Colorado Lawmakers Support Buying Shoshone Water Rights for River Flow

A majority of Colorado’s congressional leaders show support for $99 million Shoshone Water Rights purchase

The Shoshone hydroelectric power plant on the Colorado River in Glenwood Canyon has been idle for over a year. Despite this, the Shoshone water rights deal ensures the river’s full flow.
Zoe Goldstein/Vail Daily

Colorado lawmakers back the Colorado River District’s plan to buy Shoshone water rights.

On Oct. 7, six of the state’s congressional delegates sent a letter to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, supporting the district’s $40 million funding request from the Inflation Reduction Act for the $99 million Shoshone water rights acquisition.

Signed by U.S. Sens. Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper, and Reps. Joe Neguse, Jason Crow, Brittany Pettersen, and Diana DeGette, the letter highlights the importance of preserving Colorado River flows.



The Shoshone Power Plant, holding the oldest non-consumptive water rights on the Colorado River, accounts for 1 million acre-feet of water yearly. The Colorado River District aims to preserve these rights, having secured a deal with Xcel Energy for $98.5 million.

About $56.9 million has been raised, with $40 million sought from the Inflation Reduction Act’s drought mitigation funds. This proposal falls under the Bureau of Reclamation’s Upper Colorado River Basin Environmental Drought Mitigation funding opportunity, known as Bucket 2E.

“Preserving the historical flow regime of the Colorado River through the Shoshone Permanency Project will benefit the ecosystem, especially during dry years,” stated the letter to the Bureau of Reclamation.

Approval from the Colorado Water Conservation Board and the State of Colorado Water Court is needed for the water rights transfer. The River District is gathering historical data on water flows for a thorough review.

Lindsay DeFrates, deputy director of public relations, noted the necessity of proving non-injury and not enlarging rights during water court proceedings.

Northern Water, a Front Range end user, has voiced concerns, seeking an independent review. Northern Water detailed its concerns in a letter to Hickenlooper, while the River District issued a response.

“We believe our proposal safeguards historical flow regimes and benefits the state without disrupting operations,” the River District stated.

author avatar
Editorial Staff

Latest News