halloween.
Then in the spring of 2019, my board said, we’re rebranding. We’re adding storage, so rename us, rebrand us, build a new website.
How important is that storage as a component of what you do? Do you have companies that are storage exclusive?
We have some companies that are exclusively developers of storage on a large scale.
Increasingly, we have solar folks expanding (into storage) Photon Brothers is a really good example. The company has been doing rooftop systems for maybe 10 years, and they are now the leading installer of (Tesla) Powerwalls in the state because they’ve really leaned into that. They have a group of customers for which they know so this makes good sense.
For solar of 20 megawatts or more to be bid into a utility RFP without the option to have batteries is almost unheard of.
In places that have price signals, like time-of-use rates, we see batteries being used there and also in places that are prone to outages. So we’re definitely seeing that as an expanded business opportunity, but almost always by a solar company that’s moving into that space. The exception, like I said, we have a few large-scale companies that do only battery storage.
Mike Kruger, right, chats with Kevin Smith, then chief executive of Lightsource bp, upon the near completion of the Bighorn solar project in October 2021. The 300 megawatt solar project was built for Evraz, the owner of the steel mill in Pueblo. Since then Target, Walmart and Amazon have all installed solar projects associated with their operations in Colorado. Amazon has a 6-megawatt solar project in Aurora. Credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots
Looking back to before you arrived in Colorado, your predecessors spent a fair amount of time at the PUC and in meetings, trying to work toward policies. But it’s my sense that you now have two attorneys that can be engaged in the PUC process. Are there signal accomplishments that you think you’ve been able to achieve in the policy realm?
Some of the stuff I’m proudest of is still working its way through.
First, I want to be clear that I stand on the shoulders of the folks that came before me. I didn’t come into an organization that I created from scratch. We’re actually celebrating our 35th anniversary this year.
One item I’m very proud of is that we just got a tariff from Xcel and Black Hills about multi-unit net-metering so that for apartment dwellers you can put a large solar array on-site somewhere in the apartment or on the roof and the individual apartment occupants and renters can get solar credits. That’s a huge market that has not been tapped. That was a single issue that we pushed. There really wasn’t a lot of other folks pushing it. Once we got it to the Legislature and brought it to people’s attention, we picked up some allies. That’s one I’m proud of.
The most recent Xcel electric resource plan had a lot of small details, but those details add up. We’re getting 5,300 megawatts of new renewables being procured.
One of our big wins was in Xcel’s initial filing, they only wanted 400 megawatts of batteries. We forced them back to the drawing board. They are ending up buying 1,848 megawatts of batteries. So, more than four times what was originally planned.
Once you get all those batteries on the grid, we will better be able to integrate renewables. We’ll decarbonize faster. We’ll have less need for gas-peakers. And we’ll have an increasingly stable grid, right?
Batteries solve a lot of the intermittency issues that had had many utilities concerned. They don’t solve everything. I get that lithium-ion batteries have four-hour windows or six-hour windows. But four hours is better than nothing. And energy geeks like the Big Pivots readers will know that we really are only worried about four hours or thereabouts most days. Except for—
When you’re worried about a hundred hours when the wind isn’t blowing, right?
Yeah, exactly. There will be some point in the future when we have 10 days of no sun, no wind, and it will be dastardly cold or whatever. And we’ll need something bigger than that.
That’s why COSSA is involved in some of the conversations about regional markets and expanded transmissions, because it may be brutally cold here with no wind and no solar, but it won’t be in New Mexico or it won’t be in Idaho.
Hopefully we’re smart enough to grab a big geographic footprint to offset those few occasions.
Allen, there’s plenty more to do. The state is far from decarbonized. We have some policies in place, but not enough. And then we’re adding a boatload of new load (demand), right? New electrification of vehicle and fleets and industrialization and buildings. We’ve haven’t solved any of that. It’s a huge opportunity for my membership. It’s millions and millions of dollars of new private investment in mitigating climate change that we haven’t even tapped into yet.
Any workforce issues? As we talk about decarbonizing buildings, it’s brought up again and again that we don’t have the workforce familiar with heat pumps, for example.
Yes and no. Right now, solar is kind of in a steady state where we’re not hiring but we’re not firing. If you’ve been a student of this for a long time, we’ve had the “solar coaster” where we’ve ramped up and hired a bunch of folks and then the bottom dropped out and we let a bunch of folks go. Right now I think things are pretty steady state.
However, like other trades, we struggle to attract new individuals. You can make a lot of money being a crew lead or being a sales lead or a chief designer, but maybe it’s on us to do a better of communicating that. It’s not as sexy as say, going to Harvard or getting your master’s degree from CU or whatever.
All the trades have this problem. That includes plumbers and electricians. I applaud a bipartisan effort to draw attention to that through education. Honestly, though, if you wanted to become an electrician today, if you know where to look, you can do it for free. The grants are available, the training is available, and you can end up with a $150,000 job and have no debt.
Percentage of State’s Electricity from Solar: 9.03%.
Solar Companies in State: 394 (38 Manufacturers, 182 Installers/Developers, 174 Others).
Total Solar Investment in State: $7.7 billion.
Prices have fallen 47% over the last 10 years.
Growth Projection: 2,836 MW over the next 5 years (ranks 19th).
OK, and you have to go in a minute, but let’s talk land use.
I am not totally convinced that we have a problem to solve yet. I think there is potential for conflict, whether that’s on the local community with NIMBys or the environmentalists who are worried about specific species or ecosystems. However, we don’t have them yet.
For us to be solving a problem at the Legislature that we don’t have yet feels a little premature. I know there are folks on the other side who say, well, we should solve them before they become a problem. I get a little worried about solving a problem that doesn’t exist because we might solve it in the incorrect way and create all kinds of unintended consequences. Coming up on seven weeks left in the session, we don’t have a bill yet. To my knowledge, there’s still not an agreement about what a bill should contain.
But things could move quickly – as always.
And then Kruger was off to his next meeting. The land use in question was a non-bill that has been getting a lot of attention – including from Big Pivots. See: “Should Colorado tell counties how to review renewable projects?” It would set a statewide standard for evaluating renewable energy projects by towns, cities and county governments. In late February, Sen. Chris Hansen told Big Pivots he planned to introduce it during March. As of early April, it has not.
What will have to wait are my questions about hail and solar panels. My in-house editor wants to know whether Colorado’s proclivity for hail made it somewhat less attractive to solar developers.
And then there’s the question about all those acres and acres of warehouse roofs that are proliferating along I-70 and I-76 on the eastern and northeaster edges of metropolitan Denver. What role might they place in the future? Will they be covered with solar panels some day?
Author’s note: My “Extinction Countdown” column will mark its 20th anniversary this summer. As that milestone approaches, let’s look back at some previous entries, which I’ll update for the world we find ourselves in today. A version of this article was published in 2016 in Scientific American.
Japanese knotweed. Purple loosestrife. Kudzu. Mesquite. Giant hogweed. Bitou bush. What do these plants have in common? Easy: They’re among the most “invasive” plant species on the planet. When humans bring these highly adaptable, fast-growing plants to new ecosystems, whether it’s on purpose or by accident, native species often get squeezed out and pushed toward extinction.
But, unlike predators such as rats and cats — which have threatened animal species and caused extinctions around the globe — have displaced plants like kudzu ever actually driven another plant species extinct? The authors of a 2016 paper published in the journal AoB Plants couldn’t document any confirmed cases.
Not yet, anyway. But that’s only because globalization is a relatively recent phenomenon.
“The main reason why there is no clear evidence of extinction that can be exclusively attributed to plant invasions is that invasions have not been around long enough,” co-author Dave Richardson of the Centre for Invasion Biology at Stellenbosch University, South Africa, said in a prepared release. “Our research shows that plant extinction is an agonizingly slow process. However, red flags are evident in numerous locations around the world — species that now exist in fragmented populations, with radically reduced opportunities to reproduce.”
