I've seen May 1 as the start date on several Facebook sites but I haven't seen any confirmation of that date from a government source.So, it sounds like the plan is to release a bunch of water from FG and decrease outflow from Powell. When does it all start? Is the basic idea to keep the lake at about present level, not increase the level?
I've seen the 3500' elevation mentioned several times also. Only 10' of headroom seems like an uncomfortable buffer to me.As best I can tell no details of operations have been released and the BoR press release from Friday said what was proposed still needs to be finalized this week as well - so the top line numbers might still change.
BoR has said repeatedly for many months that 3500 is the elevation they are trying to protect. So expect operations to avoid dropping below that if nothing else.
I sincerely doubt any plan would involve raising the lake above where it is right now. Dumping more water into a reservoir with much higher evaporative losses before or during the summer just wouldn’t make much sense. Although it would certainly be nice to keep north and south access for as long as possible I’m not sure that’s really a priority.
It will be interesting to see how operations are structured for a glide path down to 3500 and if they try to keep any reserve above that for some period of time. There are some environmental reasons to do transfers from Flaming Gorge at particular times potentially (mimic floods to promote spawning) and there is probably a practical floor to how low releases from Powell can get (like around 450kaf/month). So those kinds of things might shape how the lake level behaves over the summer and through the fall.
All speculation at this point though! Currently all the operational plans online do not reflect anything from the press release.
The centerline of the pipes to the powerplant is at 3470', and the level needed to avoid entraining air (which can cause cavitation, and thus all kinds of bad things) is 3490'. If you look at the data in lakepowell-water-data.com for the 1960s, you can see that the reservoir operated at 3590-3592' for many months, confirming that it is safe to do so. So 3490' as a safe level is based on history, not just paper studies. 3500' is BuRec wanting a 10' margin above that, which should be fine since the pool elevation never drops more than a few inches per day at most (except during beach-building flows, and there won't be any of those this year). If the changed releases announced last Friday work as planned (54' above the lowest level in the April 24-month study), then the 2026-27 water year minimum will be 3510' at the end of March 2027, which adds a further 10' margin.I've seen the 3500' elevation mentioned several times also. Only 10' of headroom seems like an uncomfortable buffer to me.
If the changed releases announced last Friday work as planned (54' above the lowest level in the April 24-month study), then the 2026-27 water year minimum will be 3510' at the end of March 2027, which adds a further 10' margin.