An initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder

Home Blog Page 17

At Peak of Its Wealth and Influence, Arizona’s Desert Civilization Confronts A Reckoning Over Water

Golf course photo
Severe water scarcity now invites an urgent question for Arizona. Can this desert civilization survive another 100 years, or even another 50? Photo © J. Carl Ganter/ Circle of Blue

By Keith Schneider

CASA GRANDE, Ariz. – Tales of personal anguish are the typical start of serious articles about Arizona’s conspicuous confrontation with scarce water. The distraught Chino Valley homeowner buying water out of a truck because her well dried up. The Pinal farmer losing income because his water-starved fields lie fallow. The Phoenix golf course operator, burdened by high irrigation costs and declining revenue, selling out to a home developer.

This report, the first of three on how Arizona copes with a drought more serious than any in 1,200 years doesn’t start there. Instead it begins with this: A brief on how adept engineering for dams and aqueducts, government subsidy, technological development for pumps and water recycling, surpassing marketing, and an advantageous assemblage of natural resources – sun, warmth, blue sky, and open spaces – produced one of the greatest desert civilizations in human history. 

Arizona’s population, 7.1 million, has increased by an average of 1 million people a decade since the 1950s, when the five C’s ruled the state: cattle, copper, cotton, citrus, and climate. Even as the first four have declined in relative importance, the appeal of warmth and sunshine has not diminished. In fact, it’s boom times. Phoenix, with 1.7 million residents, is now the nation’s fifth largest city. To spend time in Arizona is to understand why it’s been one of the fastest growing states for four generations. The state embodies a century of pure American capitalist exuberance. 

Arizona’s annual gross domestic product, nearing $380 billion, has more than doubled since 2000. New solar installations, electric vehicle makers, computer chip manufacturers, data centers, and corporate farming companies are piling into the state.

Arizona added nearly 200,000 new jobs last year and issued construction permits for 65,000 new homes, according to state and federal figures. 

State government has amassed a budget surplus every year since 2016. The general fund last year, in an unmistakable rebuke to the pandemic, collected $2 billion more in tax revenues than it did in 2020. State economists forecast a $4 billion budget surplus over the next three years. 

The economic boom transformed the landscape. Arizona built an impressive array of beautiful homes, attractive neighborhoods, wide highways, thriving businesses, fine universities, high-tech manufacturers, and state-of-the-art irrigated farms. All of it — 114,000 square miles, 73 million acres — is saluted by cactus forests, towering mountains, mesquite desert, and transcendent vistas that touch the horizon. 

Arizona, in other words, reveled in its location in a mighty desert, commanded the contemporary 20th century rules of the development game, and reached the pinnacle of its lifestyle appeal and economic influence in the first decades of the 21st. 

The question now, as it has been since 1911 when the first big reservoir was completed to supply Phoenix with water, is one of longevity. Can this desert bounty be sustained for another 100 years, or even another 50? That question is more urgent and more relevant than ever. Climate change is disrupting the rules of the development game. Drought and extreme heat are emptying rivers and reservoirs, fallowing tens of thousands of acres of farmland, forcing thousands of homeowners to secure water from trucks and not their dead wells, and pushing Arizona ever closer to the precipice of peril. 

The most revealing and menacing evidence of that fact has emerged on the Colorado River, which supplies 36 percent of the state’s water. The river’s flow is 20 percent lower than it was in the 1990s. The country’s two largest reservoirs — Lake Mead, which opened in 1934, and Lake Powell, in 1963 — are on the river and were designed to hold 55 million acre-feet of water. (One acre-foot equals 325,852 gallons.) At 30 percent of capacity combined, they now hold less water than at any time since soon after they were opened. In total, 36 million acre-feet, or nearly 12 trillion gallons, of storage space is empty.

Last August, as extreme heat and drought dropped the lake levels further, the federal government issued a formal declaration of water shortage. Translated into the legal details of the pact involving two countries, seven states, and 30 tribes that guides the river’s management, the declaration meant that Arizona’s share of the river will be cut by 512,000 acre-feet this year, or 166 billion gallons. 

The Salt River photo
The Salt River is the single largest source of water for metropolitan Phoenix, and provides about 60 percent of the region’s water demand. Photo © Keith Schneider / Circle of Blue

River Water Lost

It’s a lot of water on paper, amounting to 8 percent of the 7 million acre-feet of water that Arizona uses annually. And it’s almost 20 percent of the 2.8 million acre-feet that Arizona is legally entitled to receive each year from the Colorado River. 

Arizona was already using less Colorado River water in the years before the declaration, and there is wiggle room in the math for how much the state will actually go without. Nevertheless, the federal declaration was a body blow. It formalized what the state has managed to avoid for a century. Arizona’s demand for water in metropolitan regions and industry has crossed the line delineating diminishing water supply. The consequence is a slow motion collision that puts Arizona’s desert economy and way of life, along with its governing capacity to adjust and evolve, in the direct path of nature’s power to drive out and dry up much of what was built. 

State lawmakers and business executives have anticipated the confrontation for nearly a decade and insist that there is no immediate crisis. More than 13 million acre-feet of water — a nearly two-year supply — has been purposefully stored in underground reserves specifically for use in emergencies. Republican Gov. Doug Ducey has convened expert committees. He’s also urging the Legislature to establish a new state agency, the Arizona Water Authority, and commit over $1 billion to a new strategy for securing additional sources of water, like building desalination plants and harvesting flood waters from the Mississippi River. Arizona and the six other Colorado River Basin states have a 2026 deadline to reach a new agreement on sharing the river’s water. 

Invoking words of assurance principally designed to quell anxiety in the markets for housing and new business starts, state leaders display determined allegiance to the message that Arizona has sufficient supply and know-how to continue to thrive. As Gov. Ducey likes to say: “Arizona is open for business.”

That’s true, for the time being, for the more than 5 million people in Phoenix and its suburbs, and the 1 million residents of metropolitan Tucson. Both cities have developed secure sources of water, and applied effective techniques of water conservation, recycling, and reuse. 

But both cities also are served by the Colorado River. Phoenix receives 40 percent, and Tucson 60 percent of their water from the river. Climatologists project the worst is yet to come and the river could lose 3 million more acre-feet from its flow by mid-century, or another 20 to 30 percent. If that occurs, water supplies for Phoenix and Tucson would be substantially cut. Residents and businesses will contend with dramatic shifts in lifestyle and water consumption. Green grass, swimming pools, golf course water hazards, even golf courses would be amenities of the past. The price of water could rise well above the cost of electricity and thereby influence all sorts of economic outcomes like changes in housing values, residential construction, and business starts.

The Central Arizona Project photo
The Central Arizona Project transports Colorado River water 336 miles across the state, serving 40 percent of demand in Phoenix and 60 percent of Tucson’s demand. A federal water shortage declaration last year significantly reduced the aqueduct’s flow. Photo © Keith Schneider / Circle of Blue

Drier Conditions Projected

If those meteorological projections are accurate, and if decades can be described as a race for time, Arizona has about a generation to figure out, finance, and execute a new resilience strategy. The state appears to have two paths, and just two, to pursue. One that rallies federal, state, tribal, and local governments to unify opposing forces and bring water supply and demand into balance in the era of accelerating climate change. The second path is more perilous, strewn with impediments of politics, civic disagreement, financing, litigation, and inaction that yields a catastrophe where everything goes wrong.  

“Most of the press, it’s the second one not the first one,” said Tom Buschatzke, director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources. “There’s hard policy choices to be made. For instance, how much farming do we need? Where will you get your farm products? Are we going to rely on another country for our food? There’s that kind of debate that’s going on.

“Part of our mission statement actually has the words ‘lifestyle.’ So what lifestyle do you want? Do you want not one green thing in the city? City environments to the point where use is 18 gallons per capita? We need a different, more holistic look at how everything fits together. It’s conservation. It’s about augmentation. It’s about a whole bunch of things.”

 “We’ve got 20 or 30 years,” added Grady Gammage Jr., an attorney who’s written extensively about water and is distinguished fellow at Arizona State University’s Morrison Institute for Public Policy. “We’re still so addicted to growth as the solution to everything. But where’s the water going to come from? I used to tell people, ‘Relax. We don’t need to worry about that for a long time.’ Not anymore. Now is the time that we need to worry about that.”

New construction in Pinal County photo
Water scarcity has not disrupted demand for new housing in Arizona. From January 2019 to December 2021 municipal authorities in Pinal County issued construction permits for 161,519 new homes. Photo © Keith Schneider / Circle of Blue

Outside Metro Areas The New Sound of Alarm

That message is starting to penetrate more deeply. There’s a reason. A dress rehearsal for contending with serious water shortage is in process for 1 million residents who don’t live in Arizona’s two big metro regions. During a month of frontline reporting in Arizona, Circle of Blue encountered unmistakable signals of extreme water stress: 

  • Wells have run dry for thousands of residents who rely on groundwater for drinking, from Cochise County in the southeast, to Maricopa County north of Phoenix, to the Chino Valley north of Prescott.
  • Industrial livestock and nut farms have settled in Cochise County, and in Mohave County in the north. Because demand has increased, and moisture to recharge groundwater reserves has diminished, aquifers are dropping 5 feet a year. Irrigation wells on existing farms already have gone dry and more are in jeopardy of going dry. 
  • Water scarcity is driving two of Arizona’s fastest growing business sectors. Water hauling companies are adding trucks and drivers to keep pace with demand. And water well drilling companies, prompted by customer lists so long that orders are filled six or more months after they are made, are buying new equipment and hiring more staff. 
  • The San Carlos Reservoir, formed by 92-year-old Coolidge Dam, is designed to store 1 million acre-feet of water from the Gila River to irrigate 100,000 acres of farmland between Phoenix and Tucson. Rain and snow melt in the high desert where the reservoir is located have been so altered by climate change that it’s filled only once since 1980 and now holds a mere 37,000 acre-feet.
  • Though 40 of its 140 miles are protected in a national conservation area famed for wildlife and migrating birds, the San Pedro River in southeast Arizona is hardly a river at all. The aquifers that sustained its flow have been drawn down by extreme heat, drought, and hundreds of wells drilled for housing. Once promoted as one of the state’s last “free flowing” rivers, the San Pedro is now but a trickle, and altogether dry along much of its path.
  • The dollar value of water is climbing to heights never before seen in the state or hardly anticipated. Arizona last year approved the sale of 2,083 acre-feet of Colorado River water annually to Queen Creek, a Phoenix suburb. The cost of the deal: $21 million or $10,000 per acre-foot. Queen Creek is anxious to pay. It needs the water. The city’s population — 60,000 — is 15 times higher than in 2000. Its water demand is 10 times higher. 

