Colorado Springs: Stormwater enterprise demise leaves $82 million worth of projects to compete for general fund dough
December 31, 2009
From the Colorado Springs Independent (J. Adrian Stanley and Pam Zubeck):
Stormwater Enterprise manager Ken Sampley unfolds a large budget graph labeled “DRAFT” in big gray letters. He circles one total: $66,145,000. That was the estimated cost in 2006 of completing Stormwater’s 26 top-priority drainage projects. He circles another number: $82,790,676. The estimated cost for completing the same 26 projects in 2009 dollars.
Stormwater began work in 2007, with a backlog of more than $300 million in projects. So far, Stormwater hasn’t put much of a dent in that. “We never got to the point where we even got close to our $60 million,” Sampley says. “If we can’t get close to the $60 million, why even worry about the next couple hundred million?” On average, Stormwater collected $16 million a year in fees, and spent about $8 million annually on capital projects, leveraging the money where possible. The rest went to other needs: In 2009, over $4 million was spent on maintenance and another $1.7 million to maintain mandated federal water quality standards. The rest was sucked up by engineering, planning studies and administrative costs. Over three years, fees produced just $22.5 million for projects. Stormwater leveraged that to nearly $30 million but still finished less than a third of those top-priority projects.
One project that Stormwater won’t complete has certain consequences. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has said it will declare a northeast section as a 100-year floodplain if repairs and updates aren’t made to the Templeton Gap levee. The floodplain area contains more than 3,000 properties and 5,000 structures. With no Stormwater funds, the Templeton Gap project, which could cost up to $6 million, won’t get done, and most lenders will require property owners within the plain to buy flood insurance. While Stormwater fees cost a single family home $25.80 to $163.80 a year, flood insurance will cost many times that amount. Councilor Scott Hente has fought hard to keep his constituents from paying those big insurance premiums. After 300 passed, he wanted to keep Stormwater fees for at least two years, so Templeton Gap could be completed. But he was in the minority. And his fighting spirit on the issue was tempered when he found out a majority of the floodplain residents voted for 300. “You’re saving yourself a few bucks a year,” Hente says with astonishment, “to incur the luxury of spending $1,000 a year on flood insurance.”[...]
With no fees, the city will have to fork over money for emergency stormwater repairs. It’ll also have to pay for a federally mandated basic stormwater program costing about $1.75 million a year. If the city doesn’t pay, it could face fines of up to $27,500 per day for each water quality-degrading “incident” from the Environmental Protection Agency, plus an additional $10,000 in daily civil fines from the state. If an incident isn’t properly reported or is deliberate, the state can also levy criminal fines of up to $25,000 a day. But the death of Stormwater grieves none so much as Utilities. It loses a crucial partner in controlling rainwater runoff, which eventually makes its way to Fountain Creek — the lightning rod in the city gaining approval for its Southern Delivery System.
More stormwater coverage here.
Here’s a release from the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (Erin Curtis):
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is seeking public comments on a draft Wild and Scenic River Eligibility Report conducted by the Uncompahgre Field Office.
The report is the first step in a Wild and Scenic River evaluation for the 900,000-acre field office, which is being conducted as the field office revises the Uncompahgre Resource Management Plan. The Draft Eligibility Report provides an inventory of river and stream segments on BLM-administered lands, and identifies those segments that meet the eligibility criteria necessary for federal Wild and Scenic River consideration.
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was passed in 1968 to preserve selected rivers or sections in their free-flowing condition in order to protect “the water quality of such rivers and to fulfill other vital national conservation purposes.” To be eligible under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, a river or stream segment must possess one or more “outstandingly remarkable values,” have sufficient water quality to support those values, and be “free-flowing.” The BLM evaluated 174 river and stream segments and found 35 to be eligible.
The draft report identifies five segments of the San Miguel River (approximately 55 miles), two segments of the Dolores River (approximately 20 miles), and two segments of the Gunnison River (approximately 18 miles) as eligible. Eligibility review does not take into account potentially conflicting uses or the manageability of a river segment, which will be addressed in the upcoming suitability phase.
At this stage, the BLM is specifically looking for information regarding free-flowing condition and outstandingly remarkable values, including vegetation, wildlife, cultural, recreation, hydrologic, geologic, and scenic. Public comments on the draft report will be accepted through Feb. 26. The report is available at http://www.blm.gov/co/st/en/fo/ufo/uncompahgre_rmp.html.
