Energy policy — nuclear: Locals debate Powertech’s proposed uranium in-situ mine near Nunn
June 30, 2010
From KUNC (Kirk Siegler):
“People have a misunderstanding about uranium and nuclear power in general,” says Powertech CEO Richard Clement. “People conceive of uranium being a major radioactive substance where if you just become associated with it you’re going to be radiated and killed.”[...]
“People just don’t understand what we’re trying to accomplish here, really it’s a very non invasive type of development,” Clement says. A fire hose would be injected a couple hundred feet below the ground to break up the uranium, and pump it back to the surface…
Colorado environmental officials appear poised to make sure those things won’t happen again, as uranium mining appears poised for a comeback. The state is currently rewriting regulations to protect groundwater from toxic runoff. That could be one more road block in front of President Obama’s push for more nuclear power. But State Department of Natural Resources spokesman Theo Stein says the intent is not to stop uranium mining, but make sure it’s done safely. “Groundwater in that part of the state is precious and limited, and it’s important to make sure that any industrial activity does not adversely impact that groundwater,” Stein says.
[Joe Bagby] says he thinks the mine will happen anyway, because he says it’s a top down push from president Obama, a push that may get more of boost in Colorado and nationwide in light of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
From The Glenwood Springs Post Independent (Julie Sutor):
“We can’t continue to take and take water from the Upper Colorado without accounting for the serious impacts to fish and wildlife habitat,” said Ken Neubecker of Colorado Trout Unlimited. “This river is on the brink. A vibrant, healthy river system in the Upper Colorado is every bit as important to the future of Colorado as the water it supplies to our farms and cities.” Neubecker nominated the Upper Colorado for its designation on American Rivers’ 2010 list.
The diversions of concern to conservation groups (and headwaters communities like Summit County) are the proposed Moffat Project and Windy Gap Firming Project. Both proposals would expand reservoir storage capacity on the Front Range to move more West Slope water from the Colorado River and its tributaries, including the Blue River in Summit County and the Fraser River and Williams Fork in Grand County.
Denver Water and Northern Water, the two Front Range water providers behind the projects, say habitat protection and water conservation are big priorities, and such principles already figure into their project plans and their daily operations. “I think we’re going to take care of a lot of their concerns,” Northern Water spokesman Brian Werner said of the Windy Gap Firming Project, which would increase supply for a number of Front Range communities including Loveland, Broomfield, Longmont and Greeley. “We’ve been working long and hard to reach some West Slope compromises, and we’ve proposed some stuff that’s never been proposed in this state before, in terms of taking care of the Upper Colorado.”[...]
Neubecker doesn’t feel either the Moffat Project or the Windy Gap Project necessarily equates to a death sentence for the Upper Colorado. On the contrary, if done in the right way, both have the potential to enhance protections for the river’s aquatic ecosystem and adjacent riparian habitat. But for that to happen, he says, the projects must do two things: First, they should take into account the cumulative environmental impacts of existing water diversions and not just examine the impacts of the proposed projects in a vacuum. The Colorado headwaters have been subject to major water depletions for more than 100 years, and wildlife has paid the price, according to American Rivers. Second, guidelines for future diversions and flow management should be flexible enough to adjust for unforeseen environmental impacts — a concept called “adaptive management” — something Werner said Northern Water supports. “We need to have some serious and meaningful mitigations and have the proponents of these projects recognize the impacts they’re having on these rivers beyond the narrow legal concepts under Colorado water law. Lawns recover a lot faster than rivers do. For a river to lose that water is a matter of life and death,” Neubecker said.
More Colorado River Basin coverage here.
