Water law

The Shoshone Instream Flow Acquisition: Public Process Carves a Path Forward

Annie Carlozzi — Mon, 15 Dec 2025 15:00:00 +0000

The Shoshone Instream Flow Acquisition: Public Process Carves a Path Forward Annie Carlozzi Mon, 12/15/2025 - 08:00

Daniel Anderson

On November 19^th, a rapt crowd gathered both in Denver and online for a six-hour public hearing and deliberation by the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) board members. CWCB was meeting to consider a proposed deal to acquire and protect the water rights for the Shoshone hydropower station in the Colorado River as an “instream flow” (ISF). Perhaps more fascinating than the CWCB board members’ approval of the ISF agreement, however, was the open process built on shared values that led to this decision.

The non-consumptive Shoshone water rights, which have been generating power at the Shoshone generating station in Glenwood Canyon for nearly a century, have considerable importance on the Colorado River. Under the proposed ISF agreement, once Public Service Company (PSCo) stops generating hydropower under these Shoshone rights in the future, the water will continue to flow downstream rather than become available to junior users, like those on Colorado’s Front Range. A collection of West Slope entities, CWCB, and (presumably) the federal government will chip in to pay $98.5 million to purchase the water rights and then donate them to the CWCB in perpetuity. The goal: improve the environment on the 2.4-mile stretch in Glenwood Canyon where water currently is diverted out of the Colorado River to generate power before being returned. Importantly, acquiring these water rights would also maintain the fragile status quo for municipalities, irrigation districts, endangered species, and recreation downstream.

Some Front Range municipal water users, like Denver Water and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (Northern), opposed technical and legal elements in the agreement to change these significant water rights for use as instream flows. After several hours of thoughtful questioning and tinkering with words like “shall” and “may,” the CWCB board members ultimately approved the monumental ISF agreement on terms substantially similar to the proponents’ proposal. The legal transfer of the water rights contemplated in the agreement now heads to Colorado water court (25CW3177). There, the water court process should lead to a decree that ensures the exercise of these water rights matches historical use, and therefore, no injury comes to other Colorado River users.

Characterizing public decision-making processes as wasteful and inefficient is in vogue. Just eight days before CWCB’s approval of the Shoshone ISF agreement, the seven Colorado River basin states failed to meet a deadline on how they plan to manage Colorado River operations after 2026 – all after years of primarily closed-door negotiations. But the CWCB’s process during the Shoshone water rights acquisition facilitated both collaboration and compromise – two critical elements that appear to be missing from the present negotiations regarding the Colorado River’s post-2026 operations. The Shoshone example demonstrates that a public process rooted in shared values can lead to fair, durable, and flexible solutions in complex water management problems.

Finding Compromise through Effective Public Process

Despite the high stakes, the November 19^th CWCB hearing that decided the fate of the Shoshone ISF agreement was remarkably open and fluid. In fact, this hearing was actually an extension from a roughly fourteen-hour opposition hearing that took place September 17^th-18^th pursuant to the public process required by 2 CCR 408-2 (specifically, ISF Rule 6m). The two-day September hearing concluded with a request by CWCB board members to both sides: earnestly pursue mediation with former water court judges to reach a negotiated settlement before the next regular CWCB board meeting on November 19^th-20^th. Two months later, the parties brought back competing redlined versions of the ISF agreement (and even competing bluelines due to fractures among the opposers). Despite returning without a complete settlement, CWCB staff and the Colorado River District (CRD), the named proponents of the ISF agreement, incorporated solutions to some of the opposers’ major concerns. For example, their proposed version provided a mechanism to continue a 2007 agreement that allows Denver Water to jump the seniority queue for Colorado River water using the Shoshone rights under defined “drought” conditions.

Despite this progress, a few issues lingered during the November 19^th hearing. It became evident three hours into the hearing that neither side would surrender on a few aspects of the ISF agreement. And the CWCB board members, representing every major water basin across the state, seemed uncertain whether they really needed to reach a decision that day. But their hesitation was not due to a lack of decisiveness or entrenched positions. Rather, the hesitation reflected concerns with how future generations might look upon this acquisition long after these decision-makers were gone. CWCB board members wrestled with these concerns on hot mics, prefacing questions and statements with their unique expertise and regional perspective.

