Western States Water Council: 2009 symposium day 3 recap

Federal Roles, Regulations and Planning Functions

The last day of the conference started out with a panel of representatives from four federal agencies moderated by Tony Willardson (Western States Water Council) and included: Chandler Peter (Denver Regulatory Office, Omaha District, Army Corps of Engineers); Bert Garcia (Director , Ecosystems Protection Program, Regions 8, Environmnetal Protection Agency); Randy Karstaedt (Director, Physical Resources, U.S. Forest Service); Meg Estep (Mountain-Prairie region, Chief, Water Resources Division, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service).

Peter explained that the Corps regulatory authority comes from Seciton 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act. He added that the Corps doesn’t bring any money to the table in the permit process, nor do they participate in planning — their job is to tell applicants what to do and what not to do.

Collaboration is the name of the game now. Peter hopes to move the EPA (at least in his office) to work collaboratively with water and land developers. He told the conference that much of the information that the Corps uses comes from submittals and that there is opportunity to collaborate on data collection and analysis.

Peter ran through some of the requirements for a permit. The Corps requires a needs analysis with each application. He said, “The amount of water needed translates directly to effects on aquatic resources.” The intensity of the review can be adjusted, “in light of the level of impact,” but he admitted that the needs analysis process can, “involve substantial cost and effort.” Some of the elements of the analysis are, demand, reliability of the source, conservation efforts, water rights, contracts, leases, and growth projections.

The Corps is statutorily required to evaluate alternatives to any proposed project and choose the option with the least environmental effect, he said.

The Corps, according to Chandler, is trying to improve the permitting process. He cited three examples where, after multi-year efforts and high investment, the application ended up in litigation and the applicant was denied the permit. Two Forks Dam made the list. Proponents spent some $40 million and in the end the reservoir was not approved.

Fort Collins and Greeley have agreed to partner with the Corps to test a new collaborative process, according to Peter. The pilot is the proposed Halligan and Seaman reservoirs expansion.

Garcia also cited Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as the authorizing legislation for the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulatory efforts. He asked the question, “What can we do to improve the process?”

He advocates transparency in the give and take between the EPA and thos the agency regulates. The more they know about projects the better they can integrate processes.

Garcia told the conference that the EPA will be promoting more low impact development.

Karstaedt said that the U.S. Forest Service is a land management agency rather that a regulatory agency. Most of us, “depend on rural areas and forests for our water,” he said. In the west forests comprise around 19% of the land area but supply more than half of the fresh water. He added that in Colorado the numbers are 22% of the land in forest provides 68% of the water supply. Nationally, he said, ranches, farms, private and state forests and federal land provide 80% of the drinking water supplies.

The USFS has been buying acreage near forest land to simplify watershed management. They recently purchased parcels in the Beaver Creek Watershed.

Estep told the conference that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service gets their charter from the Endangered Species Act. Their job is to prevent species from going extinct or ending up listed as threatened.

The Candidate Conservation Program, “…assesses species and develops and facilitates the use of voluntary conservation tools for collaborative conservation of candidate and other species-at-risk and their habitats, so that these species do not need the protection of the Endangered Species Act,” according to the USFW website.

They will also work with landowners to protect endangered species to set up best management practices through their Habitat Conservation Planning program.

A current focus of the agency is water quality.

More Colorado water coverage here.

Lamar: Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority runs out of dough

From the Lamar Ledger (Aaron Burnett):

One month after opening bids for a major waste water improvement project, the city of Lamar will likely be shelving the project through at least the end of the year. Funding for the project, which was intended to replace the waste water system’s main lift station, dried up this past week when the Colorado Water Resources and Power. Development Authority (CWRPDA) informed city staff that the authority would not be able to offer a loan for the project in 2009. The city had applied for and been approved for up to $2 million in loan funds from the authority and was notified as late as August that the loan would be in place for 2009. City Administrator Ron Stock informed the council during its Monday evening meeting that staff had explored alternative funding sources, but had yet to identify one that would prove practical for the project.

More wastewater converage here.

H.R. 3123: Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel cleanup

From The Colorado Independent (Katie Redding):

The Leadville Mine Drainage Remediation Act of 2009, HR 3123, sponsored by Colorado Republican Doug Lamborn of the 5th District, would order the federal Bureau of Reclamation to take responsibility for the entire length of the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel, which drains zinc, cadmium and lead-laced water from many of Leadville’s historic mines. “We’re ecstatic that we’ve made it through the House again,” said Lake County Commissioner Ken Olsen…

The bill also directs the Bureau to work with the Environmental Protection Agency to treat additional water from the Superfund site. The Bureau has done so in the past, but alleged that it does not have the authority to treat the water in perpetuity.

But Olsen had no patience for federal agencies who won’t use their already-built plant to treat nearby contaminated water. “The plant is made to treat contaminated water entering the Arkansas River,” he insisted. “It’s a public plant.” Olsen added that he was “extremely hopeful” that Senators Udall and Bennet would be able to secure passage of S. 1417 in the Senate.

More H.R. 3123 coverage here.

Weminuche Wilderness: Federal judge denies dam project at Emerald Lake

From The Durango Herald (Dale Rodebaugh):

In a Sept. 18 ruling, U.S. District Court Judge John L. Kane dismissed a claim by the irrigation district that in 1940 it acquired the right build a dam at Emerald Lake. Kane also upheld the federal government’s position that heirs of the man who built a dam there about 1895 have no claim, either. The legal battle started about 2004 when Pine River Irrigation District, which provides Vallecito Reservoir water for irrigators in southeast La Plata County, attempted to resurrect what it alleged was the right to build a water-storage facility at Emerald Lake. The lake and nearby Little Emerald Lake, a total surface of 300 acres, sit at about 10,000 feet elevation in Hinsdale County.

Daniel Israel, a Denver attorney who represents the irrigation district, said Friday that an appeal is possible. “There’s a long history here,” Israel said. “We relied on a federal court decision eight or nine years ago, but Judge Kane rejected the court’s analysis. We don’t agree with his reading.” Israel said the 1891 law on which the early dam builder acted never has been analyzed by a federal court of appeals.

More San Juan Basin coverage here and here.