The tightening supply of water, in effect, is testing Arizona’s growth-focused operating system, and producing losers and winners. That is especially true in Pinal County, a Connecticut-size expanse of mountains, desert, farmland, copper mines, Native American reservations, and growing cities set between Phoenix and Tucson. One other feature distinguishes Pinal: about 100 miles of the 336-mile-long Central Arizona Project, one of the country’s longest aqueducts that transports Colorado River water from Lake Havasu to south of Tucson. At its peak in the early 1990s the project delivered 550,000 acre-feet of Colorado River water annually to irrigate a $2.3 billion dairy-alfalfa-cotton-melon farm sector, one of the most prosperous in the country. 

Because of agreements that Arizona reached from 2004 to 2019 as the river waned, the federal shortage declaration last August cut the water supply to Pinal County’s four irrigation districts from more than 200,000 acre-feet in the 2000s to 31,000 acre-feet in 2022. The state has promised $40 million to drill or rehabilitate groundwater wells to make up a portion of the loss.

Houses replace farmland in Pinal County
Houses replace farmland in Pinal County. Between 2012 and 2017 almost 180 Pinal farms went out of business, a nearly 20 percent reduction. Some 100,000 fewer acres were farmed, an 8 percent decline. Photo © Keith Schneider / Circle of Blue

Pinal’s Pain

On a crisp January morning, Atanacio “Nacho” Gonzalez returned from a distant field to his Pinal County farm headquarters, within sight of the treeless Table Top mountains, and described what drought and water shortage are doing to 1,500 acres of Bermuda grass and alfalfa that he raises for horses and livestock. 

“I’ll give you an idea of where we are,” said Gonzalez, who is 62 years old and has farmed this piece of ground since 2002. “Before the cuts I order 18 CFS for 1,000 acres.” (That’s 18 cubic feet per second or 36 acre-feet per day.) “I apply that nonstop for about two weeks at a time, then alfalfa grows or grass grows. We do that, usually, nine times out of a year. 

“What am I going to get this year?” he continues. “Very little, according to what my water companies tell me.”

A University of Arizona analysis published last year projected that because of the federal water declaration Pinal farm income would drop $100 million annually. It’s not a killing blow. It is, however, the latest of the economic hits steadily driving the Pinal farm community to threatened status. Between 2012 and 2017, according to the U.S. Agricultural Census, almost 180 Pinal farms went out of business, a nearly 20 percent reduction. Some 100,000 fewer acres were farmed, an 8 percent decline. 

Gonzalez is one of 176 farmers who receive water from the San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage District, all of whom are contending with a double dose of water shortage. First is the loss of all Colorado River water delivered by the Central Arizona Project. Second is what’s happening with the San Carlos Reservoir, which is 97 percent empty. Turning on wells to supply groundwater will not make up the difference.

“Our wells don’t put out so much water,” Gonzalez said. “I’m thinking that I’ll grow on 600 acres, not 1,000. How many cuttings can we do on 600? I’m hoping to do seven to nine. But that’s yet to be seen. We’ll have a 40 percent reduction in the crop.”

Gov. Stephen Roe Lewis photo
Gov. Stephen Roe Lewis, the leader of the Gila River Indian Community, which has rights to one of the largest reserves of fresh water in the Southwest.
Photo © J. Carl Ganter / Circle of Blue

Tribal Water Abundance

The federal shortage declaration also produced winners, especially the Gila River Indian Community. Most of the tribe’s 372,000-acre reservation is spread across the northern section of Pinal County. In 2004 Congress approved a huge water settlement that confirmed the tribe’s right to more than 650,000 acre-feet of water, about half from the Colorado River. The long-term goal of the tribe, whose ancestors date back to the people who inhabited the region 8,000 years ago, is to restore its ancestral farming ground to about 75,000 acres. It currently farms about 35,000 acres. A $92 million appropriation from the Interior Department is funding the expansion of the tribe’s irrigation network. 

In the meantime, the nearly 23,000-member tribe is marketing some of the 311,800 acre-feet of Colorado River water it is entitled to each year. It agreed to lease 33,000 acre-feet annually for 25 years, starting this year, to operators of the Central Arizona Project to support residential development. As a requirement of the 2004 settlement, it leases 41,000 more acre-feet annually to supply drinking water to cities in the Phoenix region.

Since 2016, it’s also kept 370,000 acre-feet in Lake Mead to help slow the reservoir’s decline. And though the August shortage declaration cut its Colorado River water supply by 41,000 acre feet, the tribe agreed to leave nearly 130,000 more acre-feet in Lake Mead this year. That amount is most of Arizona’s share of 500,000 acre-feet that the state, California, and Nevada agreed to keep in the lake last December. The price for that water: $274 an acre-foot, or $35.6 million. In effect, water has become an annual revenue item nearly as significant as the tribe’s three casinos.

Tribal officials did not make themselves available for an interview. But Gov. Stephen Roe Lewis, the tribal leader, said in a 2019 news release that the tribe’s goal in leasing water was to “protect Lake Mead,” and “ensure that water supplies are available for an important sector of Arizona’s economy.”

By economy, Lewis principally meant real estate construction, the engine that has propelled the state’s growth for 70 years. Pinal is an example. In 1950, just as the post-war population boom started, Pinal was still a lightly settled farm and mining county with 43,000 residents, nearly 1,200 farmers, 2.5 million acres of farmland, and 13,000 homes. 

By 2020 the shrinking agriculture sector counted less than 800 farms and 1.1 million acres of farmland. But the county’s population soared to 425,000 people living in 181,000 homes, most of them built on former farmland. 

Pinal County’s long-term plan forecasts that 5 million more residents could show up. At current rates of Arizona’s growth, that means that by mid-century virtually all new state residents will settle in the county. They potentially could if there is sufficient water. 

The following data points are important. In 2020, the latest year for complete figures, Pinal’s annual water demand was 950,000 acre-feet; 40 percent from the Central Arizona Project and almost all of the balance from groundwater, according to state data. Farming used most of it, 750,000 acre-feet per year. Cities and industry used just 35,000 acre-feet.

The county anticipates that at current rates of water use serving 5 million more residents, equivalent to 1.5 million new residences, would require 840,000 to 1.7 million acre-feet of additional water supplies every year. 

Where’s that water coming from? The Colorado? Not likely. And the state Department of Water Resources has changed its view of how much groundwater will be available. 

In 2019 the agency took a fresh look with new groundwater models and announced it made a mistake. Its newest assessment of supply and demand showed that Pinal’s water demand over the next few decades would be 8 million acre-feet over and above the available supply.

Last year the state halted issuing water supply certificates for housing subdivisions. The announcement, though, hasn’t curtailed new construction for housing. Yet. From January 2019 to December 2021, according to the St. Louis Federal Reserve, Pinal’s municipal authorities issued construction permits for 161,519 new homes that already had been approved. 

This project was made possible by a fellowship awarded by Stanford University’s Bill Lane Center for The American West.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Western river compacts were innovative in the 1920s but couldn’t foresee today’s water challenges

Colorado River water flows through a canal that feeds farms in Casa Grande, Ariz., on July 22, 2021. AP Photo/Darryl Webb
Colorado River water flows through a canal that feeds farms in Casa Grande, Ariz., on July 22, 2021. AP Photo/Darryl Webb

By Patricia J. Rettig, Colorado State University

The Western U.S. is in a water crisis, from California to Nebraska. An ongoing drought is predicted to last at least through July 2022. Recent research suggests that these conditions may be better labeled aridification – meaning that warming and drying are long-term trends.

On the Colorado River, the country’s two largest reservoirs – Lake Powell and Lake Mead – are at their lowest levels in 50 years. This could threaten water supplies for Western states and electricity generation from the massive hydropower turbines embedded in the lakes’ dams. In August 2021 the federal government issued a first-ever water shortage declaration for the Colorado, forcing supply cuts in several states.

The seven Colorado River Basin states – Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming – signed a water sharing agreement, the Colorado River Compact, in 1922. Some observers are now calling for renegotiating the compact to correct errors and oversights. Nebraska and Colorado are also arguing over water from the South Platte River, which they share under a separate agreement signed in 1923.

Delph Carpenter, standing at center, at the signing of bills approving the Colorado River and South Platte River compacts in 1925. Colorado State University Water Resources Archive, CC BY-ND
Delph Carpenter, standing at center, at the signing of bills approving the Colorado River and South Platte River compacts in 1925. Colorado State University Water Resources Archive, CC BY-ND

My work as head archivist for Colorado State University’s Water Resources Archive gives me a unique perspective on these conflicts. Our collection includes the papers of Delph Carpenter, a lawyer who developed the concept of interstate river compacts and negotiated both the Colorado and South Platte agreements.

Carpenter’s drafts, letters, research and reports show that he believed compacts would reduce litigation, preserve state autonomy and promote the common good. Indeed, many states use them now. Viewing Carpenter’s documents with hindsight, we can see that interstate river compacts were an innovative solution 100 years ago – but were written for a West far different from today.

Water for development

In the early 1900s, there was plenty of water to go around. But there weren’t enough dams, canals or pipelines to store, move or make use of it. Devastating floods in California and Arizona spurred plans for building dams to hold back high river flows.

With the Reclamation Act of 1902, Congress directed the Interior Department to develop infrastructure in the West to supply water for irrigation. As the Reclamation Service, which later became the powerful Bureau of Reclamation, moved forward, it began planning for dams that could also generate hydropower. Low-cost electricity and irrigation water would become important drivers of development in the West.

Carpenter worried that downstream states, building dams for their own needs, would demand water from upstream states. He was especially attuned to this issue as a native of mountainous Colorado, the source of four major rivers – the Platte, the Arkansas, the Rio Grande and the Colorado. Carpenter wanted to see upper basin states “adequately protected before the construction of the structures upon the lower river.”

