Every year, about 90% of Central Oregon's Deschutes River disappears into networks of canals and pipes traversing high desert. Between April and October, what remains in this major river—one of the largest spring-fed waterways in the U.S.—looks more like a creek trickling out of Bend, Oregon.

Six irrigation districts divert water to green up properties for about 7,500 landowners in one of the state's driest regions. Of these six, none is as powerful as the Central Oregon Irrigation District (COID), which holds rights to use more than half the river's volume—more than all other districts combined. Under state law during times of scarcity, most other districts must cut back to protect COID's share.

During the last drought, state water law forced commercial farmers downstream to fallow their land while COID diverted four times what its landowners' crops consumed, according to an Oregon Public Broadcasting and ProPublica analysis of state data. Similar ratios appeared across both wet and dry years, roughly aligning with estimates COID provided the state for crop requirements.

More than 9 out of 10 acres in the district were pasture—grass for grazing or landscaping, or hay for livestock—considered 'beneficial' under Oregon water law. To maintain rights to water, districts must prove customers are consistently using it beneficially.

What the Left Is Saying

State Rep. Ken Helm, the Democratic co-chair of the House Committee on Agriculture, Land Use, Natural Resources and Water, said he believes more water should remain in the river. 'Legally speaking, that doesn't have to happen,' he told ProPublica. Helm, a land-use lawyer who grew up in Bend, has watched the region transform as affluent residents moved in for reasons unrelated to farming.

Helm acknowledged political obstacles to changing bedrock water law. 'We'd get crushed by the powers that be and we might even not be reelected,' he said. Oregon and other Western states have so far rejected legislation restricting what people can grow or requiring irrigation efficiency, with strong opposition rooted in property rights protections for existing water allocations.

Environmental advocates argue the current system prioritizes a small number of wealthy landowners over river health and downstream agricultural communities. They point to data showing COID's water use vastly exceeds its customers' actual crop needs during drought conditions.

What the Right Is Saying

COID Managing Director Craig Horrell said the district cannot tell people what they can farm if it's legally permitted. 'Our job is to distribute water to our customers and to deliver it much more efficiently and sustainably in the future,' he stated, noting the district's focus on infrastructure improvements rather than restricting agricultural use.

Property rights advocates contend that water rights represent legal entitlements that farmers and landowners have invested in based on existing state law. Changing those rules retroactively could undermine economic stability for thousands of property owners who hold valid allocations under current statutes.

Conservative legislators argue that solutions should come through voluntary market mechanisms and infrastructure investment rather than government mandates restricting agricultural water use or dictating farming practices to rural communities.

What the Numbers Show

The Deschutes River is one of the largest spring-fed rivers in the United States, yet between April and October annually, approximately 90% of its flow is diverted for human use.

COID controls more than half of the river's total volume—more water rights than all other five irrigation districts combined. During the most recent drought period, COID diverted four times what its customers' crops actually required, according to OPB and ProPublica analysis of state data.

The district delivers water through open canals built 120 years ago, blasted from porous lava rock that requires them to run full for gravity-powered distribution across 42,000 acres. Nearly half the water—approximately 40-50%—evaporates or seeps into the ground before reaching customers.

Replacing the canal system with pressurized pipes could take up to 50 years and cost more than $700 million total. COID is in final planning stages for a potential $360 million project piping a main artery serving more than a thousand landowners between Bend and Redmond, many of whom are not professional farmers according to reporting.

More than 90% of acres served by the district consist of pasture—grass or hay crops considered beneficial under existing state water law without restriction on crop type.

The Bottom Line

Oregon faces a fundamental tension between its stated goal of preserving river ecosystems and a century-old water rights system that prioritizes established allocations over environmental outcomes during scarcity.

The primary proposed solution involves replacing the COID's aging canal network with pressurized pipes, which could reduce water loss by nearly half while freeing water for downstream users. In exchange for federal and state funding for piping projects, COID has pledged to send more water downstream to farmers outside the district.

However, infrastructure improvements face significant hurdles: the project would cost hundreds of millions of dollars, take decades to complete, and does not address underlying questions about which crops should receive water priority during drought. Lawmakers from both parties have so far been reluctant to impose restrictions that could be framed as government overreach into private property rights.

What happens next will likely involve continued infrastructure negotiations between COID, state officials, and federal agencies, while legislators avoid direct confrontation with the legal framework governing Western water allocation.