From email from the Colorado Foundation for Water Education (Kristin Maharg):
Register online by Wednesday, May 4 and receive a $100 discount! Or call the CFWE office at 303.377.4433.
Join us on June 13-15 for a unique networking experience with 100 local experts, educators, elected officials and water professionals. We will visit the Colorado River headwaters and hike in Rocky Mountain National Park, tour energy facilities, a working vineyard in Palisade and water supplies on Grand Mesa.
Scholarships are available for select educators and community members. Contact kmaharg@cfwe.org for more information.
Everyone at the Colorado Foundation for Water Education is excited to have a great time learning about water in the Colorado Basin!
More Colorado Foundation for Water Education coverage here.
San Luis Advisory Committee Meeting May 13
April 30, 2011
From email from the Colorado Division of Water Resources (Mike Sullivan):
Attached are the Latest Working Draft of the Rules and a draft Statement of Basis and Purpose for consideration at the meeting May 13th. As our earlier email noted the meeting will be held at Adams State College, Room 309 of the Student Union Center.
There will be a public meeting about the Irrigation Season Policy from 9AM – 10AM. The SLV Advisory Committee will meet from 10AM – 3PM. Lunch will be provided
Seeing as its late Friday these documents will also be posted on our website by Monday afternoon:
http://water.state.co.us/SurfaceWater/RulemakingAndAdvising/SLVAC/Pages/default.aspx
More Rio Grande River basin coverage here.
Colorado-Big Thompson Project update: 450cfs in the Colorado River below Granby Reservoir
April 30, 2011
From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):
You probably noticed changes in releases from Granby Dam to the Colorado River today, April 29. Northern Water adjusted the releases from the dam so that about 450 cfs is now flowing into the Colorado River.
We are continuing to balance inflow with storage as we adjust our forecasting in anticipation of this year’s spring run-off season. With that in mind, Willow Creek Reservoir has been drained to make room for coming snow melt run-off.
We will be in Granby on Wednesday, May 4 for the River District’s annual State of the River meeting to share our spring run off forecast information.
Meanwhile, both we and Northern Water continue to keep information available and accessible on-line. Follow Northern’s blog at http://www.ncwcd.blogspot.com/. Reclamation has snow pack and reservoir storage information as well as a general update at http://www.usbr.gov/gp/ecao/.
More Colorado-Big Thompson coverage here.
Summit County: The Colorado River Cooperative Agreement will be on the agenda at Tuesday’s ‘Summit State of the River’ meeting
April 30, 2011
From the Summit Daily News:
Details of the historic proposed Colorado River Cooperative Agreement between Summit County, 26 other West Slope entities and Denver Water will be discussed with the public at Tuesday’s Summit State of the River meeting set for 6:30-8:30 p.m. at the Summit County Community and Senior Center.
Panelists include Summit Board of County Commissioners, county manager Gary Martinez, Denver Water Chief Executive Officer Jim Lochhead and Colorado River District general manager Eric Kuhn.
The meeting is sponsored by the Colorado River District and the Blue River Watershed Group.
The proposed agreement is five years in the making and seeks to settle many long-standing water disputes between the West Slope and the Front Range, including issues surrounding reservoirs, transmountain diversions, river flows, and financial support for environmental and wastewater treatment projects.
The Summit State of the River meeting will also provide information of snowpack and runoff predictions as well as reports on how Denver Water will operate Dillon Reservoir this year. The Bureau of Reclamation will report on its Green Mountain Reservoir operations.
Another meeting is slated for 6:30-8:30 p.m. Wednesday at Mountain Parks Electric in Granby. Grand County officials join Denver Water and the Colorado River District in the panel discussion.
More Colorado River basin coverage here.
Governor Hickenlooper, Denver Water, the Colorado River District, et. al. announce the Colorado River Cooperative Agreement
April 29, 2011
Bump and update:
Here’s the joint release from the Colorado River District and Denver Water (Lori Peck/Audrey Hughes):
Leaders from Grand, Summit and Eagle counties stood with representatives from Denver Water, the Colorado River District, the ski industry and other main stem Colorado River Basin water interests to announce a historic proposed agreement, the “Colorado River Cooperative Agreement.” This proposed agreement will change the way water is managed in Colorado.