Richardson and co-author Paul Downey from the University of Canberra looked at these “red flags” and came up with a six-point “extinction trajectory” for native plant species facing threats from displaced vegetation:
Plants die more quickly than they can be replaced by their offspring in some locations.
Plants disappear from some locations entirely, but potential offspring remain as “propagules,” seeds or spores that could regenerate a new cohort of individuals.
Some locations lose both individual plants and their propagules. With no plants or seeds, this is a local extinction.
The last locations hosting a species lose their individual plants, but in some places seeds or spores remain in the soil.
The species is entirely lost in the wild, with no individuals or propagules. The only survivors are held in botanic collections.
The remaining plants are lost, and the remaining seeds or spores are no longer capable of becoming new plants.
Downey said that this research suggests we need to start managing threatened plants much earlier than we currently do.
“If we wait until we have sufficient evidence to show that extinctions are occurring, it will be too late to save a great number of species,” he said. Hundreds of plants species, the authors warn, may already be functionally extinct and exist now only as “the living dead.”
The biggest risk point for many plant species appears to exist somewhere between points 2 and 4 on Downey and Richardson’s scale. As we’ve seen with many endangered plants, figuring out how to keep a species alive in a botanical setting is not as easy as simply sticking a seed in the ground. Many plants require very specific conditions in which to germinate — some rely on fire, for example, while others need to be consumed by an animal, after which stomach acids soften a seed’s outer layer before it is pooped back out. Other plants require specific pollinators, which may also disappear as humans destroy an ecosystem’s delicate balance.
Will we discover the details on how these endangered plants propagate in time to save them? That seems unlikely for many species. Another 2016 paper in Conservation Biology warned that plants in general remain understudied while scientists concentrate on mammals and other more charismatic species, much in the same way that scientists also ignore “ugly” creatures. The authors called this “plant blindness” and suggest that it could have severe implications for conservation of many species now and in the future.
As Downey and Richardson wrote in their paper, the lack of evidence for extinctions “does not mean we should disregard the broader threat.” In fact, that may just make it more urgent.
Stephen Roe Lewis, Governor of the Gila River Indian Community, speaks in Tucson, Ariz. on Mar. 13, 2024. The tribe has been a high-profile partner to federal and state water managers in recent years, but Lewis said it does not support the latest Lower Basin proposal for post-2026 Colorado River management. Credit: Alex Hager/KUNC
Click the link to read the article on the KUNC website (Alex Hager):
March 13, 2024
This story is part of ongoing coverage of the Colorado River, produced by KUNC in northern Colorado, and supported by the Walton Family Foundation.
The Gila River Indian Community says it does not support a three-state proposal for managing the Colorado River’s shrinking supply in the future. The community, which is located in Arizona, is instead working with the federal government to develop its own proposal for water sharing.
The tribe is among the most prominent of the 30 federally-recognized tribes that use the Colorado River. In recent years, it has signed high-profile deals with the federal government to receive big payments in exchange for water conservation. Those deals were celebrated by Arizona’s top water officials. But now, it is diverging from states in the river’s Lower Basin — Arizona, California and Nevada.
Stephen Roe Lewis, The Gila River Indian Community’s Governor, announced his tribe’s disapproval of the Lower Basin proposal at a water conference in Tucson, Ariz., while speaking to a room of policy experts and water scientists.
“This is not the time to be standing on the sidelines,” Lewis said. “We all have a responsibility to do what we can. And that’s why The Community can’t support the current Lower Colorado River approach as it stands now.”
The announcement adds a new wrinkle to an already-complicated process. Last week, the seven states that use the Colorado River unveiled competing plans for managing its water. The Lower Basin states revealed one, and the Upper Basin states – Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico – revealed another. The opposing plans represent stark ideological differences between the two groups of states, marking the latest disagreement between rival camps that have argued over water management for decades.
Lewis, who has positioned his tribe as an ally to the federal government in helping save water, outlined a few major sticking points that led Gila River to work on its own proposal.
Water enters an irrigation canal on the Gila River Indian Reservation on May 7, 2021. The Gila River Indian Community is among the most important tribal players in ongoing negotiations about using water from the Colorado River. Photo by Ted Wood/Water Desk
One issue, Lewis said, is that the Lower Basin’s proposal creates an “unfair burden” on the state of Arizona. Under the proposed plan, all seven states would have to cut back on demand for water if levels in the nation’s largest reservoirs — Lake Mead and Lake Powell — drop below a predetermined trigger in the future. Arizona would take the largest of those cutbacks.
Another, he said, is that the Lower Basin’s plan does not explain how it would mitigate the impact of those potential new water cutbacks. Lewis said he would like to see plans to identify new sources of water away from the Colorado River that could replace water lost to cutbacks, or financial compensation.
States are under pressure to agree on plans to manage the river before 2026, when the current guidelines for sharing its water expire. Both of last week’s plans came just ahead of a deadline from the Bureau of Reclamation, the federal agency which manages the West’s dams and reservoirs. The deadline was an effort to get the ball rolling on new river rules with enough time to implement them before a potential change in administration after the upcoming November election.
Reclamation officials said they expect to work with states over the spring and summer and reach a draft for post-2026 river management rules by the end of 2024.
Now, Lewis and his staff are working with Reclamation on what could potentially be a third competing proposal. He said he hopes a proposal will be released in “weeks,” rather than months.
“It’s potentially not just the Gila River, because this will affect other tribes as well,” Lewis said. “I wouldn’t be surprised if other tribes started to register their concerns as well.”
As states and the federal government draw closer to a new set of river management rules, some tribes have repeatedly expressed frustration about being excluded from negotiations. Tribal communities often lack reliable access to clean water due to aging infrastructure and a history of underinvestment, and many are calling for greater inclusion going forward.
Lewis said that was not the issue in this case, and that the Gila River Indian Community was included in talks.
“We were at the table,” Lewis said. “It’s just the proposal, the finished product as it is right now, doesn’t reflect our concerns.” [ed. emphasis mine]
North American Indian regional losses 1850 thru 1890.
Click the link to read the proposed guidelines on the Water for Colorado website. Here’s the introduction:
On behalf of our respective organizations, the undersigned conservation groups (Conservation Groups or Groups) submit the Cooperative Conservation Alternative (Cooperative Conservation) to contribute to the ongoing dialogue shaping the future of the Colorado River through the post-2026 NEPA process for developing Colorado River Guidelines and Strategies.
The Groups request the Bureau of Reclamation include Cooperative Conservation in its analysis of post-2026 Colorado River Guideline Operations and Strategies as a forward-looking, comprehensive approach for addressing the pressing and evolving challenges facing the Colorado River Basin, its ecosystems, and the diverse community of sovereigns and stakeholders who rely upon its resources.
Cooperative Conservation is designed to inform and enhance one or more alternatives for consideration in developing the post-2026 Colorado River Operations and Strategies Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). It emerges from a synthesis of lessons learned, a deep understanding of the Basin’s environmental dynamics, and a commitment to collaborative, equitable water management, and endeavors to introduce innovative strategies that balance the needs of human and natural systems under the shadow of climate change and increasing water scarcity. [ed. emphasis mine]
The urgency to redefine the framework for Colorado River operations cannot be overstated. The Bureau of Reclamation’s (Reclamation) notice of intent to prepare an EIS for the post-2026 Colorado River marks a critical step toward addressing the Basin’s future needs (“Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Post-2026 Colorado River Operational Guidelines and Strategies for Lake Powell and Lake Mead,” 88 Fed. Reg. 12345 (June 16, 2023)). The existing guidelines, while pioneering at the time of their inception, are now recognized as insufficient to navigate the complexities of prolonged drought, escalating impacts of climate change, and pressing needs of a diverse array of sovereigns and stakeholders. Cooperative Conservation is rooted in the recognition that the Colorado River Basin has entered an era of uncertainty, where traditional management approaches must be reevaluated in light of scientific advancements, changing hydrological patterns, and the imperative of sustainability.
