2010 Colorado elections: Ken Buck says that climate change is the ‘greatest hoax that has been perpetrated’
October 21, 2010
From the Fort Collins Coloradoan (Robert Moore):
“Sen. Inhofe was the first person to stand up and say this global warming is the greatest hoax that has been perpetrated. The evidence just keeps supporting his view, and more and more people’s view, of what’s going on,” Buck said.
Bennet spokesman Kincaid criticized Buck’s global warming stance.
“The simple fact that Ken Buck doesn’t believe in proven science is troubling and calls into question his understanding of more complex issues. It helps explain why he would oppose developing the new energy economy that would create jobs right here in Colorado.”
More 2010 Colorado elections coverage here. More climate change coverage here.
Secretary of Interior Salazar announces the ‘Colorado River Basin Geographic Focus Study’
October 21, 2010
Here’s the release from the Department of Interior. Here’s an excerpt:
“The Colorado River Basin is ground zero for assessing the effects of climate change on our rivers and taking creative management actions to head off the related dangers posed to our water supplies, hydroelectric power generation and ecosystems,” the Secretary said. “We are with you for the long haul to protect our region and its water.”
The Southwest Climate Center is the fourth of eight planned regional Climate Science Centers—or CSCs–to be established by the Department. With the University of Arizona in Tucson as home base, the center will be led by a consortium of that school and others — University of California, Davis; University of California, Los Angeles; Desert Research Institute, Reno; University of Colorado, Boulder; and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego.
More coverage from Amy Joi O’Donoghue writing for the Deseret News. From the article:
Called the Colorado River Basin Geographic Focus Study, the inventory will be conducted by scientific experts within the U.S. Geological Survey.
The study will be conducted over a three-year period and also is intended to provide a platform on how much water is needed to support ecosystems amid significant competition over water resources.
Salazar said the study is part of an ongoing effort outlined in the WaterSMART Secretarial Order signed in February of this year, adding that the last comprehensive assessment of water availability in the country was in 1978.
The USGS WaterSMART initiative will produce a water census for the nation, a new and ongoing appraisal for water availability that links both water quality and quantity. It will track changes in flow, use, and storage of water, as well as develop models and predictive tools to guide decisions.
A relatively new area of science evaluates how much water needs to be left in the streams to support important ecological values. This initiative includes a significant research and assessment effort to help wildlife managers characterize the flow needs for aquatic species and their habitat.
The USGS WaterSMART Colorado River Basin Geographic Focus Study will complement the River Basin Supply and Demand grant awarded for the Colorado Basin by the Bureau of Reclamation in 2010. It is one of three such studies on major river basins across the nation planned to begin this year.
More Colorado River Basin coverage here.
Climate change: Drought may threaten much of globe within decades
October 21, 2010
Here’s the release from the National Center for Atmospheric Research. Here’s an excerpt:
Using an ensemble of 22 computer climate models and a comprehensive index of drought conditions, as well as analyses of previously published studies, the paper finds most of the Western Hemisphere, along with large parts of Eurasia, Africa, and Australia, may be at threat of extreme drought this century. In contrast, higher-latitude regions from Alaska to Scandinavia are likely to become more moist.
Aurora: Water treatment system background
October 21, 2010
From the Aurora Sentinel (Sara Castellanos):
The city’s water supply is derived primarily from snowmelt runoff in the Colorado, Arkansas and South Platte river basins. The water is then stored in 12 reservoirs and lakes including Aurora, Homestake, Twin Lakes and Rampart. It’s transported to the city from as far as 180 miles away through pipes, tunnels and pumps. There are nine staff members at the Wemlinger Treatment Plant who have more than 200 years of combined experience in the water quality field, with extensive knowledge in the world of chemistry. “It’s awesome to be associated with so many people who care so much about making really great water,” [Sherry Scaggiari, quality control supervisor] said. “We don’t say, ‘OK, what’s the level we have to meet?’ We say, ‘We are going to do better than that, and we are going to lead the industry.’”[...]
The contaminants in the city’s water are far below the allowable level mandated by state and federal laws. For example, the maximum contaminant level of total coliform bacteria, which is naturally present in the environment, is no more than 5 percent per month. The highest monthly percentage found in Aurora’s water was 0.52 percent, according to the 2010 Water Quality report. Only one sample was found positive for total coliform bacteria out of 2,268 samples. Hard work has paid off for the employees at the Wemlinger Treatment Plant. In 2009, the plant was awarded the “Excellence in Water Treatment” status after undergoing three levels of review by the American Water Works Associations’ Partnership for Safe Drinking Water program. Wemlinger is one of six treatment plants in the country to receive the award.
More water treatment coverage here.
Colorado State University Named Host Institution of Department of the Interior’s North Central Climate Science Center
October 21, 2010
Here’s the release from Colorado State University (Kimberly Sorensen):
Colorado State University is a hub of climate change research and is now home to one of eight U.S. Department of the Interior Climate Science Centers, announced today by Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar. The CSU-led consortium of nine universities and other affiliated national laboratories was selected to host a regional Climate Science Center. The center is designed to put science to work to help federal, state, local, private and non-profit natural resource managers understand current and future impacts of climate change on critical natural, cultural, wildlife and agricultural resources.
The new North Central Climate Science Center will eventually host as many as eight federal scientists and several post-doctoral fellows who will provide regional land, water, fish and wildlife, and cultural heritage resource managers with the scientific tools and information to strategically adapt to and mitigate the impacts of climate change. The center is expected to be up and running in early 2011.
The CSU-led North Central consortium includes the University of Colorado, Colorado School of Mines, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, University of Wyoming, Montana State University, University of Montana, Kansas State University and Iowa State University. In addition, other federal partners in the consortium include the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, National Center for Atmospheric Research and others.
“The members of the consortium headed by Colorado State University can provide us with great expertise in the major climate-related challenges facing the North Central region – including diminishing water supplies, the spread of invasive species, outbreaks of pests and diseases, changing fire regimes, decreased crop and livestock production, and loss of habitat for critical fish and wildlife species,” said Salazar. “Selected through an open competition, these universities represent the full array of landscapes in the Rocky Mountains, Intermountain West and Great Plains.”
Regional Climate Issues
Federal scientists will collaboratively work with university researchers and address pressing regional climate issues such as the effects of pine bark beetle outbreaks on water, forest conditions and grizzly bears in Yellowstone National Park, and study the potential for dust from overgrazed areas to accelerate climate-driven snowpack melting.
Other work of the U.S. Department of the Interior North Central Climate Science Center will include:
Downscaling of global climate change models linking physical factors with biological, physical and ecological responses.
Forecasting of the effects of climate change on fish and wildlife populations, habitat and ecosystem services dynamics – including research as well as tool and data development and distribution.
Researching climate adaptation related to vulnerability assessments, adaptive management development, coping strategies and risk analysis development.