Focused on cooperation, the proposed agreement brings parties who traditionally have been at odds together as partners on a path to responsible water development benefitting both the East and West Slopes. It achieves better environmental health for the Colorado River Basin, maintains high-quality recreational use and improves economics for many cities, counties and businesses impacted by the river. The proposed agreement, which was five years in the making, will now be considered by towns, counties, and water entities from the headwaters to the Utah state line.
“This cooperative effort represents a new way of doing business when it comes to water,” said Gov. John Hickenlooper at today’s announcement. “It shows that water solutions must be crafted from a statewide perspective. We hope and expect that this process will ripple across Colorado to other areas of water conflict.”
With 34 partners stretching from Grand Junction to the Denver metro area, the proposed agreement is the largest of its kind in the history of the state. In addition to its benefits for Denver Water and the West Slope, the proposed agreement will trigger a major water-sharing and conservation arrangement between Denver Water, Aurora Water and water providers in the South Denver metro area. Taken as a whole, these landmark agreements mark the most significant change Colorado has seen in how the state’s water resources are managed.
“This all comes down to the health of the Colorado River Basin for us,” said Eric Kuhn, general manager of the Colorado River District. “I believe we can all agree that, in the end, the Colorado River and many of its tributaries will be healthier under the terms of the proposed agreement than it is today.”
The comprehensive proposed agreement focuses on significantly enhancing the environmental health of much of the Colorado River Basin and its tributaries, as well as supporting many West Slope cities, towns, counties and water providers as they work to improve the quality and quantity of water through new municipal water projects and river management initiatives.
“Denver Water is proud to be part of this new vision for water management in Colorado that seeks to ensure the good of the whole,” said Jim Lochhead, CEO/manager of Denver Water. “We hope this first-of-its-kind agreement sets the standard for how the state thinks about building a secure water future.”
In exchange for environmental enhancements, including financial support for municipal water projects and providing additional water supply and service area restrictions, the agreement will remove opposition to Denver Water’s Moffat Collection System Project.
“We welcome the opportunity to discuss with our constituents this proposed agreement, which benefits Grand County and much of the Colorado River Basin,” said Grand County Commissioner James Newberry. “The specifics of the proposal have been a long time in the making, but we believe they represent the best opportunity to improve the health of the Fraser and Colorado rivers, the economy of our county, and provide additional water for community and recreational use.”
The Colorado River Cooperative Agreement also establishes a process, dubbed “Learning by Doing,” by which Denver Water, Grand County, the Colorado River District, the Middle Park Water Conservancy District and others will use the flexibility in Denver Water’s water system to manage flows for the benefit of the environment in Grand County.
“We hope our constituents will see the proposed agreement as a win for all of us by substantially moving away from the confrontational way water has been managed in the past to a more inclusive, collaborative process that seeks the best solutions for everyone,” said Thomas Davidson, Summit County commissioner. “It’s an impressive accomplishment when groups as diverse as the partners on this agreement come to the table and find common solutions.”
See more details about the proposed Colorado River Cooperative Agreement.
Here’s the link to the executive summary.
More coverage from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
“This cooperative effort represents a new way of doing business when it comes to water,” said Gov. John Hickenlooper at the announcement of the agreement Thursday at the town of Tabernash in Grand County. “It shows that water solutions must be crafted from a statewide perspective. We hope and expect that this process will ripple across Colorado to other areas of water conflict,” said Hickenlooper, who was Denver mayor through the course of negotiations…
“This all comes down to the health of the Colorado River basin for us,” said Eric Kuhn, general manager of the Colorado River District. “I believe we can all agree that, in the end, the Colorado River and many of its tributaries will be healthier under the terms of the proposed agreement than it is today.”[...]
“While recognizing that much work remains, we join in celebrating what this agreement does accomplish: putting new resources to work to improve the health of the Upper Colorado River, and offering a new model for greater cooperation between the Front Range and Western Slope,” said David [Nickum], executive director of Colorado Trout Unlimited.
