As the Upper and Lower Basin states of the Colorado River fight amongst themselves —and with the federal government — over new rules for the over-allocated river, an idea that's been around for a while may be gaining some steam.
It's called Fill Mead First, which essentially aims to says that if there isn't enough water in the Colorado River's two main reservoirs — Powell and Mead — why not think about consolidating the water that is there in Lake Mead? This effort would save that reservoir, supporters say, and also give Glen Canyon a chance to restore itself.
Needless to say, this would likely be a difficult plan to pull off — both logistically and politically. But that doesn't stop advocates like Eric Balken, executive director of Glen Canyon Institute, from making their case.
Balken joined The Show to talk more about it.
Full conversation
MARK BRODIE: Eric, it seems like it's safe to say that we're kind of at this point, right? Like, there isn't enough water to fill both reservoirs.
ERIC BALKEN: Yeah, and, you know, it's interesting that you say that because the Fill Mead First concept, as we kind of put it together in the late-2000s, this was a point in time where the idea that climate change was impacting the system, that's when people really started to grasp that concept. So, that's when Powell and Mead, you know, they really dropped dramatically from 2000 to 2005. They sort of rebounded in the late-2000s.
But that's when we started to see some really good science come out. There was a paper from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography titled, "When Will Lake Mead Go Dry?" That was a bombshell paper, and it really changed the conversation around Colorado River management. Nowadays, right, if you look at where Powell and Mead are today, their combined storage has not been this low since 1957.
So, we're in a situation where we have way too much storage. And on the ground, you know, these dams, this water infrastructure, it's being pushed to its limit. They were not designed to operate at low levels. So, now there's an infrastructure component of this conversation as well. So, saying Fill Mead First today is almost a misnomer, because you can't even fill Mead. A more appropriate way of saying it today would be Save Lake Mead.
MARK BRODIE: Why would Mead be the one to save as opposed to Powell?
ERIC BALKEN: If you were to poll all of the decision-makers and stakeholders in the Colorado River Basin and ask them which reservoir is more important, Powell or Mead, I would wager that most of them would say Lake Mead. It's a bigger reservoir. It generates more hydropower. It generates more tourism revenue.
The Las Vegas metro area pulls its water directly from the reservoir, in contrast to Lake Powell, where the only direct consumer of reservoir water is Page, Arizona, and the LeChee Chapter of the Navajo Nation.
Lake Mead plays a very different role in the basin. It is the top of the lower basin. It is very integral to how water works in the lower basin. Lake Powell and Glen Canyon Dam, that was built to send water to Lake Mead.
MARK BRODIE: So, one of the other things that folks who are advocating for this are talking about is that the amount of water that Lake Powell loses is just astronomical in terms of both evaporation and the water that sort of seeps into the sandstone that is at the bottom of Lake Powell, and that Mead is maybe a more shore-up reservoir, you wouldn't lose quite so much. Is that a valid argument for doing this, do you think?
ERIC BALKEN: It's part of the argument that should be considered when thinking about how to best store water in a declining hydrology. Now, it's notoriously difficult to calculate evaporation and seepage at reservoirs. The technology is getting better.
So, the question you're asking is, would it save water or would it lose water if we put all of the water in Powell down into Mead? The best available data that I'm aware of was from a study from Jack Schmidt at Utah State University from about 10 years ago. He estimated that Fill Mead First could save around 30,000 to 50,000 acre-feet of water.
It's a very complicated question to answer because you have to consider what the jumping-off point is. But the available data is suggesting that it would either be a break-even or it might even save some water.
MARK BRODIE: OK. Under this scenario, what would you ideally like to see happen to Lake Powell and Glen Canyon Dam?
ERIC BALKEN: So, what we have been advocating for is that the Bureau of Reclamation begin studying consolidating water storage in Lake Mead and studying modifications at Glen Canyon Dam, including bypass tunnels around the dam that would allow it to operate all the way down to river level. This would look similar to the original diversion tunnels that were built when the dam was first being constructed.
Because what's happening right now is that once the reservoir behind Glen Canyon Dam drops below the hydropower penstocks, the only way that water can get through the dam is through these four smaller tubes called the river outlet works. The river outlet works were not designed to be used full-time.
So, what we're asking the federal government to begin analyzing is, let's start looking at bypass tunnels around Glen Canyon Dam. You could keep the dam in place as a backup facility in case of a massive flood event or in the unlikely event that more water and a wetter hydrology returns. But this would allow water to flow freely through the Grand Canyon into Lake Mead. You could operate the reservoir at all levels, and you wouldn't have this sort of infrastructure limitation.
MARK BRODIE: So, under this scenario, would there be any water left in Lake Powell? And I mostly ask because, you know, you mentioned even though maybe there's more recreation and tourism on Lake Mead, I think the folks of Page, Arizona, would have something to say about that.
ERIC BALKEN: So, what becomes of Lake Powell Reservoir after that? That's a whole other conversation about, say that the dam is modified, say that you have the ability to bring the reservoir down to even lower levels or to run a river level. I think that's when you start to have that conversation with communities and stakeholders about what the future of Glen Canyon actually is.
There is not enough water in this river system to fill Powell and Mead. There's not enough water to fill even Lake Mead. There's not enough water to fill one of them. So, the future for Glen Canyon as we see it, we think it should be a national park with a free-flowing river. And I understand that there are a lot of people who love the reservoir and they have a lot of memories there, but it doesn't change the hydrology. It doesn't change the facts on the ground.
So, we don't think it makes sense to look at Glen Canyon as an empty storage tank anymore. We want people to start thinking of Glen Canyon as a living, breathing place.
MARK BRODIE: So, at the end of the day, I mean, it seems like the bottom line here is the thinking is one more full reservoir is better than two less full reservoirs. What odds do you give of this happening? Like, do you think at some point in the not-too-distant future, given where we are sort of hydrologically, climate-wise, politically, infrastructure, do you think that this has legs? Like, do you think this is going to happen?
ERIC BALKEN: I mean, if you look at where the hydrology is going and where the reservoirs are now, they're already on the brink. I think Mother Nature is pushing this idea on us faster than we're actually grappling with it.
I personally don't think Lake Powell will be there in 20 or 30 years. I just don't see how it could work. You know, I hear a lot of people when we post things online, they say, "Oh, fill Powell." It's like, I understand why you're saying that, but fill Powell with what? So, as climate continues to warm, as we see more pressure on this river system, I just think it's going to be politically less realistic to try to prop up Lake Powell while Lake Mead suffers.
MARK BRODIE: I mean, but with all the various sort of impediments to doing this, it seems like maybe it makes sense to do it, but it just seems like there's so many things that have to go right, so many challenges to overcome, that actually doing it would be difficult.
ERIC BALKEN: Well, things can change quickly, right? If you think about the Berlin Wall, for example, if you asked people two months before the Berlin Wall came down if that was going to happen, they'd probably say no. There were sort of things taking place around geopolitics and everything that slowly led to that sort of pivotal moment where it came down, and then everything changed all at once.
I think we're reaching our Berlin Wall moment at Glen Canyon Dam. I think once we really hit the critical elevation point and we really start to see Lake Mead continue to drop and we see that pressure on the lower basin states, you know, I just think that things are going to change whether we like it or not.
MARK BRODIE: All right. That is Eric Balken, executive director at the Glen Canyon Institute. Eric, thanks so much for the conversation.
ERIC BALKEN: Thanks, Mark. Great being on.
Copyright 2026 KJZZ News