Developing innovative decision-support tools for adaptation and mitigation.Colorado State University as Host
Colorado State University’s historic strength in environmental research and education on climate issues affecting land, water and energy supplies not only advances scientific understanding, it also cultivates the next generation of students and scientific workforce, making CSU an ideal host of a Climate Science Center.
“Colorado State University faculty have long been leaders in advancing environmental and climate research, and we’re honored and proud to be named home to the new North Central Climate Science Center, “ said CSU President Tony Frank. “This is a testament to the extraordinary achievements of our faculty and their colleagues across the region, and it will provide them a stronger platform to engage with other scientists on critical and pressing climate studies.”
Dennis Ojima, professor in CSU’s Department of Forest, Rangelands and Watershed Stewardship and senior research scientist at the Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory in CSU’s Warner College of Natural Resources, will lead the consortium.
“CSU has world-class expertise in climate, and we are leaders in engaging the public and policy makers in rendering our science and discoveries into practical solutions. Those strengths will be critical as the North Central Climate Science Center engages the research community and then ultimately translates that science to the decision-making community,” Ojima said.
State of Colorado Leader in Climate ScienceIn addition to premiere research universities, the state of Colorado is home to one of the most respected climate science communities in the world with many prominent institutions specializing in climate science including the National Center for Atmospheric Research, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration’s Earth Science Research Laboratory, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Western Water Assessment Regional Integrated Science and Assessments program, Agriculture Research Service, National Ecological Observation Network among many others. The North Central consortium will tap these and other institutions as they address regional climate science.
“Congratulations to Colorado State University for being selected to lead such a prestigious consortium of research institutions and to serve as host for the North Central Climate Science Center,” said Gov. Bill Ritter. “Over the past few years, Colorado has become a recognized leader in addressing climate change. We have enacted numerous policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and implemented strategies to adapt to and mitigate those impacts. This new regional center will advance this work and continue to keep Colorado on the leading edge of one of the most important challenges facing the world today.”
Other Climate Science Centers
The regional Climate Science Centers are a key element of the Interior Department’s first-ever coordinated strategy to address current and future impacts of climate change on America’s land, water, ocean, fish, wildlife and cultural resources. Climate Science Centers are intended to be a seamless network to access the best science available to help resource managers and decision-makers.
On Wednesday, the Interior Department announced the University of Arizona as home of the Southwest Climate Science Center. The Southeast Climate Science Center is led by North Carolina State University, the University of Washington hosts the Northwest Climate Science Center, and an Alaska Climate Science Center is led by the University of Alaska. The department will soon announce the host institutions for the Northeast, South Central and Pacific Islands Climate Science Centers.
Salazar initiated the coordinated climate change network in September 2009 that not only created the regional Climate Science Centers, but also a network of Landscape Conservation Cooperatives that engage federal agencies, local and state partners, and the public in crafting practical, landscape-level strategies for managing climate change impacts on natural resources.
More climate change coverage here.
2010 Colorado elections: Proposition 101, Amendment 60, Amendment 61 and Amendment 62
October 21, 2010
From the Broomfiled Enterprise (Dylan Otto Krider):
There aren`t many issues that can unite unions, business groups, school boards, charter schools, the Broomfield Chamber of Commerce and the Colorado beef industry, but amendments 60, 61 and Proposition 101 have done just that, bringing together the seemingly disparate groups in a stance against the ballot measures. They are among the groups that have joined a concerted effort to defeat the measures, which opponents say will cause massive layoffs and prevent future building at a time when schools budgets are shrinking…
Among those who have sent declarations of opposition to the measures to the Enterprise are Alliance for Sustainable Colorado, the Charter Institute, the State Board of Education, the Colorado Cattlemen`s Association and 36 Commuting Solutions. Broomfield City Council and the Broomfield Chamber of Commerce also are in opposition to the measures…
Steve Bobrick, former chairman of the Broomfield Economic Development Corp. board of directors, said the organization has come out against the measures, because building things such as water reservoirs are what lure facilities such as the new Conoco-Phillips training facility, slated to open in 2012 or 2013 at the former Storage Technology campus in Louisville. “You need government to do things most people will not do — take care of fire, police, water,” Bobrick said. Those core services could be in jeopardy if taxes are raised on government enterprises, a move Bobrick called “unprecedented.” Enterprises are cooperative efforts between government and private enterprise, such as universities…
In an investigation of a complaint for campaign finance violations, a Denver judge fingered anti-tax crusader Douglas Bruce, a former El Paso County commissioner and state representative, as being behind the effort to collect the more than 400,000 signatures needed to get the initiatives on the ballot. Despite the fact Bruce avoided dozens of attempts to compel him to testify in a deposition, the judge saw enough evidence to conclude Bruce coached petition collectors. Secretary of State records show eight professional signature collectors lived in a Colorado Springs rental house owned by Bruce while they collected 26,000 signatures. The Colorado Springs Gazette reported Bruce was found to have communicated with the petitioners using the e-mail address info@cotaxreform.com. Menten said she only became the spokesperson in March or April, and can`t comment on anything that happened before. She characterized the group as “grassroots” and said the language had been crafted by a number of different people.
Meanwhile, Ed Quillen takes a look at some of this year’s ballot amendments in his column in today’s Denver Post. From the article:
Which brings us to the ballot issues this year, which are making me a big fan of the quaint system of having a republic, where we elect people to make laws after hearings and thoughtful deliberation, rather than all this direct democracy.
We can start with Amendment 62, the “personhood amendment,” which would grant full legal rights to fertilized eggs. It’s almost identical to Amendment 48, which was soundly defeated two years ago. Apparently the zygote zealots plan to circulate petitions every two years until we get sick of voting it down and they manage to slip it through. You can have a small, frugal government, or you can have one that monitors every woman of child- bearing age to be sure she’s protecting the legal rights of any fertilized egg she may be carrying. But you can’t have both.
Then, we get to this year’s “Evil Three”: Amendments 60 and 61, along with Proposition 101. They’re assaults on self-government.
For instance, local residents can currently vote to “de-Bruce” their local governments, allowing them to keep tax revenue that would otherwise have to be refunded. It’s hard to see what’s wrong with that — people making decisions about taxes — but Amendment 60 would pretty well put an end to it.
Amendment 61 limits government borrowing. If I’m buying a house, I can decide whether a mortgage of 10, 20 or 30 years would work best. But if I’m a voter, then Amendment 61 says I’m too stupid to make such decisions.
Proposition 101 would roll back auto-license taxes that the legislature increased by calling them “fees” and avoiding a public vote. The honest course would have been to fund highway maintenance by seeking a fuel-tax increase in a referendum. But roads and bridges don’t fix themselves, and the state had to do something.