Western Governors Association annual meeting recap
June 30, 2010
From the Flathead Beacon (Dan Testa):
In a discussion about the demand for water outstripping supplies, Robert Glennon, author of, “Unquenchable: America’s Water Crisis and What to Do About It,” assailed many state governments, like Georgia’s, for not taking more drastic conservation steps following the severe drought there. “This is about the health of the American economy,” Glennon said. “We may fret about running out of oil, but water lubricates the American economy just as oil does.” The problem is compounded, he added, by the fact that many Americans are migrating from the coasts, where water is more abundant, to Western cities, where it’s scarce. Developing renewable energy sources, like ethanol and solar power, he added, also use vast amounts of water.
Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter, of Idaho, asked whether settling water rights with tribes should be a top priority. “Unless and until these tribal rights are quantified,” Susan Cottingham, of the Montana Reserved Water Rights Compact Commission, answered. “It is this uncertainty hanging over all the other water rights.”
Runoff news: Arkansas River flows dropping
June 30, 2010
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
As of Tuesday, more than 50,000 acre-feet of water has moved through the Boustead Tunnel into Turquoise Lake from the collection system high in the Colorado River basin. “We’re close to our projections,” said Roy Vaughan, Fry-Ark Project manager. The visible snow is largely melted off in the mountains, coming off faster than would be optimal for water production. A slower melt would have allowed more opportunity to capture flows. The good news is that requirements for minimum flows will ease into July, providing better chances to capture water…
Flows in the Arkansas River have dropped dramatically in the last three weeks to about one-third of what they were at the beginning of June. On Tuesday, there was about 1,600 cubic feet per second flowing at Avondale.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
Colorado Springs, in the current negotiations with the Bureau of Reclamation for its proposed Southern Delivery System, argues that it would be fair to be granted the same rate Pueblo has for storage in Lake Pueblo, and to not pay an annual fee for conveyance.
Pueblo’s rate and payment arrangements were determined under different circumstances and for different reasons during negotiations in 2000. Pueblo received a 25-year contract to store nonproject water in Lake Pueblo in 2000 for a fixed price of $17.35 per acre-foot. The contract began at 3,000 acre-feet, and increases to 15,000 acre-feet by 2025. At the same time, it agreed to pay its share, 77.58 percent, for construction of the South Outlet Works and Delivery Manifold over a 25-year contract at 3.046 percent — about $169,000 annually, or $4.2 million over time.
Reclamation offered Colorado Springs storage and conveyance for $75 an acre-foot and an exchange contract for $50 per acre-foot, a deal termed “unacceptable” by SDS Project Director John Fredell at the end of a June 15 negotiating session. Throughout the negotiations, Colorado Springs tried to hammer home the point that as part of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District, it should be entitled to the same terms Pueblo received in its 2000 contract. Colorado Springs also maintains it should not have to pay to use the North Outlet Works, which it intends to pay for and construct, along with its SDS partners — Security, Fountain and Pueblo West.
The North Outlet Works was bumped up in Colorado Springs planning in 2008, after it became apparent the connection on the south end of the dam, either through excess capacity or enlargement, would not be available. Colorado Springs wants the power to sell its own excess capacity in the new connection to help pay for it…
Colorado Springs already benefits from the Fry-Ark Project through the Fountain Valley Conduit, as well as arrangements made for the use of Twin Lakes and Turquoise Lake by the Homestake Project, which includes Aurora as a partner. Fountain Valley (Colorado Springs, Security, Widefield, Fountain, Stratmoor Hills) is entitled to 25 percent of the relatively cheap Fry-Ark allocations each year, as well as ample storage space for project water in Lake Pueblo. But Colorado Springs and its SDS partners want more. SDS is seeking to use excess-capacity space in Lake Pueblo that was never part of the Fry-Ark Project to accommodate growth, provide redundancy and fully use water rights obtained after the Fry-Ark Project began. Negotiations continue July 15 in Fountain.