Comments can be emailed to uformp@blm.gov or mailed to the Uncompahgre Field Office, Attn: RMP Revision, 2645 S. Townsend Ave., Montrose, CO 81401.
“Once the eligibility study has been finalized, we’ll be working with stakeholders to look at each eligible segment to determine whether or not it is suitable for Wild and Scenic River consideration,” said Uncompahgre Field Manager Barb Sharrow. “Public involvement in this process is essential.”
The suitability study will be included in the Resource Management Plan revision, which will analyze a range of possible recommendations. The BLM may or may not actively recommend suitable segments for Wild and Scenic River designation, based on input from stakeholders and the public.
River segments determined to be eligible are afforded interim protective management by the BLM until a suitability study is completed. The Resource Management Plan revision and suitability analysis is scheduled to be completed in 2013.
The Cache La Poudre River is currently the only river in Colorado with segments included in the Wild and Scenic River system. For more information on Wild and Scenic Rivers, visit http://www.nps.gov/rivers/.
More Wild and Scenic coverage here.
Snowpack news
December 31, 2009
From the Summit Daily News (Robert Allen):
Dillon Reservoir recorded 9 inches of snow this month — accurate before Wednesday — relative to 34.5 inches for the entire month in 2008, Burroughs said. While El Niño is often blamed for higher snowfall in Colorado’s southern mountains, Burroughs said local observers have noticed “just really a different storm track this year.”
State Representative Kathleen Curry plans to introduce bill to allow boaters access to streams running through private property
December 31, 2009
From the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Charles Ashby):
Though settled in other Western states, the question of whether rafters, kayakers and fishing enthusiasts have a right to use Colorado’s waterways when they go through private land remains a sticking point between those users and private landowners. While there is court precedent on the subject, exactly what it allows is still in dispute, the Gunnison lawmaker said. Curry, who shocked the state this week with her announcement she is leaving the Democratic Party to become an independent, plans to introduce a measure to allow commercial rafters to traverse private land even without a landowner’s consent.
The issue was sparked anew this summer when a Texas developer, Lewis Shaw, purchased thousands of acres of land on the Taylor River in Gunnison County with the intent of reselling it as exclusive 35-acre ranches. As a result, the developer notified two long-established rafting companies that they no longer could cross the land, Curry said…
Danny Tomlinson, a Denver lobbyist who represents a landowners’ group that routinely opposes such measures, said he only recently heard about the proposal and wouldn’t comment on it, either. He did, however, say his group doesn’t want to see anything that alters People v. Emmert, a 1979 Colorado Supreme Court case that ruled rafters who touch the bank or riverbed are trespassing, although some lawyers say that case affects even those who merely float through. “We’ve had concerns about various different floating, fishing, trespassing kinds of legislation,” Tomlinson said of Creekside Coalition, a group of private landowners that is expected to oppose this measure, too. “We haven’t seen a copy of the bill, so it’s hard to quantify what our concerns would be, but we would have serious concerns if it made significant changes to the Emmert case.”
Bob Hamel, president of the Colorado River Outfitters Association, said the issue is one of jobs and fairness. Hamel said the courts have long held that the water flowing down the state’s streams are publicly owned and that the right to float on it shouldn’t be an issue. “We’re not trying to take away the landowner’s rights, but rafting is a $142 million business in Colorado, and it employs hundreds of people. We’re just trying to protect jobs and people’s livelihoods,” Hamel said.
More whitewater coverage here.
From The Green River Star (Jack H. Smith):
One story that hit home hard and sent shock waves across Sweetwater County was the possibility of a transbasin water diversion project. In April, Fort Collins entrepreneur Aaron Million visited Green River to speak at public scoping meeting conducted by the Army Corps of Engineers…
His plan was met that night and in the following months with stark opposition. “Mr. Million gets the last allocation of Colorado water, and we get the shaft,” Western Wyoming Professor Craig Thompson said at the scoping meeting. Local leaders, residents and government agencies would all speak out against the project.
“If the Million pipeline is built, the river below the point of diversion and Flaming Gorge Reservoir will suffer eternal drought,” Wyoming Game and Fish Department Fisheries Biologist Craig Amadio said.