“New plot using the nClimGrid data, which is a better source than PRISM for long-term trends. Of course, the combined reservoir contents increase from last year, but the increase is less than 2011 and looks puny compared to the ‘hole’ in the reservoirs. The blue Loess lines subtly change. Last year those lines ended pointing downwards. This year they end flat-ish. 2023 temps were still above the 20th century average, although close. Another interesting aspect is that the 20C Mean and 21C Mean lines on the individual plots really don’t change much. Finally, the 2023 Natural Flows are almost exactly equal to 2019. (17.678 maf vs 17.672 maf). For all the hoopla about how this was record-setting year, the fact is that this year was significantly less than 2011 (20.159 maf) and no different than 2019” — Brad Udall
The significance of this Alternative lies not only in its aim to expand consideration of ways to address the immediate challenges, but also in its vision for a resilient and adaptive future that honors the interdependence of all who share this vital river. By embracing a holistic perspective that integrates scientific insight, stakeholder inclusivity, and environmental stewardship, our alternative is a framework for optimizing every drop of the Colorado River to better ensure it can remain a life-sustaining resource for future generations.
As the Conservation Groups submit this Alternative, we are mindful of the collective effort required to steward the Colorado River through the challenges ahead. We look forward to engaging in a constructive dialogue with Reclamation, the Basin States and Tribes, and all interested stakeholders involved in this essential process, united by our shared commitment to the River that sustains us all.
Map credit: AGU
Native America in the Colorado River Basin. Credit: USBR
by Jonathan Thompson, High Country News March 28, 2024
This is an installment of the Landline, a monthly newsletter from High Country News about land, water, wildlife, climate and conservation in the Western United States. Sign up to get it in your inbox.
In 2018, Brian Richter, a hydrologist and water sustainability expert, hooked a camper trailer to the car, and he and his wife embarked on a road trip up the spine of the Rocky Mountains. It was one of the driest years in a two-decade-long regional megadrought, and the entire Southwest was parched. Wildfires raged from British Columbia to Colorado, while reservoir levels continued to plummet.
As Richter traveled through the West’s uplands, he saw all the expected signs of drought: Tinder-dry forests, diminished streamflows, stressed vegetation and a ubiquitous pall of smoke that irritated eyes and lungs and blotted out the view. But he also noticed something that struck him: Nearly every valley bottom was still relatively verdant, even lush, despite the desiccating conditions.
The reason, of course, was irrigation. A major part of the settler-colonial project has been a determined effort to harness the West’s rivers and streams to raise crops and support a growing population. This has not only succeeded, it has altered much of the landscape, establishing a stark dividing line between irrigated and non-irrigated lands. “It’s part of our aesthetic as Westerners,” Richter said.
While golf courses, turf and booming desert cities gulp up a lot of water, the lion’s share of the West’s water still goes to growing crops and turning rural valleys green. Richter got to wondering: Precisely where was all that water going, and how were the different uses affecting various ecosystems? So he set out with a team of researchers to deconstruct the drivers of Western water consumption.
Irrigated landscape in McElmo Canyon in the summertime. Jonathan P. Thompson photo.
They found that 86% of the water consumed in the Western U.S. is used to irrigate crops. Everything else — from energy development to swimming pools to Las Vegas’ elaborate casino fountains — gets by on the remaining 14%. In the Colorado River Basin itself, things are marginally more balanced, with agriculture consuming about 79% of the water. Most of that, however, is used to grow food for cattle — alfalfa, hay and grass.
“We were quite surprised to see how large a proportion was going to cattle crops,” Richter told me in a Zoom interview earlier this month. The findings were published in Nature Sustainability in 2020. The article’s title — “Water Scarcity and Fish Imperilment Driven by Beef Production” — grabbed media attention and sparked many a news story that blamed the Colorado River’s demise on our appetite for cheeseburgers and steaks and the hay necessary to create them.
This spring, Richter and his team published an update of sorts, this time focusing entirely on the Colorado River. It’s the first-ever complete accounting of the system, encompassing water use from the Gila River, a tributary in New Mexico and Arizona, and all the consumptive uses[1] of the Colorado’s water, including reservoir evaporation and riparian and wetland evapotranspiration, as well as out-of-basin exports to places like Denver and the Rio Grande watershed, and water use in Mexico.
Sadly, this more complete tabulation exonerates neither bovines or beefeaters. Still, though the percentages going to cows and alfalfa farmers didn’t change significantly, it did provide more detail on those uses. Findings included:
Irrigated agriculture is by far the dominant consumer of Colorado River water, accounting for 52% of overall consumption (which includes reservoir evaporation and riparian and wetland evapotranspiration) and 74% of direct human consumption.
Cattle-feed crops (alfalfa and other hay) consume more Colorado River water than any other crop category, accounting for 32% of all water from the basin; 46% of direct water consumption; and 62% of all agricultural water consumed.
Cattle-feed crops consume 90% of all the agricultural irrigation water in the Upper Basin — three times more than is consumed by municipal, commercial and industrial uses combined.
19% of the water supports the natural environment through riparian and wetland vegetation evapotranspiration along river courses.
This accounting can help guide water managers in making the estimated 2-to-4 million acre-feet of cuts from the total annual consumption necessary to stabilize reservoir levels. Even larger reductions will be required to bring water consumption into balance with availability, as climate change-exacerbated drought and heating continues to further diminish the Colorado River. And yet, so far, the Upper Basin and Lower Basin states aren’t even close to agreeing on how those cuts should be made, or who should bear the burden.
Alfalfa and other cattle-feed crops consume 90% of all the agricultural irrigation water in the Colorado River’s Upper Basin.
The Lower Basin states — California, Nevada and Arizona — use far more water than the Upper Basin states. But when drought years shrink the Colorado River, the Upper Basin is forced to cut consumption under the 1922 Colorado River Compact. Therefore, the Upper Basin’s representatives argue, the Lower Basin should bear the burden of future cuts. The Lower Basin is willing to accept 1.5 million acre-feet of cuts, but beyond that, it wants its upstream counterparts to share the load. That amounts to an 814-billion-gallon gap between the competing proposals.
There’s a tendency to believe that rapidly growing desert cities — and ostentatiously profligate water-users, such as golf courses and lawns and swimming pools — ought to bear the burden of the cuts. But even if you cut off all the pumps in Lake Mead that serve Las Vegas, it wouldn’t make much of a difference. Southern Nevada’s consumptive Colorado River water use is about one-tenth of the Imperial Irrigation District’s in Southern California, where monumental amounts of water go to growing alfalfa and other food crops. And even as its population soars, Las Vegas is using less and less water, a phenomenon Richter terms “decoupling.”
“The only dial we have to work with is irrigated farming,” Richter said. His accounting would seem to offer an easy out: Just stop growing alfalfa and fallow the fields, or shift to less water-intensive crops. But it’s not quite that easy.
Cowgirls lasso calves so they can be branded and vaccinated at Harts Basin Ranch in April. The Delta County ranch, whose owners have been accused of water speculation, raises organic cattle.
CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM
Alfalfa is a paradoxical crop: It’s thirstier than other crops, yet also relatively drought-tolerant. It doesn’t need to be replanted every year, meaning that less tilling of the soil is required. It can be harvested by machine, so it doesn’t require a lot of increasingly hard-to-find human labor. And it’s always in demand: Though beef cattle numbers are on the decline in some Western states, the dairy industry is burgeoning — and alfalfa is important for dairy operations.
Rather than reducing alfalfa acreage or production, some Colorado River Basin farmers, especially in Utah and Arizona, have begun growing more since the megadrought began. The federal government has forked out millions of dollars to pay farmers to stop growing alfalfa, or at least to stop irrigating their fields. But that can only achieve a fraction of the needed cuts, and it is hardly sustainable over the long term. And, by reducing overall supply, it drives up prices for hay, incentivizing other farmers to switch to alfalfa rather than away from it.
Besides, shutting down farmers’ ditches and spigots would imperil those emerald ribbons of green that curl through the West’s dry rocky valleys. Agricultural irrigation greens up more than crops: The farm fields’ runoff and leaky canals also nurture willows and wetlands as well as the wildlife that depends on them.