Pueblo, on the other hand, received contracts for parts of the Fry-Ark Project that were envisioned as far back as 1960. At that time, Congress was getting close to passing the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project Act, and a large treatment plant was envisioned at the base of Pueblo Dam that would provide water for Pueblo and communities below…
Concurrently, Pueblo was improving its own system. In the 1950s, Pueblo’s two water companies, which served either the north or south side of the Arkansas River, merged. Both operated river intakes, which are still used occasionally. There also were wells at the honor farm. When Pueblo Dam was completed in the 1970s, the South Outlet Works was built with a capacity of about 359 cubic feet per second. In all the planning documents, 310 cfs were reserved for Pueblo and the Arkansas Valley Conduit, as part of the Fry-Ark Project. The final allocation gives Pueblo capacity of 278.5 cfs (180 million gallons per day); Fountain Valley, 30.6 cfs; Pueblo West, 18.94 cfs; and future Arkansas Valley Conduit, 30.94 cfs. Pueblo is nowhere near using that full capacity, while Fountain Valley and Pueblo West already occasionally hit the limits. Land was set aside on federal property for a filter plant that would eventually be built to serve Pueblo and the conduit. In addition, there was an understanding throughout the development of the Fry-Ark Project that Pueblo would receive consideration on 20,000 acre-feet of storage space, said Terry Book, deputy director of the Pueblo Board of Water Works. “When we did our negotiations, we looked at what the legislation said and documented the history and correspondence between the parties,” Book said. Those records show a clear trail back to 1967 of official correspondence between Reclamation, Pueblo water board and the Southeastern district that led up to the 2000 negotiations. Over that time, Pueblo constructed a new water treatment plant north of the Arkansas River in 1977, and completed a major upgrade of the plant in 2003. By about 1999, the water demand in Pueblo was sufficient to construct the pipeline from the South Outlet Works to the water treatment plant…
Since the Pueblo contract, Aurora — a city of 300,000 east of Denver that uses the Fry-Ark Project to move water out of the basin — was given a 40-year contract. Colorado Springs was successful in gaining Reclamation’s approval of a 40-year contract after the first SDS negotiating session in May.
CWCB: June 23 Water Availability Task Force recap
June 30, 2010
Below are my notes from last Wednesday’s meeting:
Drought Plan
Veva Deheza (CWCB) announced that Colorado’s drought plan revision is currently in internal review. Public comments will be solicited starting July 19. Final approval on the mitigation plan is expected by 1/1/2011.
Colorado River Water Availability Study
Comments are trickling in for the study and are due by July 21.
Colorado River mainstem
Currently water storage in Lake Powell is 64% and Lake Mead is at 41% for a system-wide total of 58%, according to Taryn Hutchins-Cabibi (CWCB). This is slightly below last year. So far this year streamflow into Lake Powell is much higher than predicted earlier in the year.
State Climatologist’s report
Colorado’s weather was cool to considerably cooler than average in May, according to Nolan Doesken. This was the, “Coolest May in a number of years,” he said. The one week of warm weather in May kicked off the runoff in a big way.
Klaus Wolter (NOAA) told the group that we are in the, “coolest one year running record on record,” with his 28 years of data.
In May it was dry in the southwestern part of the state with very good moisture on the eastern plains, according to Doesken. The first half of June has been dry as well. Morgan County has already received half their average annual moisture, and, “The northeast corner of the state is doing dandy,” he said.
Doesken reported precipitation news from around the state. He said that Grand Lake got off to a slow start and is tracking with the driest year on record. Grand Junction is tracking along with median precipitation. The Uncompahgre Valley is near normal. Mesa Verde had a surge of mid-winter moisture but has moved from above average to below average since. Del Norte had a wet start as well but is now showing a pattern similar to Arizona in an El Niño year — dry. Pueblo is above average with a big May. Burlington continues at near record precipitation. Doesken added that, “crops are looking fantastic and I hope that hail will leave them alone.” Akron is tracking at near average. Fort Collins in above average as is Boulder.
Report from the NRCS
Mike Gillespie remarked, about Colorado, that we’ve gone, “from floods to fires in the same month,” and the, “remnants of the 2010 snowpack are rapidly melting out.”
