Aspen: The city’s Environmental Health Department staff is gearing up to promote tap water as an alternative to bottled water
March 31, 2011
From The Aspen Times (Andre Salvail):
In a recent memorandum to the council, [Ashley Cantrell, a city environmental health specialist] wrote that the complete elimination of bottled water “is neither an achievable nor a manageable goal at this time.” But a campaign to promote and market Aspen tap water is doable, depending on costs, most council members agreed during Tuesday’s meeting. “Rather than target bottled water as a negative thing, we want to promote Aspen tap water as a positive thing,” Cantrell told council members.
More water treatment coverage here.
Lake Mead news: Reclamation projects another 9 foot rise in water levels even with the summer’s projected draw down
March 31, 2011
From The Wall Street Journal (Jim Carlton):
The fierce winter did bring some good news. The vast lake [Lake Mead] is rising for only the second time since the Southwest entered a debilitating drought 12 years ago. The water is 14 feet higher so far, and is projected to rise about nine feet more from the spring’s snowmelt by the end of the current water year in September. That takes into account the expected drawdown…
Lake Mead’s water level now stands at 1,096 feet, near its lowest point since the reservoir began filling in the 1930s and 110 feet below when the drought began in 1999, according to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. The lake last rose in 2005. Already, that low level has forced the bureau to cut power from the lake’s Hoover Dam by 20%.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
Fort Collins entrepreneur Aaron Million announced plans to pursue the project five years ago, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is evaluating his proposal in an environmental impact statement. Last year, the Corps said it could take until 2018 to reach a decision, although Million remains confident he can move the timetable up. About one year ago, the Colorado-Wyoming Coalition, led by Parker Water General Manager Frank Yeager, announced its own study of the feasibility of the project. Communities with a combined population of more than 500,000 are participating in that group.
Shortly after the announcement, Drew Peternell of Colorado Trout Unlimited, published an article claiming the cost of water from Million’s project was too much for anyone but growing urban areas to afford, and suggested sticking in the fork.
Not long after that, Gary Barber, chairman of the Arkansas Basin Roundtable floated the idea of a state task force on either Flaming Gorge idea, modeled after the Fountain Creek Vision Task Force. Within the next few months, the Colorado Water Conservation Board had approved a $40,000 grant to determine whether the task force should be formed. A report is expected in June…
Million was encouraged earlier this month when one of his consultants, former State Engineer Jeris Danielson, asked Gov. John Hickenlooper about the potential for private-public partnerships to develop water projects in the state. Hickenlooper, speaking at the first State Roundtable Summit, said all options need to be considered. “I think Governor Hickenlooper understands the private-public model of cooperation better than many in state government,” Million said. Million’s plan includes setting aside some of the water, whether directly or through return flows, to serve agriculture and fill environmental needs in Colorado. But even if every drop went to cities, he sees the project as beneficial because it relieves the pressure on other water rights in Colorado. “What’s the issue? Do we continue to let water flow down the Colorado River while we dry up farms in Eastern Colorado?” Million said.
More Flaming Gorge pipeline coverage here and here. More Colorado-Wyoming Cooperative Water Project coverage here.
From the Fort Collins Coloradoan (Bobby Magill):
A bill moving briskly through the Legislature could make it more difficult for those old water supply structures to be included in either the Colorado Register of Historic Properties or the National Register of Historic Places. House Bill 1289, sponsored by Rep. Jerry Sonnenberg, R-Sterling, and Sen. Mary Hodge, D-Adams County, would require the consent of everyone with a property or water rights interest in a water supply structure for it to be considered for inclusion in the state or national register.
If any one of possibly many property owners objects, the structure would be ineligible for historic recognition by History Colorado, formerly the Colorado Historical Society, the state’s administrator of the National Register of Historic Places. “The fear was if someone needed to upgrade a diversion or a headgate, if it was on the historic list, then you have to go through extra paperwork or time and may not be able to get that done in a timely manner if you need to fix it,” Sonnenberg said.