The Colorado River flows through seven U.S. states and Mexico, ending at the Gulf of California. USGS
The Colorado River flows through seven U.S. states and Mexico, ending at the Gulf of California. USGS

Carpenter also knew about interstate water conflicts. In 1916, a group of Nebraska irrigators sued farmers in Colorado for drying up the South Platte River at the state line. Carpenter was already lead counsel for Colorado in Wyoming v. Colorado, a case involving the Laramie River that began in 1911 and would not be resolved until 1922.

Carpenter viewed such legal battles as wastes of time and money. But when he proposed negotiating interstate river compacts, he was met with “skepticism, indifference, failure of comprehension or open ridicule,” he recollected in a 1934 essay.

Eventually Carpenter persuaded his Colorado clients to resolve their litigation with Nebraska by negotiating a compact to share water from the South Platte. It took seven years of data collection and discussion, but Carpenter believed the agreement would ensure “permanent peace with our neighboring state.”

Or maybe not. Today Nebraska officials want to revive an unfinished canal to pull water from the South Platte in Colorado, citing concerns about Colorado’s numerous planned upstream water projects. With Colorado officials pledging to aggressively defend their state’s water rights, the states could be headed to court.

Portioning out the Colorado

West of the Continental Divide, the Colorado River flows more than 1,400 miles southwest to the Gulf of California in Mexico. Once, its delta was a lush network of lagoons; now the river peters out in the desert because states take so much water out of it upstream. https://www.youtube.com/embed/6iqh_fRkhRg?wmode=transparent&start=0 In 2014, the U.S. and Mexico started collaborating to restore the ecosystems of the Colorado River Delta.

In 2014, the U.S. and Mexico started collaborating to restore the ecosystems of the Colorado River Delta.

When settlers developed the West, their prevailing attitude was that water reaching the sea was wasted, so people aimed to use it all. California had a bigger population than the other six Colorado River Basin states combined, and Carpenter worried that California’s river use could hinder Colorado under the prior appropriation doctrine, which dictates that the first person to use water acquires a right to use it in the future. With the U.S. Reclamation Service studying the Colorado to find good dam sites, Carpenter also feared that the federal government would take control of river development.

Carpenter studied international treaties as models for river compacts. He knew that U.S. states had a right under Article 1, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution to make agreements with each other. And he believed that solving water conflicts between states required “statesmanship of the highest order.”

In 1920, officials agreed to try his approach. After the states and the federal government adopted legislation to authorize the process, representatives began meeting as the Colorado River Commission in January 1922, with then-Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover as chair. Meeting minutes show that negotiations nearly collapsed several times, but the end goal of rapid river development held them together.

The commissioners reached agreement in 11 months, adopting a final version of the compact in November 1922. It allocated fixed amounts of water – measured in absolute acre-feet, not percentages of the river’s flow – to the upper and lower basins. With water levels in the river declining, this approach has proved to be a major challenge today.

In 2021 the Interior Department declared a water shortage for the Colorado River, triggering supply cuts for Arizona, Nevada and Mexico.

At their meetings, the commissioners discussed both the variability of the river’s flow and their lack of sufficient data for long-term planning. Yet in the final compact they allowed for dividing up surplus water starting in 1963. We know now that they used optimistic flow numbers measured during a particularly wet period.

A hotter, more crowded West

Today the West faces conditions that Carpenter and his peers did not anticipate. In 1922, Hoover imagined that the basin’s population, which totaled about 457,000 in 1915, might quadruple in the future. Today, the Colorado River supplies some 40 million people – more than 20 times Hoover’s projection.

The commissioners also didn’t anticipate climate change, which is making the west hotter and drier and shrinking the river’s volume. Some water experts say a new agreement is needed that recognizes an era of shortage. Others say renegotiation is politically impossible. The states signed a drought contingency plan in 2019, but it runs through only 2026.

Testifying before Congress in 1926 about the Colorado River Compact, Hoover stated, “If we can provide for equity for the next 40 to 75 years we can trust to the generation after the next to be as intelligent as we are today.” In the face of extreme Western water challenges, it is now up to Westerners to meet – or exceed – that expectation.

[Understand new developments in science, health and technology, each week. Subscribe to The Conversation’s science newsletter.]

Patricia J. Rettig, Head Archivist, Water Resources Archive, Colorado State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Two new Colorado River deals give parched Lake Powell temporary relief

Lake Powell's Glen Canyon Dam is used to produce hydropower that is delivered over a 17,000-mile transmission grid, reaching six states and 5 million people. Photo courtesy Western Area Power Administration
Lake Powell’s Glen Canyon Dam is used to produce hydropower that is delivered over a 17,000-mile transmission grid, reaching six states and 5 million people. Photo courtesy Western Area Power Administration

By Jerd Smith

Drought-strapped Lake Powell won a major reprieve last week with two emergency agreements that will provide 1 million acre-feet (maf) of Colorado River water this year to boost lake levels and protect its hydropower production.

The water will come from an emergency release of 500,000 acre-feet from Utah’s Flaming Gorge Reservoir, and a 500,000 acre-foot reduction in releases from Powell’s Glen Canyon Dam.

That’s as much water as it would take to fill Colorado’s Lake Dillon four times, and it will add a significant buffer to Powell, which has dropped to just over 5 maf of stored supplies. The lake has the capacity to store 26 maf.

“This is a short-term Band-Aid,” said Amy Ostdiek, who helped oversee the drought negotiations for the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the state’s lead agency for water planning. “We are going to have to consider the long-term solutions and they have to be balanced.”

The Colorado River Basin covers seven states, as well as Mexico. The basin is divided into an Upper Basin — Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico — and Lower Basin — Arizona, California and Nevada.

Under the 1922 Colorado River Compact, Colorado and the other Upper Basin states must deliver 7.5 maf of water to the Lower Basin at Lee Ferry, Ariz., just downstream of Glen Canyon Dam, on a 10-year running average. This year the Upper Basin will deliver just 7 maf from Lake Powell.

But because the 10-year running average stands at roughly 9 maf, there is still time to help the system come back into balance before the Lower Basin states could legally call for more water than they currently receive.

Lake Powell is the Upper Basin’s largest storage pool on the system and is designed to ensure the four Upper Basin states can meet their legal water delivery obligations to the Lower Basin states. Because of those obligations, Colorado water users are closely monitoring the ongoing declines in Powell, with the threat to hydropower production seen as a dangerous precursor to a water shortage that could trigger a legal compact crisis.

Last year, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation ordered the release of 125,000 acre-feet of water from Flaming Gorge, and another 36,000 acre-foot release from Colorado’s Blue Mesa Reservoir.

This year is expected to be slightly better from a snowpack and water supply perspective. In Colorado, for instance, snowpack ahead of the spring runoff, sits at 91% of average, above last year’s 79% mark.

But that’s not enough moisture to help any of the reservoirs on the Colorado River’s seven-state system recover, water officials said. It should be enough, however, to protect hydropower production, which has been steadily dropping as Lake Powell has declined.

Colorado River Basin. Credit: Chas Chamberlin
Colorado River Basin. Credit: Chas Chamberlin

But it’s not just hydropower and water supplies that are causing concern. The drop in reservoir levels is affecting thousands of boaters and campers across the West, who flock to these storage pools every summer to camp, fish and boat.

John Rauch and his family have operated Cedar Springs Marina on Flaming Gorge for decades. Last year, as he watched the lake shrink, he acted quickly, moving boat docks and accommodating customers whose recreation plans were being altered on a daily basis.

This year’s announcement was no surprise, Rauch said, but the jump in the amount of water being released, a nearly four-fold increase, is worrisome.

Equally concerning is the prospect that more releases will be required next year, Rauch said.

“I think we’re going to lose a lot more water,” he said.

Lake Powell, which can store roughly 26 maf of water when full, and its sister reservoir, Lake Mead, with 29.4 maf of storage, are two of the largest reservoirs in the United States. But upstream are three more: Utah’s Flaming Gorge, which holds 1.8 maf when full, Colorado’s Blue Mesa which holds 900,000 acre-feet, and New Mexico’s Navajo Reservoir, with 1.7 maf of storage.

A 20-year megadrought, considered to be the worst in 1,200 years, including two back-to-back intense drought periods during 2020 and 2021, has left each of the reservoirs well below their former levels, with Blue Mesa, for instance, sitting at roughly 40% of capacity with no prospect of refilling this year, and Lake Powell down to about 25% of capacity.

After weeks of closed-door talks with officials from the seven states, Reclamation, which operates the reservoirs, opted to tap Flaming Gorge again this summer because it sits high in the system and could accommodate a release easier than Blue Mesa or Navajo, officials said.

That move, along with the 500,000 acre-foot cutback in releases from Lake Powell, should be enough to protect hydropower production this year, said Becky Mitchell, director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board.

How that water will be restored to the states is unclear. Under the terms of a historic set of Drought Contingency Plans approved in 2019, so-called “recovery” of these water supplies is to be considered when the federal government decides the system is healthy enough again, according to Reclamation.

Reclamation declined an interview request on the new agreements, but in documents released last week it said that little if any recovery is likely over the next four years.

Drought has plagued the Colorado River since the early 2000s and in 2007 the seven states agreed to a hard-fought plan to begin jointly managing the system, hoping that the drought would end before the agreement, known as the Colorado River 2007 Interim Guidelines, expires in 2026.

All seven states are gearing up to renegotiate those guidelines, a process expected to take several years. And water officials across the region are calling for a recognition that the river can no longer produce the water quantities envisioned even as recently as the early 2000s.

What that may mean for water users isn’t clear yet, but all seven states have begun cutting back their use of Colorado River supplies, either because the river has run physically short of water, as in the Upper Basin states, or in the Lower Basin, due to the 2007 guidelines, which tie water-use reductions to levels in lakes Powell and Mead.

For John Rauch, adapting to a more water-short world is going to be a huge undertaking, though not an impossible one.

“It’s a complicated problem,” he said. “We’re going to do everything we can … but it’s going to take a lot of snow.”

Jerd Smith is editor of Fresh Water News. She can be reached at 720-398-6474, via email at jerd@wateredco.org or @jerd_smith.

