BRC's Fill Lake Powell Project

Here's a brief insight to some different points of view and what may lie ahead.

coyotegulch.blog

#ColoradoRiver District General Manager: #California #water cut far from what is needed from that state - The #GrandJunction Daily Sentinel #COriver #aridification - Coyote Gulch

Click the link to read the article on The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel website (Dennis Webb). Here’s an excerpt: The general manager of the West Slope’s Colorado River District says proposed cuts by California entities in river water use are much less than is needed from that state, and their...
coyotegulch.blog coyotegulch.blog

This is a significant water district.
 
We may be getting somewhere!!
coyotegulch.blog

Interior Department Initiates Significant Action to Protect #ColoradoRiver System: Proposal to revise operating guidelines one of several decisive steps underway to protect the System #COriver #aridification #CRWUA2022 - Coyote Gulch

Click the link to read the release on the Reclamation website: As collaborative work continues across the Colorado River Basin to address the ongoing drought crisis, the Department of the Interior today announced expedited steps to prepare new measures that, based on current and projected...
coyotegulch.blog coyotegulch.blog
 
Yes, this is a significant step in the right direction. Seems like BOR is starting to finally assert itself, and I generally agree with what is outlined as necessary steps in a delicate process. I think this wil play out in the next few months as a series of small actions and adjustments from the states every time they’re pushed by BOR, who until now I think has been trying to figure out the sweet spot between facilitating a solution and forcing one when time is of the essence…

Encouraging news…
 
JFRCalifornia said:
Yes, this is a significant step in the right direction. Seems like BOR is starting to finally assert itself, and I generally agree with what is outlined as necessary steps in a delicate process. I think this wil play out in the next few months as a series of small actions and adjustments from the states every time they’re pushed by BOR, who until now I think has been trying to figure out the sweet spot between facilitating a solution and forcing one when time is of the essence…

Encouraging news…
Click to expand...
John, I'm getting lost in all the convolutions. Couldn't BOR just shut the spigots a bit under the guise of normal operating procedures? This seems like protocol for the sake of protocol.
 
Paladin said:
John, I'm getting lost in all the convolutions. Couldn't BOR just shut the spigots a bit under the guise of normal operating procedures? This seems like protocol for the sake of protocol.
Click to expand...
It’s a good thought. But the problem BOR faces in reducing outflows more than they have is keeping the 10-year rolling average release to the lower basin above the currently required 8.23 maf. As you can see in the attached graphic, 10-year average deliveries have NEVER been below that line, and so arguably the Upper Basin has over-delivered over the years. But in 2023, if BOR releases less than 7.3 maf (which they plan to do), for the first time the rolling 10-year average will drop below 8.23 maf. And of course they have to do this in order to protect power generation.

Seems like a practical reality, and makes sense, so why not just do it? Well, it’s not consistent with the Law of the River as it currently stands… a good illustration why the rules need to change. Until those rules change, I would think that some sort of findings supporting the emergency nature of lowering releases would be needed in order not to completely invalidate the existing legal framework.

Seems overly complicated from a distance, and there is no time to waste, but I do understand the idea of not appearing to act arbitrarily without justification…

B4CECDFF-F951-47B0-8D03-E1D789434B99.jpeg
 
JFRCalifornia said:
It’s a good thought. But the problem BOR faces in reducing outflows more than they have is keeping the 10-year rolling average release to the lower basin above the currently required 8.23 maf. As you can see in the attached graphic, 10-year average deliveries have NEVER been below that line, and so arguably the Upper Basin has over-delivered over the years. But in 2023, if BOR releases less than 7.3 maf (which they plan to do), for the first time the rolling 10-year average will drop below 8.23 maf. And of course they have to do this in order to protect power generation.

Seems like a practical reality, and makes sense, so why not just do it? Well, it’s not consistent with the Law of the River as it currently stands… a good illustration why the rules need to change. Until those rules change, I would think that some sort of findings supporting the emergency nature of lowering releases would be needed in order not to completely invalidate the existing legal framework.

Seems overly complicated from a distance, and there is no time to waste, but I do understand the idea of not appearing to act arbitrarily without justification…

View attachment 19949
Click to expand...
Seriously, great graphics!
I have not reviewed the actual laws that govern this (I'm sure you have) but I would bet that within those laws and regulations there should be an "out" for emergencies. Because of the historical compliance and unfailing delivery of water to the lower basin, I see no moral, and very little legal reason, the flows can't be reduced by the BOR immediately. They could get their bluff in on all of the basin states and continue to press for an agreed-upon voluntary reduction. Kind of a "you're messin' around so we're going to do it for you."

I think that would be a good place to start. I have long maintained that the users will not move off the dime until forced to.
 
I was at Lake Havasu last weekend, and noticed it is at full pool. I heard that Lake Mojave was also full pool. I have heard that there is a water agreement governing this, but it seems like water could be restricted to them which would raise Lake Powell and Lake Mead.
 
Bill Sampson said:
I was at Lake Havasu last weekend, and noticed it is at full pool. I heard that Lake Mojave was also full pool. I have heard that there is a water agreement governing this, but it seems like water could be restricted to them which would raise Lake Powell and Lake Mead.
Click to expand...
Together their capacity is about 2.4 million a/f. So even a 50% reduction would only add about 600k a/f each to Mead and Powell. Not really significant (or realistic). Bring on the snow!
 