From the Glenwood Springs Post Independent (John Stroud):
Initial lab tests had indicated the plant may already be at 85 percent capacity, but the tests were inconsistent, according to an engineers report presented at the Dec. 22 Carbondale Board of Trustees meeting. A problem was detected that was believed to have resulted in the higher readings, and subsequent tests indicate the plant is actually at about 55 percent capacity, the report indicated. As a result, “The present plant will be capable of treating present and future growth flows for the next five to 10 years as a result of these interim improvements,” the report stated. Also reinforcing the town’s decision to proceed with the plant upgrades rather than a new plant at this point was an engineer’s determination that the quality of the water coming out of the plant and going into the river is better than most treatment plants in the area, Baker said. Another factor working in the town’s favor to extend the life of the existing plant is a decrease in demand on the facility, and lower costs for some of the work related to the economy, he said…
Approximately $123,000 worth of work was done on the plant this year, mostly to address an odor problem that became noticeable around the north end of town and in nearby unincorporated Satank last winter. So far this winter, the odor has not returned. The $1.7 million worth of upgrades will be able to be paid for out of the town’s existing wastewater fund, which had a $3.9 million fund balance going into 2009. Town trustees have also been considering an increase in tap fees for new development as a way to pay for an update to Carbondale’s 14-year-old water and wastewater master plan, which would help determine when exactly a new treatment plant would be needed.
More wastewater coverage here.
Snowpack news
December 29, 2009
From The Denver Post:
Through Monday, the state’s snowpack this season is at 82 percent of its 30-year average. The Upper Rio Grande River basin in south-central Colorado has fared the best at 94 percent of average. The basins of the Yampa and White rivers in northwest Colorado have done the poorest, at 72 percent.
Officials have not expressed alarm, since Colorado’s snowiest months are still ahead. Besides skiing and beautiful winter landscapes, snow provides about 90 percent of the state’s year-round water supply.
Noctilucent clouds being seen a lower latitudes
December 29, 2009
From DNA:
“These clouds exist literally on the edge of space,” said James Russell, principal investigator for NASA’s Aeronomy of Ice in the Mesosphere (AIM) satellite, adding that the clouds form only in a very narrow band a little more than 50 miles (80km) above Earth’s surface. According to a report in National Geographic News, once seen mostly in the Arctic, night-shining clouds are now appearing more frequently at lower latitudes. Scientists suspect that the increase in night-shining clouds may be due to climate change. Even as surface temperatures rise, the upper atmosphere is getting colder due to the buildup of carbon dioxide, creating perfect conditions for cloud formation, according to experts…
High-altitude night-shining clouds are similar in structure to lower-level clouds – a fact that is “startling,” according to AIM deputy principal investigator Scott Bailey, of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. “That’s because the two types of clouds form under such radically different conditions,” Bailey said. AIM’s data on night-shining clouds have told scientists a lot about the upper atmosphere. “The processes that control these clouds are very likely similar to the ones that control clouds down near the surface of Earth,” said Bailey…
In addition, more night-shining clouds tend to light up the skies during times when the sun is quiet, according to Daniel Marsh of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. “That’s because when solar activity is most intense, ultraviolet radiation breaks up the air” water molecules and prevents the clouds from forming,” Marsh said. Volcanoes also inject water vapor into the upper atmosphere, which can lead to night-shining clouds.
From The Telluride Daily Planet (Ben Fornell):
The project endeavors to replace Ophir’s water treatment plant, create a new source for the water, and build a 35,000-gallon storage tank. The current water-treatment plant is old, and bleeding the town’s meager coffers, as the repairs seem to never end. And a water tank, Barnes said, is a public safety necessity. “What if we had to put out a fire?” Barnes asked. “We need that kind of capacity.”
Previously, the town had relied on an archaic system that took water from Warner Springs with a simple redwood box. “You could have dropped a kid’s floaty boat in and watch it go right into our pipe,” Barnes said. The new system features a device that will run alongside a creek in Waterfall Canyon and take a bit more water with more filtration capabilities…
The project was financed with $390,000 through a grant from the Colorado Department of Local Affairs and an interest-free loan of $500,000 as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Barnes said one of the town’s biggest goals was keeping the project affordable for its roughly 200 residents, and not creating a new mil levy to pay for it. As of now, the project will be financed through the town’s existing 2.9 mil debt service levy. However, the town has increased water fees by $20 per quarter to help pay for future water expenses.
More infrastructure coverage here.
