Aspen Journalism received nine awards in the Colorado Press Association’s 2025 Better News Media Contest, including four first-place honors, recognizing work produced across our local investigations, water, social justice, environment, data and history beats.

The awards, announced Aug. 29 at the Colorado Press Association’s annual convention, reflect a tremendous breadth of work, with honors for public service reporting, investigative storytelling, breaking news, politics coverage and infographics. The recognized work examined the concentration of wealth and influence in Aspen, the uncertain future of the Colorado River, immigration enforcement, public lands, education policy, stream access, efforts to reconnection with Aspen’s history and the sale of St. Benedict’s Monastery.

The honors went to reporting by Paul Andersen, Eleanor Bennett, Catherine Lutz, Laurine Lassalle, Heather Sackett, Curtis Wackerle and Kaya Williams.

Aspen Journalism received:

• Four first-place awards for Best Social Justice or Equity Reporting, Best Investigative Story Package, Best Series or Sustained Coverage and Best Informational Graphic
• Two second-place awards for Best Public News Reporting and Best Public Service Project
• Three third-place awards for Best Breaking News/Deadline Reporting, Best Data Journalism Reporting and Best Politics Reporting

As an independent, nonprofit newsroom, Aspen Journalism’s model is designed to foster the expertise and commitment required to produce impactful investigative journalism on the local level. Our mission is to publish authoritative reporting on consequential issues, sustaining that coverage over the long term. This reporting helps residents understand the decisions, institutions and forces shaping their communities while creating a lasting public record of the region.

“These awards affirm the civic value of a dedicated investigative news organization committed to doing the work of public-service journalism — attending the meetings, examining the records, analyzing the data, traveling to the communities affected and continuing to report long after the initial headlines fade,” said Aspen Journalism Editor and Executive Director Curtis Wackerle. “We are so proud to see the well-earned recognition for journalists behind this work, and grateful to the readers, donors, publishing partners and collaborating newsrooms who make it possible.”

That support allows Aspen Journalism to ask difficult questions, follow complex stories wherever they lead and provide in-depth public-service reporting free of charge across the regional media ecosystem and without a paywall.

Best Social Justice or Equity Reporting

First Place Editorial: Eleanor Bennett

Eleanor Bennett traveled to the Klamath River basin to document a historic 310-mile journey by Indigenous youths—the first full descent of the river following the removal of four major dams.

The expedition was organized by Paddle Tribal Waters, a program of Aspen-based nonprofit Ríos to Rivers that teaches Native youths river navigation, environmental stewardship and leadership skills. Bennett reported from the river as the young paddlers encountered returning salmon, changing river conditions and communities reconnecting with a waterway central to their culture and history.

The resulting multimedia story, which was supported by The Water Desk at the University of Colorado Boulder’s Center for Environmental Journalism, explored what the largest dam-removal project in history could mean not only for the river’s ecosystem but also for the health, traditions and futures of tribal communities throughout the basin.

Best Investigative Story Package

First Place Editorial: Catherine Lutz, Laurine Lassalle and Curtis Wackerle

The influence of ultra-wealthy homeowners in the Aspen area is inescapable. The building and maintaining of palatial residential developments, and catering to their occupants, increasingly forms the bedrock of the local economy, but this sector often plays as an enigma. Seldom do we get to know who is actually driving the development trends. Similarly, there’s an overarching narrative that there are a lot of billionaires who own homes in and around Aspen. But just how many? Fifty? One hundred? One-twenty-five? And who’s counting? The assertions tend to be vague. Part of the reason why Aspen Journalism undertook this long-term investigative project, which was reported and published in collaborations with Aspen Sojourner magazine, was to stake out factual cairns in this obscured landscape. With The Aspen 80, refreshing an effort we first undertook in 2014, we dig through public records to see how many among the ranks of the world’s billionaires can also be tied to local property ownership. 

Best Series or Sustained Coverage

First Place Editorial: Post 2026 Colorado River Negotiations by Heather Sackett

Aspen Journalism Water Desk Editor and Managing Editor Heather Sackett has closely followed negotiations over the rules that will govern the Colorado River into 2027 and beyond with the expiration in 2026 of the river’s previous operating guidelines.

Her sustained reporting brought readers inside a highly technical and increasingly urgent interstate process involving water managers, federal officials, tribes and water users across the seven basin states all dealing with increasing strains on the resource. The recognized stories examined competing proposals for sharing shortages, worsening hydrologic conditions and the legal language at the heart of the divide between the Upper and Lower basin states. Informed by more than 60 water meetings Sackett attended in 2025, she provided singular coverage of perhaps the most challenging negotiations water managers in the basin have ever faced. We learned this summer that the federal government will impose its own solution where operating guidelines will be updated every two years, since the states failed to reach a deal on their own; that outcome has already prompted one Lower Basin state to sue. However, hope springs eternal that the states may still reach a more durable agreement. 

This award recognizes the value of keeping a reporter on a complex story over time — and how information turned over throughout a long process can grow in importance as events develop.

Follow Aspen Journalism’s continuing  coverage of the post-2026 Colorado River negotiations here.

Follow Aspen Journalism’s coverage of the post-2026 Colorado River negotiations.

Best Informational Graphic

First Place Photo and Design: Laurine Lassalle

First-place honors for Best Informational Graphic went to Aspen Journalism Data Editor Laurine Lassalle for visualizations accompanying Water Desk Editor Heather Sackett’s reporting on drought conditions in the Upper Colorado River Basin.

In February 2025, Upper Basin water managers warned that conditions could begin to resemble 2021, when a near-average snowpack translated into far-below-average runoff because drought and dry soils absorbed much of the melting snow before it could reach rivers and reservoirs.

Sackett reported on water managers’ request for monthly meetings with federal officials so they would not be caught off guard if emergency releases from upstream reservoirs were again needed to support Lake Powell.

Lassalle created visualizations comparing snowpack and Lake Powell water levels in 2021 and 2025. Her graphics illustrated why snowpack percentages alone do not tell the full story of Colorado River conditions, making the relationship among snowpack, dry soils, runoff and reservoir levels more accessible to readers.

See the award-winning graphics and read the story.

Best Public Notice Reporting

Second Place Editorial: Eleanor Bennett

Reporting for Aspen Journalism’s Social Justice Desk in collaboration with Aspen Public Radio, Eleanor Bennett examined how the Garfield Re-2 School District was responding to a new Colorado law requiring public schools to establish policies for honoring students’ requests to use chosen names. The law did not prescribe what those local policies should say. The awarded story covered the debate among Garfield Re-2 leaders over whether the school should be required to notify parents when a student requested a chosen name that differed from the student’s legal name and reflected their gender identity.

Bennett’s reporting presented the concerns of community members who supported parental notification alongside warnings that mandatory disclosure could further isolate transgender students or place some young people at risk. The story translated a statewide policy debate into its immediate implications for local students, families, educators and schools. It was awarded under a new category in the Better News Media Contest focused on reporting that originates from, is informed by, or is substantially advanced through the use of public notices, recognizing the essential role such notices — in this case school board meeting agendas — play in transparency, accountability and local democratic engagement.

Read or listen to the story

Best Public Service Project

Second Place Editorial: Paul Andersen

At a moment of renewed national debate over proposals to shrink federal land holdings, Paul Andersen examined the history, meaning and future of the public lands held in common by the American people. The concept of public lands as we know it today is the result of hundreds of years of conflicting human impulses playing out on an epic scale — at times brutal and greedy, but increasingly as the American project evolved infused with the will to preserve a legacy bigger than any special interest.  

Paul Andersen’s artful storytelling takes us through the earliest forms of western expansion when 13 British colonies became a new nation. Hordes of settlers encountered a landscape that may have seemed limitless, but which they soon learned could not be left to free-for-all exploitation, lest it become spoiled for future generations. That was the genesis of the U.S. Forest Service and National Forest System lands — that without a management authority to ensure land remained suitable for multiple uses, the treasures we hold as a nation might be lost. 

The stories take us through the creation and evolution of the White River Plateau TImberland Reserve, only the second reserve designated in the U.S. when it was established in 1891. Today, it is the largest national forest in Colorado at 2.3 million acres. In its final installment, the series examines the legacy of prior divestments of public lands, which continue to shape our communities today.

Andersen placed contemporary debates over the sale, protection and management of public lands within a much longer history of displacement, speculation, conservation and public stewardship. The project gave readers the context to understand not only how the nation’s public lands came to exist, but what may be at stake when their future is reconsidered.

Best Breaking News/Deadline Reporting

Third Place Editorial: Kaya Williams

When deeds recorded in December showed that St. Benedict’s Monastery had sold its 3,700-acre Old Snowmass property for $120 million, freelance reporter Kaya Williams was poised to break the news.

Williams had been following the monastery’s uncertain future for more than two years, first as the arts and culture reporter for Aspen Public Radio and later as an Aspen Journalism freelancer. That sustained attention allowed her to respond quickly and accurately when the long-anticipated sale was recorded and the Wall Street Journal subsequently identified the buyer as Palantir CEO Alex Karp.

The breaking-news report was the latest development in a body of coverage documenting the monastery’s history, its role in the community, efforts to preserve the property and the land-use and conservation questions surrounding its future.

The award demonstrates how long-term, long-form reporting strengthens deadline journalism: Williams could move quickly because she already understood the people, history, records and public interests involved.

Read the breaking news story

Best Data Journalism Reporting

Third Place Editorial: Eleanor Bennett

Aspen Journalism’s Social Justice Desk — a collaboration with Aspen Public Radio — analyzed federal immigration-enforcement data obtained by researchers at UCLA and UC Berkeley. The newsroom filtered the records to examine arrests and detentions in Pitkin, Eagle, Garfield and neighboring Mesa counties.

The analysis confirmed an increase in local immigration arrests during the first six months of the second Trump administration. It also revealed a shift in who was being detained, with a growing share of enforcement actions involving immigrants without criminal records.

Eleanor Bennett paired the data with the experience of a young Garfield County resident who had spent months in an Aurora detention center, connecting changing federal enforcement patterns with their consequences for people in the region.

The multimedia story was published in English and Spanish and produced for both print and radio audiences, making the findings available across communities and platforms.

Read or listen in English.
Lea la historia en español.
Lea la historia en español.

Best Editorial Special Selection

Third Place Editorial: Paul Andersen

In The Second Coming of Albert Schweitzer, Paul Andersen revisited the 1949 Goethe Bicentennial, the event that helped transform Aspen from a former mining town into an international center for culture and ideas.

The four-part series explored Schweitzer’s philosophy of “reverence for life,” the ambitions of Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke, the birth of the Aspen Institute and the origins of what became known as the “Aspen Idea” — the pursuit of a life integrating mind, body and spirit.

Andersen connected that history with a contemporary effort by Aspen residents to revive the humanistic principles associated with the bicentennial. In doing so, the series examined the ideals that helped shape modern Aspen and asked what relevance they retain in a community now more commonly portrayed through its wealth, celebrity and exclusivity.

Begin reading The Second Coming of Albert Schweitzer.

Best Politics Reporting

Third Place Editorial: Heather Sackett

Heather Sackett examined the unresolved tension between private property rights and public access to Colorado’s waterways — an issue that has generated conflict among landowners, anglers and boaters for decades.

The story followed a coalition seeking greater legal clarity around the public’s right to float and wade in streams that cross private property. It explored why Colorado’s laws remain unsettled, what advocates wanted state lawmakers to consider and how disagreements over access affect recreation on rivers throughout the state.

By explaining the legal and political questions beneath recurring stream-access disputes, Sackett’s reporting gave readers the context needed to understand a deceptively simple question: Who has the right to use Colorado’s rivers?

These awards affirm the civic value of reporting that remains with important stories: attending the meetings, examining the records, analyzing the data, traveling to the communities affected and continuing to report long after the initial headlines fade. This work is only possible thanks to the generous support of individual donors. Thank you for reading, and supporting, Aspen Journalism.

The post Aspen Journalism honored with nine awards in 2025 Better News Media Contest appeared first on Aspen Journalism.

Matthew Anderson, who is now 28, grew up in Basalt — helping out at his parents’ pharmacy in town, playing soccer after school and spending time outside.

“I wasn’t like a ‘river rat’ as a kid, but it’s all about rivers here in Basalt,” Anderson said. “The teachers I had in high school and the classes I took with them — that was my first introduction into rivers in an ecological sense.” 

After graduating from Basalt High School, he went on to study environmental science in college and returned home in the summers to intern at the Roaring Fork Conservancy, a local water conservation nonprofit. 

When the COVID-19 pandemic hit in 2020, Anderson moved home to finish his college degree remotely before starting a full-time position at the conservancy in downtown Basalt. He now works as a water quality technician helping the nonprofit monitor the health of local rivers and streams. 