JFRCalifornia said:
It’s a good thought. But the problem BOR faces in reducing outflows more than they have is keeping the 10-year rolling average release to the lower basin above the currently required 8.23 maf. As you can see in the attached graphic, 10-year average deliveries have NEVER been below that line, and so arguably the Upper Basin has over-delivered over the years. But in 2023, if BOR releases less than 7.3 maf (which they plan to do), for the first time the rolling 10-year average will drop below 8.23 maf. And of course they have to do this in order to protect power generation.

Seems like a practical reality, and makes sense, so why not just do it? Well, it’s not consistent with the Law of the River as it currently stands… a good illustration why the rules need to change. Until those rules change, I would think that some sort of findings supporting the emergency nature of lowering releases would be needed in order not to completely invalidate the existing legal framework.

Seems overly complicated from a distance, and there is no time to waste, but I do understand the idea of not appearing to act arbitrarily without justification…

View attachment 19949
Click to expand...
The problem that BOR is faced with is that there is a legal mandate to deliver a certain amount of water to the Lower Basin states over a certain period of time. By contrast, there is no legal requirement to retain hydropower generation at either Hoover or Glen Canyon dams. As a result, if this next winter also generates sub-par runoff, then BOR could find itself in a situation where states such as California could invoke their legal claims to water (as could other senior rights holders across the entire Colorado River basin), forcing BOR to choose which hydro plant to idle. Invoking an emergency situation to override existing water law would likely not be viewed favorably by senior rights holders in many Western states, because they might feel that it could set a precedent that could be used as a pretext to curtail their water uses as well. Therefore it would almost certainly be subject to legal challenges, which could tie up implementation. But as the current Southwest drought continues past its second decade, we are facing all sorts of non-analog outcomes. It will be very interesting indeed to see where we are on all this 12 months from now.
 
Colorado Expat said:
The problem that BOR is faced with is that there is a legal mandate to deliver a certain amount of water to the Lower Basin states over a certain period of time. By contrast, there is no legal requirement to retain hydropower generation at either Hoover or Glen Canyon dams. As a result, if this next winter also generates sub-par runoff, then BOR could find itself in a situation where states such as California could invoke their legal claims to water (as could other senior rights holders across the entire Colorado River basin), forcing BOR to choose which hydro plant to idle. Invoking an emergency situation to override existing water law would likely not be viewed favorably by senior rights holders in many Western states, because they might feel that it could set a precedent that could be used as a pretext to curtail their water uses as well. Therefore it would almost certainly be subject to legal challenges, which could tie up implementation. But as the current Southwest drought continues past its second decade, we are facing all sorts of non-analog outcomes. It will be very interesting indeed to see where we are on all this 12 months from now.
Click to expand...
I think your analysis is spot-on, and in the end, some aspect of this process will inevitably end up in court. Of course, drought does not care about courtroom dates, or 60-day extensions, and will do as it pleases. All parties will have to do some previously unforeseen creative thinking and make some unprecedented compromises to have this all work out...
 
It looks like 2012 release was a big mistake, but in hindsight we can say things like that and of course i don't know what the situation was like back then.

And everyone is hoping for a good water year all around in California, Utah, Arizona, Nevada and Colorado. New Mexico seems to have been doing ok in the eastern part so far but i'm not sure how their storage is doing (i haven't had time to check lately on much of anything).
 
Bill Sampson said:
I was at Lake Havasu last weekend, and noticed it is at full pool. I heard that Lake Mojave was also full pool. I have heard that there is a water agreement governing this, but it seems like water could be restricted to them which would raise Lake Powell and Lake Mead.
Click to expand...
Coinincidence that LA draws thier water from Havasu?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Take a look; good stuff.
Pay attention to the water rights issues; this is coming our way as we lobby for our lakes preservations.
Also: lithium = batteries = electric cars.
coyotegulch.blog

In remote #Nevada valley, race for more lithium comes down to water - The Nevada Independent #ActOnClimate - Coyote Gulch

Click the link to read the article on Nevada’s only statewide nonprofit newsroom The Nevada Independent (Daniel Rothberg): There is an otherworldly feel to the crystalline-blue evaporation ponds that sit in Clayton Valley, an arid area in Nevada’s least populated county, Esmeralda. From above...
coyotegulch.blog coyotegulch.blog
 
Good explanation of El Nino and La Nina and the attendant meteorology. A little heavy on the climate hysteria but a good read, nevertheless.
Great background reading for the current drought.

coyotegulch.blog

Where does #GlobalWarming go during #LaNiña? - NOAA #ENSO - Coyote Gulch

Click the link to read the post on the NOAA ENSO Blog (Richard Allan, Michael McPhaden, and Shang-Ping Xie: Here at the ENSO blog, we’ve been talking about La Niña (the cool phase of the El Niño-Southern Oscillation climate pattern) for going on three years now. People have started to tell us...
coyotegulch.blog coyotegulch.blog
 
Momma Bear and all others:

This is too important a thread to get it shut down by letting it devolve into a highly charged subject like climate change. Please everyone don’t say anymore on that subject.

If you want to start another thread about climate change and argue there until it gets shut down that’s up to you.

But please don’t get this one banished.

(Spoken by the last post-er on more than my fair share of closed threads) 😂
 
In fairness (to me), I was simply replying to the pejorative of climate hysteria.

If the preference of the board and moderators is to believe our drought issues are only seasonal and consideration of climate change in science articles is fairly labeled hysteria, so be it.

I can hang with Galileo on this one. It truly is no skin off my back.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top