The Yampa/White River basin precipitation was at 94% of average for the year and reservoir storage is 113% of average, he said. Streamflow forecasts are below average.
The Colorado Basin precipitation is at 92% of average and reservoir storage is 119% of average while the streamflow forecast anticipates 70-80% of average. Basin storage is the best in a decade. Karen Rademacher (Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District) said that Granby Reservoir will probably start spilling Monday, adding that Northern’s reservoirs on the east slope filled with east slope water rights this year and that no water is currently moving through the Adams Tunnel.
In the South Platte Basin Gillespie noted that precipitation is 93% of average, reservoir storage is at 108% of average and the streamflow forecast is below average. Snowpack had a, “nice late peak with a number of rebounds,” he said.
The Gunnison Basin snowpack started out like gangbusters but experienced an early melt from warm weather and dust events. Precipitation is at 94% of average, reservoir storage is 119% of average. Streamflow is expected to be below average with inflow to Blue Mesa forecasted at 69% of average.
Gillespie said that southwestern Colorado experienced, “a rapid early melt out,” with little precipitation in May and so far in June. Precipitation for the year is at 82% of average and reservoir storage = 115% of average. Streamflow is forecasted to be 70-80% of average. Down in Dolores they are, “worried about the back-end of the season,” with the lack of moisture and early runoff.
In the Rio Grande Basin precipitation is at 92% of average but, “June has been terribly dry,” he said. Reservoir storage is 90% of average but the streamflow forecast is, “fairly good,” at 90-98% of average.
The Arkansas Basin precipitation is sitting at 87% of average. Reservoir storage is 105% of average with below average (75-80%) streamflow expected.
Wildfire
Taryn reported that the current outlook predicts average fire potential with a quieter grass fire season than 2008 and 2009.
Short term and long term weather outlooks
Klaus Wolter told the task force, “La Niña looks inevitable now.” The weather forecast for the next 5 days looks dry. The 2 week forecast is not calling for a, “super heat wave,” he said, and, “Summers after El Niño years tend to be dry.”
The final word came from Nolan Doesken quipping, “The last time reservoir storage looked really good was just before it got really bad.”
More CWCB coverage here.
Western Governors Association annual meeting recap
June 29, 2010
From the Associated Press (Matt Gouras) via the Sky-Hi Daily News:
In many states, water claims in entire watersheds remain in limbo without the funding to sort out exactly who owns what, [University of Arizona law professor and author Robert Glennon] said. Then there are the treaty claims by many Native American tribes that can stretch back 150 years. Some of the claims are still the focus of unresolved settlements that ultimately could require the taxpayers to cough up cash to buy the water rights. About three-quarters of the region’s water goes to agriculture. Glennon said prices need to be raised to increase conservation — a notion not quickly embraced by the governors.
Idaho Gov. Butch Otter said the water claims can only be sorted out locally, even if it’s a laborious process. No would trust outsiders to come in and do it for them, he said. “We are very jealous about our water in Idaho and our use of it,” Otter said.
There is still too little known about the interconnection of different water aquifers, rivers and basins, the governors were told. These relationships will be key in charting out water use agreements. “I think there is general consensus we can’t manage what we can’t measure and we what we don’t understand,” said Michael Connor, commissioner of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
Oh be Joyful Kayak race photos
June 29, 2010
Check out the photo essay from last weekend’s Oh Be Joyful Kayak Race from The Colorado Springs Gazette.
More whitewater coverage here.
Energy policy — nuclear: Black Range Minerals says they are 3-5 years out from mining operations
June 29, 2010
From the Cañon City Daily Record (Charlotte Burrows):
“Before we can make any decision about whether we might have a commercially viable operation by incorporating additional resources, we need to update the work that was done historically.” said Black Range Minerals managing director Mike Haynes during a community meeting Friday at the Abbey. “In order to update that work, we need to drill six to 12 holes down on the northern end of the South T-Bar Ranch. In order to drill those holes, several weeks ago, we launched an amendment to our application a week ago to have the conditional use permit incorporate the South T-Bar Ranch into the existing CUP.” That will take about three months. In anticipation of that application being granted, the additional 12 holes will be drilled in October, which will take about six or eight weeks. Upon completion, the company would then analyze the results to determine whether or not to proceed…
Mining uranium began when it was first discovered in 1954. From 1954 to 1972, there were more than 16 mines operated on Tallahassee Creek District, which consisted of 120,000 acres from the Arkansas River up toward Hartsel, Haynes said.