Anderson hopes to continue building his career, and eventually buy a home, in the community where he grew up — a dream that only recently began to feel more attainable. 

He spent the last six years living with his parents in his childhood home in the Blue Lake neighborhood near El Jebel, saving up money as the cost of housing continued to rise.

“When I was growing up here as a kid, there were certainly new developments and people moving here, and an affordability crisis already entrenched,” Anderson said. “But when I came back during the pandemic we saw so much acceleration in housing prices.” 

According to a regional housing needs assessment recently conducted between Parachute and Aspen, the price of condos in Basalt rose by about 80% and more than doubled for single-family homes and townhouses from 2015 to 2024, with a noticeable rise since the COVID-19 pandemic hit in 2020. 

Homeownership rates in Basalt also shrank from 67% in 2018 to 58% as of 2023, according to the regional assessment. 

When Anderson’s boss at the Roaring Fork Conservancy offered him a chance to rent a deed-restricted studio apartment the organization purchased last month in the newly-built Midland Residences development in downtown Basalt, he jumped at the opportunity. 

“I’m not sure you could ask for a better situation, right? It’s a brand new building, and most importantly, I’m right here,” Anderson said. “I get to walk to work, that’s wild — I don’t know anybody, any of my friends who walk to work, so the opportunity is almost indescribable.”  

‘A full circle’ opportunity 

The new apartments in Basalt are located at a site that was formerly occupied by Clark’s Market. Anderson said his family’s pharmacy used to operate in the market and later moved to its current location.

“I’m going to be sleeping right above where I used to walk every day after school for about 15 years,” Anderson said. “It is almost eerily full circle.”

The old grocery store space sat vacant for years before it was purchased by locally-owned development company LB-West. In 2022, Basalt approved the company’s proposal for a major mixed-use development at the site that also included adjacent commercial space where local businesses like Jimbo’s Liquor and the BLT Taqueria were located. 

The recently finished development has 65 residential units (a mix of studios, one-bedrooms and two-bedrooms), along with space designated for a liquor store, a small grocery shop and a locally-owned restaurant group. 

A quarter of the condo units are deed-restricted, with varying income limits. Sixty-five percent are required to be occupied by primary residents.

Of the 17 income-based, deed-restricted units, 10 are designated for people earning up to 80% of the area median income and another seven are for people earning up to 120% of the AMI. In Basalt, that median income is about $97,770 for a one-person household in 2026.

The income requirements for the deed-restricted units are roughly in line with the recent regional assessment, which found housing in Basalt is most needed for residents making 51% to 130% AMI. That translates to yearly income between $49,863 and $127,100 for a one-person household. 

Employer invests in housing 

On Aug. 25, the Roaring Fork Conservancy held a ribbon-cutting with town officials, project developers, and donors outside the Midland Residences to celebrate its purchase of a deed-restricted studio unit. 

“We’re excited about this opportunity, and hopefully, it’s part of a paradigm shift in employee housing here in the Roaring Fork Valley,” said Rick Lofaro, the conservancy’s executive director. “Let’s build real workforce housing here, real employee housing, and house the people that work and live here and make a difference in this community.”

According to Lofaro, most of the employees at his small organization have stable housing, but some still have long commutes to the office. 

“We still have an employee who lives in No Name and has that commute every day, and we have an employee in Silt who has that commute every day,” Lofaro said. “If we could somehow wave a magic wand and move everybody right here to Basalt, it would be wonderful.”

Lofaro acknowledged that purchasing employee housing can be an expensive endeavor, especially for smaller organizations like the conservancy. Outside funding can make a huge difference. 

The total cost of the studio condo that the nonprofit purchased last month was $340,000. The conservancy paid about half of that through $60,000 of its own funding and money raised from local donors. 

“We have a mortgage and a loan through Alpine Bank here in Basalt for the remaining $171,000,” Lofaro said. “And we will continue to fundraise around that amount in an effort to obviously pay that mortgage down in several years, and then be done and own it free and clear.”

Local business leader and philanthropist Jim Light — a founding board member of the conservancy — helped the nonprofit raise money from local donors, with the largest contribution coming from Atlantic Aviation. The company operates a large network of fixed-base operators across North America, including the private airports in Aspen and Rifle.

“This is just one unit, it’s one studio, it’s one person, and in the broad scheme of things it’s not a big deal,” he said. “But we need to be doing this one step at a time.”

Shaping workforce housing 

Close to half of the units in the new Midland Residences are now owned by local organizations and businesses who plan to rent the units to their staff or students, according to developer LB-West. 

The town of Basalt, Colorado Mountain College and the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies purchased deed-restricted units and other employers like Aspen’s school district and fire department bought free-market condos. 

Andrew Light, who grew up in Snowmass Village and is one of two managing partners at LB-West, said they worked closely with town officials to come up with a project that would support full-time residents. 

“We have always had a goal of this project being an active, living community,” he said.

Though the town now requires about 25% of new housing developments to be deed-restricted, the Midland Residences ultimately exceeded Basalt’s requirements at the time of its approval. 

“It became clear in the approval process that just meeting the town code wouldn’t be enough — we had to exceed the town code,” Light said. “The code was 15% of the units needed to be rent capped, and we agreed to go to 25%.” 

According to the regional housing assessment, about 18% of Basalt’s total housing stock was deed-restricted as affordable as of 2023. 

Basalt Mayor David Knight, who also attended the recent ribbon-cutting at the Midland Residences, said he hopes the town will continue to increase deed-restriction requirements for new developments as housing costs rise. 

“We saw a steep acceleration after COVID that is continuing now,” Knight said. “We are trying to meet the moment and deal with the situation the way it is, which is increasingly imperative and urgent.”

As a developer, Light said it’s helpful when local governments set clear municipal codes so that his team can come up with a realistic budget in the early stages of a project. 

Unforeseen costs can still occur, like when rising interest rates forced LB-West to change the Midland Residences from rental units to for-sale condos with town approval in 2024. 

Light said mixing free-market units with deed-restricted housing can also help developers balance affordability and keep the project financially viable.

Free-market condo prices at the Midland Residences started at $599,000 for studios, $995,000 for one-bedrooms and $1,490,000 for two-bedrooms.

“There’s a lot of voices that say we should only approve affordable housing, and what that means is that nothing will get built because you can’t have 100% rent-capped housing that pencils,” Light said. “I think that’s why you’re seeing towns like Snowmass and Aspen funding extremely expensive workforce housing projects since that’s the only way those will get built.” 

But Light sees promise in a growing effort to come up with creative solutions and strengthen public-private partnerships to build more affordable housing. 

“The key mix is having people that have the expertise and the ability to bring in a project on time and on budget with the appropriate government funding and incentives,” Light said. 

Meeting a diversity of need  

Jennifer Steffel Johnson is an assistant professor at the University of Colorado Denver’s Urban and Regional Planning Department and co-director of a certificate program where students help design real affordable housing projects. 

According to Steffel Johnson, more towns like Basalt have been implementing affordable housing requirements for new developments ever since the state passed a new law in 2021 allowing them to do so.  

“This is often called an ‘inclusionary ordinance’ or ‘inclusionary zoning,’” Steffel Johnson said. “It was previously considered to be rent control, and that wasn’t allowed in Colorado, but that’s since been reinterpreted.”

Steffel Johnson sees the Midland Residences in Basalt as just one example of how housing projects are creatively mixing together various strategies like inclusionary zoning to address affordable housing needs. 

“We just need more and more diverse housing for all kinds of people and I think there’s absolutely a place for creative development models in that,” she said. “This one in Basalt that is mixed-income as well as mixed-use and mixed tenure, … that takes a lot of skill and savvy to be able to do that, and it needs to be in the right place.”

Though Steffel Johnson still sees value in projects that are focused on housing the most vulnerable residents, including those with lower incomes, she said there are also benefits — beyond just financial viability — for projects like Basalt’s that include both free market and deed-restricted units. 

“If a development includes market rate, it has to have more amenities and parking and a good location,” she said. “And there’s a lot of value in economic integration of not having, you know, ‘the lower income side of town,’ but to enable all people to access the good parts of communities.”

As towns like Basalt see an increase in housing need at higher income levels, Steffel Johnson said people are also beginning to question harmful stereotypes about who benefits from affordable housing. 

“The scope and the scale of the affordability challenges is changing the conversation,” Steffel Johnson said. “We’re no longer talking about creating housing for, you know, ‘those people’ — we’re talking about how we can house our whole community.”

In the case of Basalt, housing the whole community includes securing a place to live for local residents like Anderson, the water quality technician at the Roaring Fork Conservancy. 

As a beneficiary of a new deed-restricted unit at the Midland Residences, Anderson agrees that all kinds of housing are necessary to meet the diverse needs of communities like Basalt and towns throughout the region. 

“I am more secure now, which is very fortunate,” Anderson said. “I just hope that the community continues to recognize how important these housing initiatives are, and that we do it in a responsible way.” 

Though his new studio apartment is tied to his job and he may one day have to move out, Anderson sees it as a major step toward achieving his long-term goal of owning his own home in the community where he grew up. 

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correct the spelling of the LB-West development company’s name.

This story was produced through a social justice reporting collaboration between Aspen Journalism and Aspen Public Radio.

The post Basalt’s new housing development could help some residents stay in their community  appeared first on Aspen Journalism.

Rivers running well below normal

Local streams are flowing at 24-47% of normal in the Roaring Fork watershed as of Sept. 3, while the Colorado River is running at 55% of average at Dotsero and 65% near the Colorado-Utah stateline.

Despite recent rainfall, the Roaring Fork River watershed is still experiencing exceptional drought, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor’s Sept. 1 update.

At Stillwater, located upstream of Aspen, the Roaring Fork River ran at 11.4 cfs on Sept. 3, or 24% of average. Last year, the Fork ran at 43.1 cfs on Sept. 3 at Stillwater.

Diversions through the Twin Lakes Tunnel have reduced the Fork’s flows at Stillwater although the amount of water diverted through the tunnel, which sends Roaring Fork flows east of the Continental Divide, has slowly decreased since mid-June.

The USGS sensor below Maroon Creek recorded the Fork running at 69.5 cfs on Sept. 3, or 45% of average. The river flowed at 30% of average near Emma, below the confluence with the dam-controlled Fryingpan.

Meanwhile, the Crystal River above Avalanche Creek, which is not impacted by dams or transbasin diversions, flowed at 41% of average on Sept. 3, or 60 cfs.

The Colorado River ran at 1,140 cfs at Glenwood Springs, or 48% of average, on Sept. 3, down from last year’s 1,730 cfs, while the Colorado flowed at 2,220 cfs near the Colorado-Utah stateline, or 65% of average.

The post Real-time local streamflow appeared first on Aspen Journalism.

As this year’s historic drought drags on, conflicts over how to share and manage water are bubbling over. Gunnison River anglers and boaters say federal water-management decisions are causing increased water temperatures, prompting fishing closures, and creating serious economic impacts to outfitters and businesses.

An Aug. 26 letter from Drew Peternell, Colorado state director of Trout Unlimited, to U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Area Manager Bart Deming, asks the federal agency to change its approach to drought management. The river conservation nonprofit organization asked Reclamation to increase streamflows in the Black Canyon and Gunnison Gorge to alleviate damage to the fishery; to evaluate water use by downstream irrigators; and to better understand the drivers of storage depletion. 

“We acknowledge that the extraordinary drought conditions of the current water year present significant operational challenges,” the letter reads. “Nevertheless, the decision to reduce flows in the Gunnison River has exerted a toll on a vital and cherished natural resource.”

At a public Aug. 27 operations meeting in Grand Junction, Reclamation officials said they plan to reduce flows out of Blue Mesa Reservoir to as low as 200 cubic feet per second through February, in an effort to recover some storage in the reservoir, which is depleted after this year’s record-breaking drought and hot temperatures. Flows so far this month have hovered around 245 cfs.

Peternell said Trout Unlimited would like to see flows of at least 300 cfs in the Gunnison River, the minimum threshold for a healthy environment set by a federal reserve water right. The Black Canyon and Gunnison Gorge are home to a 27-mile-long Gold Medal trout fishery and are downstream of the federally operated Aspinall Unit, which is made up of Blue Mesa, Morrow Point and Crystal reservoirs.

“It’s been a tough year for everyone and there’s not enough water to go around, unfortunately, so we appreciate that Reclamation is in a tough spot,” Peternell said in an interview with Aspen Journalism. “But 300 cfs is a minimum flow target for the Black Canyon and it’s the minimum amount of water the fishery really needs to survive down there, and we’re below that. We’re down to 250 or 240, and that’s hard on the fish, it’s hard on the people who make a living off that fishery.”

Federal water managers control how much water flows out of the Aspinall Unit in the highly engineered Gunnison River system, which is the largest tributary of the Colorado River in the state. Reclamation officials project storage in Colorado’s largest reservoir could fall to just 128,000 acre-feet, or 15% full, by the end of the year under the most probable scenario. 