It’s quite the quandary, and it’s hard to see a clear path to sustainability. What is clear is that massive changes are long overdue, and those changes will alter the Western landscape, perhaps returning it to something that resembles the days before industrial-scale irrigation began.
“It’s really intriguing to me to think about how the Western landscape is going to have to change,” Richter said. “What we’re talking about is not unlike the fossil fuel industry, especially coal, as it goes into decline. The ramifications for regional and local economies and the culture and social fabric of communities are even going to be greater, especially for agricultural communities.
“It’s going to be an interesting decade ahead,” he added. “And I sure wouldn’t want to be one of those negotiators on the Colorado River.”
We want to hear from you!
Your news tips, comments, ideas and feedback are appreciated and often shared. Give Jonathan a ring at the Landline, 970-648-4472, or send us an email at landline@hcn.org.
[1] Consumptive use is the amount of water withdrawn from the system and not returned to it. The Southern Nevada Water Authority, for example, withdraws about 450,000 acre-feet from Lake Mead annually — far more than the 300,000 acre-feet it’s entitled to under the Colorado River Compact. But it also returns more than 200,000 acre-feet in the form of treated effluent, giving it a consumptive use of 223,670 acre-feet in 2022.
This article first appeared on High Country News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
Click the link to read the article on the Vail Daily website (Scott Miller). Here’s an excerpt:
April 6, 2024
The good news is that the snowpack around Colorado is looking pretty good heading into spring and summer. In fact, more than 70% of the state is reporting no drought conditions, a significant change from the start of this year, when just less than 35% of the state was in zero-drought status…
After a slowish start, the snow water equivalent at measurement sites on Vail Mountain, Copper Mountain and Fremont Pass are all near or just above 100% of the 30-year median. The Copper Mountain site is nearest to the snow fields atop Vail and Shrine passes; the Fremont Pass site is closest to the headwaters of the Eagle River near Tennessee Pass…The Fremont Pass site is the highest and longest-lasting of those sites. It was also the slowest this season to hit 100% of the 30-year median, not hitting that mark until early March. All of those high-elevation sites — ranging from roughly 10,300 feet at Vail to 11,300 feet at Fremont Pass — hit their peak accumulation between late April and early May. That means we still have another few weeks to expect spring storms.
Here’s the release from Southeastern Water (Chris Woodka):
Leann Noga, a longtime employee of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District, was appointed Executive Director of the District at a special Board of Directors meeting on March 8, 2024.
“Each and every one of us very much look forward to working with you, ” Board President Bill Long said. “I think we all have confidence in you and your ability to lead the Southeastern District. It’s a great day for the District.”
Long also thanked Jim Broderick, who is retiring, for his 22 years of service to the District as Executive Director. Mrs. Noga, 43, started working for the District in 2004, and most recently was the Director of Finance and Administrative Services.
“I want to be the spokesperson for the District and carry forward the Board’s message,” Mrs. Noga said following the appointment. “The Board is made up of water experts, and I will draw on that expertise. I will lead by example and manage with fairness and accountability.”
She briefly outlined her goals:
“At the top of the list of course is finishing the Arkansas Valley Conduit,” she said. “I also want to continue to develop relationships for the District, collaborate with others on water issues and protect the District and the value of its water.”
Mrs. Noga started in the District as an administrative support specialist but constantly continued to acquire the skills and education to advance within the organization. In 2013, she earned her Bachelor of Science degree in business administration from Colorado State University-Pueblo. In 2017, she earned a Master of Finance with a specialization in human resource management from Colorado State University.
At the same time, she and her husband Pat began raising a family. They have three children: Patrick, Mikey and Kayle. Pat attended the meeting in support of his wife on Friday. Mrs. Noga is also a member of the National Water Resources Association, Colorado River Water Users Association, Colorado Rural Water Association, Government Finance Officers Association, Colorado Water Congress, Water Education Colorado and Association for Records Management Association.
The Board’s decision was unanimous and came at the end of a search for a new Executive Director that began in December 2023. Several candidates were interviewed in February and Mrs. Noga was named the sole finalist by the Board at a February 21, 2024 meeting. Other Board members voiced strong support for Mrs. Noga.
“I think there is a real belief (in the Arkansas Basin) in your capacity to take on this leadership role and guide the next chapter of the District’s history,” said Board member Greg Felt, a Chaffee County Commissioner and Chairman of the Colorado Water Conservation Board. “There are a lot of people in this basin who are really proud of you, and I think there are lot of women who are exceptionally proud of you.”
Mrs. Noga pointed out after the meeting that the Board’s decision coincidentally occurred on International Women’s Day.
“It’s not lost on me than Leann literally started at the bottom and has worked herself to the top,” said Dallas May, a rancher who represents Prowers and Kiowa Counties. He is also chairman of the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission. “I think that’s so commendable that somebody could and would do that, and she’s done that at the same time as raising a family.”
“I think this decision is great for the District’s future,” said Alan Hamel, who represents Pueblo County on the Board. “You have a great staff. I’m sure with your leadership and the support of all 15 Board members, you’ll move the District forward. ”
The Southeastern District was formed in 1958 and includes parts of nine counties: Bent, Chaffee, Crowley, El Paso, Fremont, Kiowa, Otero, Prowers and Pueblo. The District is the state agency for the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project and administers the project in partnership with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. The two agencies are working together to build the Arkansas Valley Conduit.
Some of the District’s activities include allocation of Fry-Ark Project water, operation of the James W. Broderick Hydropower Plant at Pueblo Dam, an excess capacity storage contract for Pueblo Reservoir and the Upper Arkansas Voluntary Flow Management Program.
Arkansas Valley Conduit map via the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District (Chris Woodka) June 2021.
It’s the beginning of April, which signifies the beginning of the end of our snowpack season. In Colorado, our southern basins typically reach their peak snowpack in the next few days, while our northern basins still have a few more weeks to go. But by this time, we usually have a pretty good idea on how we fared this season and what our water situation might look like as we approach the summer. So let’s take a look!
At the end of March, all Colorado basins reported above median snowpack. The Arkansas basin is at the highest, with 119% of median, and the San Juan basin in southwest CO is at the lowest, with 104% of median. Despite the basin averages. there are a few individual SNOTEL sites that are a bit below average. A few sites around the San Juan mountains are showing lower snowpack, as is Park Reservoir on the Grand Mesa.
The above graph shows how the snowpack has accumulated since the beginning of October, following the black line. The green line indicates what’s typical, and the “X” shows the normal peak date and value. For the statewide average, we’re six days away from the peak, and well on target to reach and possibly exceed that normal peak.
So, what happens after we reach peak?
It’s easy to forget, but passing the peak does not mean it stops snowing. In fact, it’s very important that snow continue to accumulate in the high elevations well into May! It’s hard to tease out from the snowpack graphs (like the one above) that new snow is being added on, even in the midst of overall melting. The peak really means the mountains have hit a critical time when solar radiation, and the higher angle of the sun, are having a greater impact on the snow surface. Snowpack becomes isothermal (meaning consistent temperature of 32°F throughout the entire depth), and melting takes over.
The graphic above is a pretty cool product produced by the NRCS. Focusing in on the Colorado Headwaters region here, we’re looking at the total amount of snowpack that accumulates in each individual month for water years back to 2012. The stacked graph on the right shows the median (what is typically expected). Next to that is how the current water year is stacking up. The magenta color is March snowpack. You can see this year is a bit ahead of the median, but behind what we had last year. The teal and green colors are yet to stack up for April and May. For just April and May, we normally add 3.4″ of new snowpack. Water Years 2013 and 2019 are examples of when we got much more than that in April and May.
Now look more closely at Water Years 2012 and 2021. In 2012 snowpack lagged behind for most of the winter. And there was barely any accumulations in March and April, resulting in near record low snowpack for many areas, including the Colorado headwaters. In 2021, accumulations were a little behind at the end of March, but not too far off. Unfortunately, very low snowpack numbers in April and May resulted in much below average total snowpack and contributed to worsening drought conditions.