More 2011 Colorado legislation coverage here.
Colorado River basin: Are transmountain diversions degrading the Upper Colorado River riparian habitat?
March 30, 2011
From The Denver Post (Scott Willoughby):
“We do a lot of guiding on the Fraser and Colorado rivers, and even before this we’ve lost a lot of insects. The green drakes on the Fraser are completely gone, a whole insect class that’s just disappeared,” said Ehlert, owner of Winter Park Fly Fisher and a 20-year guide with Grand County Fishing Company. “The other one was the salmonfly hatch on the Colorado. We still have them below Kremmling. But we used to get them on the river above Kremmling and now they are completely gone.” Ehlert believes he knows the culprit behind the mystery, and he’s not alone in pointing his finger squarely at trans-mountain water diversions he believes are sucking the life out of the Fraser River and Colorado headwaters. Shallow rivers and rising water temperatures have pushed the ecosystem to the brink, he said. “We’re fighting right now just to keep the water we have in the river, but I personally think we’re not being aggressive enough. We need to get the water back that’s gone,” he said. “If we lose any more, I think the whole system is going to crash. It may be too late now. Once the insects and food are gone, the fish are going to follow.”
Concerns over the health of the entire Upper Colorado River drainage have been magnified in recent months by proposals from Denver Water and Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District to annually draw an additional 45,000 acre feet from the Fraser, Williams Fork and Blue rivers through the Moffat Collection System Project and Windy Gap Firming Project. If approved, the water that would otherwise make its way into the Upper Colorado will instead be diverted across the Divide primarily for residential use among multiple municipalities along the Front Range from Greeley to Denver.
As part of the proposal, the water districts are expected to submit both a Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plan and an Enhancement Plan to the Colorado Wildlife Commission at the April 7 workshop in Meeker. While the required FWMP addresses expected future impacts from the two projects, the optional enhancement plans are designed to address past and ongoing impacts to the river suffering the combined effects of development, agriculture, sediment loading, whirling disease and diversions, among others. The formal presentation of the plan starts a 60-day clock in which the Wildlife Commission will determine its official recommendation for or against the projects to the state.
More Colorado River basin coverage here.
2011 Colorado legislation: Governor Hickenlooper signs HB 11-1083 (Hydroelectricity and pumped hydro)
March 30, 2011
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Patrick Malone):
Under HB1083, the Public Utilities Commission can authorize hydro projects and allow rates to be adjusted to recover the costs of the projects, similar to other renewable energy sources like wind and solar…
Concessions to environmental groups that worried about the impact on aquatic life and others who were concerned about its impact on downstream water users paved the way for the bill’s popularity. “When we started out, I was scratching my head wondering how we were going to get this passed. We were butting our heads against a wall,” said sponsor Rep. Keith Swerdfeger, R-Pueblo West. “We backed up, just started communicating with the people that had concerns, and then it came on board.”
The bill passed through two committees, the Senate and the House twice without a vote against it. Experts testified that hydro is an economical way — except for the hefty up-front investment — to store and generate energy in order to fill gaps in wind and solar generation, and that up to six sites throughout the state have been identified as suitable sites for hydroelectric plants.
More 2011 Colorado legislation coverage here. More hydroelectric coverage here and here.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Peter Roper):
Opponents of a proposed nuclear power plant in Pueblo County are planning a rally Friday on the steps of the Pueblo County Courthouse, beginning at 4 p.m. A list of speakers has signed up for the event, but organizers describe it more as an “open microphone” rally where the public can voice its opinion on the proposal from local attorney Don Banner to rezone about 24,000 acres in the eastern county for an energy park, including a site for a nuclear power plant. “We’re trying to be positive about alternative energy, not just anti-nuke,” explained Suzanne Morgan, one of the organizers of Pueblo for Safe Energy, the group that has sprung up to oppose any approval of a nuclear power plant here.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
The company signed a 40-year contract with the Pueblo Board of Water Works last year that would provide enough water for up to seven units at the new plant, located northwest of Pueblo Memorial Airport, said Terry Book, deputy executive director for the water board. The contract is structured so that Black Hills pays for the water it expects to use each year at current rates for treated water. It also pays a fee for readiness to serve on the balance of water up to 2,500 acre-feet…
The new plant is scheduled to come on line by the end of this year, when a lease to purchase electricity from Xcel’s Comanche plant expires. “Black Hills is able to take water now, and will be able to make basic runs by the end of the year,” Book said. Under the contract, Black Hills is expected to pay up to $1 million annually to the Pueblo water board for delivery of water.