Energy policy — oil and gas: 2010 Colorado elections
June 29, 2010
From the Colorado Statesman (Ernest Luning):
At a forum sponsored by the Denver Petroleum Club, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper and former U.S. Rep. Scott McInnis surveyed the state of the oil and gas industry in Colorado and offered proposals to pull the conversation back from what both characterized as polarized extremes…
Judging by the results of an instant poll conducted among audience members — using hand-held opinion meters — the state’s oil and gas crowd believes its industry is treated unfairly in Colorado and is on the decline. By a large margin, those who registered their opinions said government regulation is the top issue facing the industry, outweighing environmental concerns and commodity prices…
Last year’s tough oil and gas regulations are responsible for driving jobs out of Colorado, McInnis told the crowd of about 250. He also blasted Hickenlooper for allowing the rules to go into effect without protest, despite what he called the industry’s enormous impact on Denver’s economy. “Colorado moved from a state that was very friendly — that also had best practices in place, but also knew how to put people to work,” McInnis said. “All of a sudden, we began to swing and became one of the toughest states to do business in.”[...]
Staking out his own version of a middle course, Hickenlooper — who made frequent reference to his work as a geologist before opening a brewpub in Denver after the oil and gas industry crashed in the 1980s — outlined a series of steps he said would encourage compromise between factions that agree about more than they realize. Noting that he was still a member of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Hickenlooper argued that his own history gave him “a certain perspective — there’s not so much separating the different sides in this issue.” When it comes down to it, he said, the various sides “agree on 90 to 95 percent of the issues” and can reach positions they can all live with, if only they sit down and talk. “If we can’t get 100 percent of the oil,” he suggested, “how do we get 85 percent, 90 percent?” On the other side, he said, “How do we limit encroachment on the environment to be as little as possible?”
More 2010 Colorado elections coverage here.
From the La Junta Tribune-Democrat (Bette McFarren):
The object of the letter and the grant is to obtain an additional $18,000 in matching funds to continue the tamarisk eradication. The Colorado Forest Service has had good luck with Habitat, a herbicide that can be applied from the air, using a helicopter, or from an ATV. The herbicide takes 3 years to deplete all carbohydrates in the root system. Last year it became substantially more cost effective when the original patent ran out and other sources than the inventor could manufacture it. The cut-stumps method of application is less efficient in that it is extremely labor-intensive and does not leave the tree skeletons for wildlife habitat or beneficial recycling. Mulching and chipping are options to remove the remains of the tamarisk.
From the Centennial Citizen (Peter Jones):
The facility on Jordan Road, a few miles south of Arapahoe Road, will provide up to 12 million gallons a day of potable water from Cherry Creek to about 12,000 residents and 30,000 employees in the area. [Arapahoe County Water and Wastewater Authority and Cottonwood Water and Sanitation District] say they entered into the cooperative venture to meet customers’ increasing potable water demands and to reduce reliance on nonrenewing deep-ground water supplies. “This plant is a major step in being able to supply our customers with the growing demand of water,” Authority general manager Gary Atkin said. “The new plant will also increase the quality of the water we provide.”
Unlike other reverse-osmosis plants in the state, the Joint Water Purification Plant is incorporating a process for disinfection called “advanced oxidation” that eliminates pharmaceuticals and other industrial chemicals that can show up in a water supply. “Microfiltration” will be used to clean up the portion of the water that is returned to Cherry Creek.
More water treatment coverage here.