Mr. Nickum sent out this release to the Colorado Trout Unlimited email list:
By now, you likely have heard about the historic agreement between Denver Water and a number of Western Slope water and governmental entities. I wanted to share with you some perspective on what this deal means for the Upper Colorado River watershed.
For decades, large water diversions to the Front Range have depleted the Upper Colorado and Fraser rivers, damaging fish populations and critical wildlife habitat. TU has sounded the alarm that the Upper Colorado River is on the verge of ecological collapse. The new agreement is a great step forward and offers promise for the future – but it addresses only a part of the problems facing the Colorado and its tributaries, and we still have much work ahead of us if we hope to defend our state’s namesake river and its gold medal fisheries.
Today, we can celebrate good news for the Colorado River. Denver Water and a broad group of west slope local governments and water districts have entered into a major agreement that will provide resources to benefit the struggling Colorado River headwaters and set a more collaborative approach for future water management and development.
The agreement includes a number of important provisions in terms of river conservation:
- Future water projects using Denver’s facilities (notably the Moffat and Roberts tunnels) will require approval from the west slope – they will need to address concerns on both sides of the Continental Divide.
- Safeguards are included for the Shoshone water right, which helps keep year-round flows in the Upper Colorado.
- Denver agrees to provide 1,000 acre-feet per year of water to help address low flow concerns in both the Fraser and Williams Fork systems.
- Denver will provide $2 million to assist with river habitat restoration.
- Water and funds (including an additional $2 million) will be managed through a partnership effort designed to adapt to changing conditions, called “Learning by Doing.” Notably, TU is the sole conservation organization that has been included in the management committee for Learning by Doing.These are significant new tools to help protect the Colorado River’s future and to address some of the past impacts that have put it at risk, and Denver Water and key west slope players including Grand County and the Colorado River Water Conservation District deserve great credit for crafting this agreement.
But our work is far from over.
There are also vital issues that are not addressed by the agreement. The deal does not include mitigation to offset the future impacts of Denver’s currently-proposed Moffat Firming project, which will draw another 15,000 acre-feet yearly from the Colorado headwaters. The Wildlife Commission is currently reviewing the mitigation plan for this project – and TU will continue to work for the necessary river protections in the mitigation plan.
Perhaps even more notably, the agreement addresses only Denver Water’s facilities. It does not include the single largest user of Upper Colorado River water, the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, which draws Colorado River water through the Colorado-Big Thompson and Windy Gap projects, and is proposing to take another 30,000 acre-feet per year through its new Windy Gap Firming Project.
As you can see, our work in defending the Colorado River has just begun. TU will continue to fight for mitigation from both the Moffat and Windy Gap Firming projects, and we will work to get the Northern District to step up to the plate in addressing its impacts to the Colorado. And of course, we will work constructively with Denver and the West Slope to maximize the benefits of the new “Learning by Doing” effort. Your membership and support helps make these efforts possible.
To get a feel for the challenges facing the Colorado headwaters, I encourage you to take a look at this video, “Tapped Out,” developed by Trout Unlimited and our Colorado River Headwaters Chapter.
Thank you for helping us continue the fight to defend our state’s “Home Waters” and ensuring that the mighty Colorado will be part of our outdoor heritage for generations to come.
More coverage from Bruce Finley writing for The Denver Post. From the article:
Gov. John Hickenlooper and top leaders said Thursday that meeting projected water shortfalls likely will require increased storage. But rather than a massive new reservoir, like the ill-fated Two Forks decades ago, they’re leaning toward a strategy of enlarging existing reservoirs. “Certainly, expansion of existing reservoirs has a couple things going in its favor: Less expensive. Less controversial,” Hickenlooper said. Inundating a large area, as Two Forks would have done, “is a 25-year battle that really ends up with no winners,” he said…
Hickenlooper’s senior water adviser, John Stulp, is charged with identifying potential expansions that would allow some future growth without drying up more acres of cropland. Stulp said the Chatfield and Rueter-Hess reservoirs south of Denver can hold more water, as can Halligan and Seaman reservoirs near Fort Collins. Hickenlooper suggested aquifers depleted by south Denver suburbs also could serve as a reservoir if recharged with water…
Moving ahead to address looming water shortages could not be done without a new collaborative framework, Hickenlooper said in an interview.