Western States Water Council: 2009 Symposium day two recap

From The Durango Herald (Joe Hanel):

Speaking at a conference on water and population growth, Ritter restated a water policy he’s had since his first campaign for governor: look first to conservation and sharing water among cities and farmers, and to trans-basin diversions only as a last resort…

Thirty years ago, it was an era of plenty, Ritter said. Colorado had fewer than 3 million people, and three of its four major river basins were open to claims of new water rights. Today, the state has 5 million people, and only the Colorado River has unappropriated water. “We’re in an era of water scarcity and tradeoffs,” Ritter said…

On Tuesday, Ritter urged water planners to slow down and ask questions about Colorado’s future before dedicating more water to urban growth. “What will Colorado and the West look like in 50 years if we continue business as usual? Is this the world that we want our children to inherit?” Ritter did not define under what conditions he would back a transfer of water from west to east, but he said his administration would oppose it unless it improved all parts of the state.

More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“Water must be a part of the conversation when it comes to creating vibrant, liveable communities,” Ritter told the Western States Water Council symposium on water and land use. “Any growth plan we have must acknowledge the scarcity of water.”[...]

The state needs to be smart about how it grows, and so it is rightly investing money through the Colorado Water Conservation Board in studies of water availability, water scarcity, conservation plans and sharing water. “There is no silver bullet,” Ritter said.

Ritter also lauded Aurora for pioneering water reuse through its $700 million Prairie Waters Project, which seeks to recapture flows from the South Platte River for direct reuse. “Aurora bought a lot of water from around the state, and a lot of people looked at Aurora as recklessly growing,” Ritter said. Since the 1980s, Aurora has purchased most of the Rocky Ford Ditch, part of the Colorado Canal, shares in Twin Lakes and ranches in Lake County in order to export the water from rights on those lands. Since it imports the water from another basin, it can theoretically reuse it to extinction, but that requires investment in infrastructure – a well field, pipeline and treatment plant in the case of Prairie Waters. “There is an ability to reuse that water, and that decreases the need for water from other parts of the state,” Ritter said.

More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka). From the article:

While Boulder made a decision years ago to limit growth despite having an adequate water supply for a city three times its size, Douglas County has maintained an aggressive growth policy with skimpy water supplies.

“The vision was a compact city surrounded by open space,” said Peter Pollock, who worked for 25 years as a planner for the city of Boulder. Boulder used every tool available to regulate growth and invented a few, determining where growth would come and how fast. The city worked with the county to maintain the rural nature of its outskirts, Pollock said. Pollock called the conflicting needs within the community useful in evaluating the trade-offs needed to obtain the desired results. Unlike many others at the conference, Pollock said water should be used as a tool to reinforce sustainable development, saying no community would be built if roads could not serve it…

“Efforts to control growth through water are futile,” Shively said. At least 50 percent of the state’s growth is from natural increases – from raising families and having children and grandchildren remain in the state. Communities like Castle Rock and Highlands Ranch already have per-capita water rates lower than most other areas of the state. The community is looking at rainwater harvesting, but the solution is to bring in more water from outside the Front Range to meet needs, Shively argued. “We have to teach our kids about water, and that we can’t conserve our way out,” Shively said.

More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka). From the article:

“The moment Douglas County or Aurora gets into trouble, it affects the value of every home on the Front Range,” Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper told the Western States Water Council symposium on water and land use Tuesday. “We’re having a discussion on regionalism.”

Denver has entered an intergovernmental agreement with two of its large neighbors to share resources, but that stops short of a commitment to supply water, added Chips Barry, director of Denver Water. “We’ll share our resources, but not our customers,” Barry said. For example, Denver and other communities generate return flows that it cannot physically reuse, but may be able to recycle through Aurora’s Prairie Waters Project, now 80 percent complete. Those flows could be captured for later reuse, with cooperation, Barry said…

“The West Slope is beginning to understand having a Front Range that is distressed for water is not helpful,” Barry said. “What we’re trying to do is settle 50 years of dispute. Denver wants certainty on the Blue River.”[...]

Mark Pifher, director of Aurora Water, said the marketplace may be the driver for conservation. “Water is too scarce, and what you have to do to provide infrastructure is too expensive,” Pifher said. “The costs to the consumer and the developers will come to a point where they are self-regulating.”

More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka). From the article:

Over in Texas…there might be enough water, but it’s not in the right place. Parts of the state have been in drought since 1996. Dallas has grown faster than its supply of water, said Carolyn Brittin, deputy executive administrator of the Texas Water Development Board. In the past, water was a top-down activity in Texas, with permits issued for use wherever that use popped up. Groundwater is still not administered. Now, the state is trying to incorporate local decisions in its long-range water planning for storage and delivery, Brittin said. Conservation and reuse are becoming popular concepts, but Texas still doesn’t mess with land-use planning. Before it’s all done, 1.5 million acre-feet will have to come off farms unless the state can develop some of its 20 identified reservoir sites. Land regulation appears to be a last resort. “We’re going to grow . . . I find it fascinating that you would contemplate permits for subdivisions based on water availability,” Brittin said. “That’s pie in the sky for me, because I’m from Texas.”

More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka). From the article:

…state Rep. Kathleen Curry, D-Gunnison, encountered a surprising amount of friction over a bill in 2008 (HB1141) that simply asked local governments to take water into account before issuing permits. “Local control is something that is in the fabric of this state and that’s not going to change any time soon,” Curry told the Western States Water Council symposium on water and land use Tuesday. While the state has a role, there are also issues of private property rights and water rights that play into these decisions.

And, judging from a parade of speakers at the conference Tuesday, a wide spectrum of what can be accomplished building-by-building, lot-by-lot, throughout a community and along a watershed. Planners discussed everything from low-flow appliances to rainwater capture to stormwater runoff on a small scale. Larger-scale solutions included high-density development, filling in empty urban spaces and locating essential businesses near homes through zoning to create pedestrian-friendly communities. “The danger of imposing the solution that we can all fit our hands around is that it isn’t going to work in every situation,” said Andy Hill, a Colorado Department of Local Affairs specialist in sustainable community development…

A report by Drew Beckwith looked at communities in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah that analyzed how techniques like using recycled water from homes to irrigate, reducing water use by appliances and Xeriscape landscaping significantly reduced water use. For instance, the Civanno community near Tucson, Ariz., used 35-45 percent less water than the already-low levels in the area, while reducing peak demand, Beckwith said.

More Colorado water coverage here and here.

Montrose County League of Women Voters: Water a Vital Resource October 1

From email from the Colorado Watershed Assembly:

The first in a series of meetings hosted by the Montrose County League of Women Voters about regional programs working toward sustainability.