At the Aug. 27 meeting, officials presented modeling that showed releasing water at a rate of 300 cfs could cause Blue Mesa to fall below the level needed to make hydropower, but 200 cfs will allow storage to build back up slightly over the winter. Reclamation officials presented modeling projections that showed if they don’t reduce releases now, the amount of water coming out of Blue Mesa may need to be dialed back to just 150 cfs this winter to preserve the ability to make hydropower.

“If we didn’t act, this slide right here is a plane going down and we pull up at the last second,” said Reece Carpenter, a Reclamation staffer with the Resources Management Division at the Western Area Office in Grand Junction. “So it’s very important for Reclamation and all of our partners to have that coordination to make some decisions.”

This management decision rests on a sentence in the Record of Decision for the Aspinall Unit’s environmental impact statement, designed to protect endangered fish, that says “the minimum downstream flow through the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park and Gunnison Gorge National Conservation Area is 300 cfs, except in severe drought when the flow may decrease.” And the Colorado River Basin is experiencing the most severe drought in recorded history.

Tim Patterson, owner of RIGS Fly Shop & Guide Service in Ridgway and who has been guiding for more than 30 years, said Gunnison Gorge trips represent more than half of his company’s guiding and outfitting business, and that flows of 200 cfs are a deal breaker. Low flows contribute to higher water temperatures, which can lead to fishing closures, and make navigating some rapids difficult, if not impossible.

Patterson would like more advance notice from federal water managers when flows will be dropping, and real-time temperature and flow monitoring. Patterson said he has already canceled a handful of trips this year and may have to cancel more if flows stay below about 250 cfs.

“The Gunnison Gorge National Conservation Area, as far as a guided fly-fishing trip, is a bucket-list trip known around the world and a must-do,” Patterson said. “So people have planned for over a year in advance for this experience, and it just puts us in a real tough spot.”

Farmers facing ‘immeasurable hardship’

While flows in the river decline, downstream irrigators are still taking nearly their entire allocation of water. The Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association is still diverting just more than 1,000 cfs through the Gunnison Tunnel. The association is a vast expanse of farmland that extends from just south of Montrose to Delta, and is the largest water user in the Upper Colorado River Basin. Water from the Gunnison River transforms the arid high desert into lush green fields of corn, pinto beans, onions and alfalfa. 

The association normally gets half of its water supply from the Uncompahgre River. But this basin saw some of the worst snowpack in the state at just 14% of median. That means farmers in this area are experiencing deep water cuts this year. And some growers made the tough decision to leave fields dry and unplanted this year. 

“I’ve got a senior water right, and I got 50% of my system that’s fallowed right now,” Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association General Manager Steve Pope said at the Aug. 27 meeting. 

This year’s conditions on the Gunnison River highlight how tensions are exacerbated among water-user groups — especially in times of extreme drought. Colorado’s prior appropriation system of water law says the oldest water rights have first use of the river, which almost always means agricultural water users get their water first. 

The state didn’t begin to grant water rights for the environment until the 1970s and for recreation until around the early 2000s. Although a large part of the Western Slope’s economy, culture and identity is now centered around outdoor recreation, keeping enough water in rivers for boating and fish is often the last priority.

The letter from Trout Unlimited asks Reclamation to evaluate power contracts with the Uncompahgre Water Users Association, which has several hydropower generating stations on its system of canals, and implement clear efficiency standards for water use. The letter lists reasons that suggest more water is being diverted from the Gunnison River than is necessary for irrigation.

Pope called their concerns “absolutely ridiculous.”

“These farmers have suffered immeasurable hardships this year, and for someone to say, ‘We think you should further reduce to maintain water temperatures and fish flows in the Black Canyon,’” Pope said. “They don’t bring a water right to the table; they don’t bring anything but a demand, and I don’t agree with it. Irrigation and agriculture is the senior priority, and it’s going to be used.”

Pope said he plans to dial back Gunnison River diversions to about 700 cfs by mid-September, but the river won’t see a bump in flows because of Reclamation’s plan to keep dam releases low to build back storage.

Patterson is hoping his business can get through September — which is the busiest month for multiday trips through the gorge — relatively unscathed. He would like to see more collaboration and communication between water managers and water users, and he wants anglers to have a seat at the table. 

Patterson framed the issue not as a fight among water users, but as an unevenly built safety net in times of shortage. For now, river recreation remains largely at the mercy of upstream decision-makers.

“We’re seeing it all over the Colorado drainage,” Patterson said. “You can’t demand water that isn’t there. But passing it through a special place like this and working with us on times of years to minimize water temperature issues and things like that is a great step. I think it starts with acknowledging that this place is special and important and deserves to be protected.”

The post Gunnison River anglers question feds’ plan to reduce Blue Mesa releases appeared first on Aspen Journalism.

Western Slope water managers are raising concerns that the legal tools used under Colorado’s new conservation program could cause negative impacts to local communities and the state’s agricultural industry.

In a letter to the state water board, the Glenwood Springs-based Colorado River Water Conservation District said it is concerned that the legal mechanisms state officials plan to use to move conserved water into downstream reservoirs may mean certain geographic areas are more likely to give up water. The River District also says the program’s framework should be set by lawmakers – with a significant stakeholder process – during the 2027 session, instead of by the Colorado Water Conservation Board and state Division of Water Resources officials.

At its July meeting, River District staff presented a map of the river basins in its 15-county region, showing which areas were most likely to participate in a conservation program. The Uncompahgre River basin; Dolores River basin; Colorado River in the Grand Valley; White River near Rangely; and Green River, Little Snake; and the Yampa in the Maybell/ Lily Park area were the most likely regions to see participation in a new state conservation program. 

“What it shows is the potential for the disparate impacts,” River District General Manager Andy Mueller said at the July board meeting. “And because it’s so easy to pay someone in the Grand Valley for a full [growing] season, that’s going to be the inclination. That’s the easy thing.”

In July, officials from the CWCB and Division of Water Resources unveiled what they are calling a “near-term contribution program,” designed to pay water users in the Upper Colorado River Basin (Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming) to voluntarily cut back for the next two years. The state of Colorado will run its own program, alongside similar programs in Utah and Wyoming, using $100 million in promised funding from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 

“We have this federal funding available to us and to bring those funds into Colorado, we need to hit the ground running and start the application window,” Amy Ostdiek, interstate section chief at the CWCB, said in an interview with Aspen Journalism. “So we are looking at doing this with the tools we have available under the law as it exists today. And that’s just kind of the reality of the timing of it.”

Shepherding vs. existing authorities

One of the complications of setting up a contribution program are the legal tools used to move water saved upstream to either Lake Powell or Blue Mesa Reservoir, where the state can then get credit from Reclamation for the stored water. One of the criticisms of past pilot conservation programs was that the water was not tracked to Lake Powell nor measured to see how much ended up there.

State lawmakers would need to pass a law to ensure that conserved water is protected as it moves through the river system so that it reaches a specified downstream reservoir without being taken by other water users along the way, a process known as “shepherding.” State officials believe they have the legal authority to shepherd water across the state line only in the case of a call from the Lower Basin states (California, Arizona and Nevada). And so far, the Lower Basin has never placed a compact call. 

That means the most straightforward places to wring water from the state are the Grand Valley, the Uncompahgre Valley and the Upper Gunnison Valley. The irrigation districts of the Grand and Uncompahgre valleys are close to the state line and the Upper Gunnison Valley is just above Blue Mesa, so the majority of water conserved in these locations will get to where it needs to go without the state Division of Water Resources having to actively shepherd it. 

The River District has long warned that these types of programs, if not done carefully, could cause negative economic impacts by removing water from the Western Slope’s rural agricultural communities.

“Without shepherding, you end up with the potential that there are certain areas that are targeted and can produce water in this program and other areas that cannot,” Mueller said. “Therefore, you end up with these disproportionate impacts that we’ve been concerned about.”

Sonia Chavez is the general manager of the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District, one of the areas that could be singled out. The 59,000 irrigated acres of agricultural land in the district produces mostly hay and is above the state’s largest reservoir, Blue Mesa, where state officials plan to store water conserved under the program.

“That has not been lost on us that we are the only community sitting above a federal reservoir in the state of Colorado,” Chavez said. 

State officials say they intend to use their “existing authorities” for this new program, without the change in state law needed to allow shepherding. But the precise definition of existing authorities is still unclear. Officials said it could include loans of conserved water to the state’s instream flow program or releasing water from Blue Mesa Reservoir at times of year when downstream users won’t pick it up, so the water is nearly guaranteed to get to the state line. 

The River District’s letter asks the CWCB for more clarity on the definition of existing authorities and how they would be used as part of a contribution program.

Lawmaker involvement

The creation of a conservation program for Colorado comes at a critical time for the basin, which remains locked in the grip of a historic drought, combined with a management crisis. With the seven states that share the river still unable to find agreement on a new framework after more than two years of failed negotiations, the federal government has stepped in with its own two-year operating plan. That plan, which was released last week and includes cuts to water use in the Lower Basin, immediately triggered a lawsuit from the state of Nevada. 

While the Lower Basin states are subject to mandatory cuts under the federal plan, the Upper Basin is not. But the four Upper Basin states have offered to voluntarily contribute 100,000 acre-feet of water over the next two years, when conditions allow, which would be set forth in a parallel agreement with Reclamation separate from the federal management plan. Colorado’s conservation program is an effort to make good on that promise.

“We’re in the post-2026 world, and I think that acting now and doing what we can with the authorities that we have shows Colorado’s commitment and demonstrates that we are at the table in a meaningful way,” Ostdiek said. “We think it’s important, for various reasons, to move forward with this now.”

In its letter, the River District also asks for the state to limit the criteria it uses to approve participation to a one-year, temporary program so lawmakers can use the 2027 session to use a stakeholder process to come up with a framework for a future program beginning in 2028. 

“The Colorado River District has long advocated that any government action that facilitates a Colorado River conserved consumptive use program inside the State of Colorado – or directs the Colorado State Engineer to shepherd conserved water to the state line, whether done under existing authorities or otherwise – must only be done through legislation enacted by the Colorado General Assembly,” the River District’s letter reads. 

At a June hearing of the state’s Water Resources and Agriculture Review Committee, lawmakers told state officials that the legislature should be involved in the creation of a conservation program.   

But putting the conservation issue – which remains controversial – before stakeholders and lawmakers hasn’t yielded results in the past. In 2023, a 17-member, state-wide drought task force, was supposed to make recommendations to lawmakers about what a conservation program should look like. The group could not agree and did not advance any recommendations on that topic, with some members saying a state conservation program was premature.

And at an August 2025 meeting of the Water Resources and Agricultural Review Committee, some Delta County ranchers asked lawmakers to consider a bill to allow shepherding during the 2026 session. They did not. 

CWCB taking feedback  

CWCB officials are currently taking comments and feedback on the contribution program. They held a well-attended workshop for water users on Aug. 19 at Colorado Water Congress in Steamboat Springs. Attendees had many of the same lingering concerns that have been voiced for years, including how to protect water rights and how to encourage participation across the state. 

State officials plan to offer different amounts of compensation to participating water users to account for the difference in the value of relatively cheap water on the Western Slope versus more expensive water on the Front Range. So far, in previous pilot conservation programs, every participant has been a Western Slope water user. 

Western Slope agricultural water users have long said that if they don’t see comparable cuts being taken by Front Range municipalities, which collectively draw about 500,000 acre-feet from the headwaters of the Colorado River each year, that they won’t want to participate. They don’t want Front Range urban growth to be fueled by water cuts west of the Continental Divide.

At the workshop, Northern Water’s Director of Engineering Kyle Whitaker tried to put that fear to rest, saying the water provider, which supplies water to farms and communities on the Front Range like Fort Collins, Boulder and Longmont through its Colorado-Big Thompson project, would participate in future conservation programs.

“As transmountain diverters to the east, I only speak for Northern Water, and we will participate from here going forward,” Whitaker said. “We’ve been working on things to be a part of this for a number of years now, and those are finally in place.” 

The CWCB is set to consider the criteria for program participation at its September meeting.

The post River District concerned legal tools for conservation program could favor some regions over others appeared first on Aspen Journalism.

Por Eleanor Bennett
Para Aspen Journalism y Aspen Public Radio

Read this story in English here. This bilingual, multimedia reporting is made entirely possible by individual donors. Will you join them?

Un centro de detención temporal gestionado por el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE, por sus siglas en inglés) en el Midland Center de Glenwood Springs podría estar un paso más cerca de su cierre. 

El 6 de agosto, la ciudad votó por 6 votos a 1 a favor de demandar al propietario privado de las instalaciones de ICE ante un tribunal estatal por presuntamente infringir el código municipal al permitir detenciones no autorizadas en una zona comercial sin permiso municipal. 