Fresh Water News is an independent, nonpartisan news initiative of Water Education Colorado. WEco is funded by multiple donors. Our editorial policy and donor list can be viewed at wateredco.org

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Lawmakers suspend attempt at legislative fix for water speculation

An irrigation ditch on Orchard Mesa in the Grand Valley, bringing water from the Colorado River to orchards and fields. The Grand Valley has been the center of discussions and a legislative effort around investment water speculation.
An irrigation ditch on Orchard Mesa in the Grand Valley, bringing water from the Colorado River to orchards and fields. The Grand Valley has been the center of discussions and a legislative effort around investment water speculation. CREDIT: BRENT GARDNER-SMITH/ASPEN JOURNALISM

By Heather Sackett

Colorado lawmakers have suspended an attempt to prohibit outside investors from profiting off the state’s water.

On Thursday, the Senate Agriculture & Natural Resources Committee voted 5 to 2 to approve an amendment sending Senate Bill 29 back to the interim Water Resources Review Committee for more study and input from water users. However, at the end of Thursday’s hearing, Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg, acting as chair, decided to “lay over” the bill, meaning the committee would take it up at another time.

But with the 2022 legislative session ending on May 11, there is probably neither time nor the desire from lawmakers to push the bill through, meaning that, to all appearances, the legislation is dead. The Senate Agriculture & Natural Resources Committee would now have to take the measure back up and move it along to the full Senate and then to the House in order for it to go back to the interim committee.

Sonnenberg, R-Sterling, and Sen. Kerry Donovan, D-Eagle County, who initially proposed the back-to-interim-committee amendment and is a sponsor of the bill, were the two votes against sending the issue back to the interim committee. It’s unclear why Donovan, who did not return a call for clarification as of presstime, voted against her own amendment. 

“We gave it a heck of a college try,” said Donovan, the twice-elected representative for Senate District 5, which includes Pitkin County, who will be stepping down at the end of the year due to term limits. “And I think we continued an important conversation. Water always takes a long time to figure out and I was certainly hopeful that by having a bill we would force conversation.”

Senate Bill 29, with Western Slope sponsors Donovan and Sen. Don Coram, R-Montrose, was an attempt to stop out-of-state investors in agricultural water from making a profit off a public resource that grows scarcer in a water-short future driven by climate change. 

Many say investment water speculation is a threat, but few agree on what should be done about it. A legislative fix, despite several attempts at tweaks with amendments throughout the session, failed to gain support from the constituency the bill aimed to protect: agricultural water users. Although some agricultural water rights holders recognize there could be negative impacts to their communities if water is sold to investors, they don’t want the state making the process of selling their ranch harder, placing restrictions on who they can sell to or limiting their ability to make a profit. 

The original bill would have given the state engineer at the Department of Water Resources the ability to investigate complaints of investment water speculation and fine a purchaser of water rights up to $10,000 if they determine speculation is occurring. 

That version failed to gain traction, as did a handful of proposed “strike-below” or “strike-through” amendments, including one put forth by the Colorado River Water Conservation District, which would have addressed speculation using the abandonment principle by saying that if someone was getting paid to not use their water, they could be punished by losing their water right.

Donovan then floated the most recent amendment that would have sent the issue back to the interim Water Resources Committee for further study and input from water users, a move Coram said was kicking the can down the road. 

Lawmakers scolded some in the water community for what they said was a lack of cooperation and communication around developing legislation aimed at preventing speculation. 

“We have an ineffective water group that won’t have a conversation with lawmakers anymore,” Sonnenberg said. “When we have a bill they just take a position and quit working with people.”

WAM bought this 57-acre parcel as part of a $6 million deal in January 2020, leading some to suspect the company was engaging in investment water speculation. WAM’s activity in the Grand Valley helped prompt state legislators to propose a bill aimed at curbing speculation.
WAM bought this 57-acre parcel as part of a $6 million deal in January 2020, leading some to suspect the company was engaging in investment water speculation. WAM’s activity in the Grand Valley helped prompt state legislators to propose a bill aimed at curbing speculation. CREDIT: BETHANY BLITZ/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Bill opposition

At Thursday’s hearing, several people testified in opposition to the bill. Colorado Water Congress, Colorado Farm Bureau, Rocky Mountain Farmers Union, as well as three Grand Valley water providers, among others, were opposed to the bill. 

Former state representative from Gunnison County Kathleen Curry works as a lobbyist on behalf of the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District, Grand Valley Water Users Association and the Ute Water Conservancy District, organizations that provide agricultural and domestic water to the Grand Valley. She said her clients would support taking more time to consult with experts and stakeholders.

“My folks have two major concerns regarding the legislation as it was introduced and as it’s been contemplated so far,” she said. “One has to do with the additional time needed to obtain feedback from the affected parties and water rights owners and secondly, they are still a bit unclear about the need for legislation, and the scope of potential impacts to water rights owners remains a concern.” 

The Grand Valley has been the center of investment water speculation concerns, where New York City-based private-equity firm Water Asset Management has been acquiring irrigated farmland. WAM is now the largest landowner in the Grand Valley Water Users Association. But as long as WAM keeps putting the water to beneficial use and keeps the land in agricultural production — which it appears to be doing — it doesn’t count as speculation. 

Still, the threat from out-of-state, urban interests loomed large at Thursday’s hearing.

“We were hearing across our districts and state about a new type of player in the water world,” Donovan said. “And that player was custom suits and shiny shoes that call big cities home. … There was concern from many in the water world that probably an investment firm was not going to be the best partner moving forward.” 

In an attempt to address the issue in 2020, legislators convened a workgroup, made up of water managers and policy experts across sectors to explore ways to strengthen the state’s anti-speculation laws. Saddled with the incredibly complex task of figuring out how to protect Colorado’s water from profit-seeking investors without infringing on private property rights, an August 2021 report from the workgroup did not give recommendations to lawmakers because they could not come to a consensus about which concepts to implement. The group’s report did, however, lay out potential avenues new regulations to prevent investment water speculation could take.

For Loma rancher, workgroup member and President of GVWUA Joe Bernal, the lack of consensus meant that lawmakers should not move forward with any legislation. 

“Our group found it very important that more information be gathered from landowners and stakeholders,” he told the committee Thursday. “I find it very concerning that bill sponsors moved forward with the crafting of an anti-speculation bill when there seems to be very little support from the people and the citizens it seems the sponsors are trying to protect.” 

An irrigated field in the Grand Valley, near Grand Junction made green by water diverted from the Colorado River. Grand Valley water user groups were opposed to Senate bill 29, which was aimed at preventing investment water speculation.
An irrigated field in the Grand Valley, near Grand Junction made green by water diverted from the Colorado River. Grand Valley water user groups were opposed to Senate bill 29, which was aimed at preventing investment water speculation. CREDIT: BRENT GARDNER-SMITH/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Threats to agriculture

The concern at the heart of the speculation issue is not that investors could profit off of Colorado’s water. Underneath, there is a broader fear about the loss of agricultural land and with it, a way of life and a part of Colorado’s history, culture and identity. The work group identified the large-scale, permanent dry-up of agricultural lands as the No. 1 risk from speculators.

For Bernal, the bigger threat to Colorado agriculture comes from developers who would subdivide the land for houses and ranchettes and take it out of agricultural production. The acres that were sold to WAM, which are still being farmed, could have been sold instead to developers, an outcome he doesn’t want to see.

“I think it could be studied further, but at this point we don’t have a problem yet,” Bernal said. “I’m not saying I’m glad WAM is here, but it seems to be the lesser of two evils. Given the choice of having the land developed, it’s a better option.”

Aspen Journalism covers rivers and water in collaboration with The Aspen Times. This story ran in the April 23 edition of The Aspen Times.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

New forecast: Lake Powell electricity production to drop, as officials race to boost water levels

Lake Powell's Glen Canyon Dam photo
Lake Powell’s Glen Canyon Dam is used to produce hydropower that is delivered over a 17,000-mile transmission grid, reaching six states and 5 million people. Photo courtesy Western Area Power Administration.

By Jerd Smith

Electricity produced at Lake Powell’s Glen Canyon Dam, which serves some 50 Colorado utilities, and dozens of others in the Colorado River Basin, has been cut in half by the 20-year drought, with power levels over the next two years projected to be 47% lower than normal, according to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

“We’re going to be generating less than we have in quite some time. It will be among the lowest years of generation ever,” said Nick Williams, power manager for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s Upper Colorado River Region in an interview last week.

The grim forecast comes as water officials race to bolster Lake Powell’s water levels. On April 8, Reclamation announced it would likely keep more water in Lake Powell, reducing releases from the planned 7.5 million acre-feet to 7 million acre-feet, a move that could trigger emergency water cutbacks in Arizona, California and Nevada.

At the same time, electric utilities across the West are looking for other green options and hoping that hydropower production won’t stop altogether. According to Reclamation, there is a 27% chance that Powell will still stop generating electricity completely over the next four years.

“If Glen Canyon Dam ceases to operate, we are going to have to replace that power somewhere else and it will have a bigger carbon footprint,” said Bryan Hannegan, CEO of Holy Cross Energy, which buys Lake Powell’s hydropower to serve customers in Western Colorado.

The picture was much different 59 years ago, when the giant storage reservoir on the Colorado River was filling, its electricity helping power the West and the revenue from its power sales helping fund endangered fish protection programs across the Colorado River Basin.

Back then, Hannegan said, “We made an assumption that our WAPA (Western Area Power Administration) allocation would be firm, reliable and always there. Now, though, we know that it’s not firm, it’s not reliable, and it’s coming at a much higher cost.”

Late last fall WAPA, which operates the electric grid and distributes the power to utilities, raised rates 30% to cover reductions in power revenue. Few expected to ever see this drop in hydropower production, let alone consider what to do if Glen Canyon were to cease electricity production entirely.

“The forecast is changing daily and there are still a lot of variables,” said Lisa Meiman, a spokeswoman for WAPA. ”But it is concerning. This is the big warning bell.”

The drop in the power forecast comes as Upper Colorado River Basin states of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming prepare to finalize a new drought operations plan for the giant river system. The draft plan is expected to be released next week, according to Becki Bryant, a spokeswoman for Reclamation’s Upper Colorado River Region.