Moab: Progress report on moving uranium tailings
December 28, 2009
From the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Gary Harmon):
Abut 630,000 tons will have been moved from Moab to the disposal cell near Crescent Junction by year’s end, said Wendee Ryan of the U.S. Department of Energy. The Energy Department and its contractor, Energy Solutions Corp., began moving the tailings pile this year. Moab residents and downstream water providers lobbied for years to have the 16-million-ton pile of mill tailings moved from its spot along the north bank of the Colorado River to a cell up against the Bookcliff Mountains at Crescent Junction that is deemed less likely to contaminate the river.
The pile is being moved by train from Moab to the disposal cell 30 miles north. It takes about 80 minutes for the train to travel to Crescent Junction with a full load of tailings, Ryan said. “It’s very slow and deliberate,” she said.
There, the contents of each 33-ton and 40-ton container placed in the cell are marked via Global Positioning System, said Fred Smith of Energy Solutions. The cell, in which native earth has been scoured out to form a half-mile-wide pit, will be filled with tailings and then recovered with the native earth. Once the tailings pile has been moved, it will fill a cell about a half-mile wide and a mile long, Smith said.
Regional Rotary Clubs are working together to help fund the construction of new water filtration systems and sanitary latrines in Nicaragua
December 27, 2009
From the Longmont Daily Times Call. (Magdalena Wegrzyn):
Seven regional Rotary Clubs have combined forces to support a project that will fund the construction of new water filtration systems in the northern Nicaraguan villages of Los Pinares, Barrio Nuevo and Miraflor. Clubs of Boulder Valley, Carbon Valley, Conifer, Golden, Mead, Twin Peaks and University Hills in Denver have raised $60,518 in donations and grants for the Los Pinares project. Fundraising is still under way for the other two villages. “Once you see the need, you can’t not do something,” said Dale Rademacher, a Mead Rotarian and chairman of the committee organizing the project. “I call these the forgotten people.”
From The Colorado Springs Gazette (R. Scott Rappold):
…after two summers of releases here [Arkansas River Basin], the beetles have eaten little of their favorite food, and experts fear they are leaving, dying or becoming food themselves. “In most cases that I’ve seen so far, it seems like the beetles are gone and we’re trying to come up with ways to deal with that,” said Dan Bean, director of the state’s Palisade Insectary, where the beetles are bred…
In summer 2008, the National Resource Conservation Service released 27,000 beetles along Fountain Creek north of Pueblo. Last summer, after biologists found no trace of the beetles, they released another 15,000. “We did see a slight amount of defoliation, but it often takes a couple years for the beetles to take hold and establish,” said conservation service biologist Patty Knupp. She will return in spring to look for beetles.
Elsewhere in the Arkansas Basin, there have been only a few pockets with slight signs of beetles eating the tamarisk. Said Bean, “There could be some quirks in climate and weather that cause them to not make it, but I think it’s more likely it’s something biological. Something is eating them.” He suspects other insects are the culprit.
One the other hand here’s a story about a mystery population of the little buggers in Fremont County from October 2008. From the post:
On the drive back to Grand Junction after visiting Pueblo in July, Bean noticed the tamarisk at the U.S. 50 bridge over Beaver Creek were yellowing – a tell-tale sign of beetle defoliation. He stopped, and sure enough there was a thriving beetle population in the trees below the bridge. Where the beetles came from is anyone’s guess. The Bureau of Reclamation has, for years, done controlled releases of beetles on trees below Lake Pueblo, but Bean knows of no official releases of beetles upstream of Lake Pueblo. “If the conditions were just right, they could migrate upstream,” Bean said. The beetles were found in a rocky canyon, which is similar to the areas where the same type of insects have thrived in eastern Utah and Western Colorado.