JG Housing Solutions, una sociedad de responsabilidad limitada con sede en Florida, figura como la actual propietaria de la parte del edificio que ocupa ICE. Aspen Public Radio y Aspen Journalism enviaron una solicitud de comentarios a los miembros de la familia Gillespie que, según los registros del impuesto sobre bienes inmuebles y los documentos estatales de negocios, parecen estar vinculados al arrendador JG Housing Solutions, pero no respondieron antes de la fecha límite de publicación. 

El 28 de abril, la Comisión de Urbanismo y Ordenación Territorial de la ciudad revocó el permiso de uso especial de las instalaciones de ICE, que llevaba décadas en vigor. Durante los últimos tres meses, los residentes locales habían estado instando a la ciudad a que hiciera cumplir su decisión y detuviera las operaciones de detención en las instalaciones, situadas en el número 100 de Midland Ave., suites 110 y 210. 

Una gran multitud se presentó una vez más para instar a que se tomaran medidas durante el turno de comentarios públicos previo a la votación final en la reunión del 6 de agosto, entre ellos Amy Hausman, residente de Glenwood Springs desde hace mucho tiempo. 

“Si no tomamos medidas contra este inquilino o este arrendador porque pensamos que resultará demasiado costoso, o demasiado difícil, o demasiado complicado de llevar a cabo… ¿estamos sentando un precedente por el que ya no podremos hacer cumplir nuestra normativa urbanística en ningún lugar frente a ningún inquilino o arrendador?”, afirmó Hausman. “Y eso me parece un verdadero problema”. 

En respuesta a Hausman y a otros residentes preocupados, la alcaldesa en funciones Erin Zalinski reconoció que la ciudad se había mantenido prácticamente en silencio sobre el tema desde que se revocó el permiso de uso especial. 

“Durante meses, hemos tenido salas como esta llenas de personas apasionadas que nos suplican que tomemos medidas, y da la sensación de que nos quedamos de brazos cruzados sin hacer nada”, afirmó Zalinski. “Solo quiero que sepan que nuestra intención es representar a nuestra comunidad con integridad y de la mejor manera posible con las herramientas de que disponemos, por lo que lo que pudo parecer negligencia no era más que un intento de actuar con determinación”. 

El fiscal municipal Karl Hanlon, que también presta asistencia legal a Aspen Public Radio, afirmó en la reunión del 6 de agosto (y en un memorándum presentado esta semana en el que recomendaba que la ciudad emprendiera acciones legales) que no fue hasta que el cuerpo de bomberos de la ciudad acudió a una llamada de servicios médicos de urgencia en las instalaciones el 24 de julio cuando la ciudad pudo confirmar con certeza que ICE seguía deteniendo a personas allí. Afirmó que esta confirmación brindó a la ciudad la oportunidad de emprender acciones legales por una infracción de la normativa urbanística, específicamente, el uso de las instalaciones para operaciones de detención sin un permiso de uso especial.  

“Para mí, como su abogado, es importante desde el punto de vista fáctico que, si voy a comparecer ante el tribunal, cuente con una base legal y con un hecho en el que pueda basarme en relación con su uso”, afirmó Hanlon. “Y eso es lo que obtuve con la llamada al servicio de emergencias médicas del 24 de julio”. 

Infracciones anteriores de la licencia 

El permiso para las instalaciones de ICE fue aprobado por primera vez por la ciudad en 2003, pero a principios de este año, las solicitudes de acceso a registros públicos, las quejas de los residentes y las informaciones publicadas por los medios de comunicación llevaron a la ciudad a revisar datos que mostraban que ICE retenía a los detenidos durante más de 12 horas en el lugar, infringiendo las condiciones de su permiso, lo que condujo a la decisión de la comisión de urbanismo de revocar el permiso de uso especial. 

En la reunión del 6 de agosto, Hanlon confirmó que JG Housing Solutions, ICE y la Administración de Servicios Generales de EE. UU. (GSA), que gestiona los arrendamientos comerciales de ICE y supervisó su solicitud original de permiso municipal para las instalaciones locales, no respondieron a la notificación de infracción emitida el 25 de marzo, no participaron en la audiencia sobre el permiso celebrada el 28 de abril ni recurrieron la decisión de revocación del permiso por parte de la ciudad antes de la fecha límite de mayo. 

En respuesta a una solicitud de comentarios enviada por Aspen Journalism y Aspen Public Radio a la GSA, así como a ICE y a su organización matriz, el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional, ninguna de las partes abordó directamente la anterior decisión de revocación del permiso, la nueva supuesta infracción de las normas municipales de ordenación territorial ni la directiva municipal del 6 de agosto de emprender acciones legales contra el propietario del centro de retención.

En su lugar, un portavoz del DHS facilitó el viernes una respuesta por escrito en la que afirmaba que: “ICE no mantiene a los detenidos durante más de 12 horas en las instalaciones, las cuales, según alegó, son un `centro de tramitación, no un centro de detención´, donde las personas son procesadas rápidamente y trasladadas a un alojamiento permanente en un centro de detención”. 

Los centros de retención más pequeños de ICE, como el de Glenwood Springs, son espacios básicos y temporales de procesamiento que no están diseñados para pasar la noche y que han sido objeto de un escrutinio cada vez mayor, tanto a nivel nacional como en Colorado, debido a la limitada supervisión y al aumento de la duración de las detenciones.

Aspen Journalism analizó unos 15 años de datos de las Operaciones de Control y Expulsión (ERO) de ICE, publicados por el Proyecto de Datos sobre Deportaciones de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad de California en Berkeley, y descubrió que ICE retuvo a personas más allá del límite de 12 horas en las instalaciones de Glenwood Springs al menos 17 veces entre el 1 de enero de 2011 y el 10 de marzo de este año. 

Aproximadamente la mitad de las infracciones por superación del límite de 12 horas se produjeron desde que la segunda administración de Trump intensificó la aplicación de la ley de inmigración. El número total de detenciones registradas desde 2011 ascendió a unas 1,200. 

En un correo electrónico anterior, con fecha del 12 de marzo, ICE se negó a comentar las presuntas infracciones de su política de retención de 12 horas y de las condiciones de los permisos, alegando que se trataba de datos de terceros no verificados´, aunque el Deportation Data Project afirma que obtiene sus conjuntos de datos directamente de solicitudes de registros gubernamentales, litigios o divulgaciones proactivas por parte del Gobierno. En ese mismo correo electrónico, ICE también desmintió las preocupaciones más generales sobre la supervisión, la transparencia y las condiciones en los centros de retención más pequeños. 

Aplicación de las normas urbanísticas municipales 

Aunque algunos residentes y concejales se mostraron dispuestos a debatir en la reunión pública del 6 de agosto las anteriores infracciones de la norma de las 12 horas por parte de ICE y cuestiones más amplias relacionadas con las medidas federales de represión en materia de inmigración, la decisión final de la ciudad se centró en la aplicación de las normas locales de ordenación territorial. 

“La cuestión que se nos plantea esta noche es la aplicación del código de uso del suelo, y no creo que queramos sentar un precedente que permita ignorar nuestros códigos de uso del suelo”, afirmó David Townsley, miembro del concejo municipal.

La votación se aprobó con el apoyo de los concejales Townsley, Sumner Schachter, Steven Smith y Mitchell Weimer, así como del alcalde Marco Dehm y de Zalinski, a favor de emprender acciones legales contra el arrendador ante un tribunal estatal, mientras que el concejal Ray Schmahl se opuso. 

“Hay consideraciones muy prácticas en juego aquí, […] el respeto a la ley, la coherencia”, añadió Smith. “Y, junto con ello, la sensibilidad hacia las necesidades humanas, hacia el peligro que corren las personas y hacia la propia humanidad”. 

Aunque Schmahl votó finalmente en contra de la moción, afirmó que podría respaldar la decisión de la ciudad con ciertas limitaciones. 

“Para mí, mi definición de liderazgo local valiente consiste en no malgastar el dinero de los contribuyentes, y se me ha dicho una y otra vez que esto supone un despilfarro”, afirmó Schmahl. “Creo que deberíamos seguir el consejo de Karl, pero no creo que dispongamos de un chequera en blanco para un esfuerzo inútil”.

Hanlon explicó a los concejales que llevar el caso contra JG Housing Solutions ante un tribunal estatal, en lugar de citar a ICE y a la GSA como demandados en un tribunal federal, ofrecía a la ciudad las mayores posibilidades de éxito, aunque advirtió de que probablemente ninguna de las dos vías resultaría fácil. 

Estimó que las probabilidades aproximadas de obtener una orden judicial en un tribunal estatal eran `inferiores al 25 %´, citando la posibilidad de que el arrendador invocara la cláusula de supremacía de la Constitución de los Estados Unidos, argumentando que la aplicación de la normativa urbanística por parte de la ciudad interfiere en la capacidad de sus inquilinos para hacer cumplir las leyes de inmigración, lo cual constituye una función federal fundamental. 

“¿Qué respondemos a eso? Desde mi punto de vista, es: Tienen instalaciones completas en Denver, tienen otras en Grand Junction, y estas últimas no las utilizan mucho”, afirmó Hanlon. “No es esencial para su función fundamental; no se trata de decir que no puedan hacer cumplir las leyes de inmigración, sino de que no pueden retener a personas en Glenwood Springs”. 

Hanlon estimó que el litigio podría costar aproximadamente $50,000 para superar una audiencia de medida cautelar preliminar en un tribunal estatal, o unos $100,000 en un tribunal federal. 

“Para llegar a juicio en un tribunal estatal, lo más probable es que cueste entre [$250,000] y $300,000; en un tribunal federal, medio millón de dólares”, afirmó Hanlon. “Esa es simplemente la realidad de llevar esto adelante”.

Según Hanlon, el siguiente paso de la ciudad será presentar una demanda formal contra el arrendador, ante un tribunal estatal, junto con una solicitud de medida cautelar, una orden judicial que, de concederse, podría detener las operaciones de detención en las instalaciones antes de que el caso llegue a juicio, un proceso que, según Hanlon, de no ser así podría tardar entre 18 y 24 meses en resolverse. 

Si un juez concede la medida cautelar, se prohibiría a JG Housing Solutions alquilar el espacio para su uso como centro de retención o detención temporal mientras se tramita la demanda subyacente.

Hanlon hizo hincapié en que cualquier medida cautelar se aplicaría de forma estrictamente limitada a la propia operación de detención, y no al contrato de arrendamiento en su conjunto. ICE y la GSA seguirían estando autorizados a utilizar el espacio del Midland Center para funciones administrativas u oficinas, lo cual está permitido según la zonificación actual del inmueble. 

“Si la GSA desea alquilar ese edificio para que ICE opere desde él, puede hacerlo en ese distrito de zonificación”, afirmó Hanlon. “Lo que no pueden hacer según nuestra normativa es detener [a personas allí], … ni gestionar el centro de retención en su interior”. 

Los residentes respaldan la medida 

Cuando se anunció el resultado de la votación (6 a 1), la abarrotada sala de la ciudad estalló en aplausos. La reacción se extendió a la sala anexa, donde los residentes habían estado escuchando y esperando su turno para intervenir en el turno de comentarios públicos durante la sesión. Veinte personas tomaron la palabra durante los aproximadamente 45 minutos que duró el turno de comentarios públicos.

Algunos, entre ellos la residente local Ashley Stahl, también instaron a la ciudad y a la comunidad en general a reflexionar críticamente sobre por qué el centro de ICE pudo funcionar durante años a pesar de las repetidas infracciones de las condiciones de su permiso municipal. 

“Este edificio nunca fue un secreto, al menos no para todos”, afirmó Stahl. “Nuestros vecinos inmigrantes saben exactamente lo que ocurre en el número 100 de Midland desde hace veinte años, porque fueron sus hermanos, sus madres y sus primos quienes fueron conducidos a través de esa puerta para no volver jamás a casa. … Lo que nos llevó veinte años no fue descubrir lo que estaba ocurriendo, sino escuchar”.  

Claire Noone, residente desde hace mucho tiempo en Glenwood Springs y abogada especializada en inmigración, cuyas solicitudes de acceso a registros públicos a principios de este año ayudaron a revelar que el centro de ICE había funcionado sin un certificado definitivo de ocupación durante dos décadas y desencadenaron una nueva ronda de inspecciones municipales, también intervino en la reunión del 6 de agosto instando a la ciudad a considerar diversas medidas coercitivas. 

El 3 de agosto, Noone presentó una denuncia por escrito en la que recomendaba que la ciudad investigara más a fondo otras posibles infracciones en las instalaciones de ICE a lo largo de las últimas décadas. Entre sus recomendaciones figuraba que la ciudad se asegurara de que los planes de evacuación de las instalaciones, y otras medidas de seguridad fundamentales exigidas para los centros de detención, cumplieran las normas nacionales del código de edificación, así como los propios códigos de edificación y contra incendios del municipio. 

