Publications

Power on Public Lands: Comparing Federal Energy Revenue Sharing and Opportunities for Reform

Annie Carlozzi — Mon, 19 Oct 2026 02:51:21 +0000

Power on Public Lands: Comparing Federal Energy Revenue Sharing and Opportunities for Reform Annie Carlozzi Sun, 10/18/2026 - 20:51

Mallory Tope-Lewis

Power on Public Lands: Comparing Federal Energy Revenue Sharing and Opportunities for Reform is a new Getches-Wilkinson Center report examining federal energy revenue-sharing policies and opportunities for legislative reform. For decades, oil and gas development on federal public lands has generated billions of dollars supporting state and local governments and important water infrastructure across the West. As renewable energy development on public lands becomes increasingly important to meeting the nation's energy and emissions-reduction goals, how can federal policies ensure that these projects deliver comparable economic and public benefits?

This new paper compares the long-established revenue-sharing framework for oil and gas development under the Mineral Leasing Act with the new framework established for renewable energy under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025. It analyzes key differences in how revenues are generated, distributed, and reinvested, and highlights shortcomings in the current renewable energy framework. The paper also proposes legislative reforms to increase state and local revenue sharing and establish a dedicated fund to support clean energy infrastructure and long-term transition needs. For policymakers, researchers, and other stakeholders interested in renewable energy development on federal public lands, this report provides an analysis of the evolving federal revenue-sharing framework and opportunities to better align renewable energy development with local economic benefits and long-term public investment.

Report author: Mallory Tope-Lewis, Colorado Law Student, Getches-Wilkinson Center Student Research Assistant

Read Power on Public Lands: Comparing Federal Energy Revenue Sharing and Opportunities for Reform

Off

Traditional

White

2026 Colorado River Conference Summary

Annie Carlozzi — Wed, 12 Aug 2026 20:21:14 +0000

2026 Colorado River Conference Summary Annie Carlozzi Wed, 08/12/2026 - 14:21

Emilia Endara

The Getches-Wilkinson Center has published a comprehensive report documenting discussions from the 46th Annual Colorado Law Conference on Natural Resources Law. Held in partnership with the Water & Tribes Initiative, this landmark event gathered 505 in-person and remote participants to address shared challenges and evolving management on the Colorado River.

As negotiations for post-2026 river guidelines face ongoing gridlock over shortages and conservation obligations, this new publication preserves the diverse stories and lessons shared by top decision-makers. The report serves as a roadmap for navigating the river's ecological and structural changes.

Report authors: Emilia Endara, Colorado Law Student and Getches-Wilkinson Center Research Assistant and Doug Kenney, Ph.D., Director of Getches-Wilkinson Center’s Western Water Policy Program

Read the full conference summary here.

Cover image by John Weisheit.

Off

Traditional

White

Thirst for Data: State Responses to Data Center Water Use

Annie Carlozzi — Thu, 09 Jul 2026 23:11:18 +0000

Thirst for Data: State Responses to Data Center Water Use Annie Carlozzi Thu, 07/09/2026 - 17:11

Daniel Anderson

Thirst for Data: State Responses to Data Center Water Use is a new Getches-Wilkinson Center report on Artificial Intelligence, water, and legal reform. AI is fueling a data center development boom—but what does it mean for our water future? Data centers consume large amounts of water, are increasingly located in the arid West, and are projected to grow exponentially in the coming years. With the federal government standing aside, states are struggling to respond swiftly and effectively to their citizens' concerns. This new paper examines emerging state legislation across the country, identifying four major water policy approaches: reporting, conservation, incentives, and prior appropriation requirements. Whether you're a policymaker, researcher, industry leader, or concerned citizen, this analysis offers a timely snapshot at one of the fastest-evolving intersections of technology and water policy.