More energy policy coverage here.
2011 Colorado legislation: HB 11-1286 (Clarify State Engineer Nontributary Rule Authority) sails through the state House
March 29, 2011
Click here for Joe Hanel’s analysis of the bill from The Durango Herald.
More coverage from Patrick Malone writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
Under HB1286, Water Court would be the last line of appeal for decisions by the state engineer. The bill arose in response to a 2009 Colorado Supreme Court ruling that found oil and gas wells are subject to the tributary water permitting process. Supporters of the bill have said it would streamline the permitting and appeal processes. In a committee hearing, an opponent objected that it represents legislative side-stepping of the high court. Next, the bill will be heard by a Senate committee.
More HB 11-1286 coverage here.
South Platte River basin: Morgan County Economic Development Corp. economic roundtable recap
March 29, 2011
From The Fort Morgan Times (Dan Barker):
It was an economic disaster when another part of the state saw its water rights bought up to provide water for big cities, and almost every local ditch company is now partly owned by one municipality or another, said Heath Kuntz of LeonardRice Engineers Inc. Fortunately so far, very little of the water which was once used for agriculture has been used for cities, but it will happen eventually, said Fort Morgan City Councilman Brent Nation, who owns Nation Engineering…
Lack of water in the future would mean little chance for industry to expand, and little chance for economic growth, she said. One of the difficulties is that the large cities can pay big bucks to speculate and hold water rights, and smaller rural areas cannot afford as much, Kuntz said.
More South Platte River basin coverage here.
From the Colorado Independent (David O. Williams):
In the wake of the Japan’s ongoing crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant northeast of Tokyo, more than just the so-called “dirty front end” of nuclear power – Colorado’s rich but sometimes toxic uranium mining history – is being called into question. The issues of waste storage at the state’s only nuclear power plant – the now-defunct Fort St. Vrain – and a lack of water to cool future reactors also are being hotly debated.
Still, Udall remains resolute in his support of increased nuclear power as a means of reducing the amount of carbon-spewing fossil fuels being burned to generate electricity and as a way to convert the nation’s transportation system from gas-powered to electric vehicles. In a statement last week to the Colorado Independent, Udall urged caution in moving ahead on nuclear power but reiterated his determination to do so.
“Our need to tackle climate change hasn’t gone away,” Udall said. “I’m a realist, and if you want to substitute electricity for petroleum in transportation, nuclear has to be part of the equation. However, any new nuclear power plants that are built — be they in Colorado or elsewhere in the United States — must involve lots of input from the local community and include robust permitting requirements, safety protocols and oversight.”
Coyote Gulch turns 9 years old today
March 29, 2011
Wow, 9 years. Here’s the link to the post where I dubbed the weblog Coyote Gulch.
I caught some momentum covering the municipal elections in Denver in 2003 where now Governor Hickenlooper was elected mayor of Denver in a runoff against Don Mares.
Later in the year Governor Owens tried to pass Referendum A and I found my “beat.” Readers kept sending me links and I was off and running on a labor of love.
It’s hard to know how many posts I created on the old software and Coyote Gulch — somewhere around 15,000. I’m up to 4,461 posts here on WordPress since February 12, 2009.
Thanks for reading. Thanks for the links. And thanks for the kind words when I’m lucky enough to meet you in person.