For instance, Denver Water and Northern warned the CWCB board members that under the proponents’ ISF agreement, the CWCB would cede their statutory authority to CRD in perpetuity due to Section 7B, the collaborative process created for voluntary ISF call reductions. CWCB board members asked clarifying questions of both sides to understand the details of 7B. In limited circumstances, 7B allows CWCB and CRD to jointly decide whether to voluntarily reduce the amount of water flowing downstream under the Shoshone water right. This voluntary reduction was not required by law or any previous agreement but was included by CWCB and CRD to provide opportunities for public input and adaptive action if unforeseen challenges threatened future Coloradans across the state. Rather than shy away from an innovative process due to an unresolved legal argument over CWCB’s exclusive authority, CWCB board members shifted their attention to adjusting 7B’s language to fairly accomplish the aims of such a voluntary call reduction. During final edits on the ISF agreement, CWCB board members ensured that any “affected water user” – not just current opposers – could request this voluntary reduction. They also changed language so CWCB and CRD could make these voluntary call reductions based on future circumstances beyond the already-extensive list of factors found in 7Biii.

The hearing was time-consuming and a bit unstructured, but in the end, quite productive. Ultimately, the hearing officer suggested projecting the proponents’ updated ISF agreement for all attendees to see, then collectively reviewing and editing the ISF agreement live. Under the leadership of Chair Lorelei Cloud, the CWCB board members agreed to this approach. At the end of the night, a modified version of the ISF agreement containing compromise, flexibility, and creative joint decision-making mechanisms was approved by the CWCB board members. The transfer of these rights still needs to clear other hurdles, but in time, CWCB will hold this substantial water right in perpetuity to preserve and improve the natural environment on the Colorado River.

Shrouded Colorado River Negotiations

Compare this with the cycle of closed-door negotiations taking place between the seven basin states over the Colorado River. For the last few years, state negotiators have engaged in clandestine meetings, often in undisclosed locations, at undisclosed times. The public often hears only a few rumors of what is being discussed. Publicly, basin representatives repeat the legal positions that reinforce their proposed management alternative but also commit to continuing the difficult discussions off-the-record. Then the cycle repeats.

This heightened level of confidentiality might be prudent for settlement negotiations involving a sensitive private matter, such as a business dispute. But 40 million people across the American west depend on the Colorado River for their livelihoods. And this closed-door approach centered on the basin states largely excludes Native Nations, many of which cannot meaningfully benefit from their significant reserved water rights to Colorado River water. The current approach further constrains their sovereignty and their relationship with the river.

This opaque method of deciding the shared fate of the Colorado River has understandably generated frustration across the basin. At the Getches-Wilkinson Center’s Colorado River Conference this past June, Jim Lochhead, Colorado’s former top water negotiator, described the current process like “waiting for the black smoke or the white smoke to come out off the seven-state negotiating room.” So far, this conclave-like strategy has been ineffective: the states recently blew through another deadline on November 11^th.

Public Process and Binding Values in Effective Decision-making

It’s fair to say that there are just as many differences as similarities between Colorado River basin management and the Shoshone ISF agreement approval by the CWCB board members. The latter is just one step in the process to change ownership and use of water rights within Colorado law. Once the Shoshone generating station shuts down, this ISF right will improve the natural environment in the 2.4-mile stretch of Glenwood Canyon while largely maintaining the existing downstream flow regime. On the other hand, Colorado River negotiations currently take place between seven states (and impact the interests of two national governments and thirty sovereign tribal governments). That’s a whole lot more cats to herd than the seven major river basin representatives on the CWCB board who undoubtedly have more in common as a headwater state.

But take a step back from those differences, and the potential benefits of embracing a transparent and mission-driven process emerge. At least on November 19^th, that approach ultimately led to a thoughtfully crafted decision to preserve crucial flows in the Colorado River into perpetuity. Such a public process may provide more incentives for negotiators to move off sticky legal arguments and consider reasonable compromises that include everyone with a stake in the Colorado River.

While opening the Colorado River’s management to a more public process could help, the success in the Shoshone ISF acquisition also required shared values. In CWCB’s Shoshone acquisition, even the opposers applauded the efforts to preserve this water for environmental reasons for future generations. To be sure, the opposers still have more chances in water court to question the CWCB’s authority to share some decision-making and quibble with the historical use volumes of the Shoshone generating station. But they also recognized the factors by which the CWCB were making their decision (ISF Rule 6e). And the Colorado legislature gave the CWCB a clear mission: “to conserve, develop, protect, and manage Colorado’s water for present and future generations.” (See also, C.R.S. 37-60-102). While broad, this mission empowers CWCB to balance competing interests in Colorado's rivers and streams, which is exactly what happened during the Shoshone proceedings.