More 2010 Colorado elections coverage here.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
All parties have stipulated in the case, but the final decree has not been sent to Division 2 Water Court Judge Dennis Maes, according to Mardell DiDomenico, an employee of the court…
The rules have been discussed for nearly three years as a way to prevent consumptive use from expanding as a result of more efficient farm practices such as canal lining or sprinklers fed from ponds. State Engineer Dick Wolfe organized a committee to develop the rules in 2008 after numerous objections surfaced to the initial form. Wolfe argued that the rules are needed in order to prevent Kansas from beginning new litigation over the 1949 Arkansas River Compact. Colorado and Kansas last year settled a 24-year lawsuit over the compact.
The rules include provisions for general compliance, individual engineering reports or group plans to meet guidelines for new systems that have been developed by the state engineer. They apply only to agricultural surface water, as wells already are covered by 1996 rules.
More Arkansas Valley consumptive use rules coverage here.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
“One of the exciting things we are finding is that we can fallow land and not be penalized,” Jim Valliant, coordinator of the study, told the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District on Wednesday. “Now we are looking at the economics: What does the farmer have to have to make it worthwhile to fallow the land.” Valliant explained that fertilization is typically best done in the fall for two reasons:
- Fertilizer is generally cheaper at that time of year.
- It allows the fertilizer to blend with the soil. “If you get a little moisture in the fall, it mellows the land for planting,” Valliant said.
A study began in 2007 at the Arkansas Valley Ag Research Center, operated by Colorado State University, to look at what is needed to bring land back into production after it has been fallow for one to three years. Four plots were cultivated, with corn planted each year on one, three years on a second, two years on a third and one year on the fourth. The harvests from the fourth year were just completed, so the final results aren’t known. However, the nitrogen levels for all four years show the soil retained sufficient levels of nutrients to produce a crop without fertilization up to three years after first being fallowed. Fertilization was considered sufficient if at least 200 bushels of corn per acre were harvested. In each of the first three years, each plot yielded more than 200 bushels, except the initial year when just one of the four was planted and harvested. In other words, the plots that had been fallowed still produced adequately in the first or second year after replanting. That reduces the input cost to farmers during the fallow years, although there are still labor and fuel costs to maintain fallowed land.
Valliant said the next step is to analyze the relative cost of taking land out of production to determine how much farmers should reasonably charge for water when land is taken The Lower Ark district initiated and funded the study — about $50,000 over four years — as part of its efforts to establish the Super Ditch. At the time, there were few reports on the cost of bringing land back into production, or the financial risk farmers take by breaking cropping cycles.
More coverage from Chris Woodka writing for the The Pueblo Chieftain:
A survey by the U.S. Geological Survey and other partners began sampling fish in Fountain Creek in April and collected 20,000 fish at 10 sites, Pat Edelmann, head of the USGS office in Pueblo, told the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District Wednesday. In the 10 areas, reaches of just 150-500 feet were studied, raising the possibility of many more fish in the creek, Edelmann said.
Of special interest is the flathead chub, a plains fish that is abundant in many places, but listed as a species of special concern in Colorado, and threatened or imperiled in several other states. In Colorado, the fish is found primarily in the Arkansas River basin below Florence and in the Rio Grande basin. “Some people say it is a trash fish, but our data collectors had a discussion with the blue herons and they think the chub are an excellent source of food,” Edelmann quipped…
The study is important to Colorado Springs Utilities, which is considering a fish ladder that would allow the chub to swim upstream. The project is part of the Army Corps of Engineers Fountain Creek Watershed Study and Pueblo County requirements for the Southern Delivery System. An earlier study found the flathead chub are poor jumpers, but persistent in finding their way around obstacles like rocks. Surprisingly, 15 of the tagged fish were found upstream of the Clear Springs Ranch site, presumably during the brief time once a week when a gate is opened to flush sediment. Some fish moved as much as 18 miles upstream.
Rio Grande Water Conservation Board meeting recap
October 20, 2010
From the Valley Courier (Ruth Heide):
The first water management sub-district board of managers had approved its approximately $1 million budget pending approval from the sponsoring water district, which unanimously approved it on Tuesday. Counties within the first sub-district, lying in the closed basin of the San Luis Valley, will begin collecting fees from sub-district irrigators in 2011…
…the water board approved a mill levy of 2.35, less a temporary reduction of .27 for total mills of 2.08. The water district covers most of the San Luis Valley…
[RGWCD Bookkeeper Amber Pacheco] added that the professional services category includes legal and engineering expenses, and the district anticipates an increase in engineering fees to keep the sub-district process moving forward, not just for the first sub-district but also for the other Valley sub-districts that are forming…
[RGWCD Manager Steve Vandiver] estimated the district would probably have seven sub-districts. The formation of these sub-districts requires attorney and engineering fees that the sponsoring district hopes to recoup once the sub-districts are operational…
RGWCD Board Member Lewis Entz, long time state legislator whose legislation enabled the sub-district process, said the reason he created the legislation was so the San Luis Valley could solve its own problems “rather than let the state engineer do it. We are trying to do it here … We want to solve our own problems.”
[Alamosa resident Leon Moyer] suggested that the district post its proposed budget on the web site in the future, since the budgets he was able to pick up prior to the meeting were not the ones ultimately presented to the board. He said the public needs to have the opportunity to adequately review the proposed budget prior to the budget hearing.
More Rio Grand River basin coverage here.
CWCB: Arkansas Basin decision support system update
October 20, 2010
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
A committee advising state consultants on how to set up the study met Monday. Concerns about whether an existing state model used in other basins or a model more commonly used in several ongoing water studies were expressed. The group also clarified that the state model would be used primarily for planning, while the data in the model could be applied to water management…
Officials from the Colorado Water Conservation Board, which is developing the model with the Division of Water Resources, assured the group that the state would not ignore data that is already being collected in other studies. “We’re not telling anybody they have to abandon what they’ve developed,” said Ray Alvarado of the CWCB staff. “We’re not intending to do this in a vacuum. We need this tool, and it’s been used successfully in other basins.” The state has developed decision support systems for the Colorado River and Rio Grande. It is finalizing the support system for the South Platte…
In some ways, the Arkansas River basin study is the most complicated to develop because of exchanges, groundwater interaction and water rights issues. It was delayed because of ongoing litigation with Kansas over the Arkansas River Compact. Alternatives for the Arkansas River basin decision support system would range from $4.5 million to $17.3 million, depending on the level of detail desired, according to a draft report. The final report is expected to be presented to the CWCB in January…
“After we completed a needs assessment last year, our roundtable said the DSS was the most important thing we could do,” said Gary Barber, chairman of the Arkansas Basin Roundtable. “There is a great deal of expectation for what the DSS will do.”
More Arkansas River basin coverage here.