“La autoridad de la ciudad es un ejercicio centenario y bien consolidado del poder policial en virtud de su carta de autonomía local de la Constitución de Colorado, que no se ve afectado ni cuestionado por la legislación federal”, afirmó Noone. “Dado que la aplicación de la normativa recae en el propietario privado en virtud de un código no discriminatorio que se aplica de la misma manera a todos los edificios de la ciudad, esto excluye la prevalencia federal”. 

Aunque no hay garantía de que la acción legal emprendida por la ciudad para hacer cumplir su código municipal obligue a ICE a cerrar su centro de detención, para el residente local Rey Worrell es una opción mejor que la alternativa. 

“Las probabilidades no parecen buenas, el coste parece elevado y la cláusula de supremacía parece que podría volverse en nuestra contra como ciudad”, señaló Worrell. “Sin embargo, la inacción, el silencio, no hacer nada y sentirse derrotados son precisamente lo que permite que los infractores sigan infringiendo nuestro código y perjudicando a nuestra ciudad. … Debemos ser vistos como la ciudad que se enfrentó a todas las adversidades por el bien de nuestra comunidad”.

Este reportaje se elaboró gracias a una colaboración en materia de justicia social entre Aspen Journalism y Aspen Public Radio.

The post La ciudad de Glenwood Springs vota para demandar al propietario de las instalaciones de ICE por permitir que continúen las detenciones sin permiso  appeared first on Aspen Journalism.

Pitkin County commissioners at a work session Tuesday asked for additional information about proposed changes to the county’s short-term rental regulations that would make more properties eligible for a license, while implementing new STR caps tailored to different areas.

“There are negative impacts that any guest brings to a community. We recognize that. There are also positives,” Andrew Knudtsen, who works for the consulting firm Economic & Planning Systems (EPS), told the board of county commissioners Aug. 18. “On the whole, we think the program will be balanced nicely with the recommendations that we are moving through.”

County staff on Aug. 13 released a “Short-Term Rental Impact Study” prepared by EPS. The report, which has been underway for about a year, analyzed existing STR conditions, neighborhood and environmental impacts through a series of surveys, community events and data. The study recommends major changes to the county’s program, including scrapping the current rental-history requirement, which limits STR license eligibility to properties that can prove they were used as an STR between 2017 and 2022, in favor of a system that would cap the number of STR permits by geographic zone. 

Commissioners showed an interest in continuing the conversation to learn more about what the revised program would look like and how the lottery and the caps would work before discussing potential code amendments. 

“I feel like we’re here to try to identify how to solve for the problem of the 2017 to 2022 rule, right? I feel like this is a step in the right direction,” Commissioner Ted Mahon said. “It’s interesting to talk about 73 short-term rentals [in Pitkin County] when there is 2,300 in the city of Aspen and Snowmass. … We’re a pretty small player in the whole game here. I do think it’s worthwhile, and the more I hear about the lottery, the more interested I am in that.”

Instead of the current tiered system that breaks down STRs by the number of nights a property can be rented, the updated program would establish two permit types for most of the county and one specific to Redstone. The capped STR-Type 1, or “general,” permit would allow up to 120 rental nights per year, while an STR-Type 2, or “low intensity,” permit, which would be left uncapped, would be limited to owner-occupied properties with no more than 30 rental nights per year. Redstone would maintain its own unique regulations and permit type (STR-R) allowing 180 nights a year. 

Proposed changes would also reduce licensing fees, and consultants recommended that the county pursue a lodging tax of up to 6% that would apply to STRs and traditional hotels. 

The changes are aimed in part at disincentivizing what has emerged as a workaround to local STR permit requirements, where property managers and renters sign leases for more than 30 days when, in fact, the renter intends to occupy the property for fewer than 30 days (STRs are defined as rentals of less than 30 days).

The recommendations are intended to maintain regulations that have had positive outcomes, such as prohibiting vacation rentals in the most remote areas of the county, while allowing more homeowners to benefit from extra income earned by renting their property and mitigating what consultants have identified as the highest intensity impacts of STRs on the community.

“During the analysis conducted for this study, it became apparent that the standards for historic use may be overly restrictive,” according to the report. “There are some community members who would benefit from the revenue, which would enable them to remain locally invested in the community. … The 2017-2022 window will grow more out of date over time, meaning as properties sell and some of the new owners cease STR operations, the inventory will dwindle.”

Aspen Journalism last month reported that the number of STR permits in unincorporated Pitkin County dropped 29% between April 2023 and this past April, from 111 to 79 STR licenses, and down from an estimated 206 STR properties before the licensing program took effect.

The county began regulating STRs in 2022 with a tiered system — “seasonal” permits, allowing property owners to rent for 61 to 120 nights per year, “limited” permits for 21 to 60 rental nights and “otherwise limited” permits for up to 20 rental nights. Properties in Redstone’s Village Commercial Zone District can rent up to 180 nights. Only properties with proof of at least one rental night between May 11, 2017, and May 11, 2022, are currently eligible to the program.

STR application fees are based on the 2022 valuation of the property and the number of nights that applicants want to rent their property. The 2022 valuation is multiplied by 0.05% (otherwise limited), 0.06% (limited) or 0.07% (seasonal). The owner of a $4 million property, for example, would need to pay between $2,000 and $2,800 in application fees each time they renew their annual permit. 

EPS recommends replacing the current fee system with a flat fee of $400 plus $200 per bedroom for STR-Type 1 and STR-R and a flat fee of $200 for STR-Type 2. “While the current approach has the advantage of scaling with more expensive homes, it is important to recognize that fees must, by definition, be set based on the resources required of county staff to provide a service,” according to the impact study. “A flat licensing fee [would] generate revenue equal to the costs to administer the STR program.”

EPS also recommends that new STR licenses be distributed through a lottery that would limit real estate speculation. “There are investors that will acquire homes because the net operating income can be substantial,” Knudtsen said.

The report maintains that STR licenses should remain nontransferable when a property is sold and suggests expanding the validity of STR license to two years instead of the one-year license used now. “The current practice of a one-year license and a rolling application period results in the licensed STR properties constantly moving in and out of the licensing program,” according to the study. 

Geographic caps

The study suggests setting up geographic caps based on master plan area (MPA) boundaries in order to mitigate intensity and preserve community character. The goal is to direct most STR activity to areas with greater levels of services or access, such as Starwood, Redstone and the area defined as within the Aspen urban growth boundary, while keeping it lower in more-rural areas. 

“There’ll be a cap by MPA and as availability occurs [when a property with an STR license sells, for example] … , applicants can apply for and staff would run, either on a quarterly basis or biannual — that’s a detail we need to refine —  a lottery for that jurisdiction,” Knudtsen said, adding that staff will then review selected applications. Once approved, applicants won’t have to go through the lottery process again but would still need to renew their permit every year. Properties with current STR permits would be grandfathered in and could skip the lottery.

Currently, STRs represent about 1.8% of all residential parcels across unincorporated Pitkin County, according to EPS, which suggests three different caps, ranging from 1% to 2% of the area’s residential properties for the most rural areas with limited access to services and infrastructure (such as Maroon and Castle creeks and the upper Fryingpan Valley) to 5% to 6% for the semi-urban or semi-rural areas with better access, such as Redstone, Starwood and the Aspen UGB. STRs will remain prohibited in Rural and Remote and the Transition 1 and 2 zone districts. 

The study expects to see a slight increase in the number of STRs for Redstone, Starwood and Aspen UGB, while little to no change in STR numbers is expected for the Crystal River Valley outside of Redstone, Emma, Snowmass Creek, Brush Creek, Owl Creek, Woody Creek and Capitol Creek.

“It is likely that the total number of STR licenses in the county would increase modestly, perhaps [10% to 20%], if this system were implemented,” the report noted, with the largest increase being in the Aspen UGB. The study expects that this increase would also include properties that are currently renting for more than 30 days but are actually used as vacation rentals.

Commissioner Patti Clapper said some people may struggle with the idea that a property in their neighborhood that wasn’t previously used as an STR may become an STR under the proposed system. “That’s going to be the hard pill for people to swallow,” she said.

Community Development Deputy Director Nicole Rebeck-Stout replied to Clapper’s concerns by saying that all these recommendations work as a system. “All of the issues that maybe a neighbor is a little uncertain about that new use happening next door, I feel like we’ve really plugged those holes with these other regulations in terms of application requirements, enforcement and ongoing monitoring to assure that community character [remains] intact,” she said.

Minimizing negative impacts

Monthly leases that function as STRs are one of the main negative impacts identified in the study, as they circumvent the county’s program requirements. STRs are defined as rentals of less than 30 days, but some STR operators content with no more than one booking per month draw up 30-plus day leases, meaning the properties need not be covered by an STR permit. According to the study, these rentals also contribute to community impacts while not being regulated and not taxed. The report adds that ineligibility for an STR license due to a lack of prior rental history is one reason that some properties engage in this practice.

“We know that people are using that as a loophole,” County Manager Kara Silbernagel said. ”Those that are using that as a loophole would probably be incentivized [to apply for an STR license] if they were doing two two-week rentals versus one two-week rental a month.”

The lack of oversight on these properties precludes the county from tracking STR activity and generating revenue commensurate with the STRs that are licensed. 

About 80% of the 79 licensed STR properties in Pitkin County are single-family homes, according to Aspen Journalism’s July analysis, and 28% of the inventory are homes valued at more than $10 million each. The EPS study identified three different markets in unincorporated Pitkin County: a lower-end market reaching up to $1,500 a night and representing about one-third of the properties; a middle market making up half of the properties with nightly rates ranging from $1,500 to $10,000; and a higher-end market, representing one in six properties, that can go as high as $60,000 a night. Twenty-two properties had rental rates exceeding $10,000 a night during New Year’s week of 2025-26, a preliminary EPS study noted.

“Pitkin County holds a unique market position among all mountain resort communities and commands a premium for guest accommodations. The corresponding guest expenditures, and resulting fiscal revenues, benefit local business and the county,” according to the recently released impact study. “If the program can be managed well, and if impacts are adequately mitigated, STRs can be net positive for residents, businesses and the county as a whole.”

The report found that STRs do not necessarily diminish housing supply for locals, given that many are second homes and would mostly be left empty if they weren’t used as STRs. But STRs drive employment from a wide range of businesses, including dining, housekeeping, recreation and landscaping, which generates affordable-housing needs. The county collects sales taxes revenues from STRs, but these revenues aren’t earmarked for affordable housing. EPS recommends that the county add a lodging tax that could reach up to 6% of revenue for both hotels and STRs, similarly to other counties where lodging taxes have recently been either implemented or increased. 

This could be added on top of the existing 6.9% sales tax (including state, county and RFTA taxes), meaning that with a 6% lodging tax, guests in Pitkin County would pay 12.9% in taxes, which is lower than Aspen’s 17.35% to 22.35% total rate, including lodging taxes and on par with Snowmass Village’s 12.8%. Currently, Pitkin County has the lowest total tax rate on STRs among 28 peer communities. A lodging tax would need to be approved by voters.

Clapper shared concerns about adding a lodging tax, since it could hurt the three small hotels located in unincorporated Pitkin County and increase room rates. 

“One of the concerns we hear is from people who say it’s too expensive to stay here, so they stay in Basalt, or they stay in Carbondale, or … in Glenwood, and they drive back and forth, … plus our room rates are already to the roof,” Clapper said. “When you’re paying $60,000 a night, I don’t think you care, but when you’re trying to pay $600 a night, you’re gonna care.”

Commissioner Jeffrey Woodruff asked if STRs could be used as a housing opportunity.

“If we have 40% of our homes that are unoccupied, and we clearly have a need from the music school, from physics, from even skiing, … could this be a tool to change that?” Woodruff said at the meeting. “We can house physicists; we can house music students; we can house folks that are here for [Aspen Ideas Fest].”

Staff and consultants said that they would look into that idea further and that an exception could be made to allow more flexibility to people who would like to rent their property during these events. 

Although the study didn’t find evidence of negative impacts on the water supply or on onsite wastewater treatment systems, EPS has heard concerns from community members about water uses and recommends that the county require that rural STR applicants on well water to provide proof that the well capacity is sufficient. Consultants also suggest that the county update application requirements regarding wildfire mitigations, such as requiring photos that prove that the property meets the county’s defensible space requirement.

Community outreach

The study includes findings from interviews with STR brokers and operators, three surveys, and two hybrid focus groups. The community survey results indicate that “most Pitkin County residents are not very impacted by STR activity, but many feel passionately about STRs, either positively or negatively, and want to see a change in regulations and enforcement that corresponds with their beliefs.”

