A nearly $99 million deal to secure one of the most powerful water rights on the Colorado River is facing tough questions across the state — another iteration of long-standing tensions between the densely populated Front Range and the more rural Western Slope.
Northern Water, which provides water to 1 million people and 600,000 acres of irrigated farming in northeastern Colorado, sent a letter earlier this month to the state’s congressional delegation and the commissioner of the federal Bureau of Reclamation. The letter outlines its concerns about the purchase of a water right connected to the Shoshone Power Plant, a small hydroelectric facility that draws on the strained and highly contested river.
The Colorado River District — a taxpayer-funded agency that works to protect Western Slope water — in December announced a $98.5 million deal with Xcel Energy to buy the right to make sure water continues to flow west of the power plant. The district wants to safeguard the right from being changed or purchased by anyone else should the plant go out of operation.
Nearly 200 miles away, the Berthoud-based water provider’s primary concern is that its water supplies could be harmed if the new owner — the Colorado River District — used the water right to its full capacity. Historically, the plant has not diverted all the water it is allocated, leaving more water in the river for other users.
“Northern Water is not trying to benefit in any way from Shoshone permanency — we’re trying not to get injured,” said Kyle Whitaker, Northern Water’s Colorado River programs manager.
Xcel Energy owns the right and uses it to operate its aging Shoshone Power Plant on the banks of the Colorado River in Glenwood Canyon, about 7 miles east of Glenwood Springs.
The 1905 water right is the oldest major water right on the main stem of the overused river, which means that it must be fulfilled before any rights established afterward — including rights held by Front Range utilities such as Northern Water. The power plant does not consume the water, instead sending it through its turbines before putting it back in the river.
Buying the right means the river district can ensure a certain amount of water flows down the Colorado River and past the power plant all year.
The plant’s rights can command 1,408 cubic feet of water per second year-round, or about 1 million acre-feet a year — enough water for 2 million to 3 million households’ annual use.
That would create stability for irrigators, municipalities, recreational users and the environment.
The district denies it will command the right’s full amount and has repeatedly said it plans to maintain the status quo — not using more water than has been used historically, said Matt Aboussie, director of communications for the Colorado River District.
“This proposal has a benefit to the entire state,” Aboussie said. “It does not harm Front Range water users and in no way is a reduction to their water access.”
The Colorado River District has repeatedly told Northern Water that it do not plan to change the amount of water used, Aboussie said.
The district is gathering data on how much water historically has been used by the plant, and that data will be analyzed in water court as part of the purchase process.
Northern Water raised its concerns with lawmakers as the Colorado River District prepares to request $40 million from the federal Inflation Reduction Act. The deadline for apply for the money is Oct. 14.
“The timing of these concerns, it does seem that they are planned,” Aboussie said.
So far, the district has raised nearly $16 million toward the purchase from 24 Western Slope entities, including multiple counties, cities, irrigation districts and Colorado Mesa University. The Colorado Water Conservation Board also kicked in $20 million and the district plans to use $20 million of its own funds.
“We firmly remember and genuinely believe that we are interconnected,” Aboussie said. “The Front Range needs access to water, as does the Western Slope — and this proposal does a good job balancing both.”
Other major Front Range water providers — Denver Water and Aurora Water — are keeping a close eye on the project. The Front Range Water Council, a collection of major Front Range water providers, asked in an Aug. 9 letter for an analysis of how the Shoshone right has been used in the past.
Water flows back into the Colorado River after being used by the Shoshone Generating Station, a hydroelectric power plant east of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, on Sept. 4, 2024. (Photo by RJ Sangosti/The Denver Post)
Related Articles
Neighbors in Denver’s West Washington Park transform their yards into native-plant havens
Colorado will get its next batch of wolves for reintroduction effort from outside U.S.
Adams 14 to add more than a dozen new electric school buses to its fleet
Magellan drops plans for controversial fuel-storage expansion near Adams County elementary school
Another reintroduced Colorado wolf dies — third mortality among 10 wolves released last year
Aurora Water is monitoring the Shoshone purchase but is not taking an active position at this point, spokesman Greg Baker said last week.
Denver Water supports the goal to permanently protect the Shoshone flows and appreciates the Colorado River District’s pledge to not harm other water users, spokesman Todd Hartman said in a statement.
“Any significant change that might upset the current operating protocols needs careful consideration to avoid harm to the millions of people across the state who rely on the Colorado River,” he said. “We are hopeful that continued discussion with all stakeholders can lead to a scenario that is positive for all of Colorado.”
Get more Colorado news by signing up for our Mile High Roundup email newsletter.