Lake Mead: ‘A record-setting moment’
October 19, 2010
Bump and update: From Time (Bryan Walsh):
What’s causing Lake Mead to dry up—and what does it mean for the Southwest? The one undeniable cause is simple growth—Las Vegas has grown from 25,000 people in 1950 to some 2 million today. That means more lawns, more laundry, more swimming pools, more car washes—in general, more straws sucking the water out of Lake Mead. And of course Las Vegas isn’t the only area in the Southwest to experience booming growth over the past few decades. From Denver to Phoenix to Los Angeles, the once lightly populated West has exploded, even as farmers in the region draw more water from the system to irrigate the desert.
But the Southwest has also been caught in a devastating drought that has now gone on for more than 10 years, one that has reduced the region’s water supplies even as growth has further stressed them. Drought is a natural phenomenon—especially in the desert, go figure—and there have been varying levels of rainfall in the region just in the 75 years since Lake Mead was first filled. But the scary thing is that the territory might be more vulnerable to drought than it seemed during the 20th century—a time period that may have been unusually wet on a historical scale. A 2007 panel organized by the National Research Council found evidence that mega-droughts had occurred in the Southwest more frequently than had been thought, and that “drought episodes are a recurrent and integral feature of the region’s climate.” The Colorado River Compact—which divides up water supplies for seven U.S. states and parts of Mexico—was drawn up in 1922, based on river flow data going back to the 1890s, a time of unusual wetness. We may have built the Southwest with a false sense of water security.
Then there’s climate change, an X factor for future water supplies. It’s difficult to gauge what impact, if any, global warming may have had on the current drought and on dropping water levels. As always, it’s virtually impossible to filter out climate change as a cause for a natural disaster amid all the noise and static of other factors. But as the recent report from the government U.S. Global Change Research Program shows, the Southwest is already rapidly warming, reducing the spring mountain snowpack that helps feed the rivers of the region. We’re likely to see increasing temperatures in the future, with more frequent drought and increasingly scarce water supplies. Climate change won’t be the only cause behind the drying of the West, but could make a bad situation much, much worse.
From The New York Times (Felicity Barringer):
“It is a record-setting moment,” said Colleen Dwyer, a spokeswoman for the Bureau of Reclamation. She added that slightly more water than usual had been released through Hoover Dam over the weekend because the power marketing agency that sends dam-generated electricity around the Southwest had requested some additional flow.
Lake Mead’s levels are still eight feet above the level at which a shortage is officially declared and limited rationing could go into effect for users in Nevada and Arizona, and well above the levels when the Hoover Dam’s hydroelectric output might be seriously jeopardized.
But Barry Nelson, a senior policy analyst for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said: “This strikes me as such an amazing moment. It’s three-quarters of a century since they filled it. And at the three-quarter-century mark, the world has changed.”
More coverage from the Arizona Republic (Shaun McKinnon):
Not since it was first filling in 1937 has Lake Mead held so little water. The reservoir’s level fell to the historic low shortly before noon on Sunday, eclipsing a previous record from the drought-stricken 1950s. The lake is now just 8 feet above the level that would trigger the first drought restrictions, which would reduce water supplies for Arizona and Nevada. That gap could close by next year – the reservoir fell 10 feet from October 2009 to 2010 – but there are measures in place that would likely delay rationing for one or two years or even longer if a wet winter increased runoff into the river. Most homes and businesses in Arizona likely would not feel the direct effects of the restrictions, which would divert water first from farmers.
But conservation groups say the reservoir’s low levels underscore the risk to the Colorado River. “Everyone needs to know when we turn on the tap, it drains water out of the river and it has ecological consequences,” said Gary Wockner, campaign coordinator for Save the Colorado, a non-profit education group based in Fort Collins, Colo. “We need to try to keep some water in the river and keep it alive.”[...]
The three lower-river states, along with Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming on the upper river, approved a drought plan in 2007 that uses Lake Mead water levels to trigger incremental rationing, part of an attempt to avoid widespread shortages. The first trigger is at 1,075 feet above sea level. The reservoir reached elevation 1,083.18 feet around midday Sunday and was at 1,083 feet by Monday afternoon. The previous low level was 1,083.19 feet, set in 1956…Under the 2007 plan, the first trigger would reduce water deliveries to Arizona by a little more than 11 percent, or 320,000 acre-feet, and to Nevada by about 4 percent, or 13,000 acre-feet. Additional reductions would occur if the lake continued to drop.
More coverage from the Las Vegas Review-Journal (Henry Brean):
Since drought took hold on the Colorado and its tributaries in 1999, the surface of Lake Mead has plunged almost 130 feet and caused fits for the National Park Service and its marina operators who must extend roads, utilities and other services to reach the shrinking shoreline.
The lake’s decline poses major problems for the Southern Nevada Water Authority, which draws 90 percent of the Las Vegas Valley’s drinking water from intake pipes that will start to shut down should the lake fall another 33 feet. “I’m worried,” authority General Manager Pat Mulroy said. “We’re trying everything we can to keep as much water in Mead as we can.” The prognosis looks bleak. Mulroy said federal climate forecasters are predicting abnormally dry conditions during the next two winters in the mountains that feed the Colorado…
The previous low-water mark for Mead came 54 years ago, on April 26, 1956, when the drought-stricken lake bottomed out at 1,083.19 feet above sea level. According to the Bureau of Reclamation, the lake hit elevation 1,083.18 between 11 a.m. and noon Sunday and continued to fall. By Monday afternoon, it sank below elevation 1,083 as water was released through Hoover Dam to meet orders downstream from cities and farms in California and Arizona. Projections by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation call for Lake Mead to reach a low point of 1,082.1 on Nov. 2. Then it is expected to rise by about 8 feet through the end of February before starting back down again. Water forecasters expect the lake to hit another record low by May and shrink below elevation 1,077 by September…
Even at its lowest level since it was first filled, Lake Mead remains the largest man-made reservoir in the United States. The falling water level has caused some problems with access, but it has also unveiled new coves and pristine beaches that used to be underwater, Roundtree said.
More coverage from the Voice of San Diego Environment (Rob Davis):
Millions of people — San Diegans included — rely on the reservoir’s water. So what does its drop mean here? In the short term, nothing. It doesn’t have any impact on San Diego’s supply even though we relied on the river for 61 percent of our water in 2009. But it does send a bad signal that the river supplying the Southwest’s lifeblood is continuing to face pressure — a pressure that scientists say is growing as the climate warms. If the lake continues dropping, it will first cause problems for cities in Arizona and Nevada before San Diego. Those states hold lower-priority rights to Colorado River water than California does.
More Colorado River basin coverage here.
La Niña primer
October 19, 2010
From the High Country News weblog The Range (Ed Quillen):
For the West, this means it will be wet in the north and dry in the south…
Colorado is in the middle between north and south in the West, so fluctuations on the jet stream will determine how much of the state gets buried in December and January…
In some years, there’s talk of “La Nada” — the nothing, or at least nothing out of the ordinary. El Niños and La Niñas tend to run in three- to seven-year cycles, and if you want to sound technical, you can call it ENSO for “El Niño/La Niña Southern Oscillation.”