The critical issue is how to maintain the lake at 3,525, which marks an elevation that is the top of the liquid buffer zone designed to protect the lake’s mighty electricity turbines.

Last July, to protect the 3,525 buffer zone, Reclamation ordered emergency water releases from three reservoirs in the Upper Colorado River Basin. Utah’s Flaming Gorge, Colorado’s Blue Mesa and New Mexico’s Navajo.

Despite those releases, Powell dropped below 3,525 last month, hitting 3,523, another historic drought landmark.

Though the 2022 forecast isn’t expected to be finalized until later this month, water officials expect that more water will have to be released from Upper Basin storage reservoirs this summer because inflows into the lake from the drought-stressed Colorado River are expected to be well below average again, in the 60% to 80% range.

Becky Mitchell is director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the state’s lead water planning agency. She also sits on the Upper Colorado River Commission. Mitchell declined to discuss the pending drought operations plan. But in a statement, she said, “The Upper Basin States are working collaboratively with the Bureau of Reclamation to draft a 2022 Drought Response Operations Plan outlining potential releases from Upper Basin reservoirs in an effort to protect critical elevations at Lake Powell. The Upper Basin reservoirs have already provided 161,000 acre-feet of water pursuant to the ’imminent need‘ provision of the Drought Response Operations Agreement, including 36,000 acre-feet from Blue Mesa Reservoir in Colorado. Water availability, appropriate timing of releases, and impacts on other resources are all being considered as the 2022 Plan is being drafted.”

Across the region, water utilities are in high-alert mode, preparing for another dry year on the Colorado River and holding hope that the Upper Basin reservoirs can be protected as long as possible from large-scale drought releases.

“The forecast isn’t great,” said Kyle Whitaker, Colorado River Manager for the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, one of the largest diverters of water in the headwaters region of the river.

“It’s better than last year, but we’ll just have to see what the next two to four weeks holds for precipitation.”

At the same time, power producers are gearing up to craft a fallback plan for extending hydropower production at Glen Canyon Dam if water levels continue to fall.

“We have to take a strong look at what we will do in the unlikely event that Lake Powell stops producing hydropower,” said WAPA’s Meiman. “It’s not a hypothetical situation anymore.”

Correction: This article has been corrected to indicate that Lake Powell began filling 59 years ago, not 60 years, as the original article stated.

Jerd Smith is editor of Fresh Water News. She can be reached at 720-398-6474, via email at jerd@wateredco.org or @jerd_smith.

Fresh Water News is an independent, nonpartisan news initiative of Water Education Colorado. WEco is funded by multiple donors. Our editorial policy and donor list can be viewed at wateredco.org

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

As Lake Powell dries up, the US turns to creative accounting for a short-term fix

A view of the Glen Canyon Dam at Lake Powell photo
A view of the Glen Canyon Dam at Lake Powell in Arizona in March 2022. Justin Sullivan / Getty Images

By Jake Bittle, Grist

Earlier this month, as water levels in the Lake Powell reservoir fell to record lows amid the ongoing Western drought, the federal government asked seven states that rely on the Colorado River to work out an emergency conservation deal. The states had been scheduled to receive river water that was stored in the lake, but releasing the water would have drained the reservoir further, threatening its ability to generate hydroelectric power for millions of people and raising utility bills for towns and tribes across the West. The feds also revealed that declining reservoir levels would endanger the tubes that carry water past the dam’s hydropower turbine, potentially depriving multiple communities of drinking water and compromising “public health and safety.”

Late last week, the states agreed to forfeit their water from Lake Powell in order to ensure that the reservoir can still produce power. The deal puts a finger in the metaphorical dike, postponing an inevitable reckoning with the years-long drought that has parched the Colorado River — and a wrenching tradeoff between power access and water access for millions. It does so, in part, through an unusual act of hydrological accounting.

The deal has two parts. The first and more straightforward part is that the federal government will move 500,000 acre-feet of water (about 162 billion gallons) from the Flaming Gorge Reservoir into Lake Powell, bumping up water levels in the latter body. Flaming Gorge, which stretches across Wyoming and Utah, is mostly used for water recreation, so the immediate effects of the transfer will be minimal. The feds could do more of these water transfers later in the year if things get worse, drawing on water from other nearby reservoirs.

The second part is more complicated — and less helpful. In ordinary circumstances, the Bureau of Reclamation releases water from Lake Powell into an even larger reservoir called Lake Mead, from which it then flows to households and farms across the Southwest. As part of the deal, the states that rely on Mead water are agreeing to leave about 480,000 acre-feet of that water in Lake Powell, thus lowering the water levels in Mead. (Reclamation already announced earlier this year that it would delay the release of 350,000 acre-feet of water in Powell in anticipation of spring snow runoff.)

The problem is that Lake Mead’s falling water level has huge implications for water access in the Southwest. Pursuant to a drought contingency plan worked out back in 2019, declines in Mead trigger mandatory water reductions for states like Nevada and Arizona. The first of these reductions arrived last year, when the river entered a so-called “Tier 1” shortage, resulting in a 30 percent cut to Arizona’s water allocation. This has forced farmers in the Phoenix area to fallow their cotton and alfalfa fields. Officials expect the river to enter a Tier 2a or 2b shortage in the coming years, which would mean even larger cuts. Keeping water in Lake Powell makes it more likely the reservoir will reach that threshold.

The deal contains an eyebrow-raising workaround for this. In exchange for leaving the water in Lake Powell rather than having it flow to Lake Mead, the states get something in return: Officials at the Bureau of Reclamation will act as if that the water did go to Mead, thus treating Mead’s water level as though it’s higher than it really is. The hope here is to avoid triggering the cuts that would accompany a Tier 2b shortage declaration, even though the actual water level in the reservoir will likely fall low enough to warrant such cuts.

A map of the Colorado River
Grist / Amelia Bates

In other words, the states have agreed to ensure Lake Powell has more water than it should, and in return they get to pretend as though Lake Mead has more water than it does. The deal protects the towns and tribal communities that rely on Powell for water, but only for a short time: The ongoing drought has shown no signs of letting up, and it’s only a matter of time before water levels in Powell fall back into the danger zone, jeopardizing hydropower access and drinking water quality.

For the millions of people who rely on Lake Mead, meanwhile, the deal just postpones a shortage declaration that was bound to arrive in a few years anyway. It may give states like Arizona more time to figure out how to cope with declining water allotments, but it won’t stop cotton fields from going fallow or absolve suburbs like Scottsdale of the need to drastically reduce their water usage. 

For as long as there’s a drought on the Colorado, federal officials will have to choose between hydroelectric power in communities that depend on Lake Powell and water access in those that rely on Lake Mead. The sudden advent of this new short-term deal shows not only that these decisions are not going away, but that they will arrive faster than any of the parties on the river ever thought they would.

Update: This story has been updated to include comments from the Bureau of Reclamation that were received after publication.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Spring runoff forecast looks better than last two years

The Roaring Fork River joins with the Colorado River in downtown Glenwood Springs photo
The Roaring Fork River (left) joins with the Colorado River in downtown Glenwood Springs. As of an April 1 report from NRCS, streamflow forecasts are tracking closer with snowpack than the previous two years. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM.

By Heather Sackett

Colorado’s predictions for spring runoff are looking better than the past two years, but streamflows are still expected to be below normal. And the lingering effects of the two previous drought years means reservoirs remain depleted and may not fill. 

According to the April 2022 Water Supply Outlook from the National Resources Conservation Service, snowpack across the state was slightly below normal at 90% of median, precipitation was 96% of median and the streamflow forecast for the coming months is for 82% of median. Locally, the numbers are a bit better. As of April 1, snowpack for the Roaring Fork River basin was at 98% of median. The streamflow forecast is close behind at a predicted 94% of median. 

In typical years, snowpack and streamflow track closely, but dry soils that sucked up snowmelt in 2021 and 2020 meant that a near-normal snowpack translated to streamflows that were far below average. Last year, streamflows in many areas of the state were down 15-20% compared to snowpack. And across the upper Colorado River basin, a near-normal snowpack resulted in an 2021 water-year inflow to Lake Powell that was just 34% of normal.

This spring should see a bit of relief from that trend, said Karl Wetlaufer, a hydrologist and assistant snow survey supervisor with NRCS. 

“It’s much better than the last two years where the drought conditions in the summer dried out the soils,” he said. “We are expecting more of that snow to end up in the rivers and streams.” 

An aerial view of Wolford Reservoir photo
An aerial view of Wolford Reservoir, which is upstream from Kremmling and owned and operated by the Colorado River Water Conservation District. The reservoir is not expected to fill this year, which means some junior water users who hold contract water in the reservoir may not get all their water. CREDIT: SOURCE: / COLORADO RIVER DISTRICT.

Reservoirs low, some won’t fill

But even though things on the whole are better than the previous two years, the lingering effects of drought means reservoirs are depleted and may take several seasons to rebound.

“The whole picture is looking better than the last two years in western Colorado, but low reservoirs are going to be a major component of the water supply people will actually have available,” Wetlaufer said. 

According to the April report, the Colorado River basin ended March with 83% of median storage. Ruedi Reservoir on the Fryingpan River is currently just 54% full and dropped to its lowest level in almost two decades at the end of March. 

The Gunnison River basin was just one of two basins in the state that was at or above median at 100% of median snowpack; precipitation was 108% of median and streamflow was forecast to be 95% of median. But several of the basin’s reservoirs are well below normal. Basin-wide reservoir storage in the Gunnison was at 63%. After federal emergency releases last summer and fall to prop up Lake Powell, Blue Mesa is just 29% full.

According to a memo from Dave Kanzer, director of science and interstate matters at the Colorado River Water Conservation District, to River District board members, Dillon, Green Mountain, Granby, Williams Fork and Wolford Mountain reservoirs are not expected to fill in 2022. 

“For western Colorado within the River District, things are concerning, and our main reservoirs will not fill in the headwaters of the Colorado,” Kanzer said. “It’s obvious that we are going to have very little carry-over storage going into next year. It’s not the worst news, but it’s a challenge.” 