While our 7-day outlook for precipitation shows more activity over the mountains, mid-April is looking more likely to be warm and dry. If we pick up normal accumulations as the melt starts this spring, our snowpack season will end in decent shape. Areas that miss out on new accumulations and start a rapid melt may find their situation a bit more concerning at the beginning of summer. We’ll see how it all unfolds soon!
If you are interesting in exploring the interactive graphics provided by the NRCS – and used for this blog – check out the NRCS Colorado Snow Survey page.
Colorado lawmakers on Wednesday hailed the announcement by federal officials that 220,000 acres of national forest land on Colorado’s Western Slope will be protected from oil and gas development and mining for at least the next 20 years.
The U.S. Interior Department confirmed that it would withdraw the Thompson Divide area near Crested Butte from federal mineral leasing, following an 18-month review process and more than a decade of advocacy by local conservationists and Colorado officials.
“This announcement is a testament to the persistence of Colorado’s farmers, ranchers, hunters, anglers, recreationists, wildlife enthusiasts, and conservation groups, who were unrelenting in their work to protect the landscape we all love,” Bennet, a Democrat who has long championed the move, said in a press release.
“The Thompson Divide area is a treasured landscape, valued for its wildlife habitat, clean air and water, and abundant recreation, ecological and scenic values,” said U.S. Interior Secretary Deb Haaland. “The Biden-Harris administration is committed to ensuring that special places like these are protected for future generations.”
Prohibiting mineral leasing in the Thompson Divide area is one component of the Colorado Outdoor Recreation and Economy Act, a public lands package championed by Democrats in the state’s congressional delegation since 2019. With the bill stalled by Republican opposition, President Joe Biden in 2022 moved to implement several CORE Act provisions through executive action, including the designation of the Camp Hale–Continental Divide National Monument near Leadville.
While oil and gas trade groups opposed the move, a U.S. Forest Service assessment last year found the impact on the industry would be negligible, while “the proposed action would protect the agricultural, ranching, wildlife, air quality, recreation, ecological, and scenic values of the Thompson Divide area for both intrinsic and economic value to local communities.”
The withdrawal order applies to nearly 200,000 acres of in the White River and Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison national forests, in addition to 20,000 acres of public land administered by the Bureau of Land Management. The Federal Land Policy and Management Act authorizes the Interior Department to order such withdrawals for a maximum of 20 years.
The CORE Act, which Colorado Democrats have reintroduced for a third time in Congress, still aims to make the withdrawal permanent. The bill stands little chance of being passed by the Republican-controlled House, where GOP lawmakers including Rep. Lauren Boebert of Windsor have called it a “400,000-acre land grab.”
But a long list of local elected officials and conservation advocates say Wednesday’s announcement has been a long time coming.
“We have worked for almost two decades to secure meaningful protection for the Divide, with ranchers, hunters, anglers, mountain bikers, off road vehicle users, and environmentalists coming together in an unlikely alliance to preserve the current uses of these lands,” Jason Sewell, a rancher and president of the Thompson Divide Coalition, said in a statement. “While we will continue to advocate for permanent protections for the Thompson Divide as afforded in the CORE Act, we could not be more thrilled to know that this landscape will continue for the next 20 years to provide the recreational opportunities, jobs, and wildlife habitat that it has for generations.”
In response to falling flows in the critical habitat reach, the Bureau of Reclamation has scheduled an increase in the release from Navajo Dam from 400 cubic feet per second (cfs) to 500 cfs for tomorrow, April 5th, at 4:00 AM.
Releases are made for the authorized purposes of the Navajo Unit, and to attempt to maintain a target base flow through the endangered fish critical habitat reach of the San Juan River (Farmington to Lake Powell). The San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program recommends a target base flow of between 500 cfs and 1,000 cfs through the critical habitat area. The target base flow is calculated as the weekly average of gaged flows throughout the critical habitat area from Farmington to Lake Powell.
Click the link to read the article on The Denver Post website (Elise Schmelzer). Here’s an excerpt:
April 3, 2024
The statewide snowpack sat at 109% of the 30-year median on Wednesday, just a few days shy of the normal peak of snowpack for the state. Every major river basin in the state also recorded above-median snowpack, reducing the risk of large, uncontrollable wildfires and boosting the state’s water supplies. Despite a slow start to the snow season, large storms in February and March boosted the amount of water that will become available as mountain snow melts. The statewide snowpack had lagged behind the median until early March.
Colorado snowpack April 5, 2024 via the NRCS.
In Colorado, the major river basins in the state ranged between 104% and 112% of the 30-year median this week. At 119% above the median, the Arkansas River basin had the best year…
Snowpack in the Upper Colorado River Basin is at 114% of the median depth, which is critical for restoring water levels in Lake Mead and Lake Powell, the two major reservoirs in the Southwest. But even if snowpack is above average, the amount of water that reaches the reservoirs can be below average due to dry soil or high heat, said Dan McEvoy with the Western Regional Climate Center.
Snow levels are far lower in Montana, Idaho, Washington and northern Wyoming. Many river basins in those states sat at less than 70% of the median as of Sunday, the most current data show.
The latest National Climate Assessment warns of a shrinking snowpack and serious downstream consequences
A recent federal synthesis of climate change research paints a grim portrait of snow’s future in the American West and warns that the fast-growing region’s water supply is vulnerable.
“Climate change will continue to cause profound changes in the water cycle, increasing the risk of flooding, drought, and degraded water supplies for both people and ecosystems,” according to the Fifth National Climate Assessment (NCA5) released in November.
The congressionally mandated report concludes there is “widespread consensus” that warming will “decrease the proportion of US precipitation that falls as snow, decrease snow extents, advance the timing of snowmelt rates and pulses, increase the prevalence of rain-on-snow events,” and transform the runoff that is vital for farms, cities and ecosystems.
Climate change has already diminished the West’s snowpack, with warming global temperatures leading to earlier peaks and shorter seasons, especially at lower elevations and in areas closer to the coast.
In areas where snow is the dominant source of runoff, the volume of water stored in the snowpack may decrease by more than 24% by 2050 under some emissions scenarios, with “persistent low-snow conditions emerging within the next 60 years,” the report said.
“When we have less snow in the West, it can strain our water supplies,” said report co-author Steph McAfee, regional administrator of the U.S. Geological Survey’s Southwest Climate Adaptation Science Center. “We’ve tended to rely on the snowpack as a reservoir that didn’t need to be built and it doesn’t need to be maintained, so it’s been a key place for storing water. Having less snow directly means less water stored for use in the summer.”
NCA5 stresses that climate change’s reshaping of the water cycle and other impacts will exacerbate inequalities in U.S. society and pose a special threat to some marginalized communities.
“All communities will be affected,” the report said, “but in particular those on the frontline of climate change—including many Black, Hispanic, Tribal, Indigenous, and socioeconomically disadvantaged communities—face growing risks from changes to water quantity and quality due to the proximity of their homes and workplaces to hazards and limited access to resources and infrastructure.”
NCA5 describes itself as the federal government’s “preeminent report on climate change impacts, risks, and responses,” though it is required to steer clear of policy prescriptions.
The report is based on the latest science, but it is produced for decision-makers and the general public, so it is written in relatively accessible language, and data visualizations play a leading role in communicating the findings.
Below I use 10 visuals from NCA5—mostly maps but also charts, an infographic and a photo—to help summarize the report’s conclusions about climate, snow and water in the West, focusing on the more arid parts of the region.
Climate, snow and water
At one level, the story of snow and climate change is simple: in order for snow to fall and stick around, it has to be cold enough, so the warming of the planet is generally bad news for snow.
“I think the changes to snow and snowpack are changes that we have more confidence in than just about any other water parameter because of the direct effect of warming on snowpack and snow precipitation,” said Elizabeth Payton, NCA5’s Water Chapter Lead and a water resources specialist at the Western Water Assessment at the University of Colorado Boulder.