From the Irrigation Association website:
Join us at IA’s second annual Water Conference, July 13-14, in Williamsburg, Va. The conference will bring strategists, academics, environmentalists and water managers together with irrigation practitioners to create a dialogue about possible solutions to worldwide water issues.
Based on the inaugural event’s success, the conference has been expanded to a day and a half to allow participants more time to absorb and reflect on discussions. The conference will include general sessions and concurrent tracks focused on agriculture and turf/landscape issues.
2010 Colorado elections: U.S. Senate race
June 28, 2010
From and interview with Ken Buck from The Colorado Statesman (Jody Hope Strogoff & Ernest Luning):
Are there other local issues that you’ve come across — wilderness area, water issues, things like that in different parts of the state that you didn’t encounter in Weld County or the 4th District?
KB: You know, it’s funny, I was at the Ski Country (forum) and they said something about “Hidden Gems.” And on the campaign we’d always talked about the Polis Wilderness Bill and the DeGette Wilderness Bill. And so they said, “Hidden Gems.”
I was thinking well, I know this has something to do with public land use and what not. So I answered it in terms of public land use but I’m unaware of that and I don’t even know whether that term appears on the bill or whether it’s just some nomenclature that’s been given to it generally. But I have certainly become aware. You know, water is essential in Colorado. It’s essential in Northern Colorado for farmers and development, just like it is anywhere else. But there are unique issues in different parts of the state, and so those unique sub-issues, I have certainly become more aware of as a result of traveling. And it’s the reason I think it’s so important for a senator to travel, because I think it’s constantly informative to learn from people what their challenges are.
More 2010 Colorado elections U.S. Senate race coverage here.
Nestlé Waters Chaffee County Project: Will Aurora need a change of use from water court to lease water to Nestlé?
June 27, 2010
From the Colorado Independent (Scot Kersgaard):
Terry Scanga, general manager of the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District, a key Aurora water partner and one angered by the deal, told the Colorado Independent it’s not clear Aurora has the right to lease water to Nestle. “Water is decreed for specific uses in specific areas. Aurora’s water rights in the Arkansas Basin were decreed for their use in their municipality,” he said…
Greg Baker, manager of public relations for Aurora Water, told the Independent that, in fact, the city is leasing only a small percentage of excess capacity to Nestle and that if a situation arises where Aurora needs the water for its own uses, it can temporarily shut down the Nestle operation. Baker said that Aurora has storage capacity of 155,000 acre-feet of water in various reservoirs, so 200 acre-feet may not matter one way or another to the city.
More Nestlé Waters Chaffee County Project coverage here and here.
From the Kearney Hub (Lori Porter):
CPNRD Biologist Mark Czaplewski said recent high streamflows have covered river sandbars and washed away any least tern and piping plover nests that might have been on them. The one possible exception is a “high and dry” artificial sandbar.
Director Dick Mercer of Kearney asked if current flows are more or less than what U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officials want to manage habitat for threatened and endangered species. “Both,” Czaplewski said, explaining that the program plan for channel maintenance includes lesser flows at times and higher, short-duration flows at other times. He said higher sandbars can be built by higher river flows, but only if the water is provided by Mother Nature, not reservoir releases. “There are easier, more economical ways to do the same thing with a bulldozer and a few gallons of diesel fuel, without taking water away from people,” Czaplewski said. “… Those birds will use sandpits and artificial sandbars. I have preached that for 20 years, and there are a lot of other people preaching it.”[...]
Czaplewski said staying involved in the program is the only way to chip away with other ideas and to use the program’s adaptive management component — changing methods if they aren’t achieving their goals. “If you look at what the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ultimately wants, it’s just overwhelming,” he said, adding that the Endangered Species Act is “a hammer” in the agency’s hands.
More South Platte Basin coverage here.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
The Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District board Friday considered its strategy in seeking funding for 2012, and possibly may ask some entities like El Paso and Pueblo counties, as well as cities that signed a 2009 intergovernmental agreement to form the district, for money in next year’s budget.