Water and the western U.S.: John Wesley Powell was correct
March 29, 2011
From Huffpost Green (Brian Fagan):
In 1893, John Wesley Powell of Grand Canyon fame, Director of the US Geological Survey, addressed an irrigation conference in Los Angeles about water in the American West. He flatly stated that there was insufficient water in the American West to support widespread irrigation agriculture. Powell was shouted down, forced by hostile interests in Congress to resign from the Geological Survey. But history has shown he was right, for our reckless consumption has taken us far beyond the point of sustainability…
No question, our grandchildren and great grandchildren will live in a very different hydrological world. Quite apart from renegotiating the now-obsolete Colorado River Compact, we will have to break the habits of our lifetimes and use water very differently. If, for example, we reduced agricultural allocations and the amount of city water going to landscaping from 50% to 5%, we would save nearly 20% of the annual flow of the Colorado River alone.
Groundwater is also vanishing further to the east, from Colorado and New Mexico to Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska, where the vast Ogallala aquifer under the Great Plains supports hundreds of communities, also large cities and major agricultural and mining activities. The Ogallala supplies about a third of the nation’s groundwater used for irrigation. US Geological Survey experts have calculated that irrigation alone sucked about 21 million acre feet (260 cubic kilometers) of water from the Ogallala in 2000, a figure slightly larger than the historic annual discharge rate of the Colorado River. Some hydrologists believe that the aquifer will dry up in about 25 years.
More Colorado water coverage here.
Snowpack/streamflow forecast news
March 29, 2011
From the Valley Courier (Ruth Heide):
Colorado Division of Water Resources Division Engineer for Division 3 Craig Cotten informed water users recently that the river forecast for this year is less than last season, and the snowpack in the mountains surrounding the San Luis Valley is less than average. As of last week, when Cotten presented his report at the Rio Grande Water Users Association annual meeting, basinwide the snowpack stood at 80 percent of average, but that averaged 90 percent for the Upper Rio Grande Basin with 56 percent for the Sangre de Cristo Mountains. On Monday, March 28, the Upper Rio Grande Basin was sitting about the same, at 91 percent of average, while the Sangre side of the Valley had dropped to 53 percent. “It is not looking real good,” Cotten told water users. He said a recent storm helped some but not much…
He said the Natural Resources Conservation Service and National Weather Service are forecasting stream flows this irrigation season (April-September) at lower levels than normal, as well. They are forecasting 420,000 acre feet of stream flow through the Del Norte gauge on the Rio Grande for the April-September time frame, or about 83 percent of average. Adding in about 90,000 acre feet that runs through the gauge during the off season, the forecast for the Rio Grande at Del Norte would be about 510,000 acre feet for this calendar year, Cotten explained. He said the current forecast could drop even more if the mountains do not collect some spring moisture. Last April 1, the forecast called for 590,000 acre feet on the Rio Grande at Del Norte, and by May 1 that forecast had dropped to 570,000 acre feet. The river ended the year with substantially less than that, 539,300 acre feet. Of the 510,000 acre feet currently predicted for the Rio Grande this year, about 130,400 acre feet of water will have to be sent downstream to New Mexico and Texas to meet Rio Grande Compact obligations. Considering the state’s credit status, estimated flows from the Closed Basin Project, return flows to the river and other factors, water users are looking at a 7-percent curtailment to meet that compact obligation.
On the Conejos River system, the current annual forecast is for 250,000 acre feet, with 75,000 obligated downstream to meet the compact. That means water users on the Conejos River system are looking at 17 percent curtailments, according to Cotten.
From the Vail Daily (Randy Wyrick):
A spring storm dumped 12 inches on Vail and 10 inches on Beaver Creek, with more snow expected later this week…Aspen, meanwhile, got 5 inches…
The Natural Resources Conservation Service keeps track of it, and they don’t really look at snow depth when they measure water. They’re looking for moisture content, said Diane Johnson with the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. We’re still ahead of snow water equivalent for this winter, running slightly ahead of the historical averages and way ahead of the 2002 drought levels, Johnson said…
The Vail Mountain site is at 108 percent of the historical average, Fremont Pass is 123 percent and Copper Mountain is 130 percent, according to Monday’s report. The Copper Mountain site has already exceeded its average high for the year, Johnson said.