Join us and guest speakers from the Uncompaghre Watershed Planning Partnership and the City of Montrose Public Works Department for a forum on how to sustain water quality for businesses, citizens and wildlife for the next 100 years. Sarah Sauter of the UWPP will speak on its goal of improving water qualtiy and riparian habitat within the Uncompaghre River Basin by developing a collaborative watershed plan that would address heavy metals, selenium, wise land use planning, storm water, protection of drinking water supplies, flood hazard mitigation, river access, healthy fisheries, wildlife, public education and recreation. The City of Montrose Storm Water Management Program is dedicated to protecting the quality of surface waters, ponds, creeks and rivers.

Thursday, October 1,7: 00 p.m., Montrose Library Community Room Call Barb Krebs at 249-3989 for more information.

Western States Water Council: 2009 Symposium day two recap

Opening Remarks

Governor Ritter kicked off the second day of the conference with a presentation about the opportunities and challenges facing the state and the western U.S. “Water is the most important resource to Colorado,” he said, citing the importance of water to recreation, tourism, agriculture, energy development along with the basic needs for the population.

Ritter mentioned the possible effects of climate change (climate disruption to some) on statewide water supplies. A 10-20% reduction in availability is the current long-term estimate. Ritter said, “How we manage our scarce water resource will determine how successful we are.”

The governor — a farmer in his youth — reminded the crowd that agriculture is the 3rd largest economy in Colorado as well as part of our heritage, saying, “It helped shape our culture.” He also made the point about the importance of a, “Sustainable locally produced food supply,” to the well being and health of Coloradans.

West slope water observers will be happy to note that the governor is opposed the transbasin diversions unless Colorado can find a “win, win, win” for all involved. He advocates thinking about land use planning as part of transportation planning and water planning. Ritter — through Harris Sherman at the Department of Natural Resources — has been asking people to consider, “How will we need to change to build the kind of west we want to leave to our children and grandchildren?”

State Efforts

This session was a panel discussion with representatives from California (Rod Walston), Arizona (Sandy Fabritz-Whitney) and Washington (Brian Walsh). The panelists related experiences and plans for the integration of land use and water planning back home.

Walston said that the traditional conversation focused on quantity and quality but now includes integrated land use and water. He outlined several legislative initiatives in California. The legislature has tried to mitigate the impacts of development by setting up statewide requirements for developers. For example, an environmental impact report for developments must be completed and approved prior to project approval and cities must create an urban water management plan which is updated every five years with a running 20 year supply.

Arizona, according to Fabritz-Whitney, requires a 100 year water supply for new developments and speculators cannot sell a lot for development unless they demonstrate a 100 year water supply. She told the group that Arizona’s first drought plan was adopted in 2004.

In Washington State the issues vary depending on location, according to Walsh. The west side of the state averages nearly 50 inches of precipitation a year while the eastern part of the state is much dryer. In addition, endangered species effect planning for virtually the entire Columbia River basin. The state has seen a good deal of success with local watershed planning groups that consist of county, city, tribal, state government and other local stakeholders. Some of the challenges going forward are the completion of a statewide water plan, a clearer definition of water rights (along with the cessation of new appropriations in some watersheds), navigating or unifying a patchwork of planning efforts, overcoming the “use it of lose it” aspect of prior appropriation, the need to permit domestic exempt wells and the effects of climate change. He listed conservation, reclaimed water, rainwater harvesting, aquifer storage and recharge and low impact development as opportunities for the state.

Local and County Efforts

The panel moderator, Julio Iturreria (Long Range Program Manager, Arapahoe County), stated that, in his career, “I have been doing planning with the idea that water will always be availiable.” He said that now is a good time — with development at low levels across the state — to approach local planning officials and ask that they include water planning in their processes going forward.

The panel included Peter Pollack (Lincoln Institute of Land Policy), Lorna Stickel (Portland Water Bureau) and Mark Shively (Executive Director, Douglas County Water Resource Authority).

First up was Pollack a former City of Boulder planner. He maintains that we can do a better job at the local level. He advocates water planning at all levels. Transportation planning drives land use, according to Pollack. He mentioned that Boulder and Boulder County were able to come to agreement about growth by using the concept of “urban services” (fire, water, sewer, police, etc.). The county agreed to stay with its rural character and drive growth to the cities and towns since they provided the urban services.

Stickel started out by saying that, “Water Supply is one of the most important aspects of planning.” There are many layers of planning in Oregon, most driven by legislation. She mentioned Portland’s gray water efforts. Homeowners are required to use “Off the shelf pre-designed systems.” She also talked about the Portland Sustainability Center which may be the largest green building in the world, according to Stickel. The building will recycle 100% of its water and generate much of the electrical demand using solar.

Shively listed some of the events that got Douglas County to where it is today — heavily dependent on the Denver Basin Aquifer system. Douglas County’s two dozen or so water providers depend on fossil water as do all of the individual domestic wells. The county was depending on Denver Water’s Two Forks Reservoir which was defeated in the late 1980s, and is still looking for a sustainable supply.

Shively told the attendees about the county conservation efforts. 40% of the county is open space. The county has implemented a rigorous review of plans. Castle Rock has reduced consumption to 134 gallons per capita per day. The county has implemented a “water ambassador program” where high school students present water education to fourth graders. The county is also part of an IGA with the South Metro Water Authority, Denver Water and Aurora Utilities that aims to share infrastructure and planning. He highlighted the Sterling Ranch development which hopes to use rainwater catchments (authorized by H.B. 09-1129 in the last legislative session) to cut gpcd for watering common areas.

Shively stressed that he wants to see people, “Work together to plan energy and water projects for our kids and grandkids.”

Two Sides Talking

The luncheon panel was moderated by Peter Nichols, an attorney with Trout, Raley, Montano, Witwer and Freeman. Panel members were Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, Denver Water Manager Chips Barry, Aurora Water Manager Mark Pifher, Aurora Mayor Ed Tauer, Colorado River District General Manager Eric Kuhn and Grand Junction Utilities Manager Greg Trainor.

Barry said, “Increased density is the way to reduce gallons per capita per day,” and greater density means, “higher per capita consumption per acre.” He said that Denver Water and west slope interests have come to understand that the two big issues are certainty of supply for Denver and a fixed total diversion number for the Colorado River Basin.