No comparable shared mission glues parties together in the Colorado River Compact of 1922 with equal clarity. There, the major purposes found in Article I are to “provide for the equitable division and apportionment of the use of the waters of the Colorado River System; to establish the relative importance of different beneficial uses of water; to promote interstate comity; to remove causes of present and future controversies; and to secure the expeditious agricultural and industrial development of the Colorado River Basin… To these ends the Colorado River Basin is divided into two basins…”. The Compact divided the basin in half and adopted a rigid allocation system in the hopes of preventing future conflict once and for all. Nonetheless, a century of controversies has followed, limiting the options available to future leaders entrusted with managing the Colorado River.

Despite good intentions when drafting the Compact, the basin states lack a body with executive authority and technical staff like the CWCB. Where no such body is directed to carefully weigh collective gains that can be shared by an entire basin, river, or region, the opportunities for creative compromise narrow. Conversely, Colorado statutes require the CWCB to act with all Coloradans in mind, and disagreements by the parties involved in the Shoshone ISF acquisition hearing were frequently couched in this unitive framework. In terms of water management decisions, this led to a relatively fast, inexpensive resolution.

Some deadlines will surely be missed when many parties are involved in making difficult, lasting choices. In the case of the Shoshone ISF agreement, extending the final decision one time after the September hearing was arguably a feature of a functioning, flexible process. Parties reported at the November 19^th hearing that they spent the past two months meeting together. These efforts led to major modifications, incorporating the concerns of various stakeholders while also making concessions that may pay dividends to the entire Colorado River basin.

While certainly not a silver bullet, Colorado River basin states should take a step back to orient around shared values to drive a more inclusive, public process. Armed with these values, Colorado River decision-makers would be empowered to realign their positions from adversaries to allies. This realignment could then inform a new approach, like creating an inter-sovereign commission that serves as a public forum or even updating the compact with a modern water allocation scheme. Future generations will thank today’s leaders for taking that risk.

For Further Reading

Final Shoshone ISF Agreement.

Colorado Water Conservation Board, 2025 Shoshone ISF Acquisition (last visited Dec. 10, 2025).

Matthew McKinney, Jay Weiner & Daryl Vigil, First in Time: The Place of Tribes in Governing the Colorado River System, 63 Nat. Res. J. 153 (2023).

Colorado River Research Group, Colorado River Insights: Dancing with Deadpool 55 (Dec. 2025).

Up Next

Stay tuned for an upcoming piece discussing the CWCB’s authority to share management of its instream flow rights – and what that means for future streamflow protection in Colorado.

Off

Traditional

White

Colorado River Insights, 2025: Dancing with Deadpool

Annie Carlozzi — Wed, 03 Dec 2025 20:46:16 +0000

Colorado River Insights, 2025: Dancing with Deadpool Annie Carlozzi Wed, 12/03/2025 - 13:46

In a collection of essays and research summaries, eleven members of the Colorado River Research Group (with eight guest contributors) touch on issues as diverse as plummeting reservoir storage, climate change trends, risk management, agricultural water conservation, equity, and governance, all against the backdrop of the need to fashion post-2026 reservoir operating rules.

Download the report here:
Colorado River Insights, 2025: Dancing with Deadpool

Chapter 1. Colorado River Reservoir Storage – Where We Stand
Jack Schmidt, Anne Castle, John Fleck, Eric Kuhn, Kathryn Sorensen, and Katherine Tara

Chapter 2. Think Natural Flows Will Rebound in the Colorado River Basin? Think Again.
Jonathan Overpeck and Brad Udall

Chapter 3. The Erosion of the Colorado River “Safety Nets” is Alarming
Doug Kenney

Chapter 4. Water Equity in the Colorado River Basin
Bonnie Colby and Zoey Reed-Spitzer

Chapter 5. The Tale of Three Percentage-Based Apportionment Schemes
Eric Kuhn

Chapter 6. A Humbly Proffered Proposal to Aid the Colorado River System: Conservation Easements & Land Purchases
Kathryn Sorensen and Sarah Porter

Chapter 7. Facing the Future: Can Agriculture Thrive in the Upper Basin with Less Water?
Kristiana Hansen, Daniel Mooney, Mahdi Asgari, and Christopher Bastian

Chapter 8. Towards a Basinwide Entity: Moving from Vision to Action
Matthew McKinney, Jason Robison, John Berggren, and Doug Kenney

Contributors

Colorado River Research Group (CRRG) Members

Bonnie Colby, Professor, University of Arizona.