“This state has to realize, people in metropolitan Denver have to realize, that their self-interest is served by treating water as a precious commodity and that its value on the Western Slope is just as relevant as its value in the metro area,” he said. “Certain parts of this water may be legally Denver’s water, or Aurora’s water. But it’s all Colorado’s water.”
More coverage from Cathy Proctor writing for the Denver Business Journal. From the article:
“The reality is that ever since the Two Forks [dam] veto [in 1990], with federal permitting requirements and local and state land use controls, the old method of just taking water and moving it from one place to another regardless of impacts — those days are over,” Lochhead said. “We need to be responsible to Western Slope communities and recognize that we impact those communities.”[...]
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper attended the Thursday press conference and said he supports the agreement. “This is an historic agreement in every sense of the word,” he said. “It sets a model of how we can have these discussions without pitting one part of the state against another, to figure out where our water comes from while pushing for reuse and conservation. “As more people hear about this and understand the significance of this, Coloradans will applaud the compromises that were made,” Hickenlooper said…
Tom Davidson, a Summit County commissioner, thanked members of the Denver Water Board of Commissioners at the press conference. “For many generations, Coloradans on the Western Slope have watched our water flow uphill, flow toward the money, flow toward the Front Range,” Davidson said.
“It’s important to recognize that the board members of Denver Water are no going to have some of that money, and the water that’s been flowing to the Front Range, flow back to the places where the water came from. Thank you for understanding and providing significant funds to Western Slope communities to mitigate some of the impacts that we’ve been dealing with for generations. It will make Colorado a better place, and the Western Slope a more sustainable place.”
More coverage from Bob Berwyn writing for the Summit County Citizens Voice. From the article:
Key parts of the agreement, including changes in operations at Green Mountain Reservoir, and water use related to operation of the Shoshone power plant, still require buy-in from entities not party to the current agreement. Though hailed as a “global” solution, the deal also would sanction an additional 15,000 acre-feet of diversions from the Colorado River headwaters to the Front Range, exacerbating an entirely different set of issues farther downstream — in the Grand Canyon, for example, where a recent report concluded that existing diversions are already damaging natural resources. It covers existing diversions and projects, but conservation advocates were careful to point out that the agreement does not encompass the effects of two large Grand County projects currently under review — the expansion of the Moffat Tunnel collection system and the Windy Gap firming project, along the upper Colorado. Click here to read the full legal version of the deal…
Kirk Klancke, president of Trout Unlimited’s Colorado Headwaters chapter in Fraser, praised Grand County, the Colorado River Water Conservation District and other West Slope stakeholders who pushed for river protections. “They realized that a healthy river is the basis for healthy communities and local economies. They realized that if we don’t save our rivers, we’ll lose the heart and soul of this magnificent place,” Klancke said…
Many West Slope leaders credited Hickenlooper with nudging the negotiations forward when he served as Denver’s mayor, in part by appointing collaboratively minded people to the Denver Board of Water Commissioners…
More coverage from Dennis Webb writing for The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel. From the article:
Parties to the landmark proposal say it would be the largest agreement of its kind in the history of a state that previously has seen big fights over Front Range efforts to divert Western Slope water. Eric Kuhn, general manager of the Colorado River Water Conservation District, praised it as a means of moving from confrontation to a “culture of cooperation.”[...]
Kuhn said a similar effort already is ongoing between the Western Slope and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Some conservationists have voiced concern that as the largest user of Upper Colorado River water, Northern Colorado isn’t a party to the Denver proposal. Kuhn said he’s optimistic about how negotiations are proceeding with that district.
More coverage from Scott N. Miller writing for the Vail Daily News. From the article:
A deal between Denver Water and the Western Slope may have been hatched in Grand County Thursday, but the incubation started in a Beaver Creek conference room in 2004. That first meeting, pulled together by the Eagle River Water & Sanitation District, the Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority, the Eagle Park Reservoir Company, Vail Resorts and other local water users and providers, resulted in the framework of the agreement announced Thursday between Denver water and more than 30 Western Slope water districts and agencies. Boulder water attorney Glenn Porzak, who has long represented local water agencies, has a lot of experience in the battles between Front Range and Western Slope water interests. Porzak said what came out of that meeting had never happened before — for the first time, Denver Water was going to negotiate with a unified group, and not just individual communities or agencies.