Energy policy — nuclear: The Pueblo chapter of Rocky Mountain Farmers Union says thumbs down to proposed power plant in Pueblo County
March 28, 2011
From The Ag Journal (Candi Hill):
Vincent Potestio, president of the Pueblo group, said the group is encouraging people throughout the Lower Arkansas Valley to call their county commissioners to oppose the power plant on this property. “RMFU is not against nuclear energy, we’re against the nuclear energy on the proposed site,” Potestio said. They are supportive of solar or wind power on the 75,000 acres, but not supportive of nuclear. Potestio said RMFU is concerned that if something happened to the plant, it would wipe out this entire area. “If this thing throws a cast iron fit like it did in Japan … everyone in this valley will lose their property, their livestock and maybe even their lives,” he said. “I know this will create a lot of jobs, but is it worth the chance of losing everything we have for the jobs?”
Potestio said if the Pueblo County Commissioners approve of the nuclear plant (they will vote April 25), “I hope, for God’s sake, that they make the company be bonded for whatever this valley is worth.”
Northern Integrated Supply Project update
March 28, 2011
From the Loveland Reporter-Herald (Jackie Hutchins):
Rena Brand, a regulatory specialist from the Corps of Engineers office in Littleton, updated people attending a regional water meeting (The Poudre Runs Through It) Thursday night about the status of the water project…
Brand told those attending the Poudre Runs Through It: Northern Colorado’s Water Future forum that her agency has taken the unusual step of doing some further study to create a supplemental draft environmental impact statement. When the document is finished, probably in December, it will be released to the public, and another round of public hearings will take place, she said. “So we still have a little ways to go.”[...]
She said besides Army Corps of Engineers approval, the NISP project will need a water quality certificate from the state, Larimer County planning approval, and approvals from the Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Environmental Protection Agency, Colorado Historical Society and Colorado Department of Transportation, which is involved because the proponent has proposed moving a highway to make room for Glade Reservoir.
More Northern Integrated Supply Project coverage here and here.
From the Glenwood Springs Post Independent:
The funding includes a $64,600 grant from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, as well as $72,200 in matching funds for the 18-month project. It is expected to begin this fall. “The basic idea is to better understand the resource we have and the challenges it faces,” said Chris Treese, with the Colorado River Water Conservation District, which helped form the partnership. “We’re working to build greater awareness within our communities about the watershed and what it means in our lives.”[...]
The initial task is to analyze existing information and develop a “State of the Watershed Report” that assesses current conditions. Building on that assessment, the partnership will work with local stakeholders to identify projects or activities to tackle key issues. The final plan could recommend a variety of activities, from on-the-ground restoration projects to public education efforts. “The good news is that we think the watershed is probably in pretty good shape,” said Mike Wilde, a member of the partnership’s steering committee who also sits on the Mount Sopris Soil Conservation District. “But should we take that as a given? Or are there things we should be doing proactively to ensure its long term health?”
More Colorado River basin coverage here.
La Niña update
March 28, 2011
From the Summit County Citizens Voice (Bob Berwyn):
In a three-month outlook covering April through June, National Weather Service forecasters say the weakening La Niña (cooler than average sea surface temperatures in the central and eastern Equatorial Pacific) will continue to influence Colorado’s weather, but to a continually lessening degree. Off the coast of Central America and northern South America, sea surface temperatures have actually climbed above average.
Through the first part of the three-month period, a west-to-east jet stream is expected to dominate the weather, with occasional dips (short-wave troughs) bringing spells of mountain snow on west-facing slopes favored under orographic conditions.