John Fleck, Writer in Residence, Utton Transboundary Resources Center, University of New Mexico.

Kristiana Hansen, Professor, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Wyoming.

Doug Kenney, Director, Western Water Policy Program, Getches-Wilkinson Center, University of Colorado Law School; and Chair, Colorado River Research Group.

Eric Kuhn, Retired General Manager, Colorado River Water Conservation District.

Matthew McKinney, Co-director, Water & Tribes Initiative; Senior Fellow, Center for Natural Resources & Environmental Policy, University of Montana; Fulbright Specialist 2025-2027.

Jonathan Overpeck, Dean, School for Environment and Sustainability, University of Michigan.

Jason Robison, Professor of Law and Co-Director, Gina Guy Center for Land & Water Law, University of Wyoming.

Jack Schmidt, Director, Center for Colorado River Studies, Utah State University, and former Chief, Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center.

Kathryn Sorensen, Kyl Center for Water Policy, Arizona State University; and former Director, Phoenix Water Services.

Brad Udall, Senior Water and Climate Research Scientist/Scholar, Colorado Water Center, Colorado State University.

Guest Contributors

Mahdi Asgari, Postdoctoral Scholar, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Wyoming.

Christopher Bastian, Professor, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Wyoming.

John Berggren, Regional Policy Manager, Western Resource Advocates.

Anne Castle, Senior Fellow, Getches-Wilkinson Center, University of Colorado Law School; former US Commissioner, Upper Colorado River Commission; and former Assistant Secretary for Water and Science, US Department of the Interior.

Daniel Mooney, Associate Professor of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Colorado State University.

Sarah Porter, Director, Kyl Center for Water Policy, Arizona State University.

Zoey Reed-Spitzer, Research Assistant, North Carolina State University (formerly University of Arizona).

Katherine Tara, Staff Attorney, Utton Transboundary Resources Center, University of New Mexico.

Download the report here:
Colorado River Insights, 2025: Dancing with Deadpool

Off

Traditional

White

2026 Conference on the Colorado River

Annie Carlozzi — Mon, 01 Dec 2025 16:10:39 +0000

2026 Conference on the Colorado River Annie Carlozzi Mon, 12/01/2025 - 09:10

The Getches-Wilkinson Center and Water & Tribes Initiative will be co-convening the 2026 Conference on the Colorado River on Thurs, June 4th and Fri, June 5th at the Wolf Law Building in ��, CO.

We hope you join us for what will be sure to be an engaging 2-day conference bringing together thought leaders from across the Colorado Basin.

Thursday, June 4th and Friday, June 5th

8:00 a.m. 5:00 p.m. (Mountain Time)
Wolf Law Building, Wittemyer Courtroom

Breakfast, Snack and Lunch provided daily
Attendee reception provided on Thurs, June 4th

Registration will open on January 15, 2026.

Off

Traditional

White

Getches-Wilkinson Center Water Law Fellow Position Announcement

Annie Carlozzi — Mon, 20 Oct 2025 18:03:40 +0000

Getches-Wilkinson Center Water Law Fellow Position Announcement Annie Carlozzi Mon, 10/20/2025 - 12:03

Program Overview

The Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment (GWC) at the University of Colorado Law School invites applications for the next GWC Water Law Fellow – an early-career attorney eager to make a difference in the field of water law and policy.

The Water Law Fellowship offers a one-of-a-kind opportunity to work on today’s most pressing water law reform challenges. Fellows are mentored by leading faculty and practitioners and partner with decision-makers from the nonprofit, government, and private sectors.

Water Law Fellows will be expected to draft at least one paper for publications in the first year and to assist with organizing conferences, workshops, public education events, and other GWC events. Fellows may also publish white papers on current topics, attend conferences on water-related topics, draft blog posts and other communications on emerging issues, and work on other projects that develop in-depth expertise in water law.

Key benefits include:

Personalized research agenda and drafting original scholarship for publication supported by GWC staff and Colorado Law Faculty, focused on real-world water law challenges in the American West, including Colorado River management, interstate water governance, groundwater management, and Tribal water rights.
Mentorship from faculty, GWC staff, and practicing attorneys – opportunities to work alongside GWC’s Executive and Assistant Directors, the Director of GWC’s Western Water Policy Program, and access to GWC’s network of leaders on the Advisory Council.
Opportunities to collaborate with leaders in NGOs, government agencies, Tribes, and private practice.
The freedom to explore creative, multidisciplinary solutions to water challenges in the West.
Travel support to represent GWC at professional gatherings, conferences and networking events.
Organization and participation in workshops, public events and conferences at Colorado Law.