Report authors: Daniel Anderson, J.D., Getches-Wilkinson Water Law Fellow and Sydney Stellato, Colorado Law Student, Conscience Bay Company Western Water Policy Fellow

Read Thirst for Data: State Responses to Data Center Water Use

Off

Traditional

White

Colorado River Insights, 2025: Dancing with Deadpool

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Contributors

Colorado River Research Group (CRRG) Members

Bonnie Colby, Professor, University of Arizona.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Guest Contributors

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

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

John Berggren, Regional Policy Manager, Western Resource Advocates.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Off

Traditional

White

GWC Works with Law Professors Across the West to Weigh in on Public Lands Rule

Annie Carlozzi — Wed, 12 Nov 2025 16:03:17 +0000

GWC Works with Law Professors Across the West to Weigh in on Public Lands Rule Annie Carlozzi Wed, 11/12/2025 - 09:03

In 2024, the Bureau of Land Management issue a new set of regulations that would guide its oversight of 245 million acres of federal public lands. Known as the “Public Lands Rule,” the regulations implement the “multiple use and sustained yield” framework adopted by Congress in the Federal Land Policy & Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA). The 2024 regulations clarify BLM’s mission to focus on stewardship of public resources by managing for long-term ecological health and resilience, which will protect the interests of the American public in a sustained yield of renewable and non-renewable resources. The intent of the Rule is to ensure that BLM treats conservation of public resources on par with other multiple uses.

The Rule is well-grounded in FLPMA, which directs BLM to manage the public lands for the long-term interests of the American public without allowing for permanent impairment of the land and the quality of the environment. The Rule does not direct BLM to allow or disallow any specific uses at any particular place, but rather it sets forth a framework for how landscape health will be measured and tracked over time, and how natural resources will be protected when BLM considers potential uses of public lands.

With the change in Administration, BLM recently proposed to rescind the Public Lands Rule, asserting that it was conflict with BLM’s statutory authorities in FLPMA. The public notice did not provide much detail on the alleged statutory conflict, but BLM stated its intent to rescind the Rule in whole.

GWC recently submitted comments on the proposed rollback of the Public Lands Rule and worked with law professors across the west to ensure that BLM correctly interprets and applies the multiple use and sustained yield of FLPMA. When Congress passed this bedrock law in 1976, it clearly delegated to the Secretary of the Interior the discretion to decide which uses will be allowed to strike the correct balance between extraction and protection of natural resources. The law professors weighed in to protect the integrity of FLPMA and to uphold the authority of BLM to carefully manage and protect our shared natural resources.

Read submitted comments here.

Off

Traditional

White

Behind the Scenes: Bringing the Martz Symposium Back to Life in Print

Annie Carlozzi — Fri, 20 Jun 2025 13:02:47 +0000

Behind the Scenes: Bringing the Martz Symposium Back to Life in Print Annie Carlozzi Fri, 06/20/2025 - 07:02

Oliver Skelly

A look inside the editorial process that transformed two days of dialogue into Volume 36, Issue 2 of the Colorado Environmental Law Journal

After a five-year pandemic-induced hiatus, the Martz Symposium on Public Lands returned to the University of Colorado Law School this past October with renewed vigor and urgency. Now, just months later, we're proud to share how those conversations made their way into the pages of the Colorado Environmental Law Journal. Many thanks to our authors, S. James Anaya, Matt Dietz, Alison Flint, Travis Belote, Monte Mils, Martin Nie, and Sarah Matsumoto, for their excellent work throughout the process.

Yet the process of turning conversations into law review articles is no simple feat. The transition from symposium presentations to law review articles presents unique editorial challenges. Read on for an assuredly riveting “behind the scenes” look on what happened in the Journal suite over the last six months to make it all happen.

From Spoken Word to Scholarly Articles

First up is tracking down your authors. This usually begins as a “call for submissions” and, if the conference’s listserv doesn’t heed the call, can often end as a “please, please, please write something for us.” Fortunately for yours truly, the 2024 Martz Symposium’s panelists and moderators—Mills, Flint, Matsumoto, and Anaya, to be specific—promptly offered up their ideas and commitments.

Once the authors are selected, the waiting game begins because, unlike the usual process where we selected pre-written articles, symposium selections will be written after the fact (i.e., the event), and generally on the subject the author presented on. Again, trepidation set in as the first-draft December deadline grew nearer; again, our authors came through.

Bear with me here because it’s about to get really interesting. The editing process is as follows: two rounds of substantive edits, onto cite checks and then a copy edit / page proof finish. The latter two rounds are where law journals across the country win their notoriety. Imagine the most monotonous task you do daily, multiply its monotony by five, then find a rule to cite for why you do it. And then do that task several hundred times over the course of a month. That’s our bread and butter, baby.

Jokes aside, these editorial rounds are what allow for law review articles to be relied upon when writing the law—be it legislators or judges. Without a swarm of staff writers and editors to do that sort of rigorous fact checking, the articles’ value to the legal field would be greatly diminished.