Trainor wants certainty or agreement about the water data that the basin roundtables are collecting, saying, “We have to be able to believe the data in front of us.”

Kuhn: “The tools of the past will probably not meet the uncertainty of the future.”

Pifher said that Aurora’s short-term strategy is to develop infrastructure to reuse their effluent. The project, Prairie Waters, filters water at the South Platte River. Water will then travel 30 some miles for treatment and distribution through Aurora’s potable water system.

Mayor Tauer said that for Aurora and Denver, “The drought was a catalyst,” regional cooperation is the name of the game now. Commenting on conservation efforts he joked that, “Denver Water’s campaign says, ‘Use only what you need,’ [while] Aurora says, ‘Use what you think you can afford with our new rate structure.’”

More Colorado water coverage here.

San Luis Valley: Second round in court for first groundwater sub-district

From the Valley Courier (Ruth Heide):

Attorneys for proponents on Monday told the judge they had complied with his February order and revised the management plan. The state engineer’s office and sponsoring water district approved the amended plan this summer.

Opponents said they still had concerns with the plan, primarily regarding provisions to protect senior water rights, and argued that the amended plan did not comply with the judge’s February order. Three attorneys, Atencio, Erich Schwiesow and Tim Buchanan, represent the senior water users who still oppose the management plan.

Kuenhold has set aside the better part of three weeks for the trial, but RGWCD Attorney David Robbins told the judge on Monday he hoped to finish it in two weeks. He said he plans to call six or seven witnesses, and the state attorney general’s office plans to call two, State Engineer Dick Wolfe and Deputy State Engineer Michael Sullivan. Robbins said many of those involved in the water management effort, including one of his potential witnesses, were still involved in harvest.

The opening arguments consumed the morning of the first day, and the trial progressed no further than the first witness by the end of the day. Vandiver remains on the stand for cross-examination this morning as the trial enters its second day.

Vandiver testified about the process and progression of the revised management plan.

In his opening argument, Robbins said the sub-district water management plan is the culmination of seven years of efforts on the part of numerous volunteers who are trying to solve the Valley’s water problems in an innovative way, self-regulation. “The board of managers wasn’t thrilled to have had to do this, but they believe it’s the right thing to do. They believe it has to be done.”

More San Luis Valley groundwater coverage here.

U.S. Senate Interior appropriations bill includes $300,000 for Rifle waterline

From the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Dennis Webb):

U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., said in a news release that he successfully included the money in an Interior Appropriations bill that passed 77–21. A final version of the bill remains to be worked out with the House of Representatives. Mayor Keith Lambert said the city had been in contact with Colorado lawmakers about the project. “To have a partner like the federal government helping us promote our water systems here in Rifle is certainly a benefit,” he said. The money would come from the Environmental Protection Agency’s State and Tribal Grant Program. It would help pay for upgrades to the city’s main water line and construction of new lines. One line would improve service to customers on the south side of the Colorado River by building in redundancy to water delivery there. Lambert said a line also would be built to where the city is planning to construct a new water treatment facility. The water lines project, now in the preliminary engineering and design phase, requires a 45 percent cost share by the city.

More Rifle coverage here.

Western States Water Council: 2009 Symposium day one recap

Update: From the Associated Press (Steven K. Paulson) via The Denver Post:

The council is an organization of representatives appointed by the governors of 18 Western states. The purposes are to promote cooperation, development and management of water resources. The theme of the meeting is “Water and Land Use Planning for a Sustainable Future.”

Here’s a recap of yesterday’s sessions, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

[John Wesley Powell's] solution, offered to the territorial powers at the time, was to set up governmental jurisdiction based on watersheds and drainage basins, rather than the grid that had been used to divide the comparatively wet part of the United States up until that point. Trouble was, nobody listened to him. So, now with a few million people added and hundreds of water projects under its belt, the West will deal with linking water and land use the best it can…

Colorado is not alone in finding its water supply already stretched and looking at shortfalls in the future. Climate change could reduce precipitation by 10-20 percent, Tubbs said. “Yet this is the region where we’ve seen the highest growth and expectations are that it will continue once the economy improves,” Tubbs said. Tubbs, former water resources administrator for Montana, said the approach to water administration so far has been to divide water according to regions, geography and use. Now that scarcity is becoming reality, things must change. “New relationships will be built, if only by necessity,” Tubbs said.

Water quality also fits into the equation, said Bert Garcia, director of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Region 8 ecosystems protection program. Local land use decisions have an impact on national water quality, but there is little money available to deal with the consequences, Garcia said. For example, there are $500 billion in needs nationally for wastewater systems, but only about $6 billion was made available in federal stimulus funds. “Protecting the watersheds is not only the duty of federal managers, but local water departments as well,” Garcia said.

More coverage from The Durango Herald (Joe Hanel):

In a conference that began Monday and concludes Wednesday, water experts from around the West are talking about how they will find enough water to serve the growing population of the West. Colorado’s population is expected to double to 10 million by 2050, and the state has no plan in place to deliver water to all the newcomers. Over the last few years, critics of Colorado’s growth policy – many from the Western Slope – have started to raise the question of where the water will be found. “What we decided is that we need to be talking, and that’s the purpose of this conference today,” said Jennifer Gimbel, director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board…

Water and population recently has become a hot topic at Colorado’s Interbasin Compact Committee, a group chaired by Sherman that is supposed to find a bargain on water sharing between the Western and Eastern slopes. Compact committee organizer Eric Hecox presented data on the booming growth expected in the West. “That growth is driven by our strong economy. So we can’t really stop the growth,” Hecox said. But it will be possible to shape the nature of the growth. As much as three-quarters of the West’s housing units the next 20 to 30 years will be either new or rebuilt, Hecox said. That gives planners the chance to build denser housing that would need less water.

More Colorado water coverage here.

Western States Water Council: 2009 Symposium

Water Use and Land Planning for a Sustainable Future: Scaling and Integrating

Opening session

The Western States Water Council, Colorado Water Conservation Board, Colorado Department of Natural Resources and the Western Governor’s Association are putting on a 3 day symposium this week taking up water and land use planning issues.

Jennifer Gimbel, Director of the CWCB kicked off the afternoon with a presentation about the agency and its role in the state’s water picture. She told attendees that the CWCB is the “water policy” group. She lined out the various responsibilities of the CWCB saying that she has, “The most fascinating job to in the state.”