Terms, Salary, and Benefits:

Start date: Flexible between January 1 and September 1, 2026.
Duration: One year, with the option to extend for a second year.
Salary: $75,000/year, plus travel and training support.
Location: ��, CO
Benefits: Excellent medical, dental, and transit benefits (ECO Pass) through the ��

What we require:

J.D.
At least one year of relevant professional experience or a demonstrated commitment to water issues during law school (judicial clerks encouraged to apply).
Excellent research and writing skills.

What we would like you to have:

Strong academic record.
Background in water or natural resources law.
Experience in environmental research.
Commitment to equity and service to underrepresented communities.
Collaborative, team-oriented approach.

Application Instructions:

Submit the following as a single PDF to Annie Carlozzi (annie.carlozzi@colorado.edu) by Monday, November 17, 2025, at 11:59 p.m.

Cover letter explaining your interest in water law and the Fellowship.
Resume (max 2 pages)
Law school transcript (unofficial accepted)
Writing sample (max 10 pages)

Applications will be reviewed on a rolling basis, so early applications are encouraged.

The Water Law Fellowship is open to individuals regardless of race, national origin, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or gender. We encourage individuals from groups historically underrepresented in environmental conservation to apply.

Contact Information

For more information, please contact Annie Carlozzi, GWC Assistant Director, at annie.carlozzi@colorado.edu

Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy and the Environment

The Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy and the Environment advances the truly sustainable management and conservation of natural resources, with a focus on the American West, by:

Influencing natural resources law and policy, including issues of water, land, climate change, and the rights of Tribes and Indigenous Peoples; and

Educating, inspiring and mentoring the next generation of committed lawyers and advocates devoted to justice and equity.

Learn more about Colorado Law

Download GWC Water Law Fellow Announcement

Off

Traditional

White

The 1922 Compact is Now the Obvious Elephant in the Negotiating Room

Annie Carlozzi — Tue, 07 Oct 2025 18:02:46 +0000

The 1922 Compact is Now the Obvious Elephant in the Negotiating Room Annie Carlozzi Tue, 10/07/2025 - 12:02

Eric Kuhn , Anne Castle , John Fleck , Kathryn Sorensen , Jack Schmidt , Katherine Tara

The Colorado River system is inching closer and closer to the “tripwire” in the 1922 Compact. This is the requirement that a specified volume of water pass Lee Ferry, the dividing point between the Upper and Lower Basins, every ten years. Declining flows and depletion of reservoir storage reserves, as well as the need to protect the Infrastructure of Glen Canyon Dam, are challenging our ability to operate the river system in a way that both preserves critical levels in Lakes Powell and Mead and avoids triggering the tripwire. This new paper by Eric Kuhn, Anne Castle, John Fleck, Jack Schmidt, Kathryn Sorensen, and Katherine Tara explains the issues, runs the numbers, and explains the conclusions. The only solution to this unavoidable conflict is a negotiated agreement among the seven Colorado River Basin states.

Read the full paper here.

Off

Traditional

White

Sydney Stellato (Colorado Law '26) Named 2025 Conscience Bay Company Western Water Policy Fellow

Annie Carlozzi — Mon, 29 Sep 2025 17:29:15 +0000

Sydney Stellato (Colorado Law '26) Named 2025 Conscience Bay Company Western Water Policy Fellow Annie Carlozzi Mon, 09/29/2025 - 11:29

University of Colorado Law School student Sydney Stellato ('26) is this year’s Conscience Bay Company Western Water Policy Fellow. The Conscience Bay Company Western Water Policy Fellowship, initiated in 2023 by leaders of the Conscience Bay Company, is awarded each year to a Colorado Law student on the basis of academic performance, commitment to public service, and interest in the study of Western water law and policy. To the extent practicable, each Conscience Bay Company Western Water Policy Fellow will focus on a specific project in advancing innovative solutions for sustainable management of water in the Western United States.