Co-author Ben Harding, senior water resources engineer at Lynker, summed up the report’s findings on snow this way:
“We’re going to see shorter periods of time with snow on the ground, the snow will start to accumulate later and it’ll start to melt earlier,” he said.
A smaller snowpack, a curtailed snow season and a new runoff regime will test the region’s complex water infrastructure of dams, aqueducts and canals, many of which were built in the early to mid-20th century, before climate change was recognized as a peril. The altered snowpack will also strain the West’s water laws and policies, many of which emerged in the 19th century, before some Western states were even admitted to the union.
But while climate change has already shrunk the snowpack in most parts of the world and will continue to take a toll as temperatures climb, there are exceptions that buck the trend. Total global precipitation is expected to increase due to warming, including in places where the snowpack shrivels. NCA5 predicts there will be worse droughts and floods.
For example, atmospheric rivers, which are pivotal for the West’s snowpack and water supply, are expected to strengthen in the years ahead. But beyond a certain point, warming makes it more likely that rain will fall instead of snow, even high in the mountains, raising the risk of flooding and a subpar snowpack.
As temperatures keep rising, increasing rates of melting and evaporation will play a key role. Another critical factor is how much moisture gets sucked up by plants and then transpired into the atmosphere. Some snow never becomes snowmelt and is “lost” to the atmosphere through sublimation, moving directly from the solid to the gaseous phase. Soil moisture is yet another essential element of the water cycle, impacting drought, flooding, agriculture and ecosystems.
But that’s not all. In Colorado, for example, dust-on-snow events are a big deal because the darker material reduces the snow’s reflectivity and causes it to absorb more heat, accelerating the meltout. Climate change threatens to worsen the dust problem as it continues to aridify parts of the West.
Warming is adjusting the dials on all of these factors, and the magnitude of these changes matter, but there’s yet another crucial dimension: timing. In spring, farmers, water managers and dam operators not only care deeply about the volume of the snowpack that will fill reservoirs, canals, ditches and pipes, but also are keenly interested in when that water will be entering the system.
“Having a pulse of snowmelt at the beginning of the growing season has been helpful to farmers and ranchers, and the timing of the snowmelt has been something that ecosystems have evolved to adapt to,” Payton said. “The timing is going to be shifting dramatically.”
Warming has already taken a toll on the West’s snowpack
While much of NCA5 focuses on the future, the report also looks back at how climate change has already transformed the nation. The graphic below depicts how the West’s snowpack has shifted in recent decades, with red circles indicating declines, blue circles showing increases and the circle scaled to the size of the change.
The figure’s title says it all: “Western snowpack is declining, peak snowpack is occurring earlier, and the snowpack season is shortening in length.”
Map “a” shows changes in the volume of the snowpack on April 1, a key date for water managers as they plan for the runoff season. About 93% of sites have experienced a decrease in April 1 snowpack since the 1950s, with the decline averaging about 23%. Map “b” concerns the timing of the snowpack’s peak, which has come nearly eight days earlier on average since 1982. Map “c” presents data on the length of the snow season, which has decreased by 18 days on average over the last four decades. (For more on these maps, including the underlying data, see this page from the Environmental Protection Agency.)
While the vast majority of circles in the figure are red, there are also some blue locations, such as in north-central Colorado. When I asked NCA5 co-authors about those sites, several noted that many of them lie at higher elevations—like those along the Continental Divide in Colorado—and the naturally colder conditions there can help preserve their snowpack in a warming world, up to a point.
“There are some parts of Alaska or some very high elevations that might have more snow when the snowpack is at its largest,” McAfee said. “They’re starting out really cold, so if it warms up some, it’s still cold enough to snow. If it warms up enough, then there’s the possibility for snow melting earlier or more of those storms bringing rain than snow.”
While some high-elevation locations may see their snowpack increase in coming years, it’s “by and large definitely not enough to compensate or offset the widespread losses in snow that are occurring everywhere else,” said co-author Justin Pflug, a scientist at the University of Maryland and NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.
How much warmer it gets will be crucial for the snowpack (and much else)
One of the challenges in producing a report like NCA5 is the uncertainty surrounding future greenhouse gas emissions. Innovation, geopolitics, consumer preferences and more make it hard to predict how rapidly the economy will decarbonize. As a result, scientists must use varying emissions scenarios, and it remains to be seen just how much temperatures will rise at a global level.
While the rate of future warming is uncertain, one thing that’s clear is that some parts of the planet will warm more than others and have already experienced much steeper temperature increases.
The graphic below, which maps the projected change in temperatures at various levels of global warming, shows that the effects are expected to be uneven across the United States. For example, at 2°C of global warming, parts of the Interior West would be more than 5°C warmer. Across the globe, researchers have found “growing evidence that the rate of warming is amplified with elevation,” according to a 2015 paper in Nature Climate Change.
Locations in Alaska would be even hotter than that, mirroring a global trend of much more rapid warming in the Arctic. A 2022 study in Communications Earth & Environment is titled “The Arctic has warmed nearly four times faster than the globe since 1979.”
“One of the key messages for us in the water chapter is that temperature really matters for water,” McAfee said. “Temperature influences whether or not we get rain or snow. It influences when the snowpack melts. It influences how big a sip the atmosphere takes from the water and all of that. So we can’t think about precipitation and we can’t think about our water systems separate from temperature.”
When people hear about droughts and water shortages, they naturally think of a lack of precipitation, which remains the primary driver of such dry times. But as NCA5 notes, “higher temperatures can cause drought to develop or become more intense than would be expected from precipitation deficits alone.”
In a “hot drought,” the atmosphere demands more moisture and desiccates the landscape. Warmer temperatures also contribute to “snow droughts” (discussed below), “flash droughts” that develop in a matter of weeks and “megadroughts” that can extend over decades.
NCA5 also emphasizes two other messages related to temperature: the degree of change matters greatly, and how hot the planet gets depends on the choices society makes now. [ed. emphasis mine]
“The more the planet warms, the greater the impacts—and the greater the risk of unforeseen consequences,” according to the report. “While there are still uncertainties about how the planet will react to rapid warming and catastrophic future scenarios that cannot be ruled out, the future is largely in human hands.”
Climate change is projected to increase global precipitation, but not necessarily in the Southwest
Scientists and their models can paint a much clearer picture of how temperatures will change compared to the projections for precipitation. That said, global warming is expected to increase overall precipitation on the planet because there will be higher evaporation rates and warmer air can hold more moisture.
The figure below shows projected changes in annual precipitation according to four different levels of warming, with greens indicating increases and browns depicting decreases. The hatching shows areas where 80% or more of the models agree on whether precipitation will increase or decrease.
Most of the country is expected to see more precipitation overall, with higher levels of warming generally leading to wetter conditions and more certainty about those changes. But in all of the maps, precipitation is expected to decrease in Southern California, much of Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, plus portions of Colorado.
“Precipitation changes also scale with global warming, but these projections vary by location and are less certain than temperature changes,” according to NCA5.
Payton said “there’s not a very strong signal” for total precipitation changes for the Southwest. “The atmosphere can hold more moisture when it’s warmer,” she said, “but that moisture has to come from somewhere, so over the Southwest, where it’s already dry, is it going to be able to suck up that additional amount of moisture that it can hold?”
While precipitation projections are cloudier, Westerners should expect a shift from snowflakes toward raindrops in many parts of the region: “it is virtually certain that less precipitation will fall as snow, leading to large reductions in mountain snowpack and decreases in spring runoff in the mountain West,” according to NCA5.
Overall, NCA5 concludes that “changes in future precipitation and temperature are expected to exacerbate drought across large portions of the US,” with projections showing “the strongest drying signal occurring in the Southwest.”
While drought and water scarcity are dominant themes in more arid parts of the West, these areas also contend with floods that can turn dry washes into raging torrents in a flash and threaten both lives and property.
