Western Water Crisis Deepens as Key Colorado River Decisions Loom

By Ali Longwell | The Fence Post

Western Slope elected officials, water managers, engineers and conservationists met in Grand Junction on Friday, Oct. 3, all focused on one thing: the uncertain future of the Colorado River.

“Water users, as a lot, tend to crave certainty, and that certainty seems more and more elusive these days,” said Peter Fleming, general counsel for the Colorado River District, at this year’s annual seminar hosted by the River District.

Andy Mueller, the River District’s general manager, said the Colorado River Basin was “at a crossroads.”

While the seminar broached many of the challenges and opportunities facing those who rely on the Colorado River, most discussions came back to two looming decisions that will dictate how the future looks for the 40 million people, seven states, two counties and 30 tribal nations that rely on the waterway.

SHOSHONE WATER RIGHTS

This includes the River District’s proposed $99 million acquisition of the Shoshone water rights and the interstate negotiations over the post-2026 operations of Lake Powell and Lake Mead. Both decisions will have ramifications for all Colorado River users — including agriculture, recreation and municipal water — but are stalled by competing interests, be it political, geographic or otherwise.  

“In the world of Western water, perspectives don’t always align,” said Matt Aboussie, communications director for the Colorado River District, in describing this year’s theme for the annual seminar, Across Divides.

“Despite these divides, the challenges we face on the Colorado River and in the basin demand that we find common ground. We can’t afford to let the differences prevent progress,” Aboussie added. 

Colorado Sen. Marc Caitlin, R-Montrose, who also serves as the River District’s board president, offered that the challenges ahead were as significant as the opportunities. 

“If we stay united across basins, political lines, and water uses, we can secure a healthy and sustainable future of the Colorado River and for the people of Western Colorado,” Caitlin said.

The River District is currently working through a multi-year process to purchase the Shoshone water rights from Xcel Energy for $99 million. The rights — established in the early 1900s — are the oldest, non-consumptive water rights on the Colorado River. 

“The West Slope, back in the 1930s, recognized that those Shoshone rights were the most important commanding water rights on the river,” Mueller said. “What it does, because of its seniority and its size, is it limits the amount of water that transmountain diversions can take to the east without replacing that water.”

“All around the state, we depend on this river, and if we allow our system to pump it dry, it will not be there to support future generations on either side of the body,” he said. 

The Shoshone water right is currently tied to the hydroelectric power plant in Glenwood Canyon, which returns 100% of the water used to produce electricity to the river. However, he said that uncertainty surrounding the plant’s longevity, given its age and location — which he called an “area of great geohazard” — led the River District to seek acquisition of the rights. Under the proposed acquisition, Xcel would continue to operate the plant. 

“We’ve been very worried because if that water right diminishes itself and someday gets abandoned, that water won’t be there — it will be picked up by upstream divers who will be in priority … and that will impact every one of our communities in western Colorado,” he said. 

The district intends to purchase the right and reach an instream flow agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board — the only entity that can hold an instream flow water right in Colorado. Doing so would maintain the status quo of the river, the River District claims. 

WEST SLOPE VS. EAST SLOPE

Defining what the status quo looks like, though, has led to disagreements between the West Slope entity and East Slope water providers. 

Denver Water, Northern Water, Colorado Springs Utility, and Aurora Water — all of which have water rights junior to Shoshone and receive water from the Colorado River basin via transmountain diversions — have contested the River District’s proposed instream flow agreement. In a September hearing, the Front Range entities argued the proposal could enlarge the right and that the River District should not be granted authority to manage the right alongside the Colorado Water Board. 

The first issue — determining how much water the right includes — will be decided in Colorado water court, the final step in the district’s acquisition. However, the question of management authority has created an impasse between the parties.

“The two entities in the state charged with protecting the Colorado River by statute are the (Colorado Water Conservation Board) and the Colorado River District. The four opposers are charged to protect their rate payers,” Mueller said. 

Currently, the two parties are attempting to negotiate a deal and the agreement will be back before the water board in November. 

The River District’s acquisition also hinges on $40 million in federal funding that was granted in the waning days of the Biden administration and frozen in the first days of the second Trump administration. 

Reps. Joe Neguse, D-CO2, and Jeff Hurd, R-CO3, both agreed on Friday that securing the Shoshone funding was a top priority for them. 

“We have a once-in-a-generation chance to really protect and preserve Colorado’s future, and that is what Shoshone represents,” Hurd said. “It’s durable. It’s long-term. It’s good for the environment. It helps us meet our compact obligations, as well.”

An additional $57 million in funding for the Shoshone acquisition has been pledged by 32 Western Slope entities, the Colorado Water Conservation Board, and the River District’s board. 

“We’re going to get those rights; we’re going to make sure those rights stay in the river,” Mueller said.

Water allocation on the Colorado River dates back to the 1922 compact agreement, which divided the river between the upper and lower basins. Right now, it’s not the compact, but the 2007 operational guidelines for Lake Powell and Lake Mead that are being renegotiated. 

While the four Upper Basin states — Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming — rely predominantly on snowpack for water supply, the Lower Basin states — Arizona, Wyoming and Nevada — rely on releases from Lake Powell and Lake Mead.

The 2007 guidelines for the two reservoirs, which govern how they store and release water, are set to expire in 2026. The seven states have until Nov. 11 to try and reach a consensus on the reservoirs’ post-2026 operations; otherwise, the federal government will step in and impose its own plan. 

Becky Mitchell, who has been negotiating on Colorado’s behalf, said on Friday that she is “hopeful” for this seven-state consensus “because the alternative is not great.” 

“I think we’ve kicked the can and we’re at the end of the road,” Mitchell said. 

READ THE FULL ARTICLE AT THE FENCE POST