Financing water projects is a major role for the CWCB using funds from severance taxes and federal penalties to fund low interest loans, primarily to rural and small municipalities. The CWCB does get into larger projects such as Aurora’s reuse project, Prairie Waters.

Another role of the CWCB is compact protection. Around two thirds of the surface water available in Colorado must be left to flow out of state according to the various compacts that the state has signed.

The CWCB is involved with the Upper Colorado, San Juan and Upper Platte River recovery program for endangered species. In 1973 the board received authority to hold water rights for instream flows. They are also involved with flood mitigation, floodplain mapping, water conservation, drought planning and planning future projects.

Gimbel outlined the responsibilities of the Interbasin Compact Committee which was established by the Water for the 21st Century Act. The committee is tackling state needs, basin needs and is working to come up with solutions to the gap in supply indentified by the Statewide Water Supply Inititative (pdf) in 2004.

The Executive Director of the Western States Water Council, Tony Willardson, introduced the organization and its initiatives. The group was formed by the Western Governor’s Association to determine how to move water from the water rich northwestern U.S. to the water poor southwestern U.S. He said that the original group consisted of, “five members wanting to get the water, five members wanting to kill the project and one member working both sides.” The project didn’t get built but the group goes on.

Willardson said that 5 of the fastest growing states are in the west. He added that planners need to face up to the fact that, “We may not be able to sustain unlimited growth,” and, “We have not looked at water when determining how we would grow.” He is pushing “integrated” water and land use planning with water weighed very heavily in the process.

His group is actively trying to identify present and future water requirments while advocating that states do the local planning. Local, regional and state planning should ideally roll up to multi-state regional and and national plans, he said.

Willardson and the WSWC are hoping to see all states start to regulate groundwater.

WSWC has signed agreements with eighteen states and five federal agencies. Willardson says that the states, “have the primary and critical role.”

Monday keynote

John Tubbs, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water and Science, U.S. Department of interior was the keynote speaker today. He listed some of the challenges that the nation faces in the 21st century.

One challenge is our water institutions. In the U.S. they are built to divide the resource. Water is divided by quantity and quality, by federal and state policy and statute. It is divided by watersheds, recreation and on and on. Necessity is now forcing water and land use planners to work together as demand outstrips supplies in many areas and climate change adds unpredictability snowpack and runoff. Pollution is effecting many drinking water aquifers.

Tubbs quoted Winston Churchill: “Americans, after exhausting all other possibilities, will always do the right thing.” The right thing, according to Stubbs, is to bring institutional resources together at the watershed level along with the federal government. After all, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, “Provides water to one out of every five [irrigated] acres in the west.”

Planning for Water Demand in the West

Jennifer Gimbel moderated a panel discussion on planning. The panel consisted of Kay Brothers (Deputy General Manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority), Carolyn Brittin (Deputy Executive Administrator of the Texas Water Development Board) and John Longworth (Bureau Chief, Water Use and Conservation Bureau, New Mexico State Engineer’s office).

Brothers went back in time to set the stage for current Las Vegas water issues and policy. She said that in the 1980s there was competition amongst the various water suppliers in the area. The Southern Nevada Water Authority was formed in 1991 when those involved realized that they needed a regional entity to find and secure water resources. With the SNWA all water and wastewater purveyors are under one roof. They’ve instituted a “Growth Pays for Growth” policy.

Conservation is a major component of policy. They had hoped to reduce consumption to 250 gallons per capita per day by 2012 but realized the goal in 2008. They are now eyeing 190 gpcd by 2020.

The SNWA plan includes developing resources such as groundwater, pursuing pre-Colorado River Compact water rights and ocean desalination.

Brittin said that Texas has a consensus driven bottom-up process for water planning. Current plans call for conservation to meet 23% of future requirements. While reuse is being emphasized environmental concerns for lagging or missing return flows have led to the creation of an environmental flow regime for Texas rivers. Planners must now mesh their plans with state and basin watershed plans, according to Brittin.

In New Mexico 90% of municipal and industrial needs are met with groundwater sources which are very junior in priority, according to Longworth. Groundwater is generally mined. Permits are required for all groundwater appropriations. Utilities must submit non-speculative plans for development. Although state law requires the State Engineer to give a positive or negative opinion on new development the final decision is left up to the counties.

Land Use Planning and Water Demand (Colorado Report)

The final session of the day dealt with water and planning issues in Colorado. Jacob Bornstein, Program Manager, Intrastate Water Management and Development Section, detailed Colorado’s planning efforts. He explained the Colorado Water for the 21st Century Act and showed the CWCB planning tool used to analyze the effects of water decisions as they will play out in the future.

Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District: What is the future of agriculture?

Here’s a recap of a discussion last week at the Lower Ark monthly meeting, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

“Things look pretty bleak for agriculture then?” asked Pueblo County Director Reeves Brown during a presentation by Eric Hecox, administrator of the Interbasin Compact Commission.

“It looks bleak for agriculture if what’s happened in the past continues,” Hecox responded. “There is opportunity for agriculture to lease water to the cities through programs like the Super Ditch. That has the potential of reducing the impact.” Hecox explained the evaluation tool the Colorado Water Conservation Board is developing with the IBCC to look at different mixes of strategies to meet Front Range needs that include new supplies from the Colorado River, conservation, reuse, identified projects, agriculture transfers and reuse.

“Is it impossible to challenge growth?” Brown asked.

“It’s not a strategy we’ve looked at in the past,” Hecox said. “In practice, we can’t stop growth, but we can talk about how we grow.”

Peter Nichols, the Lower Ark’s water attorney, said solutions lie in reasonable compromises, such as the Super Ditch sponsored by the Lower Ark district, that allow resources to be shared. “I was part of a 2001 study, where we looked at water all over the world. No community stopped growing for lack of water,” Nichols said. “In the 1990s, the five fastest growing states were also the driest. People no longer settle where the water is, because it’s convenient to move it.”

Colorado would need between 830,000 and 1.7 million acre-feet of new supplies annually to meet the demand, which probably is not available on the Colorado River alone. Under compacts negotiated in 1922 and 1948, as well an an international treaty with Mexico and federal rules, Colorado is entitled to 445,000-1.4 million acre-feet available annually on average, Hecox said. The high end would most likely be available if the Colorado River supply is somehow increased, either through pipelines from other basins – which appear unlikely – or other measures like cloud seeding, desalinization in California or tamarisk reduction. “If the last 20 years are a guide, a pipeline isn’t likely,” Hecox said.