While a summary of the deal released Thursday doesn’t seem to have much for Eagle County residents, Porzak said the process that started in Beaver Creek has some important ramifications for people who live in the Eagle River basin. Thanks to a 2007 case that was settled out of court, Denver Water gave up most of its water rights in the Eagle River basin. Those water rights could have potentially affected flows in the Eagle River, Gore Creek and other up-valley streams to fill a proposed reservoir in Wolcott. Thanks to that settlement, there’s still a chance that a reservoir could be built at Wolcott, but not without the approval of local water districts and Eagle County.
More Colorado River basin coverage here.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
The Arkansas River Basin Water Forum gave Bud O’Hara, water resources division manager for the Pueblo Board of Water Works, the Bob Appel Friend of the Arkansas River Award at its annual meeting.
“He has walked this basin literally from top to bottom and even across the Continental Divide where an important part of the water in this basin is imported from,” said Phil Reynolds, a Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District project manager, in presenting the award. The forum annually recognizes a person who has made contributions to the river with the award, which is named for one of the forum’s founders. Past winners are Allen Ringle, Carl Genova, Reed Dils, Paul Flack, Denzel Goodwin and Paul Conlin.
O’Hara was surprised by the award, having been convinced to attend the meeting at the last minute by his boss, Executive Director Alan Hamel. “I really appreciate this. Gracious, heavens,” O’Hara said. “Really, it’s been Alan who has given me the freedom to do things for the water board.”
More Arkansas River basin coverage here.
From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):
The DOW will conclude their fish-shocking work in Gore Canyon tomorrow, April 29. As a result, we will start ramping Green Mountain releases back up tomorrow morning at 8 a.m. Increases will be made in 50 cfs increments, twice a day, through the weekend.
The schedule will be the same as before. Changes will be made at 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Friday, Saturday and Sunday.
Currently, releases from the dam are about 500 cfs.They will go to 600 cfs Friday, 700 cfs Saturday, and level out around 800 cfs by Sunday evening.
We will be in Frisco presenting run-off information on Tuesday, May 3. We are participating in the River District’s annual State of the River meeting for the Blue River. Learn more about this meeting at http://www.crwcd.org/page_115.
Learn more about our operations at http://www.usbr.gov/gp/ecao/, http://www.usbr.gov/gp/lakes_reservoirs/colorado_lakes.htm; and for snow pack and reservoir levels: http://www.usbr.gov/gp/hydromet/curres_google.htm?lat=39.0959&lng=-105.5313&zoom=7.
More Colorado-Big Thompson Project coverage here.
Here’s the release from the Colorado Division of Wildlife:
The Colorado Wildlife Commission will continue its formal review of plans to mitigate impacts to fish and wildlife resources that would be created by two significant transmountain water development projects with a full day of presentations and public comment on Friday, May 6, in Salida.
The presentations and testimony regarding mitigation plans offered by Denver Water and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District will occur on the second day of the Wildlife Commission’s monthly meeting at the Hampton Inn and Suites on Highway 50 in Salida. The commission’s 60-day review began on April 7 and a final recommendation is due in June.
Denver Water is proposing to firm up the yield from its existing water rights on the West Slope, primarily by enlarging Boulder’s Gross Reservoir and diverting additional water from the Fraser, Williams Fork and Blue rivers. Northern is proposing to firm up the yield from its existing water rights in the Upper Colorado River by diverting additional water to the proposed new Chimney Hollow Reservoir west of Longmont.
“The Wildlife Commission has worked for months with the Division to understand the impacts of these projects to fish and wildlife and how the proponents intend to address these impacts,” Wildlife Commission chairman Tim Glenn said. “The information and testimony we receive in Salida will be critical our evaluation of the adequacy of these plans.”
Under state statute, the Commission’s authority is limited to a review of plans to mitigate impacts from proposed projects. Restoring the river to a past condition is beyond the scope of the project approval process and Wildlife Commission authority. However, Denver and Northern are voluntarily proposing steps to address impacts of existing water development projects to fish and wildlife resources on both sides of the Continental Divide.