The district is now funded for $100,000 annually by Colorado Springs Utilities and the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District as part of an agreement they reached in 2007 to complete a Fountain Creek Corridor Master Plan. The budget pays the salary of Executive Director Gary Barber and other administrative expenses. That agreement continues in 2011, but nothing is in place for 2012. The board earlier this year agreed that it will not be in a position to ask voters for a mill levy until 2012 at the earliest, so the district would face a gap in funding.
From The Fence Post (Bill Jackson):
The institute’s first effort drew about 20 teachers from Greeley-Evans School District 6, Eaton Re-2 and Adams 12, Bouvette said. It was conducted as part of Project WET — Water Education for Teachers — which is an international teachers training effort. The Great Western Institute is the host organization for Project WET in Colorado, but Bouvette said it exists in 49 states and 26 countries.
Project WET, he said, builds networks to encourage effective and sustainable water education programs, and utilizes the core belief that water is important to all users, including business and industry, earth systems, energy, agriculture and a host of others — basically anyone who uses water, which is everyone. The project has developed and published more than 50 guides, kits and books for teachers and students that address a wide variety of topics.
More education coverage here.
Coyote Gulch outage
June 25, 2010
We’re heading down the two-lane blacktop for some rest and recuperation. We may even try our hand at the rod, reel, cornmeal and frying pan method on non-native trout species control. See you on Sunday night.
Arkansas Valley water officials worry that Woodmoor plans will dry up more ag land in the valley
June 25, 2010
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
“These gravel pits are for one thing: To transfer water out of the Arkansas River,” said Jay Winner, general manager of the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District. “They scare me.” Winner said gravel pit reservoirs would help communities like Woodmoor, located on the Douglas County line in northern El Paso County, move water rights which have been purchased on canals in the Lower Arkansas Valley.
In fact, Woodmoor Water and Sanitation District board has voted to buy land on the Excelsior Ditch now owned by Stonewall Springs LLC. Stonewall has plans to develop three reservoirs on former farmland. There are also potential reservoir sites at gravel pits near Pueblo Memorial Airport and on other privately owned land on the Excelsior. Woodmoor also intends to purchase water rights on the Holbrook, High Line and Excelsior ditch systems as a way of making up for depletions to the Denver Basin aquifers caused by excessive pumping. The Woodmoor district late last year filed for a decree that would allow it to move water upstream through exchanges…
Winner applauded the commissioners’ recent resolution opposing the dry-up of agriculture. The commissioners in May passed a measure supporting water lease-land fallowing programs, such as Super Ditch, that keep water rights in the hands of irrigators. The resolution supports water leasing — sales of water that do not change ownership — as a way to prevent permanent dry-up of agricultural resources. “The Lower Ark is against these types of buy-and-dry activities,” Winner said.
Aspen: Local conservationists win awards
June 25, 2010
From the Aspen Daily News:
[Attorney John Ely] was given a 2010 Conservation Hero Award from the Colorado Environmental Coalition. The coalition cited him for using legislation passed in 2008 to launch a partnership with the state and the Colorado Water Trust which dedicated water rights from county open space properties to local rivers and streams — essentially sidestepping the pitfalls of Colorado water law’s “use it or lose it” rules. In a June 9 ceremony that included remarks by Gov. Bill Ritter, the environmental organization also honored Ely for his work creating the Healthy Rivers and Streams Fund, which voters approved as a sales tax increase in 2008…
…last week the Roaring Fork Conservancy honored Richards as their “River Conservator of the Year.” Richards has developed an expertise in the politics of water and she works regionally on water issues, including representing the county on the Colorado River Basin roundtable and vice-chairs the Northwest Council of Governments Water Quality and Quantity Committee. Like Ely, she was cited for her leadership in the creation of the Healthy Rivers and Streams Fund and the county’s Water Trust agreement, along with measures preparing for drought and fighting transmountain diversions from the Roaring Fork watershed.