Still developing projects within Colorado would be worthwhile. The South Platte basin already imports 345,000 acre-feet an the Arkansas basin 132,000 acre-feet annually. “Every acre-foot of West Slope water saves an acre-foot in the Arkansas and South Platte,” Nichols said. “The Arkansas Valley has a tremendous interest in developing West Slope projects.” That’s expensive, however.

A 250,000 acre-foot project would cost between $7.5 billion-$10 billion, according to state projections. The water rights already held by oil companies seeking to one day extract oil from shale are in the 500,000 acre-foot range, which further muddies the supply picture, Hecox said. A call from downstream states – California, Arizona and Nevada – has never happened and may be unlikely, but it could curtail rights within Colorado, Hecox said. Finally, climate change could reduce the amount of water physically available. When the 1922 Colorado River Compact was negotiated, the observed climate was wetter than it is now. Since 2000, flows have fallen far below the historical levels of the previous 80 years…

Drying up agriculture has been the easiest target for cities in the past, and state studies show more is on the way. The amount will depend on planning that begins today. “If we lose 500,000 acres of agriculture, how do you feed all these people?” Lower Ark General Manager Jay Winner asked. “It’s very important to create a relationship between agriculture and the cities.”

More Colorado water coverage here.

California Gulch superfund site update

Here’s an update about progress at operable unit 11 up at the California Gulch superfund site in Leadville, from Ann E. Wibbenmeyer writing for the Leadville Herald Democrat. From the article:

This area, also known as the 11-mile reach, can be seen from U.S. 24 south of Leadville near the Hayden Ranch. The work done in this area was the subject of a tour taken by the Lake County Open Space Initiative on Sept. 10. The issues in the area were caused by the mining operations on the east side of Leadville, according to Mike Holmes, project manager with the EPA. Waste from the mines would wash down the river and deposit along the riverbank, creating areas where no vegetation would grow. The goal of the project along the 11-mile reach is to remediate these fluvial tailings piles along the river.

This project is different than most remediation projects with the EPA, said Holmes. Part of the funding for this project came from a natural resource damages settlement that put money in a trust for state and federal agencies to use on habitat restoration. With this funding, for the first time, remediation is being done in conjunction with restoration, said Holmes. Usually the EPA does the remediation of mine waste, then Division of Wildlife or State Parks, for example, come in to restore the wildlife. Both were done this summer on the same project on the banks of the Arkansas River.

For the remediation, sugar beet pulp was used to neutralize the low pH, or acidity, of the soil. The pH of sugar beet pulp is 8, or basic, according to Holmes. There is calcium carbonate that releases over time in the pulp for a long-term remedy for the soil. Once this occurred, natural grasses and willows were transplanted to the river banks where there was no vegetation before. This will help in the restoration process as well, according to Nicole Vieira with the Colorado Division of Wildlife. This vegetation will make the banks more stable, especially with the unsteady releases from Turquoise Lake.

Another part of the restoration process was placing cross veins in the river. These are rows of boulders across the river that slow down the flow in specified areas. The river bed is excavated so that deep pools are created around the rocks for fish to live in the winter, she said. This will cut down on the amount of migrating in the winter to allow for healthier growth of fish, she said.

Meanwhile a new citizen advisory group is forming to oversee operable unit 6. Here’s a report from Ann E. Wibbenmeyer writing for the Leadville Herald Democrat. From the article:

According to Jennifer Lane, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Lake County Commissioner Mike Bordogna and Leadville Mayor Bud Elliott, the new CAG will be a completely different group than the existing group. Members of the existing citizens’ group are welcome to join the CAG, said Lane. Bordogna said that the two groups could work on parallel tracks. The difference, he said, is that the citizens’ group was appointed by the previous board of commissioners to advise the commissioners. This CAG would be set up under EPA guidelines, use EPA funds and advise the EPA.

The EPA is looking to cap more tailings piles in OU6, according to a report from Ann E. Wibbenmeyer writing for the Leadville Herald Democrat. From the article:

At a public meeting on Sept. 17, [Linda Kiefer, project manager for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency] outlined the pilot study and the four methods being tested as possible remedies for the Greenback, RAM and Makato tailings piles in Stray Horse Gulch. These piles are visible both from the Mineral Belt Trail and East 5th Street, or CR 1. Under the original record of decision for remediating the operable unit 6 of the California Gulch Superfund site, there were two piles that were capped as part of the remedy. The rocks that were used to cover those piles changed the appearance of those historic tailings, which have since been referred to as “the wedding cakes” by Leadvillites ever since. The other part of this decision was to send other acidic runoff into the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel, which was supposed to be plugged to ensure that all the water would be treated in the plant run by the Bureau of Reclamation.

This brought the EPA to announce earlier this year that the remedy chosen in 2003 was not working, and it informed the Lake County commissioners that capping otherwise undisturbed piles was the next option. In 2003, this was an unpopular option, because the community wanted to preserve the history of those piles. The community still wants to preserve that history. The pilot study is an attempt to compromise by capping the piles, but making them blend into the other historic mine piles.

On one section of the test pile, shotcrete will be used as the capping material. This is a light concrete that is sprayed onto the pile. It can be done with various colorations, according to Kiefer. The section next to the concrete will be covered with inert rock and stabilized with timber cribbing, much like what is seen from the Mineral Belt Trail. The inert rock, which is non-acid producing waste rock from other piles, would retain the historic look of the piles…

The hope is that the construction of the test site will be done by the end of October, when the community will be invited on a field trip to see the outcome of the test pile.

More California Gulch coverage here.

150 volunteers show up for Lake Pueblo cleanup day

Here’s a recap of yesterday’s cleanup at Lake Pueblo, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

By the afternoon, they had bagged 2,000 pounds of trash. “We only had hand scales, but we also found things like couches and tires that we couldn’t weigh,” said Tracy Wynn, owner of Aquatic Adventures. “Next year we hope to obtain two industrial floor scales so we can get actual weight on everything collected.” Most of the people worked along the shoreline, but a few divers showed up as well. Boaters ferried crews to shallow coves as well…

Future events will take place on the third Saturday in September to coincide with Project AWARE (Aquatic World Awareness, Responsibility and Education), Wynn added. To help with next year’s event, contact Wynn at 543-3483.