Bridging Academia and Practice

Nevertheless, the value in this issue’s contents was apparent from the get-go. We were very fortunate to work with an esteemed group of authors covering a breadth of practice areas. Take it from my very own editor’s note:

Issue 2 opens with S. James Anaya's incisive and experiential analysis of the International Council on Mining and Metals' 2024 Position Statement on Indigenous Peoples, examining how the world's largest mining companies are grappling with their responsibilities toward Indigenous communities. Matt Dietz, Alison Flint, and Travis Belote of the Wilderness Society then present a compelling argument for the role of landscape intactness in the BLM’s multiple-use and sustained-yield mandate, tactfully striking that elusive literary balance between law and science. Professors Monte Mills and Martin Nie then offer up the first comprehensive framework for integrating tribal co-stewardship into federal public lands planning processes by addressing a critical, inequitable gap in the current planning approaches. Colorado Law’s very own Sarah Matsumoto rounds out the articles selection in the Pacific Northwest with an Oregonian exposé on the tension between legitimate wildfire management and its exploitation by industry.

The symposium issue doesn't just feature the distinguished speakers—it also showcases the Journal's student editors' own scholarship. Here’s me again, too lazy to paraphrase:

The Journal’s lead production editor, Lara Andenoro, kicks off the student notes with a weighty analysis of Held v. Montana and how state constitutional environmental rights provisions can serve as powerful tools for climate litigation. Next up is managing editor, Aidan Bodeo-Lomicky’s investigation into the Rice's whale—the world's most endangered baleen whale—illustrating the complex intersection of environmental protection and political change. Tying a bow on Volume 36 is lead notes editor, Mason Liddell, and his comparative analysis of the Lake Erie Bill of Rights and Happy the Elephant case, revealing the challenges facing rights-based environmental and animal advocacy.

Publication in a Changing Landscape

Perhaps the most challenging aspect of the editorial process was the rapidly changing political landscape. The Journal's commitment to publishing timely, relevant scholarship meant that articles required constant updates as policies shifted. This was particularly evident in pieces dealing with federal land management, where, as anyone who reads GWC blog posts knows, there has been some regulatory change afoot over the last six months.

Still, the team's dedication to accuracy and timeliness and the authors’ hard work in keeping us up to date meant that what began as symposium presentations slowly but surely evolved into forward-looking scholarship that remains relevant even as the political landscape continues to shift.

A Labor of Love

The Martz Symposium issue represents more than just a collection of articles—it's a testament to the power of bringing together diverse voices to address our most pressing environmental challenges. From the distinguished speakers who trusted the Journal with their ideas to the student editors who worked tirelessly to bring those ideas to print, Volume 36, Issue 2 stands as a collaborative achievement and capstone on the return of the Martz Symposium.

Now, go read it yourself!

Volume 36, Issue 2 of the Colorado Environmental Law Journal is now available at scholar.law.colorado.edu/celj. Recordings of the symposium presentations can be found on the Getches-Wilkinson Center's YouTube channel.

Off

Traditional

White

Rapid Assessment of the Senate’s Proposal to Sell Off Public Lands

Annie Carlozzi — Wed, 18 Jun 2025 16:59:32 +0000

Rapid Assessment of the Senate’s Proposal to Sell Off Public Lands Annie Carlozzi Wed, 06/18/2025 - 10:59

Colorado Law students at Corona Arch in Southeast Utah, which could be sold off to a private developer under the current proposal

Chris Winter

The Getches-Wilkinson Center has published a white paper that provides a rapid assessment of a proposal from the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee to mandate the sale of federal public lands. This proposal was being considered as a part of an expedited budget reconciliation process with little to no meaningful public engagement.

A Rapid Assessment of the Senate’s Proposal to Sell Off Public Lands

The updated white paper published on June 25, 2025 analyzes updated Senate language that was made available to the public on the same day.

The earlier version of the white paper dated June 18, 2025 can be viewed here.

On June 29, 2025, Senator Mike Lee from Utah announced that he was pulling the proposed sell-off of public lands form the budget reconciliation passage. His decision comes after several republican lawmakers from western states stated that they would oppose the reconciliation package if the sell-off was included in the bill.