La Niña was a hot topic last week when members of the CWCB, water providers and others huddled up at Denver Water to answer the question, “Drought in 2011?”. Below are my notes from the meeting:
Water Year 2010 review
Nolan Doesken kicked things off with a look back at the past year.
A year ago October was wet and snowy but in November everything dried out. Northern Colorado was dry until the spring when the precipitation pattern shifted north. Wind speeds were low over the winter leading to a decline in wind energy production in northeastern Colorado. There was a wet spring and early summer in northeastern Colorado. Also in April there was a series on large dust events in the San Juans. The runoff was fast a furious with sudden warming at the end of May. Colorado experienced a strong but confined monsoon mid-July to around August 15.
He said that yesterday’s precipitation was the, “first widespread event in 2 months.”
Overall, “Most of the state ended up near average for precipitation,” he said, and added that, “This is the first time in history that we have had 3 near average years in a row.”
According to Doesken, the summer was the 15th warmest on record, statewide.
Short-term forecast
Triste Huse from the National Weather Service presented the short-term weather outlook. She said we can expect a good storm around Tuesday of next week. She showed a slide of comparing the historical precipitation for the 45 day period between August 1 and October 7. 2010 was the third lowest on record. Her 60 day comparison, ending October 7, had 2010 in first place for dryness. She added that September 2010 was the 7th warmest on record.
Long-term forecast
Klaus Wolter started off his presentation by saying that, “La Nina is on a steam roller.” The Multivariate ENSO Index is at it’s lowest level in 94 years, he said, adding that, “This is quite remarkable,” and, “The system can’t really get any colder.” (ENSO = El Nino Southern Oscillation). He told the group, “If you’re making a bet on the first snowfall,” bet on next Tuesday. His research shows that, “We’ve never really had a dry winter with La Nina.”
He told the water providers that if this La Nina turns out to be a two year event, “You better hope that the first year is not too bad because the second year will get you.” He said, “The odds are better than 50-50 that this will be a large La Nina with a normal, at best October.” He believes that we’ll have a few months above average moisture for winter, “but the runoff season next year will be on the dry side.”
“We are not on a 2002 path at this point,” he said, predicting a near normal winter and a dry spring. If La Nina continues it could be the start of a dry 2012.
Water provider updates
Bob Steger from Denver Water asked each of the water providers present to update the group on current operations and any plans for dealing with the possibility of the D1 drought continuing or worsening. Most providers are in good shape regarding storage. Aurora and Colorado Springs are planning work on Homestake Reservoir in 2012 so they will be drawing it down it prior to the work starting. Denver Water does not plan any extra releases for the next few months – they’re just going to match demand.
The National Science Foundation funds Michigan State University effort to develop a management plan for the Ogallala (High Plains) aquifer
October 19, 2010
Here’s the release from Michigan State University (Layne Cameron):
Researchers at Michigan State University are helping shape the future of the High Plains’ water supply.
The Ogallala Aquifer is a vast underground system that spans from South Dakota to Texas with smaller portions in Colorado, New Mexico and Wyoming. It is one of the world’s largest aquifer systems, storing nearly as much water as Lake Erie and Lake Huron combined. Yet this seemingly limitless water supply, a key component supporting the Great Plains’ bountiful agriculture production, is shrinking.
The National Science Foundation has awarded MSU $1.2 million to help shape a course to better manage this important natural resource. The multidisciplinary team of researchers, led by hydrogeologist David Hyndman, will use the four-year grant to develop a sustainability plan based on economic, sociological and geographic issues affecting the aquifer.
“For more than 80 years, the Ogallala Aquifer has been used for irrigation, and the withdrawals far exceed its ability to replenish itself,” said Hyndman, who worked with the Kansas Geological Survey on this project. “We are on an unsustainable course and must make difficult changes if we are to keep using some of the best agricultural land in the country.”
Researchers will review decades of scientific data. They also will study the interactions between the region’s landscape, atmosphere and socioeconomic systems and link this data with climate, hydrology, vegetation and economic models.
The end result will produce predictions and impact assessments covering a range of potential solutions. Community and government leaders will be able to implement the team’s forecasts to adjust land management policies and to make strides toward sustainable water-use practices.
“Navigating a patchwork of state laws, regulations and economics means any change will require complex solutions,” Hyndman said. “And since scientific solutions don’t exist in a vacuum, our plan will also address social and economic variables.”
The MSU research team comprises Jinhua Zhao, associate professor of agricultural economics; Stephen Gasteyer, assistant professor of sociology; Nathan Moore, assistant professor of geography; Shiyuan Zhong, associate professor of geography; Warren Wood, John Hannah Visiting Professor of Integrative Studies; and Anthony Kendall, geological sciences research associate.
The grant is funded through the NSF’s Water Sustainability and Climate program.
Energy policy — hydroelectric: Aspen hydroelectric plant application filed with FERC
October 19, 2010
From the Aspen Daily News (Curtis Wackerle):
The city on Friday submitted its draft application for a conduit exemption to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). A conduit exemption would waive the formal FERC licensing process, which would likely include an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.
The 521-page document explains why city officials believe the project qualifies for the conduit exemption.
It contains a report from Miller Ecological Consultants, which states that a minimum stream flow of 13.3 cubic feet per second (cfs) would be sufficient to maintain a healthy Castle Creek. It also contains intergovernmental agreements regarding stream monitoring and in-stream flows with the Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW) and the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB). It also includes about a dozen letters that have been filed in opposition to the conduit exemption…
Conduit exemptions are granted for small hydroelectric projects — defined as 15 megawatts or less — that use infrastructure that is not primarily intended for the generation of hydroelectricity. City officials claim that standard is met by a drainline currently under construction from Thomas Reservoir to Castle Creek near the site of the proposed hydro plant. City officials say the 4,000-foot-long drainline, approved in April at a cost of $2.3 million, is a necessary safety feature for Thomas Reservoir, which lacks adequate discharge capacity if there was ever an emergency. But the drainline also would be a “penstock” to feed water from the reservoir into a hydroelectric turbine in the proposed building underneath the Castle Creek Bridge…
A conduit exemption also requires that water used to generate electricity be discharged back into a conduit, into a point of municipal consumption or into a natural body of water if the same amount of water is re-diverted further downstream for municipal purposes. The application, prepared by Boulder law firm Dietze and Davis, states that discharging the water from the hydro plant into Castle Creek sustains an “in-stream flow” water right held by the CWCB. The in-stream flow constitutes a “point of municipal consumption,” according to the application. To come to that conclusion, the application argues that the CWCB is a municipality as defined by FERC. Further, the application cites case law which found that municipal consumption does not necessarily mean physically removing water from a river or stream…
By returning the water to the stream to meet a minimum stream flow requirement, the city and the water conservation board fulfill a municipal purpose, according to the application. The document, while arguing that it meets the discharge requirement, simultaneously asks for a waiver from that provision. “It’s just a belt and suspenders approach,” Kumli said. “We’re being careful to use FERC law in a manner that is fair [and consistent] with the way FERC approves hydroelectric projects.”[...]