Most concerns regarding STRs often focus on the loss of community character within residential neighborhoods, but 70% of community members notice either none or very little STR activity in Pitkin County, according to the community survey. 

Twenty-four STR operators responded to the EPS survey, which noted that the survey’s results are skewed toward smaller and owner-occupied properties as they were overrepresented among the respondents, and may not capture trends at the high-end of the rental market. The study said the vast majority of respondents reported that they do not offer concierge services, but this contradicts findings from high-end brokers with whom EPS talked. Those brokers reported that such services are an important part of an STR stay for wealthy guests. “The only property reporting offering these services also had an $8,000-per-night price point, the highest of the sample,” according to the report.

Although the higher end of the market may have been underrepresented in the community survey, a transportation-intensity study from EPS, which was prepared for the Vision 2050 Project that aims to update the county’s land-use code to meet climate goals, shows that employee trips increase significantly with the home size and that the largest homes generate nearly five employee trips per day during periods of peak occupancy, compared with just half a trip for the smallest homes. The study was for all residential properties, not just STRs.

Fehr & Peers conducted a traffic study specific to STRs as an addendum to EPS’s STR Impact Study, and found that STRs in the unincorporated county contribute a minor amount to overall congestion. Using 2024 Colorado Department of Transportation data from the continuous- and temporary-traffic CDOT counters located on Highway 82, Fehr & Peers estimates that STRs in unincorporated Pitkin County generate between 0.4% (80 vehicles) and 1.1% (252 vehicles) of the traffic on Highway 82 on an annual basis. 

Pitkin County contributes to Aspen Journalism with a grant from the Healthy Community Fund. Aspen Journalism is solely responsible for its editorial content.

The post Major changes proposed for PitCo’s short-term-rental regulations appeared first on Aspen Journalism.

Editor’s note: This is the final installment of a multipart series launched by Aspen Journalism in 2025 on the long history of public lands in the United States. This piece follows a gap in reporting due in part to a lengthy permit process required to climb the only privately owned 14er in Colorado.

The mountain stands out on a rolling alpine ridgeline bounded by a high desert that defines the Colorado-New Mexico border. The peak and much of the surrounding land are privately owned and strictly regulated. Culebra Peak is the only 14er (which is shorthand for a peak over 14,000 feet) in Colorado not on public lands. That doesn’t diminish its appeal to bucket-list climbers hoping to summit all of the state’s 54 14ers, but it reduces hiker traffic on a summit that, as a result, has no trail and no signage. 

Hikers must apply for a permit well in advance, and only 20 are permitted on three designated hiking days per week — when the summit is open, which is not year-round. Reservations are accepted in December for both winter and summer climbs. Winter climbs start the first weekend in January.

Journalist and book author Ted Conover, an old friend, waited two years for the permits for our hike this past June 12. We learned about Culebra during a visit I paid him at his trailer home in the San Luis Valley in the summer of 2024 when I suggested we climb the peak that’s visible from his trailer home, only to discover that it’s part of a large private  property, known now as Cielo Vista Ranch.

“How can anyone own a 14er?!” we wondered, “and what does that mean for public access?” This lingering question intrigued Conover to make a summit bid, so he applied in January and won spots for three. Conover invited me to take one of them.

The bridge

Conover is the author of “Cheap Land Colorado” (Knopf, 2022), a book about life off-grid in the San Luis Valley, specifically the central part without trees that locals call “the prairie” or el llano. Our third hiker, Lance Cheslock, is former executive director of La Puente, a nonprofit that serves some of the poorest counties in Colorado. La Puente translates to “the bridge,” connoting the social support and charitable connection that offer a unifying context to an otherwise disparate population.

The three of us gather the day before our planned ascent at Cheslock’s home — a few miles south of Alamosa — where we enjoy the comfortable shade of Chinese elms while sipping smoothies and listening to birdsong. We watch Cheslock’s dog, Ollie, lap peanut butter from a plastic container after performing tricks for us visitors. Conover and Cheslock became friends in 2020 when Conover volunteered at La Puente to gain an insider view of prairie life as part of his book research. His job was to deliver firewood and a variety of donated supplies to poor off-gridders, a role that put him in the crosshairs of valley residents, sometimes literally.

Conover credits Cheslock, who gave 30 years to solidifying La Puente, with growing the fledgling charity into an ambitious program with an annual budget today of $6 million that “offers a range of services to the poor: a valley-wide network of food banks and social enterprises such as a coffee shop in Alamosa and a used-clothing store.” Most of those people live in the valley’s main towns—Alamosa, Monte Vista, Fort Garland, Antonito, San Luis. But a few years ago La Puente noticed that the population of rural off-gridders had grown significantly. “We need to be out there,” Cheslock is quoted in “Cheap Land Colorado.” “We should have known this long ago,” he says of pervasive social ills. “But like everyone else in the community who drives on paved roads, we hadn’t paid attention.”

In “Cheap Land Colorado,” Conover opens with an apt description of the unpaved territory that harbors on-the-fringe lifestyles: “The San Luis Valley still looks much as it did one hundred, or even two hundred years ago. Blanca Peak, at 14,345 feet the fourth highest summit in the Rockies, overlooks a vast openness.” 

In his book, Conover conveys a mystique that surrounds the prairie, a high-altitude desert where harsh nature is a sobering influence on the many human populations that have transected here over the centuries. Today it remains one of the most barren, isolated and demographically diverse landscapes in the American West, and is a rare place where acreage has been and still is available on the cheap.

Cheslock, like many of La Puente’s clientele, was attracted to the region by the allure of land. “Ten thousand plots of land are ten thousand potential dreams,” Cheslock is quoted in “Cheap Land Colorado,” where the prairie becomes a contemporary frontier for pioneering seekers of solitude and housing security. La Puente’s challenges include helping settlers survive frigid winters, torrid summers, unemployment and marginal social support.

Having spent three years in Haiti working for Habitat for Humanity prior to his arrival in the valley, Cheslock is well acquainted with poverty and difficult living conditions. He was not shocked by what he discovered in the valley; rather, he was deeply sympathetic. Today, La Puente supports more than 16,000 individuals annually by providing a safety net for independent living that includes 15 food pantries, homeless-prevention resources, emergency services and educational gardens.

Life on the prairie

After our shaded sojourn and choreographed dog show, we regroup at Conover’s trailer home, located about an hour south of Alamosa. Here, trailer homes are standard. Conover has made his clean, orderly and comfortable. But it’s not comfort that brings Conover back regularly from his primary home in New York City. It is the sere and silent setting. From Conover’s small deck affixed to the rear of his well-seasoned modular, there is no other human habitation in sight. Rimmed by distant walls of mountain peaks and buffered by open expanses of sunburned grasses and desiccated shrubs, the prairie is seemingly removed from everything, making it a quiet haven and fitting antidote to Conover’s urban life back East. Conover is a Colorado native, so the setting fits his background need for vast, unspoiled vistas and the strong presence of space — big, open space.

From Conover’s deck, where Cheslock plucks out traditional tunes on his dulcimer, we gaze east at the Culebra Range where I ask Cheslock to point out tomorrow’s destination. Conover, who has a strong command of Spanish, hones my pronunciation of the peak: “kool-ay’-bra,” he articulates. The name means serpent or snake. Culebra, one of the lesser 14er summits, reaching 14,047 feet, is hard to pick out on the undulating ridgeline. Cheslock orients us by a distinct line of snow in a vertical couloir, which is the only remnant left in this parched year. Cheslock says the current drought is historically unprecedented in the local annals of an already arid landscape in which wells risk running dry and irrigation will almost certainly cease. The nearby Rio Grande River, says Cheslock, is at its lowest spring runoff in recorded history.

Alpine start

Cheslock’s dulcimer lulls us into pleasant rest that makes for an early night, which is appropriate as we agree to rise at 4 a.m. Soon, the total silence of the prairie soothes our sleep with nocturnal peace, interrupted sooner than we wish by cellphone wake-up tones. We grope from our sleep to the aroma of coffee while the first glow of morning rises in the east. A scant breakfast of cold cereal and yogurt suffices as we pack our gear, preparing for a big day. The air is cool, and a light breeze is chilling. 

We push off a little after 5 a.m. because we are required to arrive at the ranch gate no later than 6 a.m., as the instructions state, and must be off the mountain no less than 12 hours later. If not, we must pay a fine:

Hikers/climbers must sign out of Cielo Vista Ranch no later than 6:00 pm. If all climbers have not signed out by 6:00 pm, we consider this an emergency situation and will begin following search-and-rescue procedures. Any climber that fails to sign out when leaving the Ranch or leaves the Ranch after 6:00 pm agrees to make a $100.00 contribution to The Costilla County Search & Rescue, per the waiver.

Such is the tone of the rules and regulations of Cielo Vista (Spanish for sky view or heaven view) that require climbers to walk carefully and pick their route to the peak with discerning steps amid the carpet of tundra and wildflowers that begin and end the climb beneath a jumble of boulders that define the summit ridge of Colorado’s southernmost 14er.

Climbing guidelines are intended to reduce impact and conserve the natural resource, as the ranch website states:

Culebra Peak offers a unique climbing experience. Unlike any other fourteener in Colorado, hiking impacts are largely absent — Culebra is essentially “untrailed.” In order to preserve its pristine condition, please follow these climbing guidelines and procedures.

Ascend and descend on a different route, and disperse while hiking. To protect sensitive alpine plant communities, avoid hiking single file or along existing trampled routes. Try to step only on durable surfaces such as rocks to protect sensitive alpine plant communities while hiking. Don’t walk along the edge of melting snowfields or other areas where the soils are wet. Many alpine soils are over 5,000 years old, and alpine plants grow very slowly in the harsh climate and short growing season on fourteeners. Refrain from feeding wild animals or picking wildflowers: leave what you find. When relieving yourself, please bury all human waste below the tree line, not in the tundra.

Driving from Conover’s place as the rosy fingers of dawn spread, we brake for a pronghorn antelope that darts into the headlights. We pass the looming forms of several wild horses while a blazing orange sunrise illuminates the windshield. Conover’s GPS guides us through Colorado’s oldest town, San Luis, where a humble townscape and cluttered homesites reveal a modest rusticity and signs of economic marginality. 

Add a billionaire landowner to this social and cultural milieu and a serious conflict has ensued given the enormous gap in wealth and the resulting stratification, all revolving around control of the land.

A billionaire and his fence

The billionaire is William Harrison, the son of a Texas oil tycoon, who reportedly purchased the land in 2017 for $105 million. According to The Colorado Sun, Harrison has erected 20 miles of fence that excludes the public and complicates access for traditional land users, many with indigenous rights that go back centuries. The fence is high and tight, and it has interrupted deer, elk and other migration corridors that go back millennia.

The Sun reported in April 2024 that Harrison was forced to stop before finishing the perimeter along his property and that locals estimate Harrison built about 20 miles of fenceline before a judge ordered him to stop.

“Harrison counters that trespassers have entered his private property to dump trash and collect antlers, to fish illegally and ride ATVs,” The Sun wrote. “It’s his right as a landowner to keep them out, he argues, especially since the descendants of the original settlers have keys to nine gates through which they can enter the property. He built the fence to prevent illegal trespassing by people with no access rights, and to contain his herd of bison, which locals estimate at about 60 animals.” Cielo Vista Ranch representatives did not respond to a request for comment from Aspen Journalism.

But land closures of a former commons in the American West are guaranteed to engender hyperreactions when traditions are seemingly violated, so passions are running high on both sides.

The battle has spilled beyond courtrooms into the larger community where the contested fence has had a dramatic impact on traditional peoples. The privatization of these lands has also forced 14er peak baggers to apply for hiking permits, sometimes years in advance, and pay $150 per person for the privilege of hiking the “trail-less” landmark peak, the highest in the Culebra Range.

Despite what poet Robert Frost once wrote, the fence is not making good neighbors. It is making bitter enemies of people who are holding to a deal made when the valley was subdivided into the Sangre de Cristo Land Grant of 1844. “That grant,” reported The Sun, “allowed descendants of early settlers to go into the high country to harvest timber, hunt deer and elk, and graze their cattle and sheep.” It has remained mostly in place even as a line of wealthy men have purchased the land, but not always peacefully. There have been court battles, armed security guards, suspected arson and even a shooting.

Many heirs to the land under the original access terms, reported The Sun, see the fence as a “symbol of wealth inequality, and a not-so-subtle reminder that the age-old, range-war struggles over land use and private property never die.” 

The Sun reported that Harrison has ordered security cameras and surveillance drones to cover the fenceline while land grantees have reported harassment by armed security guards. Then came real trouble when the ranch manager’s house, which is not on the ranch, was riddled with bullets one night and no one was charged. 

As emotions fester on both sides, Culebra Peak remains a sought-after summit for 14er peak baggers and even for casual mountain hikers who, like Conover, Cheslock and me, desire access to what has become a forbidden mountain due to private ownership that exercises total control. Such can be the outcome when public land becomes private.

