Western Slope communities and water agencies want to be able to use powerful Colorado River water rights tied to the Shoshone Power Plant to help the environment. Over 170 members of the public weighed in on the process — and all but one said they liked the idea.
The Colorado Water Conservation Board, a state water agency, gathered the public comments in preparation for a hearing about whether to incorporate the water rights into the state’s Instream Flow Program. The program aims to keep water in rivers to help aquatic and riparian ecosystems.
The proposed change is part of a larger plan on the Western Slope to permanently maintain the historic flows around Shoshone. Doing so would benefit ecosystems near the power plant, endangered fish in downstream and local economies, supporters say. Some Front Range water providers and managers have voiced concerns, saying the plan could hurt their water supplies.
If the state says no to the proposal, it would scuttle the agreement forcing the Western Slope back to square one.
The public, it seems, is siding with the Western Slope, at least as of Aug. 5. The state water agency is still accepting comments until a hearing during the CWCB meeting Sept. 16-18.
“I am a fishing guide who relies on my guide income to support myself, my wife and our brand new daughter,” Granby resident Ross Kalsow wrote in an email to the state water agency. “It is my sincere hope that you all will support this. My livelihood and my community relies on it.”
Shoshone Power Plant is tucked into Glenwood Canyon by Interstate 70 a few miles east of Glenwood Springs. The plant’s water rights allow it to take water out of the river, send it through hydropower turbines, and spit it back into the river about 2.4 miles downstream.
The rights, owned by Public Service Company of Colorado, a subsidiary of Xcel, are some of the most powerful on the Colorado River in Colorado in part because of their size, age, location and nonconsumptive use of water. The Colorado River District, which represents 15 Western Slope counties, made a deal with Xcel to buy the rights for $99 million as long as certain requirements are met.
One of those requirements is adding the ability to use the water for environmental benefits, which requires approval by the state through its Instream Flow Program, then water court, which manages the legal process to change water rights.
The state is in the midst of its multistep process to approve or deny the environmental use, which will end when the water conservation board members make their final decision during the September hearing.
People are eager to weigh in: They’ve filed about 4,500 pages of documents to make their arguments.
Over 40 organizations filed requests to be part of the hearing, including environmental groups, water-based recreation companies, water utilities, irrigation districts and local governments. Most of these organizations supported incorporating Shoshone’s water rights into the Instream Flow Program.
Several had a “yes, but” vote of support, including Front Range water providers like Denver Water, Homestake Partners and South Metro WISE. They want to make sure past agreements are honored and their water supplies are not diminished by changes to Shoshone’s rights.
The city of Aurora and Northern Water opposed the Western Slope’s proposal, calling for more time to discuss or modify it to ensure the environmental use won’t impact their water supplies by pulling more water west than in past decades.
Colorado Water Conservation Board staff also supported the change in their official recommendation. They suggested accepting the power plant’s two water rights into the Instream Flow Program with the amount of water required to preserve and improve the natural environment.
What do the people say?
Most of the 170 public comments — about 120 — came from Coloradans. Of those, about 70% said they lived on the Western Slope. They represented nearly 30 cities or counties from Granby to Grand Junction, and Steamboat Springs to Durango.
Many of these communities have promised to financially contribute to the water rights purchase. The Colorado River District nearly covered the hefty price tag, including $40 million from the federal government. Then the Trump administration froze the funding. Colorado’s entire congressional delegation, Democrats and Republicans alike, have, along with Western Slope counties, advocated for the Shoshone funding to be released.
In their comments, Coloradans talked about the river’s importance to their agricultural and recreational businesses. Some said they’ve been visiting the Colorado River and its tributaries to fish, boat or play for decades. Shoshone’s water rights were a core part of economies in western Colorado, several commenters said.
Others recalled seeing how low the water in the Colorado River gets between Shoshone’s intake and outtake — where the power plant takes water out of the river for hydropower generation and where it spits the water back out.
At times, Shoshone can divert most of the Colorado River’s flow, depending on the amount of water flowing through the river. That leaves a narrow, but deep channel of water below the power plant’s dam and a larger stretch of dry river banks.
This is the stretch of the river that could potentially see environmental and ecosystem benefits from the instream flow right, if it is approved. The Front Range water groups and the Western Slope disagree over the amount of water that would be tied to the instream flow right.
About 50 of the commenters used a formatted message by Save the World’s Rivers, an advocacy group, led by Gary Wockner, that submitted comments in support of the Western Slope proposal.
These commenters said they supported transferring the power plant’s water rights to the Colorado River District so that environmental flows are guaranteed in the Colorado River. The water rights will help protect fish and riparian areas and support recreational opportunities, they said.
Shoshone also has a role in interstate water law, commenters said.
Colorado and other Upper Colorado River Basin states — New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming — share water with Lower Basin states — Arizona, California and Nevada. The Lower Basin can call for forced water cuts in the Upper Basin under interstate law if the amount of water flowing from the Upper Basin to the Lower Basin drops too low.
Shoshone’s ability to draw water westward could help protect Colorado against those cuts, commenters said.
“These water rights have always flowed downstream and must continue to always flow downstream,” the commenters said.
Many Front Range residents also submitted comments. They lived everywhere from Fort Collins to Denver, Castle Rock and Colorado Springs. Some nonresidents piped in from nearly 20 other states, and even Australia and Canada.
“I understand Northern Water is (rightfully) concerned about the future of water on the Front Range and has expressed concern about locking up the Shoshone Water Right for the West Slope,” John Sanderson said.
As a customer of Fort Collins Utilities, he said some of his water supply comes from the Colorado River through the Colorado-Big Thompson Project, which is managed by Northern Water and the Bureau of Reclamation.
He urged the board to accept the rights into the state’s Instream Flow Program to protect the Colorado River.
“I have spent much of my career working on water issues,” Sanderson said. “I know how critical that water right is for the environment, for recreation, and for West Slope agricultural water users.”