More Fryingpan-Arkansas Project coverage here and here.

CWCB: Upper Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District scores $190,000 for water availability study

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The study was one of 14 grants totaling $3.3 million from the Water Supply Reserve Account, which is administered by the CWCB based on recommendations from the Interbasin Compact Committee and nine basin roundtables. The Upper Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District plans to use the $190,000 from the CWCB as part of a three-year, $400,000 study with the U.S. Geological Survey and other partners to determine water availability.

Also approved last week were three grants from the Rio Grande basin: San Luis Valley Resource Conservation & Development, $200,000 toward a restoration project of Willow Creek, a tributary of the Rio Grande near Creede with historic mine contamination. Trinchera Irrigation Co., $200,000 toward restoration of a diversion canal. Colorado Rio Grande Restoration Foundation, $31,500 for planning studies.

More CWCB coverage here.

Hermosa Creek: Prime cutthroat habitat

From The Durango Herald (Paul Shepard):

The Hermosa Creek basin has two outstandingly remarkable values: recreation, and fish and wildlife. Virtually all outdoor recreation activities are allowed including mountain biking, hunting, fishing, camping, off-roading, horses, hiking, climbing, kayaking, skiing, snowshoeing and recreational vehicles. The basin also supports local agriculture with grazing allotments. To build on the outstandingly remarkable value of fish and wildlife, the Colorado River cutthroat trout reintroduction program is under way, with the Division of Wildlife working with the Forest Service…

Hermosa Creek is considered to be the top location in Colorado because it meets the criteria needed for success, including a waterfall on the East Fork to act as a barrier. If a waterfall is not available, a man-made one must be built. The barriers are needed to keep invasive trout from moving upstream and compromising the native-only populations. Barriers cannot be built just anywhere. Available geologic features must include sufficient gradient and a pinch-point. Additionally, a road must be near for equipment and stocking trucks. Such a road exists in Hermosa Park…

Nearly two decades ago, the Forest Service began this process by acquiring Purgatory Flats on the East Fork of Hermosa via a land swap. In 1991, the Division of Wildlife turned this reach into a cutthroat-only fishery above Sig Creek falls. Two years ago, a man-made barrier was built on the main stem at Hotel Draw, and the reintroduction is ongoing. Once the main stem is completed, this will create two separate populations. Thus far, the cutthroat reintroduction program is considered to be a success. However, the ultimate goal is to connect these two populations, allowing for movement between drainages and promoting population diversity. The Hermosa Park private parcel is the limiting factor to complete success. This is because the confluence of these two sections resides on this private property and is out of the jurisdiction of the Forest Service…

Two years ago, Hermosa Creek received the designation of “Outstanding Waters” by the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission. The creek has such high water quality that, by law, it can’t be compromised. Hermosa Creek is the only stream in Colorado with this designation outside of a national park or wilderness area. Also, the Hermosa Creek watershed is Colorado’s largest unprotected roadless area. Literally tens of thousands of acres are so pristine, they are eligible for wilderness designation. And all this is little more than a half hour’s drive from Durango. However, the Hermosa Park private parcel sits right in the middle of this amazing open space. In an open and public workgroup formed in 2008, unrelated to the land swap issues, a consensus values statement for the Hermosa basin was articulated as: The Hermosa Creek area is exceptional because it is a large, intact (unfragmented) natural watershed containing diverse ecosystems, including fish, plants and wildlife over a broad elevation range, and supports a variety of uses, including recreation and grazing, in the vicinity of a large town.

This diverse working group – ocs.fortlewis.edu/riverprotection/Hermosa – sees the value of an intact watershed and recognizes the special and unique characteristics of the Hermosa Creek area.

More Hermosa Creek watershed coverage here.

Big Thompson River Revival

Here’s a recap of yesterday’s waterway cleanup sponsored by the city of Loveland and the Big Thompson Watershed Forum, from Pamela Dickman writing for the Loveland Reporter Herald. From the article:

The city of Loveland and the Big Thompson Watershed Forum jointly hold two waterway cleanups per year. This one, the fall cleanup, was called the Big Thompson River Revival. Volunteers found all sorts of debris in the river from flip-flops to alcohol bottles to a traffic cone to measuring tapes and more…

Alexander Alden, 7, and Jasmine Kristjansdottir, 10, stuck to the banks of the river with family members and friends. Alexander’s Boy Scout troop encouraged members to participate, but that is not the only reason he decided to pick up trash. Alexander said he was out at Fairgrounds Park “for the waterways.” “The water is what we drink,” he said. “It comes in all sorts of liquids we drink.” Jasmine added, “I’m here to help the world.”

More Big Thompson watershed coverage here and here.

Arkansas River Basin Water Forum: Invasive mussels update

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“We’ve not seen the adults [quaggas/zebra mussels], just the veligers (larvae),” said Elizabeth Brown, invasive species coordinator for the Colorado Division of Wildlife. “We’re on the cutting edge of doing the testing to find them.” Brown spoke this week at the Arkansas River Basin Water Forum, held at Colorado State Univer- sity-Pueblo. Last year, evidence of mussels was found in seven Colorado reservoirs and lakes after they were first detected in Lake Pueblo in January 2008. A total of 102 bodies of water were tested, which means that boat inspection programs or closures of some lakes were successful in stopping mussels from spreading further than they have, Brown said. “The mussels move from body to body of water primarily by boats,” she said…

Brown speculated that more adults have not been found because the zebra and quagga mussels are mainly populating the sediments at the bottom of lakes…

At Pueblo, there were 67 plankton tows, mostly performed by a team led by Colorado State University biology professor Scott Herrmann. The samples were tested at the university, by the Bureau of Reclamation and by the Division of Wildlife. Wildlife found that 70.8 percent of the samples tested positive, with anywhere from one to 76 veligers found in each of the positive samples. The DNA of the veligers was tested as well, showing that both zebra and quagga mussels have breeding population in the lake.

Reclamation last year completed a risk assessment of Lake Pueblo, finding that because of fluctuations in water, dissolved oxygen levels do not favor large outbreaks of mussels. Water providers are wary, however. The Pueblo Board of Water Works is making $1 million in upgrades to its intake system because of the threat.

More invasive species coverage here and here.