Huffing it up Culebra

Just before the witching hour, Conover pulls up to the ranch gate, where a dozen vehicles are queued. Groggy hikers mill around sipping from mugs. A ranch hand begins the check-in by matching driver’s licenses to the release forms. He motions us through at the head of the line. A sturdy-looking man in cowboy boots with a clipboard then motions us out of our vehicles. Carlos introduces himself as part of a brief welcome, then directs us to drive five miles up a jeep road to the trailhead. He stresses the importance of signing out afterward as requisite for receiving a code for the gate lock so that we can then exit ranch property. “Any questions?” he asks. When no one speaks, he gestures us on. 

Our cohort of about 20 climbers pile into vehicles and begin a convoy up the rough, unpaved road that Conover navigates handily in the hail-pocked truck he acquired at a discount for his use during visits to his home on the prairie. Twenty minutes of pummeling gets us to the parking area at 11,600 feet by about 6:30 a.m. Cheslock points out a small herd of elk loping up the closest skyline ridge against a cloudy sky.

We throw on jackets and slip on gloves and hats to counter a cold wind scouring the timberline approach. We stretch our legs up a steep Stairmasterlike climb toward the first ridgeline. A faint trail soon disappears in the tundra, so everyone spreads out as instructed. I move ahead of Conover and Cheslock, focusing on a sustainable pace that leads to a second ridgeline. An enormous cairn of stone is silhouetted against a pale-blue sky where a diaphanous cloud blots the sun and keeps the air bitter cold.

The ranch website mirrors what hikers find by inferring that the journey is as important as the destination:

The path you choose is your own and may take you across small streams and across the ridge where an occasional elk, mule deer or bighorn sheep can be seen, as well as many other types of wildlife. Once your hike begins, it is evident that this mountain is like no other. With lush vegetation and no defined trail guiding the way up the mountain, one can really become captivated by the beauty and undisturbed environment that surrounds this range. A rare jewel to find, enjoy the freedom of making your own way up to the summit. Once reaching the summit, enjoy the heavenly view of other nearby peaks including Red Mountain, which can be accessed quickly from Culebra Peak.

I hurriedly seek shelter from the icy wind on the lee side of the ridge beneath a sheltering slab of rock that provides vantage to the steep north cirque of Culebra. This jutting peak, dark in shadow, promises considerably more effort than I am able to summon given my six-month battle with cancer and a debilitating chemo treatment five days before our hike. A glance around reveals a few hikers crossing a saddle of scree toward the summit, but there’s no sight of my hiking buddies.

Unbeknown to me, Conover and Cheslock have passed my bivvy and, assuming I’m in the lead, they continue across the saddle and begin picking their way up the long, rocky ridge toward the peak — which, at 14,000 feet, is no mean achievement. They assume we will celebrate together at the top, but I’m nowhere to be seen when they get there. Baffled and a bit concerned, they join five women sheltering behind a wall of stacked rock that offers the only windbreak. They eagerly inquire about their missing friend, to no avail.

Given the teeth-chattering, finger-numbing cold, I assume Conover and Cheslock have turned back, so I begin the long descent to the trailhead, which I reach about two hours before they do. I gaze north toward distant Blanca Peak to where the ground falls away and stretches out into the valley below, but there are no hikers. Much of the foreground, I realize, defines the private holdings of Cielo Vista Ranch and reaches back to the first human populations in Colorado.

Disputed land and deep history

The story of this vast territory, published as an extensive history on the Cielo Vista Ranch website, goes far beyond the past several centuries to long before the San Luis Valley was permanently settled. The region was traversed by a wide range of indigenous peoples, from Folsom cultures thousands of years ago to Apache, Navajo, Pueblo and Ute peoples in more recent times.

The ranch website states that the valley was prehistorically used more as a corridor than as a site of a permanent community when hunter-gatherers hunted bison here more than 10,000 years ago. By the 15th century, nomadic tribes — Apache, Comanche, Kiowa, Arapaho, Cheyenne and Ute — frequented the valley. 

In 1540, Francisco Vásquez de Coronado set out from Compostela in New Spain (Mexico) and conquered native pueblos near modern-day Santa Fe, New Mexico, claiming all lands to the north, including Colorado, for the Kingdom of Spain. By the 17th century, Santa Fe had been established bringing Spanish imperial domination of native peoples by enslaving many, while also facilitating the acquisition of the horse by the Utes, the first Native Americans to enjoy rapid mobility, hunting prowess and warrior superiority on horseback. 

The first American description of the San Luis Valley was offered by explorer Zebulon Pike in 1807. After trying and failing to climb Pikes Peak, the expedition moved southwest into Spanish territory in the San Luis Valley. “The great and lofty mountains seemed to surround the luxuriant vale, crowned with perennial flowers, like a terrestrial paradise, shut out from the view of man,” Pike wrote in his journal.

After winning independence from Spain in 1821, the new nation of Mexico used land grants to encourage the occupation of its northern frontier as a bulwark against rising American influence in the Southwest. Under the land-grant system, families were given plots to build homes, while large swaths of surrounding land held in common ownership were set aside for hunting, grazing and other community needs. All seven of Colorado’s major land grants were awarded by the Mexican government after 1821. 

In 1833, the Mexican government awarded the Conejos Grant, roughly spanning land between the Rio Grande River and Conejos Creek, near present-day Alamosa, to 50 families. Other Mexican land grants in the valley included the Beaubien-Miranda Grant (later known as the Maxwell), the Luis Maria Baca Grant No. 4 and the Sangre de Cristo Grant, which later became Costilla County and part of northern New Mexico.

The Mexican land grant encompassing Cielo Vista Ranch dates to 1844. Soon after, the land became part of the United States. A decree in 1863 saw the establishment of Settler Rights, guaranteeing that homesteaders who came to the territory through the land-grant process would enjoy access to the mountain lands for grazing, firewood and timber in perpetuity. In 1864, the land grant was sold to Colorado’s first territorial governor, William Gilpin. He agreed to honor traditional land-use rights, and yet the die was cast for privatization of a historic commons.

Almost a century passed when, in 1960, North Carolina timber baron Jack Taylor purchased the ranch, fenced off part of it, and denied local access, leading to decades of range war tension, including lawsuits, violence and ongoing disputes. Known as the Taylor Ranch or “La Sierra,” it was sold in the 1980s to former Enron executive Lou Pai, then sold in 2004 to Texas investors, who renamed it Cielo Vista. The property currently encompasses more than 100 square miles of the Sangre de Cristo Mountains.

The access war was supposedly settled in 2002 when the Colorado Supreme Court (in Lobato v. Taylor) upheld the historic rights of local heirs to use the land for timber and grazing, but not for hunting or fishing. In 2017, Harrison purchased the ranch from the Texas consortium. In 2018, he announced an end to access restrictions and pledged to work cooperatively with local and indigenous claimants to the land, yet soon after, he initiated construction of the fence that would become just the latest flashpoint in a long history of conflict over who belongs. 

Today, the ranch is navigating the balance between private ownership and the established, court-ordered access rights of more than 5,000 descendants of the original Spanish and Native Americans who hold claims on the land. “The history of the San Luis Valley is a living mosaic of many people over the last 10,000 years,” states the ranch website.

As I wait for my hiking companions at the trailhead, I contemplate our curious place on this particular day in that mosaic. After Conover, Cheslock and I regroup, relieved to see one another, we bump and bounce down the jeep road, sign out at the ranch office and exit the gate. Cold beer and spicy enchiladas at Mrs. Rios restaurant in San Luis restores tired bodies. A final night at Conover’s ends on the deck with a last, long gaze at storm-shrouded Culebra Peak.

The next day, driving back home to Basalt over Independence Pass, I’m musing over the private nature of Culebra while passing the La Plata Peak (14,336 feet) trailhead on a bluebird Sunday. Cars have overflowed the parking area, and dozens are parked helter-skelter on both sides of Independence Pass road. I envision a conga line of hikers trekking up the beaten route to the summit and realize that perhaps there is a silver lining to restricting foot traffic on a trail-less, privately owned 14er.

This story was updated to reflect that La Puente serves multiple counties in the San Luis Valley and to clarify the distinction between “the prairie” and other areas of the San Luis Valley.

This final installment of Paul Andersen’s series for Aspen Journalism on public lands. To read the rest of the series, visit aspenjournalism.org/tag/corruption-of-the-commons and keep an eye out for a future volume binding the stories together.

Aspen Journalism is a nonprofit, investigative news organization covering water, environment, history and more.

The post Colorado’s private 14er appeared first on Aspen Journalism.

Eighty years after the installation of Lift One, 55 years after it was replaced with Lift 1A, and decades after the debate began about the future of Aspen Mountain’s western base, the birthplace of modern skiing in Aspen is about to be transformed, as detailed in a much anticipated construction sequencing agreement between two lodging developers, the Aspen Skiing Co. and the city of Aspen. 

Long seen as a quiet neighborhood beloved by ski bums and nostalgics, the Lift One corridor at the end of South Aspen Street is poised to become a destination for luxury lodging and public amenities, with a nod to skiing’s past. But it’ll likely be at least three winters before a lift is spinning there again. 

If all goes according to the construction sequencing plan finalized July 31, crews over the next four-plus years will spring up a new Aman Aspen hotel and a Chalet Alpina complex of timeshares and residences, relocate and restore the historic Skiers Chalet buildings, and spruce up parks and public infrastructure. Among it all, they’ll incorporate new ski-area facilities, restaurants, gathering spaces and a long-awaited snowsports museum. 

A new ski lift, stretching down to Dean Street by the original base of Lift One, is the centerpiece of the plans, which voters narrowly approved in 2019. Long framed as this project’s raison d’etre, a revival of Aspen’s skiing roots for a new era, proponents said the new lift wouldn’t happen without redevelopment at the base, and its installation became entwined with the pitch for everything else, as others lamented the loss of “old Aspen” those changes would represent. 

The process by which the new lift gets ordered, installed and opened is a “critical aspect” of the project, according to the sequencing agreement that requires four different parties to coordinate on construction, and it depends on substantial progress on both the Aman Aspen and Chalet Alpina projects. 

Based on an estimated timeline in this agreement, the Aspen Skiing Co. would order the lift in the fall of 2028, install it in 2029 and cut the ribbon in the winter of 2029-30. SkiCo is already in the process of removing Lift 1A in anticipation of upcoming permits and construction for the lodging projects, and Chalet Alpina crews have removed the remains of the original Lift One for storage and restoration offsite, with plans for eventual reinstallation and display in the corridor. 

In the meantime, skiers and riders will have to take the Silver Queen Gondola or the new Nell Bell lift up the mountain from Gondola Plaza, the ski area’s busier base to the east. However, they could still have the option to ski down to the Lift One corridor and exit the slopes there. The agreement requires Aman Aspen crews to maintain a ski corridor past the site throughout construction, and SkiCo intends to maintain Schuss Gully to get there “as conditions allow,” Mak Keeling, the company’s vice president of mountain planning, wrote in an email. (Two other nearby runs, Norway and Normandy, will be closed.)

City of Aspen Community Development Director Ben Anderson wrote to Aspen Journalism on Tuesday that the next phases of building permits for Chalet Alpina and Aman Aspen are “likely imminent.” This sequencing agreement — signed by representatives of the city, SkiCo and both lodging projects, and finalized July 31 — was the key to moving forward. 

“Starting very soon,” Anderson wrote, “the entire area will have significant disruption.”

“Significant,” yes, but potentially less impactful than it would have been in the absence of a coordinated plan. This agreement affirms that SkiCo, the city, and the respective developers of Chalet Alpina and Aman Aspen “are resolved to complete the entire Lift One corridor project in the shortest amount of time reasonably possible,” and that they’ll work together to ensure “minimal disruptions” to the ski area, construction progress, and the city and its public spaces. They’ll meet every two weeks for the duration of the project to give updates and coordinate. As long as the developers of Chalet Alpina and Aman Aspen fulfill their conditions to get the site ready for a new lift, SkiCo will open it as soon as the company is able to do so safely. 

The agreement gives everyone good reason to stay on track: In addition to the benefits of mutually agreed-upon progress, both SkiCo and lodging developers could face steep fees if they cause certain delays that impact the new lift. 

“As a member of the Aspen community, Chalet Alpina, alongside the corresponding parties, is committed to fulfilling its obligations under the agreement, coordinating closely with its partners and minimizing disruption throughout construction,” according to a statement from a Chalet Alpina representative. A public relations representative for Aman did not provide a statement or answers to specific questions before deadline. 

According to the estimated sequence in this new agreement, both lodging projects could begin shoring and excavation this year. Chalet Alpina could hit that milestone first, as their crews have already completed some work on utilities and prep for the historic assets; Aman Aspen needs to do some access and infrastructure work before really digging in. 