Many million acres of public land were at risk under this proposal, and 1.2 million acres across the west could have be privatized in only 10 years. The resulting sell off would have threatened drinking water for rural communities, cultural resources valued by Tribes and Indigenous people, recreational access, wildlife habitat, and many other important ecosystem services that support rural economies and communities.

In addition, the sell-off proposal would have marked a dramatic departure from existing public land law and policy in the United States, which requires the retention of federal public lands and management of those resources according to multiple use, sustained yield principles for the benefit of the American public. Existing law carefully circumscribes when public lands can be sold to private parties, ensuring that those transactions are designed to further the public interest in public lands and that any proceeds are reinvested into conservation and recreation. The Senate ENR proposal would have waived these existing legal protections and instead sold off federal public land to fund the federal government and offset tax breaks.

If you have questions, please contact Chris Winter, Executive Director at chris.winter@colorado.edu.

Colorado Law students at Corona Arch in Southeast Utah, which could be sold off to a private developer under the current proposal

Off

Traditional

White

New GWC Scholarship Explores Renewables on Public Lands

Annie Carlozzi — Mon, 16 Jun 2025 15:40:07 +0000

New GWC Scholarship Explores Renewables on Public Lands Annie Carlozzi Mon, 06/16/2025 - 09:40

Chris Winter and Obie Johnson

The Getches-Wilkinson Center is pleased to announce the publication of a thought-provoking article, “Facilitating a Green Future? Permitting Reforms and Renewables on Public Lands,” co-authored by Chris Winter, Executive Director of the Getches-Wilkinson Center, and Obie Johnson, a Colorado Law student and Wyss Scholar.

The piece was featured as the lead article in the spring 2025 issue of the American Bar Association’s Natural Resources & Environment journal and explores recent federal permitting reforms aimed at expanding renewable energy development on federal public lands. In recent years, the United States has accelerated its transition to a clean energy future, increasing the demand for new wind, solar, and transmission infrastructure. The article discusses many of the legal and policy initiatives spearheaded by the Biden Administration to facilitate the development of clean energy infrastructure on public lands.

Winter and Johnson highlight the tension between the development of clean energy infrastructure and the need to protect wildlife habitat and other natural resource values. They evaluate recent permitting reforms implemented under the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and highlight how these new policies attempt to balance these important objectives across federal public lands.

Since the article was written, a new Administration that is less supportive of clean energy and conservation has taken office, prompting rapid changes to the legal and policy landscape. Despite these political dynamics, the long-term market trends still favor clean energy, though the full impacts of the Administration’s new policy agenda remain uncertain.

This publication reflects the GWC’s ongoing commitment to supporting scholarship and policy work that addresses the most pressing challenges in natural resources, energy, and environmental law. We are especially proud to highlight the contributions of student co-author Obie Johnson, whose work as a Wyss Scholar exemplifies the next generation of leadership in land conservation. The Wyss Scholars Program at Colorado Law School is made possible by the generous support and partnership of the Wyss Foundation.

Read the full article online:
Chris Winter and Obie Johnson, Facilitating a Green Future? Permitting Reforms and Renewables on Public Lands, ABA Natural Resources & Environment, Vol. 39, No. 1 (2025)

Read or download the full article PDF:
Chris Winter and Obie Johnson, Facilitating a Green Future? Permitting Reforms and Renewables on Public Lands, ABA Natural Resources & Environment, Vol. 39, No. 1 (2025)

To learn more about the GWC’s research and student programs, visit www.colorado.edu/center/gwc or contact us directly.

Off

Traditional

White

Getches-Wilkinson Center Defends the Endangered Species Act

Annie Carlozzi — Tue, 20 May 2025 14:41:41 +0000

Getches-Wilkinson Center Defends the Endangered Species Act Annie Carlozzi Tue, 05/20/2025 - 08:41

The Getches-Wilkinson Center recently partnered with almost 40 law professors from around the country to defend the Endangered Species Act from a regulatory rollback proposed by the Trump Administration. For more than 40 years, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has prohibited the modification of habitat that incidentally causes the “take” of a listed species. Thus, projects like timber sales, dam construction, water withdrawals, pesticide applications, construction projects and other activities that impact habitat for listed species have been regulated by FWS and subject to review and/or modification to mitigate impacts to the species and its habitat.

