1. The Future of the Colorado River – Business as Usual or ???
August 18, 2017
Don Ostler
Upper Colorado River Commission

3. WHO WE ARE Upper Colorado River Commission
- Interstate water administrative agency
- Representation from States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming and the US
- Deals with apportionments to UB States
- Deals with supply obligations to the LB States
- Deals with delivery obligations to Mexico
- Responsible for implementing curtailment of uses if required plus extraordinary drought notice
Compact Administrative Duties

4. Business as Usual 1922-2001 Supply greater than demand
States and basins did their own thing – independent
Compact interpretations less critical – no injury
Mexico was not part of the picture
Sometimes went to court
The lower basin developed quicker – uses grew
You might call this the “Mayberry” period

5. What happened along the way?
Experiences good and bad – we know a thing or two because we’ve seen a thing or two
Average demand exceeded the average supply in both upper and lower basin uses grew/ UB shortage
Severe drought - since 2000, 17 driest years on record
Prolonged reservoir decline
Basin study reality sets in – large supply/demand imbalance
Compact interpretations have become important

6. Current Use Estimates MAF/ year
Upper Basin uses incl. reservoir evap.
4.0 -
4.5
Lower Basin mainstream uses
7.5 -
7.5
Lower Basin reservoir evap.
1.0 -
1.5
Lower Basin tributaries
2.0 -
2.5
Total Lower Basin
10.5 -
11.5
Subtotal
14.5 -
16.0
Add Mexico
TOTAL
16.0 – 17.5

7. Hydrology comparison • 2000-2014 • 1988-2014 Basin Study CC
• GR
• PH
12.3 LF
13.2 LF
13.7 LF
14.8 LF
12.7 LF
CC –climate change GR – gage period NF PH – paleo-hydrology
Data from Reclamation’s Naturalized Flows database

8. Lake Mead Elevation Since 2000
January 2000
1,225
91% Active Storage
Structural
1,200
Deficit
1,175
1,150
12.52 MAF Release
WY 2011
1,125
1,100
1,075
1,050
Hydrology
1,025
1,000
975
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
24 Month
2014
2015
2P0ro1j6ected
2017
2018
2019
2020
Lake Mead Elevation (EOM)
Projected 24 Month
8.23 MAF Releases
First Shortage Tier

9. Water Budget at Lake Mead
Inflow maf
Release from Powell + side inflows
Outflow maf
Az, Ca, Nv, & Mx delivery + downstream gains and losses
Mead evaporation and losses maf
Balance maf
Given basic apportionments in the Lower Basin, the allotment to Mexico, and an average release from Lake Powell, Lake Mead storage declines about 12 feet each year

11. THE SYSTEM IS STRESSED
STRESS CREATES NEW OPPORTUNITIES

13. NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE UPPER BASIN
DROUGHT CONTINGENCY PLAN
Weather modification
Drought operations
Demand management?

14. WEATHER MODIFICATION

15. CRSP Drought Operations
Flaming Gorge Reservoir
Blue Mesa Reservoir
Navajo Reservoir
Agree on triggers and operations to implement under emergency conditions to maintain minimum power pool elevation at Lake Powell
By conserving water (temporarily) in Lake Powell or moving water available from upper CRSP facilities.
Lake Powell

16. Combined efforts bend the curve

17. Demand Management
Evaluate alternatives to facilitate temporary, voluntary, and compensated reductions in consumptive use through willing seller/willing buyer arrangements
Examples - temporary or rotational fallowing, municipal conservation, interruptible supply agreements, deficit irrigation of crop land, system efficiencies, conservation, etc.

18. What will the future demand?

20. THE FUTURE Already moved from business as usual
LB DCP - a good first step
Mexico participation is important
Augmentation must occur in large scale
Cooperation will become even more important
The Compact must continue to be the foundation
YOU AINT SEEN NOTHIN YET!

21. THANK YOU