Sydney Stellato is a 2L student at the University of Colorado Law School, where she is exploring her interest in water law, public lands, and the intersection of conservation and community. She graduated from the University of Texas with degrees in Sustainability Studies and Geography. While at UT, her studies centered on the relationship between people and waterways, culminating in a senior project where she developed a citizen science project to monitor stream health. Before law school, she worked with the Texas Conservation Corps where she focused on conservation, trail work, and sustainability programs. At CU, she is involved with the Environmental Law Society, OUTLaw, and the Environmental Law Journal. She looks forward to applying her background in environmental work to the Fellowship while learning how Western water law can balance resource management, conservation, and community needs. In her free time she enjoys skiing, hiking, and indoor rock climbing.

Off

Traditional

White

Analysis of Colorado River Basin Storage Suggests Need For Immediate Action

Annie Carlozzi — Thu, 11 Sep 2025 16:21:03 +0000

Analysis of Colorado River Basin Storage Suggests Need For Immediate Action Annie Carlozzi Thu, 09/11/2025 - 10:21

Jack Schmidt , Anne Castle , John Fleck , Eric Kuhn , Kathryn Sorensen , Katherine Tara

Water consumption in the Colorado River Basin continues to outstrip natural supply, causing steep declines in reservoir storage. This paper looks at the realistically accessible amount of storage in Lake Powell and Lake Mead and what happens if next year is the same as this year in terms of inflow and uses. The resulting picture is grim. In order to avoid extremely low reservoir reserves at the outset of the next set of operating guidelines, and the corresponding constraints on water use going forward, the prudent course of action is to reduce use immediately.

Read the full paper here.

Off

Traditional

White

Acequia Assistance Project Enters 14th Year Providing Pro Bono Legal Services

Annie Carlozzi — Thu, 14 Aug 2025 16:39:23 +0000

Acequia Assistance Project Enters 14th Year Providing Pro Bono Legal Services Annie Carlozzi Thu, 08/14/2025 - 10:39

Nathan Boyer-Rechlin , Gabrielle Cooper and Andrew Nosler

The Acequia Assistance Project is entering its 14^th year of providing pro bono legal services to the acequia community in Colorado’s San Luis Valley. Each year the project accepts new cases – ranging from helping acequia members write or amend their ditches bylaws, file articles of incorporation, or prove their water rights – and first year law students take on the challenge, and opportunity, of engaging in meaningful legal work, under supervision of a supervising attorney. For 2025-2026, the project is once again a Tier 3 grant recipient from the office of Public and Community Engaged Scholarship (PACES). These funds will support student trips to engage with their clients and the community, student events that offer professional development and community building, and legal fees associated with the project. Student apply to the project in September, and most teams begin project work with their clients in early January. The keystone of the project’s engagement with the acequia community is the annual Congreso de Acequias, hosted by the Sangre de Cristo Acequia Association and Colorado Open Lands. Each year the project brings between 15 and 30 students down to this event to represent the project, connect in person with clients, and do outreach for new cases. For most students, this is the most meaningful element of their time in the in the acequia project.

Last March, in conjunction with their trip to Congreso, Andrew Nosler and Gabrielle Cooper had the opportunity to attend the annual shareholder meeting of the ditch they are representing. Read more about their experience in the project, and connecting with the community below:

______________________________________

As part of the CU Law Acequia Assistance Project, our team is working to develop and update the Bylaws for Canon Ditch No. 22, located near Antonito, Colorado. Acequias are community operated irrigation ditches. The practice was brought to Spain by the Moors and to Colorado by Spanish and Mexican farmers who settled here before Colorado became a state. The Acequia Assistance Project aims to provide no-cost legal assistance to Acequia users in the San Luis Valley.

We recently paid a wonderful visit to Colorado’s San Luis Valley for the annual Congreso meeting. There, Acequia users from across the valley gathered to discuss and showcase the state of water management in the valley. Farmers and ranchers brought exhibits and presentations to share their unique strategies for land and water use. We watched people make fungus-based fertilizer in real time, explored a model electric fencing construction, and even learned about harvesting wild plants. These presentations showcased a future of abundance and sustainability. Locals in the valley are working hard for the future of their land and water. They are creative, industrious, and deeply connected to the community.

Colorado water rights are “first in time, first in right.” This means that the first person to appropriate water and use it has a priority water right over later users. The Acequias in the San Luis Valley are some of the oldest water rights in the state. On a tour of San Luis People’s Ditch, water right No. 1 in Colorado, we learned a slice of the vibrant history that defines the valley. Jerry Gallegos, a People’s Ditch irrigator brought us to different points along the ditch and his ranching property, so we could see for ourselves how the ditch works and the products of irrigation. We visited the stream that provides People’s Ditch with water, Culebra Creek. Alongside a group of cows (and adorable newborn calves) cold, clean water flowed fresh off the southern end of the Sangre de Cristo Mountain range. At a diversion point, called a headgate, the ditch starts and pulls a modest flow of water from the stream. It has spread water to community members for any imaginable number of uses since 1852. Walking along the ditch, it was easy to get lost imagining the generations of community members who have loved and cared for this water.