“The Pacific jet stream will likely continue to produce periods of moderate to heavy mountain snowfall on progressively higher west-facing mountain slopes as temperatures rise through at least the end of April,” forecaster Mike Baker said. ” … (A)t the same time, this prevailing zonal flow pattern will also continue to generate periods of abnormally warm and very dry weather, accompanied by potentially damaging downslope (Chinook) wind events in areas east of the Continental Divide.” This wind-flow pattern is also an important part of the Great Sand Dunes ecosystem in the San Luis Valley, helping to replenish the dunes,” he explained.
Later in May and into June, the pattern really starts to change. June is often one of the driest months in the high country, as increasingly warm temperatures in the desert southwest and across the Great Basin build a bubble of high pressure that pushes the jet stream farther north. Troughs in the jet stream will still dive southward across Wyoming and into Utah, but not as frequently. The same pattern can bring strong, gusty northwest winds to the Front Range and nearby plains, leading to a continued high fire hazard in that region. Currently, the eastern half of the state is rated as being in a moderate to severe drought, with little relief in sight in the next three months.
From the Associated Press (Lori Obert) via 9News.com:
A need for electricity and jobs is driving the proposal [for a nuclear power plant in Pueblo County]. But three days of recent public hearings underscored mixed public opinion after the Japan disaster — sentiments driven by conflicting desires for jobs, tax revenue, energy diversification and safety.
“Nuclear is the safest form of electric generation there is, and it’d be a shot in the arm for the county and city,” 55-year-old Gerald Campbell, who holds a doctorate in molecular biology, said after listening to opponents at one Pueblo County Commission meeting.
“People are afraid of what they don’t know,” said Aaron Ackerman, a Pueblo native and nuclear engineering student at the Colorado School of Mines. He noted that the containment domes around the nuclear reactors at Japan’s Fukushima Dai-ichi complex weren’t built to withstand the disasters that struck it.
Rancher Abel Rael, 64, opposed the project. “People aren’t going to want to buy vegetables from this area,” he said.
“There are a lot of competing interests here,” said Commissioner Jeff Chostner. “All of that is background for making a very local decision.”
From The Pueblo Chieftain:
Chris Woodka, a Pueblo Chieftain reporter and editor, will be the luncheon speaker on the second day of the event. He will discuss a recent water series: “Coming Up Short — Stretching Our Water Supply.” Copies of the 15-part report will be distributed to participants.
Here’s the link to the Arkansas River Basin Water Forum website.
More Arkansas River basin coverage here.
IBCC Alternative Agricultural Water Transfer Methods Grant Program draft report available online
March 26, 2011
From email from the IBCC:
The draft report on the Alternative Agricultural Water Transfer Methods Grant Program is now available on the CWCB homepage http://cwcb.state.co.us/Pages/CWCBHome.aspx. This draft report provides an overview of the CWCB’s program and projects geared towards the advancement of alternative agricultural water transfer methods.
The CWCB appreciates public input on the draft report and will accept comments through Friday, April 15, 2011. Submit comments to Todd Doherty or call 303-866-3441 x3210.
More IBCC — basin roundtables coverage here.
IBCC: February meeting minutes
March 26, 2011
Energy policy — oil and gas: The FRAC act is back — S. 587 (Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act)
March 26, 2011
From the Colorado Independent (David O. Williams):
U.S. Reps. Diana DeGette and Jared Polis, both Colorado Democrats, have once again introduced the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act (FRAC Act) to regain federal regulatory authority over the natural gas drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
DeGette and Polis unsuccessfully ran the legislation last session, seeking to close the so-called “Halliburton Loophole” named for the oil and gas services company previously headed up by former Vice President Dick Cheney. It was during the Bush-Cheney administration in 2005 that Congress granted hydraulic fracturing an exemption from federal regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Here’s the GovTrack page for the bill.
From email from the CWCB (Ben Wade):
All of the presentations from the meeting can be found on the CWCB website. If you have any questions regarding the drought update, please email Veva Deheza.
The next scheduled meeting for the Water Availability Task Force is April 14, 2011 at the Colorado Division of Wildlife Headquarters, 6060 Broadway, Denver, CO.
More CWCB coverage here.