“Warmer air is thirstier air, and that really raises the risk of higher-severity precipitation events,” Pflug said.
Flooding can also be caused by snowmelt, especially in years with a big snowpack, rapid thawing in spring or when it rains on top of snow.
“Due to climate change, snowmelt-driven flooding is expected to occur earlier in the year due to earlier runoff,” the report said. “Moreover, atmospheric rivers, which have driven much of historical flooding in the region, are expected to intensify under a warming climate.”
The graphic below shows the importance of atmospheric rivers to extreme precipitation in the Pacific Northwest, especially in winter (see my previous post for more on climate change and atmospheric rivers).
The West’s snowpack will store less water and runoff will change
The maps below depict how warming temperatures and changing precipitation patterns are expected to influence three crucial variables in the Southwest’s water cycle, with the top row of maps showing projections for 2036-2065 and the bottom row showing 2070 to 2099, both relative to the 1991-2020 period.
The leftmost maps show projected changes in soil moisture, a critical factor for agriculture and a host of ecological processes. While drier soils are expected in many parts of the Southwest, and especially in portions of the Four Corners states, other areas are expected to see increases in soil moisture.
The center maps depict projected changes in the maximum volume of snow water equivalent, a measure of the snowpack’s water content. Whereas the soil moisture picture is somewhat muddled, the story for snow is crystal clear: steep declines throughout the region, and especially in California’s mountains.
The rightmost maps show expected changes to runoff—the water that reaches streams, rivers, lakes, reservoirs and taps. As with soil moisture, the projections vary by location but many of the highest-elevation areas, such as the Sierra Nevada, the Southern Rockies and Utah’s Wasatch Range, are expected to see decreases in runoff.
The report’s co-authors stressed that the interactions between soil moisture, snowpack and runoff are complicated, and there is still considerable uncertainty about future precipitation patterns. With soil moisture, for instance, earlier snowmelt may lead to wetter conditions in spring but drier conditions later in the summer.
Because the changes will vary across the country, people should “look at results and data and projections for their own region and not necessarily take a message from elsewhere and assume that’s what’s happening where they live,” McAfee said. “Climate change will have different impacts in different places. So the fact that we might be concerned about reduced water supplies in the Colorado River doesn’t necessarily mean we have the same concerns in every river basin.”
In the Colorado River Basin, research has shown that “less snow means more evaporation, and this is because snow is really reflective,” McAfee said. “Anyone who’s ever been out skiing knows this: you can get that reflection up and the nose and chin sunburn, and if the snowpack melts early, the land gets more energy, which makes it possible to evaporate more water from the soils and streams and for the plants to get going earlier.”
One challenge for scientists and water managers is that it’s tough to calculate how much snow is out there. Snow accumulation can vary dramatically on a single run at a ski resort, not only from top to bottom due to thousands of feet of elevation difference, but even from one side of the run to the other due to trees, shading, rocks and wind.
Another vexing problem is tracing what happens to all those H20 molecules after they’ve fallen to earth.
“There’s still some uncertainties about where the snow is going hydrologically,” Pflug said.
In recent years, peak snowpack levels in the Rockies that were around normal have translated into below-average streamflows. Some scientists have pointed to deficits in soil moisture as the culprit for the disparity. Others are researching how warming temperatures are impacting sublimation, when snow converts directly into water vapor. A 2023 paper from Colorado State University scientists argued that spring and summer precipitation was important for explaining the discrepancy between snowpack levels and subsequent runoff.
Here’s how NCA5 sums up the situation for the Colorado River, which supplies some 40 million people in seven U.S. states and Mexico while also irrigating millions of acres of crops:
“Colorado River streamflow over the period 2000–2014 was 19% lower than the 20th-century average, largely due to a reduction in snowfall, less reflected sunlight, and increased evaporation. The period 2000–2021 in the Southwest had the driest soil moisture of any period of the same length in at least the past 1,200 years. While this drought is partially linked to natural climate variability, there is evidence that climate change exacerbated it, because warmer temperatures increase atmospheric ‘thirst’ and dry the soil. Droughts in the region are lasting longer and reflect not a temporary extreme event but a long-term aridification trend—a drier ‘new normal’ occasionally punctuated by periods of extreme wetness consistent with expected increases in precipitation volatility in a warming world.”
Some rural and Indigenous communities are especially vulnerable to the changing water cycle
The consequences of a thinner, less reliable snowpack and changing runoff patterns will be far-reaching, but they will be especially problematic for some rural communities dependent on farming and snow-related recreation.
The infographic below illustrates some of the downstream effects on agriculture, with snow droughts contributing to the stresses facing the sector and its workers. Reduced snowmelt for irrigation may cause farmers to lose money, generate more dust that harms both farmworkers and the snowpack, and lead to increasing use of dwindling underground aquifers as agriculture shifts from surface water to groundwater.
While the graphic above focuses on agriculture, climate change will also affect the water supply for cities, suburbs and businesses, plus the innumerable species that have evolved to depend on the snowpack and snowmelt.
Farmers who rely on direct flows from the river may have very senior water rights, but often they lack reservoirs to store the water, so as climate change shifts precipitation from snow to rain and starts the runoff season earlier, these water users—plus fish and other wildlife—face a growing risk of shortages later in the year.
“For communities that have storage rights, they’re less sensitive to the loss of snowpack if you still are getting precipitation in some form or another,” Payton said. “There are a lot of people and communities in the West who are just living on the edge, and they don’t have the storage, they don’t have the infrastructure to take advantage of when it’s there and are very much dependent on the regime that they’ve been used to.”
NCA5 highlights that “community-based snow-fed irrigation systems in high-elevation watersheds of New Mexico and Colorado, known as acequias, are particularly exposed to the shortfalls in annual snowpack.”
While building more reservoir storage is a potential solution, that strategy has three problems, Harding said. “One is people don’t like reservoirs, except for the people that are going to benefit and use the water. Two is they’re really expensive. And three is we’ve used up most of the really good reservoir sites, so that seems unlikely,” he said.
Even without the influence of climate change, many Indigenous communities in the West confront major hurdles in securing safe and adequate water supplies (see this 2021 paper for more on incomplete plumbing and poor water quality in U.S. homes).
The map below shows that many American Indian and Alaska Native homes already face serious problems with their water and sewer systems. At deficiency level 2, a water and sanitation system is in place but it needs upgrades or maintenance, while at level 5, the worst category, “there’s absolutely no water supply, no sanitation system in at all,” said co-author Heather Tanana, a visiting professor of law at the University of California-Irvine, in a webinar.
“As we’re experiencing increased changes in the water cycle, the water quality and quantity impacts are further being exacerbated in part because of aging infrastructure,” Tanana said. “So who is being the most affected? Again, it’s our under-resourced frontline communities.”
There are two types of snow drought to worry about: dry and warm
The report highlights two kinds of “snow drought” that can afflict the West (this page offers updates on the current status of snow droughts). In a “dry” snow drought, a lack of precipitation diminishes the snowpack. That’s what happened in California’s Sierra Nevada in the 2014/2015 winter, “resulting in the shallowest snow volume ever recorded there,” according to NCA5.
That same winter, but farther north in Oregon and Washington, there was another snow drought, but this one was a “warm” one. Winter precipitation was 77% to 113% of normal, yet because of higher temperatures, the precipitation shifted from snow to rain, leading to a reduction in the snowpack and higher winter snowmelt, but below-normal flows from April to August.
The graphic below illustrates the streamflow for two locations: Washington’s Ahtanum Creek and California’s Merced River. In each chart, the black line indicates flows during the 2015 water year (which began October 1, 2014), the gray lines show data from 1952 to 2021 and the dashed line plots the median for that period. The top chart shows that runoff spiked in February and again in March but was then mostly below average during the subsequent warmer months. By contrast, the Merced River’s flow was below normal for nearly the entire runoff season.