Recently, however, the Trump Administration is proposing to rollback these long-standing protections for habitat by redefining the term “harm” under the ESA, which is included in the definition of take. Since 1981, FWS has defined “harm” to include modification of habitat that actually harms or injures a listed species – i.e., harm that is “incidental” to otherwise lawful activity. Recently, however, the Trump Administration proposed to rescind that regulatory definition of harm and, in the process, significantly narrow the federal government’s interpretation of the ESA’s protections for imperiled species. Under this new interpretation of the statute, the ESA would prohibit only the “direct application of force” to a listed species and not impacts that result incidentally from modification of habitat.

GWC worked with the law professors to submit detailed comments opposing this new interpretation of the ESA and making two key points.

First, the law professors explained that the FWS’s interpretation of the statute – the definition of “take” – is incorrect. Sections 7 and 10 of the ESA create review and approval processes that explicitly apply to activities that modify habitat, thus demonstrating Congress’s clear intent to prohibit and regulate incidental take.

Second, the law professors explained that FWS must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and prepare an environmental impact statement prior to amending the ESA regulations. This substantive change to FWS’s interpretation of the ESA would have far reaching impacts to imperiled species across the country, and FWS must consider and disclose those environmental effects prior to amending the regulation.

You can read the comments here. Please reach out to GWC Executive Director Chris Winter if you have any questions on this evolving issue under the ESA.

Off

Traditional

White

Opening the Tap: Accessing EPA’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Water Assistance Programs

Anonymous — Mon, 28 Oct 2024 19:49:25 +0000

Opening the Tap: Accessing EPA’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Water Assistance Programs Anonymous (not verified) Mon, 10/28/2024 - 13:49

Frannie Monasterio

This resource—Opening the Tap—outlines Environmental Protection Agency programs established or funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) that provide financial or technical assistance for the many barriers drinking water or basic sanitation. For some communities, this barrier comes in form of non-existent water infrastructure. In others, existing infrastructure is no longer able to function as intended because it is in dire need of repairs or upgrades, or is threatened by disruptive events ranging from deep freezes and droughts to cyberattacks.

Opening the Tap is geared towards local community members and professionals alike who are working to improve access to clean drinking water and basic sanitation services no matter their needs or where they’re located. It provides basic information on whether those programs could apply to your situation, how to access those programs, and where you can turn for more information and assistance.

To ensure that this resource is accessible to everyone, it is organized as follows:

First, Opening the Tap lists contact information at EPA for specific programs designed to address drinking water or sewer wastewater challenges.
Second, this resource summarizes programs that were established by, or received significant funding from, BIL. The summary highlights potential recipients (for example, Tribes, municipal governments, or non-government organizations), categories of water projects (drinking water versus sewer wastewater), and project stages (for example, preconstruction or construction).
Third, additional information for each program found in the program summary, such as example activities a program is known to support, how to request assistance from those programs, and additional resources like websites or videos that may improve your understanding of the program, is explained in more detail in a series of program profiles.
Lastly, an Appendix lists every project type and activity that has been listed throughout this resource. The Appendix also lists whether that activity may be described with an alternative name (think “environmental review” versus “environmental assessments” versus “environmental evaluations”).

Opening the Tap is also meant to start a dialogue about how these programs can be improved. The projects and activities known to be supported by EPA’s water programs through BIL are listed. Perhaps this reveals that certain activities in popular demand aren’t currently being met by the existing landscape of assistance available. Are certain pockets of communities experiencing water insecurity ineligible for assistance in most of these programs? Are there potential areas of synergy between objectives surrounding water that can be uniquely realized, such as protection endangered species habitat while also protecting source water? To that end, I welcome any comments and questions about this resource. Reach out via gwc@colorado.edu.

Off

Traditional

White

Publications

Power on Public Lands: Comparing Federal Energy Revenue Sharing and Opportunities for Reform

Off

2026 Colorado River Conference Summary

Off

Thirst for Data: State Responses to Data Center Water Use

Off

Colorado River Insights, 2025: Dancing with Deadpool

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

Contents

Contributors

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

Off

GWC Works with Law Professors Across the West to Weigh in on Public Lands Rule

Off

Behind the Scenes: Bringing the Martz Symposium Back to Life in Print

Off

Rapid Assessment of the Senate’s Proposal to Sell Off Public Lands

Off

New GWC Scholarship Explores Renewables on Public Lands

Off

Getches-Wilkinson Center Defends the Endangered Species Act

Off

Opening the Tap: Accessing EPA’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Water Assistance Programs

Off

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

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