Kanzer said some water users that do not hold contracts for water in Wolford, which is upstream of the town of Kremmling and is owned and operated by the River District, may have to take shortages this year. Inflow into Wolford this spring is projected to be about 60% of median. Some of that contract water is for augmentation, or replacement, which is released downstream to allow junior water users to keep using water when flows get low in late summer. Kanzer said the River District should be able to meet all of its contractual obligations even though Wolford won’t fill this year.

“The reservoirs provide the supplemental supply for when the rivers naturally fall,” Kanzer said. “The rivers will fall earlier, and contracts will run out sooner and the late season supply is most at risk and junior water users are most at risk.”

The statewide snowpack was close to the peak for the year when abnormally warm temperatures March 24-28 started the annual melting and a rise in rivers. But Tuesday’s snowstorm, which dropped up to a foot in parts of Colorado’s high country, added a bit more to the snowpack.

“A big storm this time of year definitely has the potential in many parts of the state to cause an additional even higher peak, which could be our final one,” Wetlaufer said. “But one day of warm weather and the whole snowpack will be melting again.” 

Across the upper Colorado River basin, inflow into Lake Powell from April to July is expected to be 64% of average, according to the April projections from the Colorado Basin River Forecast Center. That is a 5% decrease from the March forecast. Lake Powell is currently at 3,522 feet elevation, and 24% full. 

Aspen Journalism covers water and rivers in collaboration with The Aspen Times. This story ran in the April 13 edition of The Aspen Times and the Glenwood Springs Post-Independent.

Editor’s note: This story has been changed to reflect that those water users who hold contracts for water in Wolford Reservoir will not have to take shortages.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

La Niña likely to continue, intensifying drought, wildfires; snowpack hits 91% of average

Blue Mesa Reservoir photo
Blue Mesa Reservoir near Gunnison, CO., Blue Mesa Reservoir is within Curecanti National Recreation Area and managed by the National Park Service. Blue Mesa Reservoir is Colorado’s largest lake, 20 miles long with a surface area of over 14 square miles. The reservoir was created by the damming of the Gunnison River by the Blue Mesa Dam in 1966 as part of the Colorado River Storage Project, helping control the flow of water into the Colorado River as well as generating hydroelectric power, flood control and storage. The Gunnison River is the 5th largest tributary to the Colorado River. Dean Krakel/for The Colorado Sun

By Jerd Smith

As warm spring winds whip the Eastern Plains, sapping soils of moisture, and the state’s reservoirs sit at below-average levels, water managers got more bad news Tuesday: this two-year drought cycle could continue through the summer and into the fall leading the state into its third year of below-average snowpack and streamflows and high wildfire danger.

Looking ahead the weather pattern known as La Niña, which has created the intense drought of the past two years, is likely to continue, according to Peter Goble, a climate specialist with Colorado State University’s Colorado Climate Center.

“La Niña is not letting go,” Goble said Tuesday at a meeting of the state’s Water Availability Task Force, a group charged with monitoring the state’s water supplies. “It may stick around for a third year and this will reduce our chances of any meaningful drought recovery this spring and summer.”

In Colorado, and other Western states, mountain snow levels are closely watched because when they melt in late spring, they supply the majority of water for cities and farms.

In January, holiday snows boosted the state’s snowpack to 119% of average, according to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). But spring snows have not provided as much relief as hoped.

Now, statewide snowpack is at 91% of average, according to the NRCS, an improvement over last year’s 79% of average mark at this time. But ultra-windy conditions and warm temperatures continue to rob the soils statewide of critical moisture, meaning a significant amount of the water from melting snow will be absorbed before it reaches streams.

Statewide snowpack at 91% of average

At the same time the state’s stored water supplies are at just 76% of normal, according to Karl Wetlaufer, a hydrologist and assistant snow survey supervisor with the NRCS.

“We’re seeing some of the lowest storage levels in more than 30 years,” Wetlaufer said.

Blue Mesa Reservoir is Colorado’s largest reservoir, able to store some 800,000 acre-feet of water. But due to the drought, and an emergency release of 36,000 acre-feet last summer to aid Lake Powell, Blue Mesa is just over 40% full.

More releases to Lake Powell from the reservoir, a recreational hot spot, may be necessary this summer. And because runoff isn’t expected to be that high, Blue Mesa isn’t expected to recover much, if at all this year, officials said.

“Blue Mesa is not expected to fill, and by the end of this year it will be right back to where it is now … it’s not looking good for this area,” said Beverly Richards, a water resources specialist with the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District, which helps shape policy and management strategies for the river.

On the Front Range, some cities, such as Thornton, expect their reservoirs to fill. The South Platte Basin is near normal for its snowpack and streamflow forecasts are healthier than others across the state.

But Swithin Dick, water resources manager for Centennial Water and Sanitation District in Highlands Ranch, said the outlook is worrisome.

“My gut meter is moving from cautious to concerned,” Dick said.

Denver Water, Colorado’s largest city water supplier, derives its supplies from the Upper Colorado River Basin on the West Slope, as well as the South Platte River. Its storage system is at 79% full, while snowpack in its mountain watersheds is measuring 79% to 80% full.

Some relief from the dry, windy weather could come in May if forecasts prove to be off track, Goble said.

“You want some million dollar rains on the Eastern Plains,“ Goble said. “But the deck is stacked against us.”

Jerd Smith is editor of Fresh Water News. She can be reached at 720-398-6474, via email at jerd@wateredco.org or @jerd_smith.

Fresh Water News is an independent, nonpartisan news initiative of Water Education Colorado. WEco is funded by multiple donors. Our editorial policy and donor list can be viewed at wateredco.org

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Glenwood Springs secures water right for whitewater parks

A view looking up the Colorado River from the pedestrian bridge over the river, just upstream of the river’s confluence with the Roaring Fork River. The location is one of three sites where the City of Glenwood Springs plans to build a whitewater park using a water right for recreation. CREDIT: BRENT GARDNER-SMITH/ASPEN JOURNALISM

By Heather Sackett

After a lengthy water court battle, the city of Glenwood Springs has secured a conditional water right for three potential whitewater parks on the Colorado River.

The new recreational in-channel diversion, or RICD, water right is a win for Colorado’s river recreation community, even though the city had to make concessions to future water development to get it.

The new water right is tied to three proposed boating parks: No Name, Horseshoe Bend and Two Rivers. The City plans to build a park at just one of the sites. The whitewater parks would be able to call for higher flows during certain times of year — 1,250 cubic feet per second from April 1 to Sept. 30; 2,500 cfs between June 8 and July 23 and 4,000 cfs for five days between June 30 and July 6.

The different flow rates would allow beginner, intermediate and expert boaters to all enjoy the boating structures, which have yet to be built. The five days of high flow would allow Glenwood to host a competitive event around the Fourth of July holiday.

The decree granted by water court judge James Berkley Boyd on March 23 is the culmination of nine years of work for Glenwood Springs, crafting agreements or otherwise settling with all parties that had filed statements of opposition in the case.

“We know outdoor recreation is a big part of our local culture and local economy so being able to have this opportunity to expand options and enhance options for our river recreation is really exciting,” said Bryana Starbuck, public information officer for the city of Glenwood Springs.

The city will now begin looking at designs for each of the three sites, investigating potential funding options and choosing the one that is the best fit, Starbuck said. The city will have to reapply to water court in six years to show it’s making progress on the parks to maintain the conditional right.

Glenwood Springs joins a handful of other Colorado communities with RICDs for human-made whitewater features, including Steamboat Springs, Pueblo, Fort Collins, Golden, Avon, Breckenridge, Durango, Aspen, Basalt and Carbondale.

Hattie Johnson, Southern Rockies stewardship director for American Whitewater, said in a prepared statement that this is an incredible victory for river recreation.

“The Colorado River through Glenwood Canyon is an iconic stretch of whitewater that attracts residents and visitors from far and wide,” she said. “This was an important case to ensure the Colorado River, the heart of the Glenwood Springs community, will continue to be enjoyed well into the future.”

“The Homestake Partners (Aurora Water and Colorado Springs Utilities) and Glenwood Springs worked very hard over a long period of time to reach the negotiated conclusion embodied within the stipulated Decree entered by the Water Court,” read a prepared statement from Greg Baker, manager of public relations for Aurora Water.

Proposed whitewater parks photo
A map filed by the city of Glenwood Springs showing the locations of three proposed whitewater parks. The city recently secured a recreational in-channel diversion (RICD) water right to build the parks. CREDIT: CITY OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS / WATER COURT FILING

Agreements with opposers

To get its water right, the city had to negotiate agreements with a long list of other water users and entities who opposed it, including the Colorado Water Conservation Board and Front Range water providers like Denver Water and Colorado Springs Utilities.

According to its decree, Glenwood Springs made allowances for future water rights that have not yet been developed.

A RICD water right’s power comes from its ability to place a “call.” In theory, once built, if the whitewater parks were not receiving the full amount of water they are entitled to, the city could “call out” other junior water rights users upstream, who would have to stop diverting water until the parks got their full amount.

But the decree includes a provision called “Yield Protection for New Water Rights,” which lays out restrictions on the city’s ability to call for its water during dry years. It allows 30,000 additional acre-feet of water to be developed over the next 30 years, which would be protected from a call above 1,250 cfs. As long as a new water rights holder could prove with real-time stream gauge monitoring data that they are not getting their full amount because of a call placed by Glenwood Springs for the 2,500 cfs amount, then Glenwood has to cancel the call.

This would kick in only in years when the 50% exceedance probability for streamflow in the Colorado River at Dotsero is less than 1.4 million acre-feet from April through June, according to forecasts from the National Resources Conservation Service. The provision would apply to water rights younger than Dec. 31, 2013, which is the appropriation date for the city’s water right.

Glenwood Springs also cannot use the RICD water right as the basis to oppose any future water development upstream on the Colorado River or its tributaries.

These agreements, which allow for some level of future water development by upstream parties that will not be subject to the restrictions created by a RICD, have been included in other recently completed RICDs, like Pitkin County’s whitewater waves in Basalt.

Colorado River photo
The Colorado River at No Name, above Glenwood Springs, and just off of I-70 near the No Name rest stop. This is one of three sites where the City of Glenwood Springs plans to build a whitewater park with a newly secured water right for recreation. CREDIT: BRENT GARDNER-SMITH/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Water for recreation hard to secure

The backbone of Colorado’s of water law, known as prior appropriation, is the concept that older water rights get first use of the river. But even though RICDs have only been around for about 20 years and are therefore junior to major agricultural and transmountain diversions, RICDs still often end up making concessions to allow future water development.

