Updates on the Blue: FOLBR and BVR Push Back, Angler Input Crucial at Upcoming Meeting

EDITOR'S NOTE: To see the full picture of this contentious issue, please see Fly Fisherman's previous reporting on this topic: 

• Battle for the Blue: Colorado's "Jurassic Park" Controversy
• CPW Report Confirms Troubling Trends on Colorado's Blue

UPDATE, 4/7/26: To be considered for inclusion at the upcoming stakeholder meeting, contact FOLBR at folbr.org/contact. To join the meeting, head to FOLBR's calendar to find the Teams link and password. 

---

Colorado’s lower Blue River Valley has been under the microscope recently as allegations that private stocking of unnaturally large rainbow trout, streambed manipulation, and supplemental fish feeding has led to an unhealthy ecosystem. While stakeholders float possible solutions and the debate over best practices for the fishery continues, board members from the non-profit Friends of the Lower Blue River (FOLBR) rebutted allegations to Fly Fisherman (FF) that they proposed regulations that many anglers were vehemently opposed to.

In particular was the idea of implementing a limited and permitted float system for anglers (and only anglers) to reduce the strains of fishing pressure on this section of water as a solution to recent news of an unhealthy Blue River system. Blue Valley Ranch (BVR), which owns most of the riverfront property on the lower Blue, reported that anglers accounted for far more than any other boating recreation during 2025’s “floatable days” (when the flow was between 350 and 1,100 cubic feet per second). This has increased significantly over the course of a six-year study, indicating that increased angling pressure coincided with the drop in river and fish health. FOLBR insists the permit system was just an idea, and they would have no means of implementing such a system even if they wanted to since they are not administrators of the river.

“We have never said that we're fully in support of a permitting system, and we don't see ourselves ever implementing one,” board treasurer Nick Zomer said in a recent interview with FF. “We’re just a non-profit. But if that group of stakeholders comes to the conclusion that we should be working with a governmental agency to look at what a permitting system could be, I think we'd be open to that.

“There are major sections of other western rivers that are already under permit systems,” Zomer continued. “But is that the right thing for our section of the river? I don’t know. That is currently the discussion at the stakeholders meeting.”

A recent report from Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) largely absolved angling pressure as a primary cause in the river’s poor health.

Stakeholder Input on the Lower Blue River

FOLBR says their main goal is to bring all the stakeholders together to find agreeable solutions.

“We welcome anybody who has an idea to please pipe up and contribute,” FOLBR board member and former ED Jonathan Knopf said on a recent Zoom call. “We want to bring as many stakeholders who have a voice to be involved in the process.”

But members of the local fishing community claim to have not been invited to previous meetings and felt there was minimal outreach. Ben McCormick, owner of Cutthroat Anglers in Silverthorne, who also personally owns property on the lower Blue River, said he only heard about the meeting through friends with Trout Unlimited, and said he had no idea of the upcoming meeting (details on that below).

“No invites–nothing,” McCormick recently told FF. “I haven't been asked to go. A fly shop owner who owns property on the lower Blue.”

What's Going on and Who's to Blame? 

The aforementioned CPW report from December 2025 pointed to nearby private stocking operations as a more likely cause of disease and declining fish health than angling pressure.

“The high concentration of trout occupancy and biomass [from supplemental feeding] likely fosters conditions for disease and parasite transmission, which is visibly evident in the level of gill lice infestation,” states the report.

Chapter W-00, Article VII, #012 of the Colorado Wildlife Regulations states that rainbow trout may legally be possessed by any person in the State of Colorado, with certain restrictions. Chapter W-00, Article VII, #013, goes on to state that: “Owners or lessees of property may release or otherwise provide for or allow the release of any of the above species of fish [which includes rainbow trout] into waters of the state (flowing or standing) located on property they own or lease provided they have obtained a stocking permit, or a commercial or private lake license from the Division, or if such activities are performed by a Colorado permitted aquaculture facility or licensed aquatic wildlife importer, unless the person is exempt under Chapter 12, to release such fish. Stocking permits and lake licenses will be approved or denied based on compliance with all other applicable regulations and a determination by the Division that such stocking will not otherwise negatively impact management of the state’s wildlife resources.”

When asked why private stocking operations are being permitted by CPW if they have been deemed by the agency itself as detrimental in the December 2025 report, especially in the highly regulated and fragile Upper Colorado River Basin, Rachael Gonzales, CPW Public Information Officer for the Northwest Region, replied that, “…private stocking permits are only required in certain situations, as explained in Chapter W-00 of CPW’s regulations,” then alluded to the report stating, “we have no additional information to provide related to fisheries management on the lower Blue River.”