On Friday morning, Division staff will present an analysis of each mitigation plan, followed by public testimony. The afternoon session will feature an analysis of enhancement plans to address river conditions caused by existing water development, also to be followed by public testimony. The commission will consider this testimony in evaluating each plan.
Once the Wildlife Commission adopts its final recommendation at its workshop in Grand Junction on June 9, the Colorado Water Conservation Board will have 60 days to affirm or modify it. If the CWCB makes revisions, the Governor will have 60 days to affirm or further modify the recommendation, which then becomes the official state position with regard to mitigation. The final state position will then be transmitted to federal permitting agencies.
Additional information regarding the Wildlife Commission’s review, including links to the mitigation and enhancement plans being offered by Denver Water and Northern, can be found on the Division’s web site at: http://wildlife.state.co.us/LandWater/Water/MoffatWindyGapMitigationProjects/.
During Thursday’s session, the Commission is scheduled to take final action on a regulation prohibiting the hunting or harassment of black bears in their dens and set limited license numbers for deer, elk, pronghorn, bear and moose for the 2011 big game seasons. In addition, the Commission will consider an emergency regulation to lift bag limits for all fish species at Bonny Reservoir, which is expected to be drained this fall as part of a plan to bring Colorado into compliance with the Republican River compact.
The May 5 agenda includes scheduled votes on changes to regulations governing activities on State Wildlife Areas, including a ban on tracer ammunition and armor-piercing rounds, a modification of dog-walking rules at two Loveland-area properties and other changes regarding access and hunting or angling activities on numerous Division-managed properties.
Also on the agenda are presentations on the Division’s Outdoor Discovery Center project in Gunnison, the Salida Natural Resource Center project and an update on the proposed merger between Colorado State Parks and the Division of Wildlife. The commission will be briefed on proposed mitigation for impacts to bighorn sheep from the “Over the River” landscape art project proposed by the artist Christo for the Arkansas River canyon.
In other business, Commissioners will review a proposed letter encouraging the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to allow Colorado to establish new zones and season dates for waterfowl hunting in eastern Colorado that are currently under consideration. Draft regulations allowing restricted waterfowl hunting on two state parks along the Colorado River will also be considered. At James M. Robb Colorado River State Park hunting would be restricted to designated blinds reserved by a reservation system. At Highline Lake State Park, reservations for access to existing blinds would also be required. Discussion on a proposal to increase the daily bag limit for dark geese in the Pacific Flyway portion of the Colorado from three to four birds is also anticipated. Final action on these items is scheduled for the Commission’s July meeting.
The Wildlife Commission meets monthly and travels to communities around the state to facilitate public participation in its processes. In June, the Commission will meet in Grand Junction. The meeting schedule for the proposed Parks and Wildlife Board through the rest of the year will be discussed in Salida.
The complete agenda for the May Wildlife Commission meeting can be found on the Wildlife Commission web page at: http://wildlife.state.co.us/WildlifeCommission/Archives/2011/May52011.htm.
More information on Denver Water’s Moffat Collection System proposal and Northern’s Windy Gap Firming Project may be found here: http://wildlife.state.co.us/LandWater/Water/MoffatWindyGapMitigationProjects/
Written comments on the Denver Water Northern proposals may also be submitted to the Wildlife Commission by email at: wildlife.comm@state.co.us. Hard copies may be submitted to:
Colorado Wildlife Commission
c/o Public Involvement Unit
Colorado Division of Wildlife
6060 Broadway, Denver, CO 80216Members of the public who are unable to attend Commission meetings or workshops can listen to the proceedings through a link on the DOW’s website. This opportunity is provided to keep constituents better informed about the development of regulations by the Commission and how they and DOW staff are resolving issues facing Colorado’s wildlife.
To access the live audio feed during the meeting, click on the “listen to live audio” link at the bottom of the Commission webpage at: http://wildlife.state.co.us/WildlifeCommission/
More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here and here. More Windy Gap coverage here and here.