Pagosa Springs: Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District scores $48,700 grant for water audits to help with conservation efforts
December 27, 2009
From The Pagosa Springs Sun (Chuck McGuire):
Working with Great Western Institute, a Colorado-based non-profit, the district successfully procured the “Water Efficiency Grant” to help cover costs associated with performing “SMART WATER audits” and installing water-conserving fixtures at select local businesses. Last winter, PAWSD conducted pilot SMART WATER audits at various volunteer businesses to gauge potential water savings and community-wide interest in a fixtures retrofit program. In the process, the district evaluates a business’s water use and determines water savings solutions. Typically, the most obvious and efficient actions include replacement of older water-wasting toilets, shower heads, and spray valves, while adding aerators to existing faucets, thereby reducing unnecessary flow and hot water usage. The district also performed irrigation audits to evaluate outdoor water usage by certain homeowner associations. Again, the audits identified needed fixture replacements and established annual reporting requirements, which will later detail water use before and after specified retrofits are made. Too, such “before and after” comparisons will measure program benefits from year to year…
In 2010, PAWSD intends to audit and retrofit another 15 area businesses, at an estimated annual savings of approximately 11.5 acre feet, or 3,747,287 gallons of precious water. The district invites all interested businesses to contact Water Conservation Coordinator Mat deGraaf to learn more about the program, or schedule a consultation for consideration in the next phase of SMART WATER audits beginning in March 2010. Meanwhile, for additional water conservation programs and practices directed at all water users, visit the PAWSD Web site at pawsd.org, click on the Conservation link, then click on Catch the Wave and Save. You can also contact deGraaf at 731-2691.
More conservation coverage here.
Vail Valley: ‘Girls in Science’ expands to five valley schools
December 26, 2009
From the Vail Daily:
The Gore Range Natural Science School’s after-school program, Girls In Science, has expanded from one to five Vail Valley Schools. The program was launched at Avon Elementary School in 2007 and then added at Brush Creek Elementary last year. This year, the program is being offered at Avon, June Creek, Brush Creek, Edwards, and Gypsum elementary schools with spaces for 25 students per class. “Girls are truly engaged with this program,” said Markian Feduschak, executive director of the Avon-based Science School, “Educators and administrators value the program’s unique ability to advance literacy, develop lasting role models that inspire careers in science, and build confidence in the classroom.”
Lara Carlson, who teaches the program in Avon, and Natalia Hanks, director of Development at the Science School, started the program. In its first year, Girls In Science was taught by Carlson, fellow Science School colleague Erin-Rose Schneider and Vail Mountain School sophomore Holly Domke. Twenty third through fifth grade girls took the class. On the first day of the program, girls examine their perceptions of who a scientist is. Over the course of the year, lessons are drawn from the natural sciences, engineering, architecture and forensics. Girls build skyscrapers out of paper, mimic tsunami formations with slinky toys and practice the scientific method by determining how many drops of water can fit on the surface of a penny.
More education coverage here.
Leadville: Parkview Water District to raise rates
December 26, 2009
From the Leadville Herald Democrat:
The increase will amount to about 10 percent across the board for residential and commercial customers for all meter sizes. For most residential customers, this will translate to an extra $3 per month on their bills since most customers stay below the 3,000-gallon minimum each month. For the customers who use more than the monthly minimum of 3,000 gallons, there will also be an increase of 30 cents per thousand gallons above the minimum. Even with the increase, the average monthly water charge for Parkville residential customers will still be substantially less than the Colorado statewide average water charge of $37.20 per month, Teter said. Being too far below the state average for water rates has had a negative effect on recent grant applications for Parkville. Both state and federal grant agencies are reluctant to award grant money to districts with rates that are too low to sufficiently cover operating and capital costs.
With Parkville’s line-replacement program, water loss and waste in the system have been reduced substantially. Total water through the system is half what it was ten years ago even though with more customers. Less water loss means less pumping costs, a major cost component of Parkville’s operation. Several large capital projects are carried over from year to year for lack of funding, in the hopes that increased revenue and reduced expenses will eventually allow Parkville to add more money to additional capital improvements.
More infrastructure coverage here.
Merry Christmas
December 25, 2009
Merry Christmas to one and all.
Colorado Water Conservation Board to meet January 26-27 in Denver
December 25, 2009
From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board:
Notice is hereby given that a meeting of the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) will be held on Tuesday, January 26, 2010, commencing at 10:15 a.m. and continuing through Wednesday, January 27, 2010. This meeting will be held at the Hilton Garden Inn, Denver Tech Center, 7675 E. Union Avenue, Denver, CO 80237, (303) 770-4200. The CWCB will hold a workshop on the Colorado River Water Availability Study (CRWAS) Tuesday, January 26, 2010, from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. at this same location.
More CWCB coverage here.