Meanwhile, the Aspen City Council is considering whether to grant local land use approval for the hydro plant. Public hearings on the project began this summer, but have been tabled while a group of citizens and Pitkin County’s Healthy Rivers and Streams Board undertakes further study of the project. A group of citizens also is attempting to convene mediation meetings between project opponents — some of whom are considering lawsuits if the hydro plant is approved — and the city.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
Water board employees anticipate the 5 percent increase in 2011 largely to cover increased utility costs, which are expected to rise 22 percent to $2.57 million. Other large areas of expenditures include $1.26 million for outside services, up 8 percent; $1.3 million for repairs and maintenance, level; $1.24 million for supplies, level; $1.6 million for new main extension projects; and $870,000 to continue converting meters to an automated reading system. A rehabilitation of the outside and inside of the Hellbeck water tank will cost $400,000. Without using water development money, a rate increase of 8 percent is estimated…
Metered water sales are the largest source of revenue for the water board, and are expected to be about $19.5 million — 3.5 percent below budget — for 2010. Customers continue to use less water as part of a continuing conservation trend. In 2011, $20.5 million in metered sales is projected. The board also is anticipating more than $7.5 million in contract water sales in 2011, including $4.9 million to Xcel’s Comanche plants, $1.58 million from a pair of contracts with Aurora, $812,000 from raw water sales and $360,000 from the Black Hills contract. The budget workshop is scheduled at noon Nov. 9 and the hearing at 2 p.m. Nov. 16 at the Board of Water Works, 319 W. Fourth St.
More Pueblo Board of water works coverage here.
Lake Mead: ‘A record-setting moment’
October 18, 2010
From The New York Times (Felicity Barringer):
“It is a record-setting moment,” said Colleen Dwyer, a spokeswoman for the Bureau of Reclamation. She added that slightly more water than usual had been released through Hoover Dam over the weekend because the power marketing agency that sends dam-generated electricity around the Southwest had requested some additional flow.
Lake Mead’s levels are still eight feet above the level at which a shortage is officially declared and limited rationing could go into effect for users in Nevada and Arizona, and well above the levels when the Hoover Dam’s hydroelectric output might be seriously jeopardized.
But Barry Nelson, a senior policy analyst for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said: “This strikes me as such an amazing moment. It’s three-quarters of a century since they filled it. And at the three-quarter-century mark, the world has changed.”
More coverage from the Arizona Republic (Shaun McKinnon):
Not since it was first filling in 1937 has Lake Mead held so little water. The reservoir’s level fell to the historic low shortly before noon on Sunday, eclipsing a previous record from the drought-stricken 1950s. The lake is now just 8 feet above the level that would trigger the first drought restrictions, which would reduce water supplies for Arizona and Nevada. That gap could close by next year – the reservoir fell 10 feet from October 2009 to 2010 – but there are measures in place that would likely delay rationing for one or two years or even longer if a wet winter increased runoff into the river. Most homes and businesses in Arizona likely would not feel the direct effects of the restrictions, which would divert water first from farmers.
But conservation groups say the reservoir’s low levels underscore the risk to the Colorado River. “Everyone needs to know when we turn on the tap, it drains water out of the river and it has ecological consequences,” said Gary Wockner, campaign coordinator for Save the Colorado, a non-profit education group based in Fort Collins, Colo. “We need to try to keep some water in the river and keep it alive.”[...]
The three lower-river states, along with Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming on the upper river, approved a drought plan in 2007 that uses Lake Mead water levels to trigger incremental rationing, part of an attempt to avoid widespread shortages. The first trigger is at 1,075 feet above sea level. The reservoir reached elevation 1,083.18 feet around midday Sunday and was at 1,083 feet by Monday afternoon. The previous low level was 1,083.19 feet, set in 1956…Under the 2007 plan, the first trigger would reduce water deliveries to Arizona by a little more than 11 percent, or 320,000 acre-feet, and to Nevada by about 4 percent, or 13,000 acre-feet. Additional reductions would occur if the lake continued to drop.
More coverage from the Las Vegas Review-Journal (Henry Brean):
Since drought took hold on the Colorado and its tributaries in 1999, the surface of Lake Mead has plunged almost 130 feet and caused fits for the National Park Service and its marina operators who must extend roads, utilities and other services to reach the shrinking shoreline.
The lake’s decline poses major problems for the Southern Nevada Water Authority, which draws 90 percent of the Las Vegas Valley’s drinking water from intake pipes that will start to shut down should the lake fall another 33 feet. “I’m worried,” authority General Manager Pat Mulroy said. “We’re trying everything we can to keep as much water in Mead as we can.” The prognosis looks bleak. Mulroy said federal climate forecasters are predicting abnormally dry conditions during the next two winters in the mountains that feed the Colorado…
The previous low-water mark for Mead came 54 years ago, on April 26, 1956, when the drought-stricken lake bottomed out at 1,083.19 feet above sea level. According to the Bureau of Reclamation, the lake hit elevation 1,083.18 between 11 a.m. and noon Sunday and continued to fall. By Monday afternoon, it sank below elevation 1,083 as water was released through Hoover Dam to meet orders downstream from cities and farms in California and Arizona. Projections by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation call for Lake Mead to reach a low point of 1,082.1 on Nov. 2. Then it is expected to rise by about 8 feet through the end of February before starting back down again. Water forecasters expect the lake to hit another record low by May and shrink below elevation 1,077 by September…
Even at its lowest level since it was first filled, Lake Mead remains the largest man-made reservoir in the United States. The falling water level has caused some problems with access, but it has also unveiled new coves and pristine beaches that used to be underwater, Roundtree said.
More coverage from the Voice of San Diego Environment (Rob Davis):
Millions of people — San Diegans included — rely on the reservoir’s water. So what does its drop mean here? In the short term, nothing. It doesn’t have any impact on San Diego’s supply even though we relied on the river for 61 percent of our water in 2009. But it does send a bad signal that the river supplying the Southwest’s lifeblood is continuing to face pressure — a pressure that scientists say is growing as the climate warms. If the lake continues dropping, it will first cause problems for cities in Arizona and Nevada before San Diego. Those states hold lower-priority rights to Colorado River water than California does.
More Colorado River basin coverage here.