BVR, owned by billionaire Paul Tudor Jones II, has been at the center of this controversy due to past activities that included stocking unnaturally large rainbow trout, providing supplemental fish food, and constructing manmade trout habitat that many anglers argue are bad for the overall health of the river.

Brien Rose, Blue Valley Ranch’s (BVR) fish biologist, said that BVR no longer stocks particularly large fish, in favor of planting whirling-disease-resistant, hard-fighting German Hofer-strain rainbow trout.

“We have (stocked large fish) in the past,” Rose said. “But for the last like seven years, we've partnered with Colorado Parks and Wildlife and we release Hofer-strain rainbow trout…We've released about a half a million wild-type rainbow trout, typically like 3 to 5 inches. We do have some grow-up ponds that will release a few thousand fish that are in that kind of like that 12- to 14-inch range were released, as two-and-a-half-year-old fish.

“We still want a quality fish,” Rose continued. "We don't want a bunch of 12-inch fish in the river. But we're trying to go for hard fighting fish, realistic looking fish and stocking them smaller…All the public that we talked to, they love the change that we've made. I'm trying to manage for more on that 3- to 5-pound trout than the historic stuff.”

And regarding supplemental feeding by BVR: “In the past we've supplemented feed into the river,” Rose said. “We're not feeding the river currently, per se. We've certainly switched our management strategy… We're not currently feeding the main river.”

Rose justified the past supplemental feeding as necessary to maintain any trout fishery in the lower Blue at all. Green Mountain Reservoir is managed for water storage and power generation, which means that the river below the dam–the section in question–can run as low as 30 to 40 cubic feet per second. That, combined with low aquatic insect density (Rose stated that the lower Blue hovers around 2,000 bugs per meter squared, which is at the very lowest end of what a healthy stream should have, due at least in part to a didymo proliferation) and angling pressure create an environment in which there would be no point in stocking fish without providing the necessary sustenance.

“So we have no bug production, no natural food,” Rose continued. “It's a completely artificial environment caused by two dams. And then where do you go? You know, you can't support much recreation with 300 fish per mile. People want to have good days on the water… Is that more ethical if you're going to stock fish to take care of fish, or is it more ethical to let fish starve?”

BVR is also working with Colorado State University and the University of Montana to add liquid nutrients into the system to help reduce didymo and encourage a healthier system.

“We lose about 90 percent of the nutrients in Lake Dillon [which is above Green Mountain Reservoir on the Blue],” Rose stated. “So we're experimentally adding nutrients towards the top of the ranch to try to basically help reduce the didymo that's in the river that thrives in a low nutrient environment. And then we'll start getting more production of the more beneficial algaes. And then in turn, that'll start growing more invertebrates, which will naturally aid fish.”

Similar nutrient-adding projects are in progress in places like Montana’s Kootenai River under the supervision of the Bonneville Power Administration, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Who's Throwing Dog Food Into the Blue? 

So why then are reports of floating food pellets in the river downstream of BVR still common? FOLBR suggested it was another riverside landowner. McCormick suggested that it’s BVR pellet feeding its manmade side channels, which he said BVR does not consider the Blue River proper. A report on from Flylab’s Substack said that BVR pellet feeds trout in its private ponds, which have connectivity to the main river.

And for the record, it is legal to do so in Colorado.

“Fish feeding practices do not meet the definition of ‘Feeding or Attracting Wildlife’ nor the definition of ‘Chumming’ as described in Chapter W-01 of CPW’s regulations,” Gonzales said. “Therefore, fish feeding is a legal practice.”

In response to claims that poor management practices have led to a flare-up of gill lice in the lower Blue’s trout, Rose believes it is due more to the high prevalence of gill lice in Green Mountain Reservoir than anything else.

McCormick also criticized the habitat work done by BVR, stating that the work largely only benefits larger fish.

“The way that they designed the weirs and the holes–Colorado Parks and Wildlife has written responses that saying that there dug too deep and too aggressively,” he said. “So there's not a gradual tailout to them that would be beneficial for smaller fish spawning,” he said. “They're just giant aggressive holes.”

Rose rebutted that by saying the fish need a place to take refuge when flows get low and warm.

The Future of the Blue River

So is the Blue a naturally depleted system fighting for its life? Or are efforts to “improve” the fishery driving the disease and trout declines?

Where the river goes from here is largely up to the stakeholders and river advocates. Until then, cooperation and agreement on best management practices will be crucial.

“Why don't they (BVR) just try stopping all of that (fish stocking, supplemental feed, riverine manipulation) to see what happens?” McCormick questioned.

Anglers who want to advocate for this beloved fishery are encouraged to show up at the upcoming stakeholders meeting, which will be held on Thursday, April 9 between 1 and 4pm. The location is yet to be determined but a virtual link will be provided once it is available. Advocates can also contact FOLBR for information.

---