“In Oregon and Washington, irrigated crops—including valuable orchard crops—that depend on direct streamflow diversion water rights failed, but municipal water supplies that relied on storage rights that allow reservoirs to capture winter runoff were sufficient,” according to NCA5. “In California, total water supply was limited, resulting in severe or complete cutbacks to junior water rights and contract holders.”
The September 2015 photo below from NCA5 shows an apple orchard in the Roza Irrigation District, near Yakima, Washington, suffering the effects of the warm snow drought and reduced irrigation.
Warming will make the landscape “thirstier” in many locations
NCA5’s water chapter discusses a measure known as the “annual climatic water deficit.” In simple language, this metric describes the thirstiness of the landscape.
“This is a measure that I advocated for because I think it integrates the effects of everything,” said Harding, who defined the deficit as “how much water we’d have to add to the system to fully satisfy the needs of the plants.”
As shown in the maps below, the climatic water deficit is expected to increase by midcentury across much of the nation—and especially in the Southwest. Map “a” shows the average of the projections, while maps “b” and “c” report the average of the wettest and driest 20% of projections.
The region’s increasing dryness threatens to reinforce snow loss by increasing the amount of dust that lands on the snowpack, thereby accelerating its melting. As a result, NCA5 cautions that “under increasing aridity, agricultural practices such as fallowing and grazing on rangelands will need careful management to avoid increased wind erosion and dust production from exposed soils.”
Adding insult to injury, NCA5 warns that those soils will be more susceptible to blowing around because hotter summers will “degrade protective desert soil crusts formed by communities of algae, bacteria, lichens, fungi, or mosses.”
The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an editorially independent initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder.
32% of the Lower 48 is short/very short; 8% more than last year at this time. Dry soils are most prevalent in NM and the North Central. The Southern Plains too, although in better shape than last year.
Drought-challenged U.S. communities are overlooking what could be a major source of relief: stormwater, which generates more water annually than is stored in lakes Mead and Powell, the largest reservoirs in the West.
But Colorado and other states with laws against collecting stormwater are likely to miss out on its potential.
Lakes Powell and Mead store some 49.4 million acre-feet, according to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
That 59.5 million acre-feet of stormwater is roughly 93% of the water used by all U.S. cities and industry in 2015, according to the Pacific Institute. An acre-foot serves about two to three U.S. households for a year.
But because this source has never been fully analyzed or developed, it is not yet widely used.
“Our results indicate that there is a vast potential for stormwater capture all across the country,” said Bruk Berhanu, a lead author of the study and senior researcher in water efficiency and reuse at the Pacific Institute.
With climate change and warming, streamflows are projected to decline in Colorado and elsewhere in the coming years, and there is increasing pressure to find new sources and better use existing water supplies.
“As communities in the West face increasing strain on their water supplies, planners have been looking at strategies that use an ‘all of the above’ approach,” Berhanu said. “We aren’t suggesting stormwater could cover all of our future water supplies, but they can help fill the gap between our current water supplies and projected demands.”
Estimated annual urban stormwater runoff by state
Source: Pacific Institute, “Untapped Potential: An Assessment of Urban Stormwater Runoff Potential in the United States”
But use of stormwater comes with conditions. It would require major new facilities to capture, store and treat it if it is to be used for drinking water. If too much is captured, it could reduce water available for the environment, according to the report.
And in some places, such as Colorado, the practice isn’t allowed.
Under what’s known as the Prior Appropriation Doctrine, water users with the oldest, or most senior water rights, get their water first, even if their diversion point lies farther downstream than someone else’s. And stormwater, once it reaches the stream, becomes part of someone’s water right. If larger amounts were captured, it could jeopardize other water rights already in place.
The City of Aurora, and others, have actively worked for decades to find new ways to make their water supplies stretch further, but stormwater capture is not one of them.
“What works in some states, does not work in Colorado,” said Greg Baker, a spokesman for Aurora Water, referring to the legal prohibitions against the practice.
Could that change? Possibly.
Colorado has taken major strides in recent years to re-examine how water that falls from the sky may be collected and used in ways that don’t harm neighbors downstream. In 2009, for instance, the state passed a law that opened the door to rainwater harvesting in some rural areas and then in 2016 allowed homeowners across the state to use rain barrels to capture small amounts of water for use on gardens and lawns.
That state also created a pilot program to encourage more research. The Dominion Water and Sanitation District in Douglas County, to date, has been the only water district to participate in the pilot, according to Andrea Cole, Dominion’s general manager. Soon it may be able to legally capture rainwater when, later this year, it will ask a state water court to approve collecting rainwater commercially to serve parks and other public spaces in Sterling Ranch, one of the most water-efficient residential developments in the state.
To get to this point, Dominion spent 15 years tracking how much rain fell on the development before anything was built, and tracking how much more water was generated after new homes and roads were built and the water began falling on roofs and other solid surfaces, instead of the soil.
“In Colorado, water is precious, so every last drop is accounted for in somebody’s system. … But when you change the land from an open prairie to a development, the water no longer [sinks] into the soil, or makes its way to nearby streams,” Cole said.
Measuring the water has and will continue to be a meticulous process, she said.
“We can only capture that water [that falls on] Sterling Ranch. … If it is outside the ranch, we have to allow it to go back to the stream,” Cole said.
Sterling Ranch sharply limits outdoor water use, so lawns are scarce. The plan is to use the rainwater for parks and gardens so that homeowners with little of their own grass have a place to play and relax, Cole said.
The Pacific Institute’s Berhanu said he is hopeful that the new report will generate more interest in developing stormwater to help fill looming gaps in water supplies.
“In a state like Colorado, we would hope that this information builds the case for revisiting those policies and making adjustments to enable more stormwater capture,” Berhanu said.
The potential is there, Cole said.
“We are the first out of the chute, and being the first is always scary. But people are watching to see what we can get through water court,” she said. “Once there is a [legal] water right for it, we are going to see new developments trying to use this.”
More by Jerd SmithJerd Smith is editor of Fresh Water News. She can be reached at 720-398-6474, via email at jerd@wateredco.org or @jerd_smith.
Excavation and foundation preparation at Gross Dam wrapped up in April. The far side of the photo shows the new footprint of the dam. Photo credit: Denver Water.
“Over the past two years we’ve excavated 260,000 cubic yards of rock and placed 27,000 cubic yards of concrete to get the existing dam and the rock around it ready for expansion,” said Doug Raitt, Denver Water’s construction project manager for the Gross Reservoir Expansion Project.
The next phase of the multiyear project begins in May, when crews will begin the process of building 118 new concrete “steps” that will create the higher dam. Construction on the expansion project began in April 2022 and is scheduled to wrap up in 2027.
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.
The steps will be made of roller-compacted concrete and around 800,000 cubic yards of concrete will be needed to build them.
So, to prepare for raising the dam, a team from Kiewit Barnard is building a sophisticated concrete batch plant near the top of the dam. At the plant, cement, fly ash, sand and aggregates will be mixed together to make the specific type of concrete mixture used to build the steps.
The batch plant will produce roller-compacted concrete on-site using rock quarried from around Gross Reservoir. Photo credit: Denver Water.
“Producing the roller-compacted concrete on-site really makes for an efficient process so we don’t have to haul it in from off-site,” Raitt said. “We’re also crushing rock that we quarried on-site as well.”
Learn more about the Gross Reservoir Expansion Project at grossreservoir.org.
Crews are also building an elaborate conveyor system that will carry the concrete from the batch plant to the dam.
Workers are building a conveyor system that will move concrete from the batch plant to the dam. Photo credit: Denver Water.
Once conveyed over the top of the dam, the concrete will slide to the bottom via a chute system, which also will be built this spring.
At the bottom of the dam, workers are creating a flat surface that will be the base for the new roller-compacted concrete steps.
Workers are building the base of the dam that will serve as a platform for the roller-compacted concrete steps. Photo credit: Denver Water.
“It’s an exciting time as we get ready for the actual dam raise phase of the project,” Raitt said. “Once the roller-compacted concrete process begins, it will take about three years to complete the expansion.”
Colorado transmountain diversions via the State Engineer’s office