The Aman Aspen building would start to take shape next year, starting with its subgrade structure that includes a parking garage. Chalet Alpina would begin work on its subgrade structure — which also includes a parking garage — early next year, and its main buildings will start to spring up in 2028. 

Chalet Alpina’s section of the current schedule indicates an interior finish by the summer of 2030; Aman Aspen’s section doesn’t include that specific milestone, but it indicates that it will at least have the building enclosed by the fall of 2028 with some functioning fire alarms and sprinkler systems by the summer of 2029. The city of Aspen’s work on parks and public infrastructure is all pegged for 2029. 

What will happen when

This agreement has been in negotiations for years, and outlines more than 50 milestones distributed among the city, SkiCo, Aman Aspen and Chalet Alpina projects. 

The estimated schedule isn’t a legally binding commitment to a certain timeline: The agreement recognizes that it might evolve as construction proceeds, and notes that progress depends on — among other factors — the city’s building permit process. The schedule indicated that Chalet Alpina would get its shoring and excavation permit and that Aman Aspen would get its access and infrastructure permit by July 15; as of Tuesday, neither permit had been issued, but they are expected soon.

Chalet Alpina developers have received a notice of approval for some updates to their plans that the city deemed “insubstantial” in nature, authorizing a 27-unit timeshare design with rooms that can lock off into 104 “lodge keys.” The lodging component was previously planned for 34 units and the same number of keys, and was envisioned in a 2023 Subdivision/Planned Development Agreement as a combination of hotel and timeshare units. Developers requested last year to move to a 100% fractional-ownership model for the lodging units. The city has ensured in its approval conditions that the rooms can be rented to the general public when available; Anderson signed the notice Aug. 4. 

The fact that this construction sequencing agreement is also signed off and recorded is a big deal, because it “clears the path for commencement and completion” of the Chalet Alpina and Aman Aspen projects, the agreement says. Although the city gave Chalet Alpina a permit to start some prep work last September, it wouldn’t release any more permits for either project until this agreement was locked in. 

SkiCo started taking down Lift 1A the same week the sequencing agreement was finalized in late July. SkiCo’s Keeling wrote to Aspen Journalism on Tuesday that the “first step” for the Aman Aspen project “is to relocate the utilities adjacent to their project,” and that “the relocated utilities required the removal of the bottom terminal of 1A.” 

Other milestones will affect when SkiCo can install and operate the new lift. 

The base terminal for the new lift sits on top of a “base pad” that sits on top of Chalet Alpina’s subgrade structure. So, construction crews have to dig out and build the subgrade structure first — then build the base pad on top of it — before SkiCo can put in that part of the lift. 

One of the towers for the new lift is planned “adjacent to and potentially structurally integrated into the foundation” of the Aman Aspen hotel, this agreement says. SkiCo reps and Aman Aspen developers still have some details to hammer out on those plans. 

The Colorado Passenger Tramway Safety Board also has some rules for operating a chairlift or gondola close to other structures, such as maintaining a certain amount of “air space” and ensuring that nearby buildings have fire alarms and sprinkler systems in place.

In order for a new lift to debut, both the Chalet Alpina and Aman Aspen projects need to be far enough along that their main buildings are “enclosed” — that is, not just hulking foundations and frames but buildings with roofs and walls on the outside — and that those buildings have initial fire alarms and sprinklers “installed or otherwise addressed” to the satisfaction of the safety board, according to this agreement. Construction on the lodging projects could continue after the lift starts spinning, as well; this agreement considers the implications and seeks to avoid ski-season disruptions as much as possible. 

SkiCo needs a continuous seven-month window in the warmer months to install the new lift, and in turn needs some headway to order that lift in advance. So, this agreement requires both developers to issue “greenlight notices” — essentially, telling SkiCo that it can place that order — by the fall before an installation year. Unlike the estimated timeline in this agreement, those notices trigger binding obligations, requiring developers to finish certain parts of their projects by specified deadlines. 

Based on a lift installation in 2029 and a debut in the 2029-30 ski season, developers would give SkiCo those notices by Oct. 31, 2028, and SkiCo would order the lift in November for installation starting the next April or May, depending on snow conditions. 

If either developer doesn’t deliver their notices by Oct. 31, the whole process gets punted a year. They have a couple years of leeway, but if they still haven’t done so by that date in 2031, they have to pay the price: $3.5 million a year as a “greenlight extension fee.” If both developers haven’t delivered their notices by Oct. 31, 2033, SkiCo is allowed to apply to the city for approval of an alternative lift-installation plan for the Lift One corridor. 

There are also consequences if developers issue the greenlight notice but don’t fulfill their remaining conditions for SkiCo to install and operate the lift on time. Those fees start at $25,000 per day in December — either Dec. 1 or the first day of top-to-bottom skiing on Ajax, whichever is later — and escalate to $50,000 by the end of the first ski season, a rate that holds in subsequent winters if the delays continue. If both developers haven’t fulfilled their conditions, they each pay 50% of the bill; if just one developer is delayed, they have to pay the full amount. 

The agreement includes some provisions for early installation of the lift before all the greenlight conditions are fulfilled, but those options are only available to SkiCo if either lodging developer (or both) stalls out for at least 12 months. The base pad on the Chalet Alpina site would still have to be finished before the new lift goes in. And developers would get a few months to restart construction with a “good faith intention” to finish before SkiCo could proceed with an early installation.

This agreement puts SkiCo on the hook, too: If developers do everything they’re required to do for the lift to run, and SkiCo delays their work so the lift doesn’t start regular operations by “Dec. 15 or the opening of Aspen Mountain for top-to-bottom skiing for the subject ski season” — whichever is later — the company will owe each of the development teams $15,000 per day until it opens the lift. 

These fees apply only during the ski season, deemed to end April 15. And they max out at $18.36 million for each of the lodging teams, and $4.05 million for SkiCo to the developers. Those amounts would reflect, on behalf of any party, multiple years of delays. And the fees wouldn’t apply if the projects get delayed by “force majeure” events, including “acts of god, fire, floods” and other similar events outside a party’s reasonable control. 

SkiCo’s payment to developers only applies if the lodging property is open for regular business. The ski-in, ski-out nature of the corridor is a major selling point: Chalet Alpina’s website, for example, has leaned heavily into the property’s relationship with the mountain and the lift. 

“Chalet Alpina’s Resort Residences sit directly on Aspen Mountain, with true ski-in, ski-out access — a privilege only a handful of properties in Aspen can claim,” its website states. The Aspen Historical Society makes note of that lift access, too, in materials about its plans for a museum.     

“To have the Aspen Snowsports History Museum at Skiers Chalet at the place where lift-served skiing began in Aspen — and still continues — in a historical former ski lodge makes perfect sense,” the historical society’s Murphy wrote to Aspen Journalism. “The museum will be surrounded by the energy of the slopes and will be a gathering spot for the community and its visitors.” 

Installing the lift any earlier than the schedule in this agreement would depend “on many factors — largely the construction progress of the two developers,” according to SkiCo’s Keeling. The fees, he wrote, are meant to “incentivize all parties to the swiftest possible completion of their respective work.”

“We — along with the community — want to see this work done as quickly as possible.” 

The post Lift One corridor construction plan anticipates three years before new lift opens  appeared first on Aspen Journalism.

On a hot and sunny morning in August, a group of nine paddlers pushed their duckies and stand-up paddle boards into the Colorado River at Harky’s boat launch in Palisade. 

The goal of the float was to experience and document the river at one of the lowest levels it has ever seen. With flows hovering around 93 cfs, a bathtub ring showed on the rocks along the riverbank and rusty hunks of old farm equipment emerged from the streambed. Bright green algae grew between the rocks, and herons and ospreys hunted in the shallows. 

In many places, paddlers got hung up on rocks and were forced to drag their watercrafts through the ankle-deep water. It took about four hours to float the roughly six-and-a-half miles from Palisade to Corn Lake, a trip that normally takes two to three hours with higher flows.

The trip was organized by Joel Sholtes, a water resources engineering instructor at Colorado Mesa University and a coordinator for the Grand Valley River Corridor Initiative. 

“I knew that the river would kind of be on life support and maybe even dry up so I wanted to get out on the river with the people that were involved in managing its flow and experience the 15-mile reach at such a historically low level,” Sholtes said. “It just felt important to be on it and see it both from a habitat standpoint and from a user experience standpoint.”

The Colorado River and its water users are now experiencing the consequences of the lowest winter snowpack on record, exceptionally hot temperatures and resulting low streamflows. The impacts are being felt across Colorado as farmers and ranchers have their irrigation water cut, cities and towns impose severe water restrictions on their customers and flows dwindle in stretches of river that are critical habitat for the ecosystem. 

The stretch of the Colorado River between the large agricultural diversions in Palisade and the downstream confluence with the Gunnison River is known as the 15-mile reach. This chronically depleted section is also home to endangered fish. Water managers work each year to keep enough flows for fish by coordinating carefully timed releases from upstream reservoirs.

This year’s historic drought makes keeping enough water in this reach more challenging than usual. The recovery program has pools of water dedicated to the fish in Lake Granby and Ruedi Reservoir that it releases specifically to boost flows in the 15-mile reach, but because of the dry conditions, less of that water is available. According to the Colorado Division of Water Resources, the average August flows in the 15-mile reach have been about 119 cfs this year, far below the 810 cfs target set by the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program. 

The program’s Instream Flow Coordinator David Graf told water managers on a conference call Wednesday that the program is trying to keep 75 cfs in the river through the end of August. Graf said the program was responsible for about 70% of the water in the river during Tuesday’s float; without it, flows could have dipped to around just 25 cfs.

“We are so far below the recommended flows anywhere in the Colorado River basin right now,” Graf said. “Keeping water in there is valuable; it takes a village.”

Irrigators reduce diversions

Nearly all of the river’s flows are being diverted to the Grand Valley’s agricultural producers. Colorado River water transforms the valley’s desert into a ribbon of verdant peach orchards, vineyards, corn and alfalfa fields. The valley’s irrigation districts can collectively draw 1,950 cfs from the river, but this year, they have reduced that down to 1,450 cfs in an effort to save some water for later in the season. 

“We collectively set the target flow lower for the sole purpose of extending to gain and accrue some storage,” said Jackie Fisher, manager of Orchard Mesa Irrigation District. “We had none at the beginning of the year and it became super critical to talk with our partners and say, what can we live on now because we knew we needed it two or three months later.”

Late summer is a crucial time for irrigators because the high flows of spring runoff have come and gone, but hot temperatures drive up the amount of water needed by crops. Irrigators often depend on releasing water stored in upstream reservoirs during this time to supplement low river flows. This year, spring runoff peaked weeks early and a pool of water in Green Mountain Reservoir known as the Historic Users Pool did not fill, which created far-reaching impacts.

HUP water is released mainly to satisfy farmers and ranchers in the Grand Valley, which hold the senior, commanding water rights on the river. The HUP also protects other water users, known as HUP beneficiaries, because without the releases from Green Mountain to supplement the Grand Valley, these other users could have to cut back. 

Entities that own or lease stored water, like the Colorado River Water Conservation District, the Colorado Water Trust, Grand County and Northern Water, among others, have pitched in this year to contribute extra acre-feet to Grand Valley irrigators. But even with collaboration and water sharing, Grand Valley Water Users Association General Manager Tina Bergonzini said they cannot guarantee water deliveries to their farmers after September 1. Irrigation season typically goes through Oct. 31. 

“It probably sounds a little melodramatic to say, but it’s not: It’s literally the first time in 111 years that we’ve run out of water in the Grand Valley Water Users Association,” Bergonzini said. “I’ve done my best and my staff has done their best to make sure that our producers and our residents that are under our system are aware that we could get to the point that we have unreliable delivery.”

GVWUA irrigators have been on restriction all season and the association has been taking just 500 of its 730 cfs water right. Bergonzini said many of her producers have switched to less thirsty crops this year like triticale and Sudangrass, instead of corn and alfalfa, and have made adjustments to the way they irrigate to adapt to less water. 

Heading into the fall with unreliable water is a scary scenario for some, Bergonzini said. It’s the time of year when some farmers plant winter crops and have a need for lots of water.

“We’ve tried to make sure everybody is prepared and that’s really all we can do,” she said. 

As water managers grapple with how to stretch this year’s meager flows as far as possible, Sholtes said from a recreation and quality of life standpoint, the Colorado River still provides so much value to the community – even when it’s barely flowing.

“I think it’s important to know that even in drought conditions, the river is accessible and enjoyable,” he said. “It’s my interest as a citizen in the Grand Valley, and as a scientist, to have a river that works for everyone, and to have growth and use that is compatible with the river ecosystem.”

The post How low can the Colorado River go? A slow float on the 15-mile reach appeared first on Aspen Journalism.