Because many of the Acequias in the San Luis Valley were established before, or early on, in Colorado’s statehood, they hold some of the highest priority water rights in the state under the first in time, first in right rule. The Colorado Acequia Recognition Law allows acequias to continue operating under their traditional communal water sharing systems and strengthens their ability to protect their water rights under Colorado law. The Acequia Assistance Project aims to assist farmers in the Valley to take full advantage of these protections, so that their water rights are protected into the future, especially as the likelihood of water scarcity rises. Students participating in the project work on a variety of projects for clients: title searches, assisting with articles of incorporation, community outreach and engagement, and drafting bylaws for ditch operations. Participating in the project has been a valuable opportunity to connect not only with people in the Valley, but also with other law students passionate about water law and equitable access to legal services.

Our team had the opportunity to attend the annual shareholders meeting for our ditch, Canon Ditch No. 22. Canon Ditch No. 22 flows near Antonito, which is southwest from San Luis. The shareholders were excited for the upcoming spring, summer, and fall. With winter slowly fading, everyone was ready to get the ditch up and running. Shareholders got down to business as soon as they formed a quorum. They voted to appoint a ditch rider, who would monitor and report on the condition of the ditch as water started flowing. They discussed transferred shares, and protocols for delinquent water users. Every discussion was open, and solution oriented. Canon Ditch draws from the Conejos River, which comes out of the San Juan Mountains. With below average snowpack, the members focused on late season conditions and how to plan around unpredictable flow rates this season.

Both at Congreso and the Canon Ditch shareholders meeting, we saw inspiring people tackling important water issues hands-on. Everybody we met had a deep connection with the land and the community. Ranchers talked about repurposing old bed frames to install electric fences and using old wheels to wind rope. Student speakers from the Acequia Assistance Project presented updates to our project and the legal services we provide. In every corner of the valley, people are working hard to secure and improve the future of agriculture. Canon Ditch No. 22 members were excited to have us down there. They explained how we can be useful and welcomed us into their conversations. It is such an amazing opportunity to serve such brilliant and hardworking people, and we look forward to helping the cause of farmers and ranchers in the San Luis Valley.

Off

Traditional

White

Colorado River Remains a Key Focus of the GWC

Annie Carlozzi — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 19:33:07 +0000

Colorado River Remains a Key Focus of the GWC Annie Carlozzi Wed, 08/13/2025 - 13:33

Doug Kenney

As the economic, ecological and cultural centerpiece of the American Southwest, the increasingly dire condition of the Colorado River remains a central focus of GWC activities. Continuing a recent tradition, the GWC joined with the Water & Tribes Initiative in June to bring basin officials, Tribal leaders, water users, and river advocates to discuss the situation in: Turning Hindsight into Foresight: The Colorado River at a Crossroads. With roughly 350 in-person (and 115 Zoom) attendees, participants were tasked with identifying past experiences and lessons that can inform current challenges, beginning with the experiences of the Ancient Puebloans displaced by drought in the 13^th century, to efforts in the early 21^st century to craft the soon expiring 2007 Interim Guidelines, to ongoing efforts to craft new rules guiding river operations after 2026. Not surprisingly, the conversation was a lively union of technical analyses of law, policy and hydrology nested within a spiritually rich foundation acknowledging the deeply personal impact that the declining river has on the people and creatures that call the region home.

Efforts to craft new (post-2026) reservoir operating rules on the river dominate most Colorado River discourse at the moment, with the ongoing Environment Impact Statement (EIS) process expected to result in a Draft EIS by December and a Final EIS (and Record of Decision) by next summer. Those efforts have largely stalled over the last year as the Basin States have, unsuccessfully, attempted to craft a joint Alternative to be included in the analysis, a difficult proposition given that every road forward is likely to result in declining water availability for every state, a painful but mathematically inevitable result of life in a basin where snowmelt-driven natural flows have dropped nearly 20% since 2000. This reality was the backdrop of a public forum in late June where I was paired with Rebecca Mitchell, the Colorado official tasked with representing the state in these negotiations. Speaking before the crowd in Crested Butte, neither of us found much reason for optimism in current trends in climate and hydrology, a situation only magnified by the shockingly low runoff of local streams resulting from what seemed like a relatively healthy winter snowpack. No amount of interstate negotiation—or threats of interstate litigation—can overcome the increasingly consequential impact of warming in the basin.