CWCB: Next board meeting November 15-17 in Berthoud
October 18, 2010
From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (Brent Newman):
Notice is hereby given that the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) will host a joint meeting with the Front Range Water Council on Monday, November 15, 2010, commencing at 10:00 a.m. This meeting will be held at Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Office, 220 Water Avenue, Berthoud, Colorado 80513.
Notice is hereby given that a CWCB Public Rulemaking Hearing for proposed floodplain regulations will be held on Monday, November 15, 2010, beginning at 1:00 p.m. This Hearing will also take place at Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Office, 220 Water Avenue, Berthoud, Colorado 80513.
Notice is hereby given that a meeting of the CWCB will be held on Tuesday, November 16, 2010, commencing at 8:00 a.m. and continuing through Wednesday, November 17, 2010. This meeting will be held at Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Office, 220 Water Avenue, Berthoud, Colorado 80513.
More CWCB coverage here.
Windy Gap Firming Project update
October 18, 2010
From the Loveland Reporter-Herald (Pamela Dickman):
“This [the Colorado River] is not a healthy river,” [the director of the Colorado Division of Wildlife] Tom Remington said at a meeting in Loveland last week. “The question is how do we fix the river?”[...]
Northern Water, the water conservancy district that wants to build the reservoir [Chimney Hollow -- part of the Windy Gap Firming Project], is required to work with the Colorado Division of Wildlife to mitigate any additional impacts to wildlife and the river. To accomplish this, the Division of Wildlife plans to bring planners together with biologists, government officials, conservation groups and others with a stake in the river. Maybe together, they can go one step beyond maintaining the river as it is to fixing problems from past water projects, Remington said.
The Division of Wildlife cannot prevent the district from taking the water, but it can try to mitigate the impact on wildlife, said wildlife commissioner Bob Streeter of Fort Collins. “We’re looking at this as an opportunity to fix a problem,” added Remington. “It leads to a better river down the road instead of just maintaining the current condition, which is all Northern Water is required to do.”
More coverage from the Summit County Citizen’s Voice. From the article:
…the [Wildlife] Commissioners were briefed on the potential impacts of the Windy Gap Firming Project on aquatic resources and heard input from landowners and fishing advocates about their concerns.
The Windy Gap Firming Project would allow the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District to capture more of the water rights its owns on the West Slope for storage in a new reservoir west of Carter Lake in Loveland to provide additional reliability to its system.
The project has been undergoing review under the National Environmental Policy Act since 2003. West of the Divide, impacts could include a decrease of water level in Lake Granby, a reduction in trout habitat in the Colorado River due to lower stream flows and increases in water temperature. There would also likely be a reduction in river flows preferred by rafters and kayakers, with a potential impact on anglers who fish from personal floatation equipment. Fisheries east of the Continental Divide would benefit from potential development of a new flat-water fishery in the proposed Chimney Hollow Reservoir.
Later this fall, the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District will present a plan to mitigate impacts from the project to the Wildlife Commission, which will need to approve or deny the plan within 60 days unless Northern consents to an extension.
The wildlife commission will take more public input on the Windy Gap project at an Oct. 21 meeting in Granby. “This is obviously a very, very important issue and our commissioners are anxious to learn more about how the impacts of this project can be mitigated,” Glenn said.
Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy board meeting recap
October 18, 2010
From The Mountain Mail (Joe Stone):
The act would designate 850,000 additional wilderness acres in Colorado at 34 sites, including six in the Upper Arkansas River Basin and three along streams of “particular importance to the Upper Arkansas region,” district manager Terry Scanga said.
He identified the three tributaries as Beaver, Badger and Grape creeks and presented a letter from attorney John Hill describing negative impacts of the wilderness designation on water rights in those areas. All are downstream from developed areas. Hill wrote that wilderness designation would require the Secretary of Interior to claim all unappropriated water in these areas for in-stream flow, which “would preclude any future appropriations upstream of the wilderness area.”
In the case of Grape Creek, Hill wrote, “The proposed wilderness area … would significantly impact the operating regimen of DeWeese Reservoir.”[...]
Tim Canterbury, district board member and immediate past president of the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association, said he recently spent four days in Washington on behalf of cattlemen urging DeGette to “go back and rewrite the implementation” that directly affects cattle grazers, water districts and other water users. “She said, ‘Absolutely not,’” Canterbury reported. “We (the association) are not opposed to wilderness, but to the effects on cattle grazing … . Since she’s not willing to talk about it, we have to oppose this.” Canterbury added, “The agencies have no choice on implementation, and that’s the problem because it eliminates all activity.”
More Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District coverage here.
2010 Colorado elections: Battle for the U.S. Senate seat
October 18, 2010
From The Colorado Statesman:
Q: Would you support expanded use of nuclear energy?
Buck: “Yes.”
Bennet: “Yes.”Q: Are you in favor of the Northern Integrated Supply Project (a water project on the northern Front Range)?
Bennet: “I don’t believe that’s a decision for me to make.”
Buck: “Yes. … That’s a decision for me to make, so, yes.” (Bennet interjected, “That’s going to come as news to the people of the region.”)Q: About “fracking,” Congresswoman DeGette has a bill to require the industry to disclose the chemicals it uses to extract natural gas. Are you in favor of that legislation?
Buck: “No.”
Bennet: “I believe there should be public disclosure of fracking fluids.” (Pressed by Buck, who said, “That wasn’t an answer. Are you in favor of the bill?” Bennet responded, “I haven’t endorsed that bill, but I believe there should be public disclosure of fracking fluids.”)
More 2010 Colorado elections coverage here.
Interbasin Compact Committee: Meeting the water supply gap
October 18, 2010
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
“This is a four-legged stool,” said Alex Davis, chairwoman of the IBCC, at the group’s meeting last week. “These are all processes to meet the gap.” The “legs” are:
- Identified projects and processes already under way.
- New supplies of water, most likely new diversions from the Western Slope.
- Municipal water conservation.
- Drying up, or alternatively sharing, agricultural water supplies.In any case, the state municipal water demand is expected to increase to nearly 2 million acre-feet from current demand of about 1.2 million acre-feet by 2050, when the state’s population is expected to double to 10 million people…
Not all of the identified projects — things like the Southern Delivery System or Arkansas Valley Conduit — are expected to be successful. And, they may not come at the right time or place to meet future needs. “We’re making the assumption that the identified projects and processes will be available to those who need them. It’s an oversimplification,” said Eric Kuhn, general manager of the Colorado River Conservation District. “Not all those who need water have access” to the identified projects and processes, he said. “The timing and how water can be available needs to be answered.”
Drying up agriculture is seen as the default option because that is what has happened in the past. Municipal water suppliers thirsty for new supplies have found willing sellers of agricultural water and have not fully developed all of the water they’ve purchased. The 2004 Statewide Water Supply Initiative developed by the Colorado Water Conservation Board, found that thousands of more acres would be dried up even if most current water projects were successful.