More conservation coverage here.
Colorado-Big Thompson Project update
June 24, 2010
From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):
I hope everyone is enjoying the full reservoirs we have this spring. As most of you already know, Carter and Horsetooth are each only a couple of feet down from full. Horsetooth remains at a water level elevation of 5427; Carter is at an elevation of 5757.
We are anticipating these higher levels for a little while, although now that it is starting to get hot, we also anticipate we will start seeing water users begin to pull water from both reservoirs. Some water has already been going out of Carter. Although we had initially projected it would not come on for a few more weeks, we will actually resume pumping water to Carter tomorrow, Friday June 25.
Also, for more information on Horsetooth and Carter reservoirs, please visit our new Webpage. Bookmark it! www.usbr.gov/gp/ecao/horsetooth_carter/index.html.
More Colorado-Big Thompson coverage here.
From The Durango Herald (Dale Rodebaugh):
Eighteen scientists and graduate students, including representatives from Japan and China, met in Silverton to share their research on the effects of airborne dust and soot on mountain and polar snow and ice. The group, led by Thomas Painter of the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory and Chris Landry from the Center for Snow & Avalanche Studies, known as CSAS and headquartered in Silverton, traveled Wednesday to the top of Red Mountain Pass to a snow-science research site. It was the last day of a three-day workshop in which participants presented research on snow degradation from the Himalayan region, the Tibetan Plateau, Greenland and the United States, including the Rocky Mountains and the Sierra Nevada…
Recent research has tied soot from industrial emissions to temperature increases in the Arctic and land-use changes in desert regions to dust that causes early and intense snowmelt in mid-latitude mountains such as the San Juan Mountains in Southwest Colorado, Landry said. Look no further than the San Juans, where dust blowing in from the south and west has turned snow tan. Landry has documented “dust events” annually since 2002-03. The phenomenon is increasingly serious, but it’s way too early to show a trend, Landry said…
Landry said the Center for Snow & Avalanche Studies is supported financially by a variety of sources, including the Animas La Plata Water Conservancy District, the Bureau of Reclamation and the Colorado Water Conservation Board. Water-management agencies are becoming increasingly interested in the impact of dust and soot on snow because it directly affects their work, Landry said. A dust storm that blanketed western Colorado on Feb. 15, 2006, made believers of many, Landry said. The dust cover led to an early and intense runoff of what little snow there was that year, he said. “A single event affected the whole state,” Landry said.
CWCB: Proposed floodplain rules public meeting recap
June 24, 2010
From The Greeley Tribune (Bill Jackson):
About 100 people attended a meeting Wednesday to hear from staff members of the Colorado Water Conservation Board concerning the board’s proposal to modify the 100-year flood plain to include a 500-year flood plain for critical facilities. It was the second of four planned meetings around the state prior to a full board meeting Nov. 17, when the board is expected to require municipalities to adopt the plan or suggest they start planning for a 500-year flood plain.
At Wednesday’s meeting at the Southwest Weld County Complex, staff members of the CWCB gave a presentation on the proposal and answered questions. Doug Rademacher, commission chairman, once again expressed the county’s objections to the plan.
More CWCB coverage here.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
The new cost estimate for the project is $20 million, more than $6.5 million less than originally estimated. Contracts are expected to be awarded in the near future, said Gene Michael, Pueblo wastewater director. “We reaped the benefit of the economic downturn and were able to save on the cost,” Michael explained.
The plant won’t increase the capacity of Pueblo’s wastewater treatment, but immediately will allow for the removal of ammonia from the discharge. Pueblo must meet new state standards for ammonia releases…
The project will have three phases, leveling the ground, constructing the plant and adding a new ultraviolet disinfectant plant. Right now, Pueblo treats an average of 11 million gallons of wastewater daily, with a maximum capacity of 19 million gallons per day. The money for the project came via a 2.5 percent interest loan through the Colorado Water and Power Development Authority.