That is partly because the CWCB is tasked with making sure RICDs, which help keep water in the river channel, don’t prevent the state from developing all the water it legally can under the Colorado River Compact.

“I think in a perfect world you would have a more clear delineation of recreational rights like this one,” said Bart Miller, healthy rivers program director for environmental conservation group Western Resource Advocates. “If they are applying for water, they should be treated the same as any other right, that is, when they come along, they get their place in line and they get water appropriate for that time.”

Securing water for recreation has proved challenging in Colorado, where agriculture and cities have long dictated water policy, even as river recreation represents a growing segment of the state’s economy.

In 2021, after being met with opposition, river recreation proponents scrapped a proposal that would have let natural stream features like a rapid secure a water right for recreation. A second proposal earlier this year that would have allowed municipalities to create a “recreation in-channel values reach” has also been tabled and will not be introduced at the legislature this session.

“That’s something I think we can aspire to, to have rights for recreation and the environment be on an even playing field with all the other rights in the state,” Miller said. “I think it’s really important to the state of Colorado to recognize and support recreational water rights and recreational uses.”

Aspen Journalism covers water and rivers in collaboration with The Aspen Times and the Glenwood Spring Post-Independent. This story ran in the March 6 edition of The Aspen Times and Glenwood Springs Post-Independent.

Editor’s note: The story has been changed to add that the City of Glenwood plans to build only one of the three potential whitewater parks; which one has yet to be decided.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

The Southwest monsoon season is changing, forcing ranchers and Indigenous farmers to adapt

Cattle photo
David McNew/Getty Images

By Chris Malloy

When the summer monsoon ends the dry season in the Southwest, the Johnson farm gets its water. Lightning forks, thunder detonates, and rain drums mountains, evaporating at first in the fierce heat and dust and then soaking, collecting, and streaming down the foothills. The torrents rush into thin, empty riverbeds carved by the flash floods of storms past, channels called arroyos or washes. These vein the desert floor a short walk north of the Arizona-Mexico border, where, in a valley of the Tohono O’odham Nation, one wash rushes by the farm.

Water Desk Grantee Publication

This story was supported by the Water Desk’s grants program.

Learn more about our grants for journalists

Read more grantee stories »

The Johnson brothers divert its floodwater to their fields, giving freshly planted seeds life. Like the region’s Tohono O’odham farmers of old, Noland and Terrol Dew Johnson grow food using only rain, unlike most of U.S. farming which relies on modern irrigation. They might be the Sonoran Desert’s last prolific Ak-Chin farmers, who practice a mode of drylands farming that has been practiced for eons.

“In this area of the Tohono O’odham Nation, farming was done by catch stream or by diverting rainwater from the main washes to the fields the farmers had started,” said Terrol, who’s also a vocal Tohono O’odham foods champion and basketry artist. “There are some areas that are known to flood very well. Villages were set up along these areas.”

Traditional Ak-Chin farming uses rain and runoff for irrigation, much from the monsoon that brings the Sonoran Desert half of its annual precipitation. Called the North American monsoon, this powerful storm system crosses from Mexico into Arizona and New Mexico in mid-June and lingers until late September. In the Sonoran Desert, which includes Phoenix and Tucson, there are two rainy seasons: winter and summer. Between them span dry periods that can include rainless streaks of more than 80 days. 

Farming in the area of the Tohono O’odham Nation photo

In the area of the Tohono O’odham Nation, farming was done by catch stream or by diverting rainwater from the main washes to the fields the farmers had started. Special Collections—The University of Arizona.

Many Americans have no idea that we get monsoons. These seasonally reversing winds creating wet summers affect two-thirds of the world’s people, including tens of millions in drier parts of North America. Born from the interplay between cooler sea air and warming air overland (like all other monsoons), the North American monsoon begins on the Pacific Coast of Mexico in late spring. It shifts inland and moves north, drawing in warm air off the mountains, steering moisture northward, reaching Arizona and New Mexico by late June or early July. Over the coming months, it then turns semiarid land soaking wet for spells, dropping rain in light sun showers, ephemeral deluges, and long, biblical drenchings that tend to occur in September and can unload half a year’s rain in hours.

Until the welcome deluges brought by the summer 2021 monsoon, recent monsoon rain hadn’t come. The 2019 Phoenix monsoon was one of the five driest since 1896, when modern records began. Last summer was the driest; Phoenix saw less than  an inch of rain and Arizona averaged 1.51 inches statewide (less than one-third the statewide average for the monsoon period). In fact, the 2020 monsoon was the driest on record across the Southwest. New Mexico’s and Arizona’s monsoons have been so rainless that some locals now call them “non-soons.”

Has the region’s monsoon diminished or otherwise changed, or do recent dry and exceptionally wet summers fall within natural, prodigious year-to-year variation? Some experts say yes, an outcome that would upend ranching and traditional methods of drylands farming. The Southwest is embroiled in a megadrought and precipitation has decreased in some parts in recent decades, but has climate change also changed the monsoon? It depends on whom you ask. To locals, especially those immersed in traditional modes of food production dependent on the seasonal rains, an altered monsoon would be no joke.

Ranch hit by a flash flood from a monsoon rainstorm photo
A ranch hit by a flash flood from a monsoon rainstorm, which was made worse by the quick runoff from the denuded landscape of the burn scar of a major wildfire upslope, is seen on August 18, 2021 in Roosevelt, Arizona. David McNew/Getty Images.

The North American monsoon is central to certain food economies, wildfire seasons, water management, biodiversity, and other core parts of life in swaths of the Southwest. Its rains sustain some 400 different plants in the Sonoran Desert alone, millions of acres of grazelands for cattle, and Indigenous methods of dryland farming. Monsoons also result in dangerous flash floods, cool relief, excellent photography, deep wonderment, and general celebration. Though technology like water pumps, center pivot irrigation, and air conditioning have curbed reliance on the monsoon in recent generations, its storms remain vital to culture, trades, rhythms, and life in its region, especially in Arizona and New Mexico, where storms hit hardest.

Ranching and Ak-Chin farming, two food traditions dependent on monsoon rain, speak to how variability and possible changes in the monsoon can bring difficulty. Both depend on the fickle rains in a naturally parched land where modern water sources—pumped in from faraway rivers or deep underground—are starting to become scarce. If the monsoon is changing, so must these food traditions, and with them the Southwest.

Beside a web of arroyos carving down from parched mountains, a ruddy dirt road splits the Johnson family farm. Circled over by hawks, fenced against the hunger of coyotes, wild cattle, and javelinas, the land is kept today mostly by Noland Johnson. Around the year 2000, he and his brother Terrol, both middle-aged today, restored family land that had sat idle since the passing of their grandfather, Alexander Pancho. Long before the abandoned parcel overgrew with mesquite trees, Pancho used Ak-Chin methods to capture monsoon rain and summon a harvest from 20 acres of withering desert. Come summer’s end and early fall, Pancho’s family would gather to pick corn, beans, squash, melon, wheat, and sugarcane.

“It wasn’t just looking at the rain clouds and how they billow up. It’s also looking at the stars. Elders would talk about how the constellations would tell them when the rain would come, or if it would come.”

In recent years, Terrol and Noland, now veteran monsoon farmers, have taught dozens of others how to start Ak-Chin plots of their own. Terrol doesn’t know any other Ak-Chin farmers who operate at their scale, only some who keep a small plot or microfarm. This is a vital tether to the deep past of the region, where, before forced assimilation, which included compulsory boarding school and re-education for children, Tohono O’odham made several intra-year migrations driven by water, including to temporary farm homes along washes just before summer’s monsoon rains.

Does Terrol believe the monsoon has changed over time? “Oh yeah,” he said.

He believes storm directions have shifted, become more irregular, that “rains are all confused and come in different areas now.” In recent years, the farm hasn’t gotten enough rain to grow on more than 15 to 20 acres, less than half their land. “It could now be a one-man job or a two-man job,” Terrol said. “We used to have 40 workers.”

Terrol recalled his youth, when Ak-Chin methods were more common. His grandfather seeded fields, repaired channels, and doctored arroyos to alter flow, often hiking miles to make small edits, like plugging holes and building dams from sticks to get water to the farm. After June’s saguaro fruit harvest and wine ritual, meant to “bring down rain,” farmers looked for celestial signs. “It wasn’t just looking at the rain clouds and how they billow up,” Terrol said. “It’s also looking at the stars. Elders would talk about how the constellations would tell them when the rain would come, or if it would come.”

workers standing with hoes and other farm instruments photo
Black and white posed photo of workers standing with hoes and other farm instruments. Special Collections—The University of Arizona.

Recent years have meant watching mostly in vain. Still, Noland prepares their rust-red soil near the village of Cowlic, Arizona. Still, the Johnsons sow arid-adapted Tohono O’odham seeds, such as tepary beans, h:al squash, and Pima 60-day corn. Still, they prepare to route runoff to their land’s three charcos, deep holes dug for storing water. And still, they pray for rain.

A few hours east of Cowlic exists land renowned for chiles, pueblos, and sunsets, but it should also be better known for cattle. New Mexico has some 1.4 million, and its history with livestock dates to the 1500s. In 2019, livestock accounted for $2.43 billion of New Mexico’s $3.44 billion in agricultural production, some 70 percent. Rangelands cover more than 90 percent of the state. In New Mexico and Arizona, cattle roam open land. In order for grasses and, thus, cattle to grow, ranchers need rain. Before the fall slaughter, ranchers need summer monsoons.

“The rain has been sporadic,” said Andrew Cox, a rancher in the northern tip of New Mexico’s Chihuahuan Desert. “The timing of rainfall is out of sync with historical rainfall. The monsoon season has seen a shift, from July through the beginning of September, more to August through the end of September, beginning of October.”

Delayed rain, even when robust, can create headaches. “In this area here, the majority of the desirable perennial native grasses rely on that timeframe of rainfall,” Cox said, referring to the traditional earlier window. “And when it shifts, it might not do so much good as far as growing native desirable grasses.”

