Water savings are critical to helping reduce Colorado’s potential municipal water gap of up to 740,000 acre-feet annually through 2050. Finding ways to reduce this gap is at the heart of the Colorado Water Plan and its focus on Transformative Landscape Change. The Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) is addressing how and why it’s important to transform landscapes through its year-long Urban Landscape Conservation Task Force initiative.

The diverse 21-member task force dug into the complex subject of landscape transformation, culminating in a final report that is available online at https://engagecwcb.org/urban-landscape-conservation-task-force. While the task force noted multiple reasons beyond water savings to promote landscape change, it also highlighted that water use within communities often represents a sizable percentage of a city’s water use. The task force promoted nonfunctional turf removal and other water conservation tools, including water budgets, tiered rate structures that incentivize low-water-use landscapes, land use codes and increased education and outreach.

While municipal water use is only 7 percent of state water use, and the outdoor component is likely 3 percent, the actual amount of water used to irrigate nonfunctional turf is not fully known. State estimates assume nonfunctional turf likely accounts for less than 1 percent of state water use. An initial analysis estimated there may be 20,000 acre-feet of water savings potential, but more research is needed.

To better understand the amount of turf in Colorado, the potential water savings and the cost of turf removal, CWCB collaborated with BBC Research and Consulting to release an Exploratory Turf Analysis in 2023. CWCB released an updated 2024 Exploratory Turf Analysis in January. With many unknowns remaining, research will continue to assist in responsible decision-making that can help continue to drive investments in water conservation.

At the same time, the CWCB will continue to learn from the agency’s Turf Replacement Program, which provides funding to eligible entities like water providers. While the program funding does not go to homeowners, HOAs or businesses, many of the municipalities and water providers that participated in the program made rebates available in their communities. After eight months, the available funding for the Turf Replacement Program was fully allocated, and 50 eligible entities helped advance turf replacement efforts through incentive programs and/or site-specific municipal projects. Currently, no additional funding Colorado Water Conservation Board releases landscape transformation report is available for the Turf Replacement Program, but in November 2023, the CWCB Board advanced a proposal the General Assembly will hear this spring that could bring an additional $2 million to the program this fall.

CWCB has been working to advance transformative landscape change and helped accelerate a statewide conversation on these efforts through the November 2022 Landscape Summit.

This work is important, especially in light of a warming climate. The Climate Change in Colorado report released by CWCB and Colorado State University’s Colorado Climate Center shows Colorado has already warmed by 2 degrees Fahrenheit and can likely expect increasingly hotter and drier conditions. This highlights the need for transformative landscape change because more water will be necessary to sustain trees and plants. Switching to more climate-appropriate, low-water plants will help make Colorado communities more resilient, especially in drought years.

To read the reports and learn more about what CWCB is doing, visit engagecwcb.org

Read more in this issue of Colorado Green Now:

Battery-powered equipment

Recommendation Tree List Released

Revised Front Range Tree Recommendation List released

In 2023, a revised Front Range Tree Recommendation List was developed through the collaborative effort of 16 individuals, each representing a different aspect of Colorado’s green industry. Participating organizations included the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), Colorado Nursery and Greenhouse Association (CNGA), municipal arborists representing Colorado Tree Coalition (CTC) and International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), Colorado State University (CSU) Extension, Denver Botanic Gardens (DBG) and Colorado State Forest Service (CSFS). Based on the committee’s education, knowledge, and experience, over 252 trees, not including many clones of these taxa, were evaluated and rated, resulting in a single reference list for professionals to use and share with customers or residents.

The purpose of this project was to update and expand on the original list produced in 2010, which created a Front Range Tree list for use by green industry professionals based on decades of experience growing and caring for trees in the Front Range. The list is intended to assist those involved in the buying, growing, selling, selection, siting and specification of trees. The list’s ultimate goal is to promote a healthy, diverse and geographically appropriate landscape in the urban forest. These ratings apply to the Colorado Front Range, generally defined as the region from Pueblo to the Wyoming border and from the foothills to the eastern plains.

The initial list of evaluated trees was based on a compilation of seven 2023 Front Range nursery catalogs, plus recommendations from committee members. The group evaluated each tree based on five different crucial factors (soil chemistry, pH, soil texture, insects and diseases, cold hardiness, and salt intolerance) and eight cautionary factors (tree wrap, sunscald, weak wooded, short-lived, transplants, leaf scorch and exposure). Three other categories (water needs, Colorado native and limited availability) were also considered. After evaluating each tree based on crucial, cautionary and other categories, each tree was placed in one of four categories or placed on a non-recommended list.

These categories were defined as follows:

Recommended: tree that has consistently displayed no serious issues related to any of the crucial factors (examples: Celtis occidentalis and Gymnocladus dioicus)

Recommended for Most Sites: trees generally recommended for most sites that have one of the crucial factors or a cautionary problem (examples: Aesulus glabra and Ginkgo biloba)

Conditionally Recommended: trees that have consistently displayed serious issues related to one or more crucial factors and one or more cautionary factors. Some of the factors can be mitigated through proper horticulture care (examples: Quercus bicolor and Picea omonika)

Trees with Potential: trees often offered for sale and have potential to do well (Zone 5 or below) but committee felt less than 10 years of experience growing and maintaining a significant population of trees in this area (examples: Acer griesum and Macluna pomifera)

Not Recommended: trees that consistently displayed overwhelming issues related to several crucial factors or can be expected to do poorly under normal circumstances (examples: Acer saccharinum and Robina hybrids) When using this list to assist in tree selection for a specific planting location, professionals should perform a site analysis relating to cultural factors, including a soil test to determine pH, soil texture and composition.

The Revised Front Range Tree Recommendation List can be downloaded from the CNGA, ASLA, CTC, ISA, CALCP, CSU Extension and Colorado State Forest Service websites. 

Read more in this issue of Colorado Green Now:

Colorado Water Conservation Board

Battery-powered equipment