This tension between the river we thought we had and the river that now exists runs through much of the work of the Colorado River Research Group (CRRG), hosted by the GWC but comprised of over a dozen prominent Colorado River scholars spread across the basin (and beyond). CRRG members are currently drafting a detailed summary of key issues and, in some cases, prescriptions for the river system, focusing on issues affecting nearly all sectors and sub-regions of the basin. It is an increasingly alarming review of trends that, collectively, illustrate the erosion of all the safety nets in the basin: reservoir storage, groundwater reserves, federal drought response funding, and technical support from agencies and universities engaged in Colorado River problem-solving.

It is a challenging time in the Colorado River Basin. More than ever, the GWC is focused on developing new leaders to bring ideas and energy to a basin in need of answers.

Off

Traditional

White

Harrison Fellow Spends Summer Immersed in International Law Practice

Annie Carlozzi — Wed, 13 Aug 2025 15:03:18 +0000

Harrison Fellow Spends Summer Immersed in International Law Practice Annie Carlozzi Wed, 08/13/2025 - 09:03

Celeste Baro

Thanks to the GWC and the David Harrison Innovations in Water and Energy Law & Policy Fellowship, I had the incredible opportunity this summer to work in Jakarta, Indonesia with the Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative (IOJI). This fellowship made it possible for me to immerse myself in international law practice in another country, gaining firsthand experience in the intersection of environmental protection, maritime security, and human rights.

During my time at IOJI, I authored a report examining the challenges of combating illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing and the gaps in governance that allow it to persist. My research focused particularly on the high seas and distant-water fishing fleets, including their links to labor exploitation and environmental degradation. Additionally, I collaborated with a colleague on a comparative legal analysis, evaluating how environmental protection is addressed at a national scale in the United States versus Indonesia. This comparative perspective illuminated both the strengths and weaknesses of each country’s legal frameworks and underscored the importance of strong enforcement mechanisms.

One of the highlights of my fellowship was attending a conference at Indonesia's Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, hosted in honor of the International Day for the fight against IUU fishing. Here, IOJI presented research and recommendations to government officials, civil society organizations, and academics. This was an invaluable opportunity to see how legal and policy work translates into tangible advocacy at the national level.

Beyond the capital, I traveled with the IOJI team to more remote Indonesian islands, where we hosted community town halls to hear directly from local fishers and residents. Many shared stories of the hardships they endure due to rampant IUU fishing, insufficient maritime security, and gaps in both human rights protections and environmental law enforcement. Listening to these experiences reinforced the reality that legal and policy solutions must be grounded in the realities of those most affected.

Our work in the field was also about building solutions. We collaborated with other civil society organizations, academic partners, and government agencies to develop actionable recommendations aimed at strengthening Indonesia’s maritime governance and protecting both marine ecosystems and the communities that depend on them.

This experience gave me a deeper appreciation for the interconnectedness of environmental law, human rights law, and international maritime policy. It also showed me the vital role that lawyers can play in bridging the gap between high-level policy and on-the-ground realities.

Off

Traditional

White

Water law

The Shoshone Instream Flow Acquisition: Public Process Carves a Path Forward

Off

Colorado River Insights, 2025: Dancing with Deadpool

Download the report here: Colorado River Insights, 2025: Dancing with Deadpool

Contents

Contributors

Download the report here:Colorado River Insights, 2025: Dancing with Deadpool

Off

2026 Conference on the Colorado River

Off

Getches-Wilkinson Center Water Law Fellow Position Announcement

Contact Information

Off

The 1922 Compact is Now the Obvious Elephant in the Negotiating Room

Off

Sydney Stellato (Colorado Law '26) Named 2025 Conscience Bay Company Western Water Policy Fellow

Off

Analysis of Colorado River Basin Storage Suggests Need For Immediate Action

Off

Acequia Assistance Project Enters 14th Year Providing Pro Bono Legal Services

Off

Colorado River Remains a Key Focus of the GWC

Off

Harrison Fellow Spends Summer Immersed in International Law Practice

Off

Download the report here:
Colorado River Insights, 2025: Dancing with Deadpool

Download the report here:
Colorado River Insights, 2025: Dancing with Deadpool