Colorado Springs city council approves $1.11 billion budget for Colorado Springs Utilities
December 25, 2009
From the Colorado Springs Independent:
In approving Colorado Springs Utilities’ $1.11 billion budget, City Council this week allowed the city-owned agency to use water rate money to fund $75.8 million in projects over 10 years. The projects will satisfy regulations imposed on the Southern Delivery System pipeline that will bring water from Pueblo Reservoir. Money for those projects is included in the rate base starting in January, although roughly $64 million in work won’t begin until after 2010. The idea is to spread the cost over 10 years, rather than coming up with all the money now, says Councilman Randy Purvis, adding that amortizing payments spreads the cost to future ratepayers. Projects include dredging Fountain Creek, developing wetlands and erosion control. The largest sum, $49.7 million, comprises five annual cash payments to the Fountain Valley Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District formed this year to improve and preserve the corridor. The Utilities budget contains rate increases that will raise the typical residential bill by about $1.90 a month, which would have been larger but for reductions in gas charges due to falling fuel costs.
More Southern Delivery System coverage here.
Pueblo West: Water and sewer rates to rise
December 25, 2009
From The Pueblo West View (Mike Spence):
…the 7.9 percent hike in water rates and the 3.2 percent increase in wastewater fees aren’t enough to offset the district’s costs. The fee hikes will increase the monthly water bill for the average water user by $3.51 ($1.75 for water and $1.76 for wastewater).
Steve Harrison, Pueblo West’s director of utilities, has been pushing for higher increases for several years. His proposal – 13.5 percent for both water and wastewater services – received some support from members of the Pueblo West Metropolitan District board of directors at past meetings. In an effort to close the funding gap, Harrison proposed the 13.5 percent hike in fees at the metro board’s Dec. 14 meeting. “The sewer fund is seriously underfunded,” Harrison said. “We need help.” Despite Harrison’s plea, the request was voted down.
More Pueblo West coverage here.
South Platte Roundtable recap
December 25, 2009
From the Fort Lupton Press (Rosalie Everson):
“There is virtually no new water left to develop in the South Platte River Basin,” Mike Shimmin, a member of the Interbasin Compact Committee said in a roundtable progress report [December 17] at the Larimer County Fairgrounds. There might not be any more water to develop, but there will be major population growth, perhaps double, in the basin, an area that includes the northeastern quadrant of the state. Closing the door to new residents, an option one member of the audience inquired about, would not completely solve the problem. Fifty percent of the increased water users will be the children and grandchildren of those who are already living in Colorado. They will need water for their basic needs, and they will also expect to fish, water ski, work and eat, priorities that can conflict with the water that will, or by 2050, will not, be supported by the existing water supply.
Agriculture in the South Platte River Basin is big business, with an annual value of more than $3 billion in crops sold. If water currently irrigating the 1,027,000 acres of cropland in the South Platte Basin is diverted to growing cities, then the average $3,102 of income per crop acre will evaporate, drying up not only farms but also the small town businesses and special district taxes-school, library, and fire protection, their profits support. Recreation, a huge generator to Colorado’s economy, could be affected if farms aren’t irrigated, Simmons said. “Much of sports and recreation environment along the river and streams is created by return flow from irrigation,” he added…
There’s also an impending double water whammy. Underground reservoirs used by municipalities are shrinking, so they are acquiring surface water rights to make up for the shortage. “We have data from South Metro Denver, and Northern El Paso County that they will need 110,000 acre feet,” said Eric Hecox, the section chief of the Colorado Water Conservation Board…
The gap between available water and increased municipal needs should be accomplished without the destruction of the agricultural economy, the roundtable members said. “We need to look at every way we can to solve this gap,” Evans said. The solution most endorsed was increasing water storage, with several members noting that the proposed Glade Reservoir would have been filled to 60 percent of its capacity had last summer’s above average rainfall been “captured.”
Colorado’s population passes the 5 million mark
December 24, 2009
From the Associated Press via The Durango Herald:
U.S. Census Bureau estimates released Wednesday show the state’s population went slightly over 5 million in July. The population rose by nearly 90,000 people from last year for a 1.8 percent increase. Neighboring Wyoming was the fastest-growing state with a 2.1 percent increase. It was followed by Utah and then Texas. The West led the nation, growing as a region at 1.2 percent.
More Colorado water coverage here.
CWCB: Is there a transmountain pipeline in Colorado’s future?
December 24, 2009
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
The state is pondering proposed pipelines to move water from most areas of the state to the Front Range in an attempt to meet future water demands. Not all will be built, and none has been officially endorsed…
Strategies in the report that move water from one basin to another include:
Flaming Gorge Pipeline: Proposed by Aaron Million, it would bring water from Flaming Gorge Reservoir in Wyoming to reservoirs near Fort Collins and Colorado Springs. Yampa Pumpback: A pipeline would look at bringing water from Maybell to the Brighton area.