No one is sure how conservation would be applied toward new supplies of water or simply as a hedge against drought…
A proposal by the IBCC to create water banking, compensatory storage on the West Slope and a risk-management plan for needs on both sides of the Continental Divide was batted around last week. The Front Range has the greatest needs, and currently brings over nearly half of its surface water supply from the Colorado River basin. In Kuhn’s words, it is a way to “share the pain.” Water banking would try to guard water rights claimed since the 1922 Colorado River Compact against a call by downstream states by storing water to release in the driest years. “The water would be stored in wet years to protect diversions in dry years,” Davis said…
“This is the discussion we’ve needed to have since we formed,” said Peter Nichols, a water attorney appointed by the governor to the IBCC. “How do we as a state develop more water out the Colorado River basin?”
“This is a different way of doing things that would protect more interests and make for less of a battle in water court,” said Melinda Kassen, Trout Unlimited’s Western Water Project legal director. “At the end of the day, this might be too much of a give, and people are free to take their risk and go their own way.”
Jeris Danielson, a former state engineer who represents the Arkansas Basin Roundtable on the IBCC, suggested municipal interests need to back off their hard-line positions. “We’re just starting a conversation that never took place for 130 years,” Danielson said. “The issues are just beginning to develop.”[...]
Davis asked the group to strongly consider moving the storage proposal ahead, allowing those with objections to help shape it into a more acceptable form. “Without a new supply, ag is the first thing we throw under the bus, and conservation becomes harder if there’s no light at the end of the tunnel,” Davis said. “The fears and concerns of the West Slope and environmental groups would be the first to halt a new supply project. We have to find conditions that make it palatable to everyone.”
More IBCC — basin roundtables coverage here.
2010 Colorado elections: The Pueblo Chieftain editorial staff endorses Cory Gardner over Betsy Markey and John Salazar over Scott Tipton
October 17, 2010
From The Pueblo Chieftain:
As Republican whip of the Colorado House, Rep. Gardner consistently has voted for smaller and more responsible government. Before being elected, he was then-U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard’s natural resources aide and even helped to draft legislation for funding the Arkansas Valley Conduit to supply good drinking water to the Lower Arkansas Valley.
Rep. Gardner is committed to represent rural water interests, the ranchers against Pinon Canyon Military Maneuver site expansion and conservative tax and budget policies. In fact, he has been described as a responsible conservative Republican in the mold of former U.S. Sen. and 4th District Rep. Hank Brown.
From The Pueblo Chieftain:
On protecting the Arkansas Valley’s precious water supply, he’s been steadfast against further water raids by Aurora or any other entity. As a farmer himself who knows how it is to be at the end of an irrigation ditch, he will continue to defend Arkansas Valley farmers who want to maintain their way of life, of being suppliers of vital foodstuff for the rest of us.
More 2010 Colorado elections here.
Summitville superfund site update
October 17, 2010
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Matt Hildner):
The water treatment plant, funded by $17 million in federal stimulus spending, has been eyed by federal and state environmental officials as a key component in limiting contamination from the site. It joins a new micro-hydro power plant and a dam spillway as projects crews worked on this summer. “There’s quite a lot going on this year,” said Austin Buckingham, project manager for the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment…
Austin Buckingham said the new plant, which will draw water from the impoundment dam at the bottom of the site, will use lime to raise the pH balance of the contaminated water. The rise in pH forces the metals to precipitate. Those metals include copper, cadmium, manganese, zinc, lead, nickel, aluminum, and iron. With a capacity of 1,600 gallons per minute and the ability to run at night, thanks to automation, the plant is expected to have an easier time dealing with spring runoff from the site, which sits near tree line 18 miles southwest of Del Norte…
Other projects moving forward this year include the installation of a 56 kilowatt hydro power plant, which is expected to cut an estimated $15,000 per year off the site’s power bill. Turbines for the plant are expected to arrive in two weeks, she said. The turbines will be powered by water coming from the treatment plant on its way to Wrightman Fork, a tributary of the Alamosa River.
Arkansas Basin Roundtable meeting recap
October 17, 2010
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
While there are numerous stream gauges on the Arkansas River and large tributaries like Fountain Creek and the Purgatoire River, there is little specific information about what happens along smaller feeders, said Tim Gates, a Colorado State University-Fort Collins researcher. “The focus of this work is to fill the gaps left by the absence of data in the Upper Arkansas Basin,” Gates told the Arkansas Basin Roundtable last week.
Gates and other CSU researchers have spent 10 years studying broad irrigation districts in the Lamar and La Junta areas to try to understand how irrigation affects water tables and salinity. Using a $600,000 grant obtained through the roundtable, the CSU team looked at 17 wells in the Upper Arkansas, along with about 200 wells it already was monitoring in the Lower Arkansas farming regions in order to track water movement year-around…
The team also looked at surface flows in the area, in an attempt to reconcile how much water flows back to the river, how much soaks into the ground and how long it takes the groundwater to return to the river. “We’re trying to get a basic understanding of how much water is being contributed on the tributaries, many of which may not be gauged,” Gates said. “We also did seepage tests on ditches in the upper basin to determine just how much is making its way back to the river.”
The study also is tracking the loading of solids, salt and contaminants like selenium or uranium, Gates said. One preliminary finding, for instance, was a hot spot for uranium near Brown’s Creek south of Buena Vista . Levels were below clean water thresholds, Gates said.
More IBCC — basin roundtables coverage here.
Bureau of Reclamation: Title XVI Water Recycling and Reuse Funding Criteria Available
October 17, 2010
From email from Reclamation (Peter Soeth):
The Bureau of Reclamation has published the funding criteria for the Title XVI – Water Recycling and Reuse Program. The funding criteria will be used for two new fiscal year 2011 Title XVI Funding Opportunity Announcements.
Earlier this year, Reclamation made draft criteria available for public comment. The final funding criteria and a compilation of the public comments received are available online at www.usbr.gov/WaterSMART.
This fall, two funding opportunities will be posted at www.grants.gov. One opportunity will be open for construction of Title XVI projects. Another funding opportunity will provide cost-shared assistance for the development of feasibility studies under the program.
Title XVI of P.L. 102-575 provides authority for Reclamation’s water recycling and reuse program. The Title XVI program is focused on identifying and investigating opportunities to reclaim and reuse wastewaters and naturally impaired ground and surface water in the 17 Western States and Hawaii. Title XVI projects have the potential to stretch water supplies using both time-tested methodologies and piloting new concepts.
WaterSMART is a program of the U.S. Department of the Interior that focuses on improving water conservation and helping water-resource managers make sound decisions about water use. It identifies strategies to ensure that this and future generations will have sufficient supplies of clean water for drinking, economic activities, recreation, and ecosystem health. The Program also identifies adaptive measures to address climate change and its impact on future water demands.
More reuse coverage here.
