In a strategic move to mitigate concerns regarding a crucial Western Slope water transaction, the Colorado River Water Conservation District (River District) has put forward a compromise proposal to Front Range water providers.
General Manager Andy Mueller emphasized the need to avert what he termed “an ugly contested hearing before the CWCB,” suggesting that the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) take a neutral stance on the amount of water associated with the Shoshone hydropower plant rights and allow water court to ultimately determine the final figure.
Mueller mentioned in an email directed to officials from the Front Range Water Council that while this approach is unconventional, it aims to address the primary concern raised during a May 21, 2025 CWCB meeting — namely, avoiding the formal endorsement of the River District’s preliminary historical use analysis by the state agency.
The River District collaborated with CWCB staff to devise the proposal, which seeks to find common ground amid ongoing disputes.
Representing 15 counties on the Western Slope, the River District plans to acquire some of the oldest and most substantial non-consumptive water rights on the Colorado River from Xcel Energy for approximately $100 million.
The water rights, linked to the Shoshone hydropower plant located in Glenwood Canyon, are viewed as critical for supporting downstream ecosystems, municipalities, endangered fish species, and agricultural as well as recreational water users.
In accordance with the transaction, the River District intends to establish an instream flow water right aimed at benefiting the environment alongside the hydropower rights.
This initiative has garnered widespread backing throughout the Western Slope, with the River District securing $57 million from at least 26 local and regional partners towards the purchase.
Furthermore, the project received a major $40 million grant under the Inflation Reduction Act late in the Biden administration’s term, although these funds have currently been frozen under the Trump administration.
Amy Moyer, chief of strategy at the River District, highlighted the significance of these water rights, calling the project “the number one project for the Western Slope,” and underscoring the priority of moving it forward.
Due to their seniority compared to many other water rights dating back to 1902, the Shoshone water rights can impose restrictions on upstream water users, having the power to regulate the flows of the Colorado River and its tributaries as far upstream as the headwaters.
However, controversy surrounding the historic use of these rights remains, as quantifying the precise amount of water historically used by the Shoshone hydro plant has emerged as a focal point of contention between the River District and the Front Range Water Council.
This council comprises some of Colorado’s top municipal water providers, including Denver Water, Colorado Springs Utilities, Aurora Water, and Northern Water.
These entities divert water—usually meant for the Western Slope—to cater to agricultural and urban needs on the eastern side of the Continental Divide via transmountain diversions, extracting about 500,000 acre-feet of water annually from the headwaters of the Colorado River and its tributaries for consumption in the Front Range.
The River District estimates that the average annual use of the Shoshone plant stood at 844,644 acre-feet during the period from 1975 to 2003, prior to the impact of natural hazards that have recurrently hindered the plant’s operational capacity in recent years.
Conversely, representatives from the Front Range Water Council argue that this estimate is flawed and potentially overstates the historical use of the water right.
They have formally requested a hearing at the upcoming September CWCB meeting to deliberate their concerns in detail.
Abby Ortega, general manager of infrastructure and resource planning at Colorado Springs Utilities, presented these reservations to the CWCB at the May gathering, stating, “The preliminary analysis that has been presented appears to expand historic use and creates potential injury.”
Chairing the determination of past water usage is paramount for setting limits on future consumption.
While alterations to water rights can be pursued through water court, expanding established rights is not permitted.
Historical usage effectively dictates the volume drawn from and returned to the river, compelling adherence to previous usage levels.
As part of the River District’s proposal to acquire these water rights, it is essential for the CWCB—being the only state entity empowered to hold instream flow water rights—to officially acknowledge the water right and proceed as a co-applicant in the water court change case.
However, Front Range water providers maintain that such an action would signify an endorsement of the River District’s historical usage estimate, effectively aligning the CWCB with one side in the ongoing discord between the Front Range and Western Slope stakeholders.
Aurora Water’s assistant general manager, Alexandra Davis, expressed her apprehension during the CWCB’s May meeting, stating, “If you agree to accept the right and as I understand it, the instream flow agreement, you’re agreeing to be a co-applicant, which risks you accepting their analysis.”
Several Front Range Water Council members have urged the CWCB to remain impartial throughout the water court proceedings.
In letters submitted to the CWCB dated May 9 and June 9, Marshall Brown, the general manager from Aurora Water, advocated for the board to abstain from endorsing any specific methodology or water volume.
He reiterated that the CWCB should maintain neutrality during the water court activities and defer to the court’s assessments on appropriate methodologies and volumetric quantifications.
The River District’s recent proposition aligns with this recommendation by inviting the CWCB to refrain from taking any position on the evaluation of historical use regarding the Shoshone water rights.
Moyer stated, “We heard the issues that are most front and center from these entities, and so we are trying to find a path forward that works for everyone.”
Nonetheless, even if Front Range Water Council members express favor for the compromise, it is doubtful that this will lead to cancellation of the impending hearing.
CWCB Executive Director Lauren Ris communicated via email that the board is obligated under its rules to conduct a hearing.
Jeff Stahla, public information officer at Northern Water, also affirmed that they would continue to pursue the hearing regardless of the River District’s proposal.
In the interests of transparency, representatives from Colorado Springs Utilities, Aurora Water, and Denver Water opted not to comment on the confidential nature of the River District’s proposal.
Beyond CWCB’s neutrality, some Front Range Water Council members harbor further issues they hope can be addressed during the September hearing.
In a letter sent to the CWCB on May 14, Denver Water’s CEO Alan Salazar highlighted their desire to incorporate certain terms from existing agreements like the Shoshone Outage Protocol.
This protocol provides an exception clause for extreme drought scenarios, allowing Denver Water to continue diverting water if reservoir levels drop below specified thresholds and streamflows decrease critically.
Additionally, Denver Water asserted that the River District’s study period was skewed by omitting the last two decades of Shoshone water use.
They contend that employing an upstream stream gauge to measure historical use is inappropriate and potentially misleading.
The scheduled hearing will take place during the upcoming CWCB board meeting from September 16-18.
During this session, the board will have the authority to either approve or reject the acquisition of the water rights or consider amendments to the proposal and adopt the revised plan.
It is essential for the board to take action during the September hearing unless the River District consents to an extension.
Pre-hearing statements are expected to be submitted by August 4.
The CWCB board members, Brad Wind, general manager of Northern Water, and Greg Johnson, resource planning manager at Denver Water, have opted to recuse themselves from discussions related to the Shoshone water rights following the July 17 CWCB board meeting and will continue to do so for any future deliberations regarding this matter.
image source from：aspenjournalism