Green Mountain Pumpback: Water from Green Mountain Reservoir would be pumped back to Dillon Reservoir and moved to the Denver area.
Big Straw: A pipeline would take water from the Colorado River at the state line near Grand Junction and bring it to the Front Range.
At the request of Front Range roundtables, another project, the Blue Mesa Pumpback in the Gunnison River basin, also is being studied…
There are also alignments of pipelines in both the Arkansas and South Platte basins that would bring water to the Front Range, possibly storing it in Rueter-Hess Reservoir, a 72,000 acre-foot reservoir constructed near Parker that currently lacks water to fill it.
Here’s some background on solving Colorado’s water supply problems, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
The newest project, proposed by entrepreneur Aaron Million, would build a pipeline from Flaming Gorge Reservoir that would go around Colorado’s Rockies rather than through them. Another, the Yampa River pumpback plan, was suggested by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Those still face the pressure of a skeptical audience. The concept behind each of the projects – building a large-volume project to bring more water across the Continental Divide – is under renewed study by the Colorado Water Conservation Board, but a long way from becoming reality. Taking water from the Rio Grande basin is for the moment off the table, but all of the Colorado River basins are part of the CWCB study. Other plans look at moving water from farmlands in the Arkansas and South Platte valleys to serve population growth…
For the next decade, the major cities began developing alternatives to the big projects of the past, leading to major changes in how water was developed. There was more talk of recycling, drying up more farmland and more long-range planning. There was more speculation by private developers to buy ag water rights from struggling farmers to hold until the cities were willing to pay. That happened during two very wet decades in the 1980s and ’90s.
When the drought of 2002 came, the state mobilized in new ways. The CWCB launched its Statewide Water Supply Initiative, which in 2004 identified more agricultural dry-ups as the easiest way to meet future urban demands. State voters turned down Referendum A in 2003 that would have created a $2 billion state fund to develop projects. When the top-down approach didn’t work, the state Legislature created the grass-roots Interbasin Compact Committee and basin roundtables to help tackle the gnawing question: Could another transmountain project be developed?[...]
The state studies of water projects looked at the relative feasibility of each and found that it could be expensive to develop more than one. Each project could bring about 250,000 acre-feet and would cost between $7.5 billion and $10 billion to build. “Projects have a better chance of success if they evaluate and mitigate impacts and produce benefits in both the basin of use and the basin of origin,” [Jennifer Gimbel, CWCB executive director] said.
Even if agreements are reached, more water would be needed. Conservative estimates of growth and water needs call for 830,000 acre-feet of new supplies in 50 years, when the state’s population is expected to double to 10 million people. Could the carrying capacity of existing diversions be increased? “The state hasn’t looked at this comprehensively,” Gimbel said. “However, most of the transmountain projects are being used to full capacity, depending on the demand pattern on the East Slope. In other words most projects use as much transmountain water as is physically and legally available.” The IBCC’s model for balancing water portfolios between strategies – conservation, more diversions, ag dry-ups – is a useful tool, but has not produced the answer so far. Groups looking at the problem focused on general proportions, not a specific project at the most recent meeting.
More CWCB coverage here.
Aspinall Unit update
December 23, 2009
From email from Reclamation (Dan Crabtree):
Flows in the Black Canyon and Gunnison Gorge decreased last week. This was due to water being diverted through the Gunnison Tunnel periodically at the rate of 100 cfs to fill Fairview Reservoir. Also, the 900 cfs flow through the Crystal Powerplant is not in an ideal operating range for that particular unit. This, combined with less than projected inflows, required that releases be reduced to 800 cfs.
Reminder – The next Aspinall Operations Meeting will be held on January 21st at the Montrose Holiday Inn Express, 1391 S. Townsend, starting at 1:00 p.m.
More Aspinall Unit coverage here.
Energy policy — coal: Colorado scores $7.3 million for coal mine cleanup
December 23, 2009
From the Associated Press via KRDO.com:
The grant announced Tuesday is part of a total $369 million going to 28 eligible coal-producing states. The reclamation program is financed through fees on coal production and the grants are based on each state’s past and current production.
More coal coverage here.