Less monsoon rain has been hard on Cox. “I’m coming out of three really bad years, so I don’t have many cattle at this point in time,” he said in late spring. 

A water tank intended for drought-affected livestock photo
A water tank intended for drought-affected livestock from a community rancher’s well on the Navajo Nation on July 4, 2021 south of Tuba City, Arizona. David McNew/Getty Images.

John Guldemann, a rancher in the twilight of his career who has raised cattle from Arizona’s Chiricahua Mountains to Anthony, New Mexico, has learned to rely on nothing but brush in dry summers, like the ones in 2019 and 2020. His cattle have learned to eat mesquite beans, yucca flowers, and prickly pear fruit. “When it only rains a little bit and you have some green grass, yeah, you take advantage of it,” he said. “But the rest of the time those cattle better know how to eat brush and weeds and things like that.”

When summer rains are weak, ranchers have to reduce stock. Rangelands bereft of grass tend to support fewer animals. With fewer animals, it can be harder to breed back stock to former levels for next year. Without grass, too, the cattle of the reduced stock will be lighter; they will fetch less profit. “During a drought year, you might be weaning a 300-pound calf,” Guldemann said. “During a good wet monsoon, you’ll be weaning a 500- to 600-pound calf.”

Cattle also need to drink—no easy task in semiarid country. Many Southwestern ranchers use groundwater pumped up from the earth. “Groundwater doesn’t grow 100,000 acres of grassland, but can fill up a stock tank,” said David Gutzler, professor of earth and planetary sciences at the University of New Mexico. Gutzler notes that a hale monsoon can fill stock tanks with rainwater, leaving groundwater, which is reaching dangerously low levels, to farmers or in the earth. This saves ranchers money, as pumping water for cattle from deep underground requires energy that comes with financial expense.

Northeast of Las Cruces, New Mexico, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) manages the Jornada Experimental Range, where researchers study how ranchers might adapt to our drier future. Sheri Spiegal, a range management scientist, is one of the research leaders. Monsoons enter her calculus.

Sheri Spiegal, range management scientist photo
Sheri Spiegal is a range management scientist, and one the research leaders of the Jornada Experimental Range who study how ranchers might adapt to our drier future. Courtesy: Sheri Spiegal.

According to a study she co-authored, over the past 14 years the local summer growing season has started later and ended earlier. In the last quarter-century, temperatures have risen. Over the past 52 years, the study shows, precipitation has decreased. Spiegal isn’t sure how much of these changes stems from a potentially changed monsoon season or from climate change more broadly.

Spiegal echoes ranchers, citing the centrality of soaking monsoon rains to cow-calf operations, the style of ranching dominant in New Mexico. “You are growing your calves in the summer,” she said. “It’s the time to recover and to lactate, grow, and to put on weight.”

Another scientific possibility is an increase in powerful storms. “More intense storms could result in more erosive forces where places used to be covered in grass and there’s a major regime shift to shrubs, and therefore less soil cover overall,” Spiegal said.

Less soil cover, of course, would also affect farms.

“More intense storms could result in more erosive forces where places used to be covered in grass and there’s a major regime shift to shrubs, and therefore less soil cover overall.”

As a counter to potential rain-related changes, Spiegal and her fellow researchers are studying new methods of ranching. One is precision ranching: bringing new technology to water stocks and tracking cattle location, allowing ranchers to monitor them more efficiently from afar, especially in times of patchy rainfall. Another method is the use of highly desert-adapted cattle breeds. One breed, the Raramuri Criollo, can tolerate high heat and dryness, and researchers are studying to see if the breed will eat some of the lower-nutrient shrubs that survive when summer rains fail.

Adapting isn’t only about ranchers and consumers—it’s also about towns, people, and local economies. “There’s an infrastructure around ranching that really underlies a lot of jobs,” Spiegal said.

Monsoon variability vexes predictive climatologists. Many studies conflict—some predicting less rain in the future, some more. But there is general agreement on a few points, including one that underlies many others: Climate models need more definition to capture all the factors necessary to make highly accurate predictions. Scholars of the monsoon vary on how the storms are changing or if they are changing. Some think we need more evidence to predict. Many believe a few ongoing changes are possible, probable, or more certain.

Gutzler, now an emeritus professor, has studied the monsoon for most of his career. “The North American monsoon is extraordinarily challenging to characterize, describe, and model, and is therefore extraordinarily challenging to predict,” he said. “It’s not that we understand nothing about the monsoon. We understand many pieces of it. And putting the whole thing together as a large-scale phenomenon is very difficult.” He believes there has been progress over the decades, yet predicting long-term changes remains elusive. “Sometimes I feel like a blind man trying to touch an elephant and describe what it looks like,” he said.

Salvatore Pascale, a Stanford University research scientist who has used climate modeling to study monsoons on several continents, agrees. He notes that the monsoon’s natural variability can “counteract” signals of climate change caused by humans. “The North American monsoon is the smallest of all monsoons on earth,” he said. “It’s perhaps the one for which we know the least, in terms of response to human-caused global warming.”

Pascale’s model predicts with “low-to-medium confidence” that the North American monsoon will become drier (meaning less rainfall). He has “more confidence” that monsoon storms are becoming more extreme. Mean rainfall trends are up for scientific debate, though Pascale’s models are among the most advanced. Increasing storm extremity has broader support.

Flash flood waters blocking a road photo
Flash flood waters block a road on August 18, 2021 near Roosevelt, Arizona. David McNew/Getty Images.

Led by hydrologist-meteorologist Eleonora Demaria, a USDA study analyzed monsoon rainfall data collected at 59 rain gauges in Arizona’s Walnut Gulch Experimental Watershed from 1961 to 2017. Data didn’t show notable trends in mean rainfall changes. But it did show that stronger monsoon storms have intensified over time. It also found that storms have been coming later in the season. Though this study drew from the most granular set of rainfall data of arguably any study on the North American monsoon, it only described one tiny part of Arizona. The local nature of monsoons makes extrapolating results from one place to another fraught. Moreover, past doesn’t always predict future.

Chris Castro, a hydrology and atmospheric sciences professor at the University of Arizona, has reached more definite conclusions. “Atmospheric instability and moisture during the monsoon have substantially changed over the past 30 years within the Southwest,” he and his co-authors found in a 2017 study, noting that these changes have created “an overall increase in atmospheric instability.” The study found that the mean daily monsoon precipitation in the Southwest has generally decreased. Extreme rainfall events, it concludes, have become more intense.

Over the literature, a few trends emerge: Rainfall might be decreasing; storms are very likely becoming more intense; and monsoon season might be starting later.

The trend of more intense storms has an impactful corollary. “If the models are projecting little or no change in the total [rainfall], but the intense events are becoming more intense, then the implication is there’s more time in between the intense events.” Gutzler said. So, in a scenario where monsoon rain is decreasing over time or staying the same, rainfall events will become more infrequent but stronger, bringing more rain. This means longer stretches without rain between storms—and that increasingly intense soakings might bring all of a given summer’s rain in hours during a slimmer window and, potentially, making it harder for plants, animals, and people to use.

When finding fact, balancing science and lived experience can be difficult, especially when the science is admittedly incomplete and the lived experience compelling. It’s not that the monsoons are unchanged from an academic research standpoint. It’s that, as of today, science doesn’t have the tools needed to tell or predict their full story.

Sterling Johnson farmer photo
Sterling Johnson learned traditional farming by apprenticing with Terrol and Noland Johnson, distant family, as their grandfathers were cousins. Ajo Center for Sustainable Agriculture.

Sterling Johnson keeps small Ak-Chin fields in Ajo and Newfield, Arizona. Also a professional rodeo rider late in his career, Sterling started farming after an injury left him in need of a new income stream. He learned traditional farming by apprenticing with Terrol and Noland Johnson, distant family, as their grandfathers were cousins. Lately, he has hoped to grow Tohono O’odham and nontraditional crops on a larger scale, especially on his one-acre farm in Newfield. The recent lack of summer rain, however, has been trying.

“It’s a hard look at reality,” he said. “We’re lucky if we get one monsoon rain and two casual ones, nothing like it was before.”

To farm monsoon rains, rain must come. Sterling said it once did. He described past monsoon seasons that brought “waves of rain stopping and starting,” storms that rushed to his sown patch of the desert “like a hurricane.”

Woman with a woven basket on her head photo
Tohono O’odham woman with a woven basket on her head. Special Collections—The University of Arizona.

Just like Terrol and Noland, Sterling now teaches Ak-Chin. These days, more Tohono O’odham know the method than when he started. Provided rain comes, this means there are more potential teachers, many of whom have learned from Terrol and Noland. Learning the old farming is important, Sterling believes, but hard. “It takes multiple monsoons to figure out this thing,” he said.

Nevertheless, even without much monsoon rain in many recent summers, he keeps hope. “To know that more people are farming now, it’s making things look brighter for the future,” he said.

In eastern New Mexico, Sam Ryerson, a founder of grazing company Grass Nomads, ranches and consults for other ranchers. Ryerson said the lack of monsoon rains has led many to modify time-honored rangeland methods. “It’s important to shift our production cycle to fit the situation,” he said. “More people are shifting their production, like shifting their calving season later in the year, when the grass is more likely to be green.”

Last year’s monsoon in his parts was “pretty weak.” Ranchers were forced to sell cattle early, to part with breeding cows they’ve spent “years if not generations growing.” The profit-sapping early sales are forced by nature upon ranchers, who “just don’t have grass.”

“It’s important to shift our production cycle to fit the situation. More people are shifting their production, like shifting their calving season later in the year, when the grass is more likely to be green.”

Ryerson travels seasonally now, splitting time between New Mexico and Montana. He is a grass nomad, following cycles of rain. He leaves for pastures north for part of the year “because that’s where the grass is.” 

Despite the region’s worsening drought and Colorado River levels that have caused the federal government to declare a shortage and rationing for basin states, hopes across the Southwest for a rainy 2021 monsoon have been met. Still, there are fears that one of the fundamental life-giving forces of the region is changing, that the drier days of the future are, horrifyingly, the drier days of today.

This article was supported by The Water Desk, an independent journalism initiative based at the University of Colorado Boulder’s Center for Environmental Journalism.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Recent stories