San Miguel County: Water 101

Here’s a recap of Friday’s Water 101 event in Telluride, sponsored by the New Community Coalition, the San Juan Citizens Alliance, the San Miguel Whitewater Association, the Telluride Institute, the Southwestern Water Conservation District and the Water Information Program, from Ben Fornell writing for the Telluride Daily Planet. From the article:

On Friday, Colorado Supreme Court Chief Justice Gregory Hobbs was in Telluride to explain how the laws that govern water rights came into being…

Part history lecture, part legal discussion, part vacation slide show, the justice said he was eager to take the members of the room on a “journey,” through the water-sharing cultures of various ancient peoples and into modern day Colorado…

And the crowd of more than 100 packed into the town council room in Rebekah Hall seemed to have no problem sitting attentively at the judge’s feet while he unwound a yarn as long as the Colorado river itself. Slated for an hour, the judge’s talk lasted nearly two, but everyone seemed to be in rapt attention. At the end, the crowd pined for more questions, and despite warnings of “just one more” from a moderator, the judge indulged his desire to dialog with the crowd.

One of the major concepts the judge discussed was the idea that, in Colorado, one has the right to cross private lands in order to obtain water — both physically and with a ditch or conduit.

More Colorado water coverage here.

Greeley Chamber of Commerce: Water Wisdom 101

From The Greeley Tribune (Mike Peters):

In Weld County, where the average precipitation is only 12 to 14 inches per year, water is a valuable commodity. About 50 people from Greeley and Weld County learned that lesson Friday as they took the 2009 Ag Tour — Water Wisdom 101 — of water facilities and heard the water history in Greeley and Weld County…

The tour is an annual event, sponsored by the Greeley Chamber of Commerce, for anyone interested in learning about agriculture in Greeley and Weld. “We want you to look at water,” said Chamber Executive Director Sarah MacQuiddy, “from different points of view — environmental, recreation, development and agriculture.” Meg Spencer of Thrivent Financial of Greeley attended the tour “because you can’t live in Weld County and not know about water. It’s too important.”[...]

The No. 3 ditch was the central irrigation ditch through Greeley and still winds through the city today. Clifford Clift, president of the Greeley Irrigation Co., told the group that “everybody seems to take water for granted, but Greeley wouldn’t exist today without No. 3 ditch.” The ditch was dug by the pioneers to bring water from the Poudre River into the Union Colony for irrigating crops. The Greeley Irrigation Co., along with the city of Greeley, oversees the ditch today and releases water for farmers in this area.

More infrastructure coverage here.

Dillon Reservoir ending water year with cushion for winter

From the Summit Daily News:

Denver Water officials said this week that Dillon Reservoir water storage is slightly above average for this time of year. Going into the winter with a slight cushion helps ensure the reservoir will refill fully next spring, said Bob Peters, a water resource manager with Denver Water. In one of its regular updates on reservoir operations, Denver Water outlined dry, normal and wet scenarios. Even with a drier-than-average winter, the reservoir is likely to fill.

More Denver Water coverage here.

Arkansas Valley Conduit: U.S. Representative John Salazar named to conference committee for the 2010 energy and water appropriations committee

Representative Salazar should be able to help funding for the Arkansas Valley Conduit move out of committe. Here’s a report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

He was named to the conference committee for the 2010 energy and water appropriations committee. The committee will meet Tuesday to iron out differences between House and Senate versions of the appropriations bill. The Colorado Democrat represents many of the communities that would benefit from the $300 million project to bring fresh drinking water to the Lower Arkansas Valley, and has staunchly supported the conduit. “I’m going to keep fighting to keep the conduit funding in there,” Salazar said Friday. “If we’re successful, this will be the realization of a project that people in the Arkansas Valley have been waiting to see for the last 47 years.” Salazar, along with Rep. Betsy Markey, D-Colo., made the argument that the conduit is a project that has long been on the federal waiting list in securing $5 million in appropriations in the House version of the bill.

Sens. Mark Udall and Michael Bennet, both Colorado Democrats, supported that position. The Senate appropriations committee, however, took the stance that the conduit was a new project, so eliminated its funding.

More Arkansas Valley Conduit coverage here.

Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District votes to recommend denial of Pueblo County permit to proposed LaFarge Aggregate and Concrete gravel pit

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District voted to recommend denial of a proposal by LaFarge Aggregate and Concrete to mine gravel and operate asphalt and concrete batch plants at a site between Fountain Creek and Interstate 25 near Pikes Peak International Raceway. “I think it’s essentially a scarring of the landscape and what this group is trying to do,” said Pueblo County Commissioner Jeff Chostner, who chaired the meeting. “(The district) is trying to protect the landscape.” Because LaFarge removed two areas of the project that were in the flood plain, the district board only had the authority to recommend approval or denial of a permit to El Paso County Com- missioners. The LaFarge decision was only the second made by the board, which was formed in July by the state Legislature, and by far the most controversial. While LaFarge representatives tried to make the case that its operation would be temporary – 15 years after excavation began – environmental groups, landowners, sewer districts and one of the state lawmakers who formed the district voiced concern or opposition toward the project.

Sterling City Council talks treatment

From the Sterling Journal Advocate (Forrest Hershberger):

Tuesday night, a public hearing was held by the Sterling City Council regarding the city’s water treatment plant. Several officials were in attendance at the city council meeting, including Jackie Whelan of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. Whelan said Sterling has been in violation of water contamination levels since it completed a four-year study in 2007. Prior to 2000, she said, the state did not monitor uranium levels, so uranium contamination in public water systems was not an issue. However, the city of Sterling’s water system has become the focus because Sterling is the largest municipal water system in the state operating under a violation, according to Whelan. She said the problem is where the municipal wells are drilled, and how deep. Councilman Mark Fuller asked Whelan why the city is the focus of the upgrades when well users just across the city boundary are apparently exempt from the standards. Whelan said the health department does not monitor private water systems. “The state of Colorado has no authority over private wells,” Whelan said.

More Sterling coverage here and here.

Precipitation news: Yuma County

From the Yuma Pioneer (Tony Rayl):

a total of 1.52 inches of rain fell on Yuma this week before the clouds cleared out. That brings September’s total rainfall to 1.68 inches, with five days left in the month. Yuma’s total precipitation now is up to 17.98 inches, tantalizingly close to that magical 20-inch mark. With three months left, 2009 already is one of the wettest in recent history. Of that year-long total, 14.99 inches of it has fallen since May 1, an average of 3-inches per month over the past five.

More Republican River Basin coverage here.