An Aspen activist is hoping to gain support for a paradigm shift in the way people view their local waterway by granting rights to the Roaring Fork River.
Environmental psychologist, author and Aspen Times columnist Lindsay Branham is asking local elected officials to consider a resolution protecting the Roaring Fork and its tributaries by recognizing that nature has rights and that it’s the government’s responsibility to care for them.
“When I came across the rights of nature movement, it just really fascinated me because it invites people to really change the way they see nature altogether and removes the resource/object/othering language and framework, and invites this personhood,” Branham said.
The Rights of Nature is a small but growing movement that seeks to evolve the legal system’s relationship with nature from one that views rivers as a resource and property for human use, to recognizing that natural entities have intrinsic value and an inherent right to exist. It pushes back against the common notion that the “working rivers” of the American West simply convey water for human purposes.
“If you’re an innovator and a dreamer and you love nature, this movement for rights of rivers is right up your alley,” said Grant Wilson, executive director of the Durango-based Earth Law Center, a nonprofit that works to give nature a voice in the legal system.
Branham first presented the idea to Aspen City Council during public comment at a meeting in late 2025, but she was referred to the Pitkin County Healthy Rivers board. County staff have met with Branham and said they are looking closely at the issue. The consideration of a draft resolution by the Healthy Rivers board would be the first step in the process, though it’s unclear when such a resolution might be brought forward.
“We certainly recognize the importance of considering impacts of any actions on the river, but to a large extent we are already doing a lot of that through our land use code and through the Healthy Rivers and Streams board,” said Anne Marie McPhee, deputy Pitkin County attorney. “We’ve asked Lindsay for more information.”
A handful of Colorado communities have passed resolutions that give rights to local waterways: Grand Lake to its namesake body of water, Ridgway to the Uncompahgre River and most recently, Durango to the Animas River.
Indigenous communities have been some of the first to take up this cause. In November, the Colorado River Indian Tribes granted personhood to the Colorado River for the roughly 100 miles it flows through tribal land on the border between California and Arizona near the town of Parker, recognizing the river as a living being and the sacred obligation to protect it.
Once the rights of a river are codified in a resolution, local governments have a duty to consider them through policymaking and land use planning. Officials could also appoint a guardian to represent and speak on behalf of the river, and produce an annual report on the status of river health. The specifics are tailored to each community, and the resolutions are usually non-binding and largely symbolic.
Rights of Nature resolutions are not intended to spark litigation or meddle with water rights, Wilson said.
“What I’ve been advocating for is a softer, more cultural movement toward the rights of nature that’s not litigious,” Wilson said. “We’re not trying to get in the courts and cancel permits . … This movement is really a way to hold a mirror up to community values and how we treat nature.”
Ridgway resolution remains untested
In 2021, the town of Ridgway passed a resolution granting the Uncompahgre River, which flows through town, and its tributaries five inalienable rights: the right to maintain natural flow in sufficient quantity for ecosystem health; the right to support essential ecosystem functions; the right to feed and be fed by sustainable precipitation, glaciers and aquifers; the right to maintain native biodiversity; and the right to restoration and preservation of ecosystem health.
The resolution says the town has the responsibility to implement and enforce policies that support these rights, and oppose or address through mitigation activities that would violate these rights. Mayor John Clark said with miles of riverfront within town boundaries, protecting the waterway from encroaching development is important. But so far, the resolution remains untested, he said.
“Since we adopted the resolution, there’s been no need for any enforcement,” Clark said. “There have been no development proposals that would have triggered any action based on the resolution.”
Over four years after the resolution passed, the town still has not appointed a guardian of the river, although the local nonprofit Uncompahgre Watershed Partnership provides an annual report about the state of the waterway, Clark said. He said the resolution is a formal recognition that the Uncompahgre River is important to Ridgway residents’ quality of life and that the town council should consider the natural environment in decision-making.
“We did get a few people speaking up and saying, ‘what is the point of this if it doesn’t have more teeth to it?’” Clark said. “And our response was: ‘It’s a start. You’ve got to start somewhere.’”
While the Rights of Nature movement seems to be establishing a foothold globally – the Rights of Nature was enshrined in Ecuador’s constitution in 2008 – it has suffered setbacks in Colorado. After granting rights to Boulder Creek and appointing guardians to advocate for its interests, the town of Nederland repealed the resolution so it could support building its own dam on Middle Boulder Creek.
Gary Wockner, director of environmental group Save the World’s Rivers, was involved in this contentious back and forth, supporting the Rights of Nature resolution and then entering the water court case to oppose Nederland’s dam plans. But Wockner said the movement is less about water law and more a campaign of transforming hearts and minds.
“We’re moving toward a new paradigm in river protection,” Wockner said. “These resolutions are a concept that make intuitive, logical and passionate sense for people to start talking about how important the river is to their community and should have a right to exist.”
Branham is hoping Aspen can become the fourth Colorado town to grant personhood to its local waterway.
“Aspen and Pitkin County could really be known for setting a precedent and a standard for shifting an extractive relationship to natural ecosystems,” Branham said. “They already have in so many ways and this is another step. What if we could set that example?”