There are four seats open for directors of the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District
April 28, 2011
From The Mountain Mail (Joe Stone):
Expiring terms are: Division 1, Fremont County School District RE-3, Timothy Canterbury; Division 2, Chaffee County School District R-32-J, chairman Glenn Everett; Division 4, Custer County, vice chairman Robert Senderhauf; and Division 6, Fremont County School District RE-2, John Sandefur.
Property owners at least 18 years old who have lived in one of those divisions at least one year may apply for appointment to the directorship for the division in which they live. Terms begin June 1 and continue four years. Applicants should have backgrounds reflecting agricultural, municipal, industrial or other interests in beneficial water use within conservancy district boundaries.
More Arkansas River basin coverage here.
From The Trinidad-Times (Steve Block):
Drought and the potential for the deadly fires were at the center of discussion in Tuesday’s meeting of the Las Animas County Board of Commissioners. The board passed a resolution supporting the submission of a letter to Gov. John Hickenlooper, requesting consideration of a Drought Disaster Declaration for the county. Once the letter gets to the governor, he will send it on to John Salazar, the state agricultural commissioner. Salazar will do an evaluation of the situation at the state level, to determine the parameters and qualifications for a drought disaster declaration. The agriculture secretary will look at precipitation records and crop production records in the county. If Salazar is persuaded there is sufficient reason, he will forward the county’s request to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. That department will examine the request at the federal level.
Arkansas Valley Conduit: The Fowler town council votes to drop support for conduit EIS
April 28, 2011
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):</p<
The main reason for deciding against the project was not having information on its cost as it plays out, said Town Manager Wayne Snider on Tuesday. “I think the council wanted to consider other options.” Snider was out of town when the vote was taken, but said the council had expressed concerns over signing a “blank check” for the conduit. Fowler currently has adequate water resources for its population, relying on springs north of the town.
It is also looking at working with Innovative Water Technologies of Rocky Ford on a membrane treatment system to improve water quality and with BiO2 Solutions of Strasburg on an algae treatment for wastewater systems. “We were concerned about the conduit, because you can’t project the cost: not only for the study but for future construction,” Snider said.
FromFrom the Cortez Journal:
Jackson Gulch reservoir live content stood at 5,496 acre-feet with a 9,977 acre-feet maximum capacity and a 5,008 acre-feet average (1971-2000) end of month content. At Jackson Gulch, no water was released into the Mancos River, and monthly total volume of 10 acre-feet were released for municipal purposes.
McPhee Reservoir live content stood at 273,370 acre-feet, with a 381,051 acre-feet maximum capacity and a 305,506 acre-feet average (1986-2000) end-of-month content. At McPhee, 1,807 acre-feet were released into the Dolores River, and 740 acre-feet were released for transbasin purposes. At McPhee, a daily maximum/minimum of 30/34 cubic-feet-per-second was released into the Dolores River.
More San Juan River basin coverage here.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
A new report by the water resources department of the water board shows the yield from all sources in 2010 was 86,291 acre-feet, up slightly from yields in the previous three years. In 2006, yields were 89,137 acre-feet. It’s surprising because 2008 was the best recent year for snowpack. The water board didn’t fully take advantage of the conditions then because its reservoirs were relatively full. “I think the difference is that we didn’t take any Fryingpan-Arkansas Project water in 2008,” said Alan Ward, water resources administrator for the Pueblo water board. “You always have to walk that line between having enough and, I guess you’d call it, gluttony.”[...]
Still, 2010 was a banner year for direct-flow water rights in the Arkansas River basin, because a heavy runoff at the right time allowed the water board to capture more water than it otherwise would have. About 60,310 acre-feet, or 70 percent of the total, came from within the Arkansas River basin in 2010. That was the most in a decade from native sources. “The key reason was that for several days we got to store water in Clear Creek Reservoir because all of the downstream rights were satisfied,” Ward said.
More Pueblo Board of Water Works coverage here.
From the Summit Daily News (Janice Kurbjin):
“It’s about getting kids up here,” [Aurora Water's Mary Dawson] said. “No matter what they do … they’re getting out of the concrete jungle. … It’s one thing to talk about it, but to see the relationship between snowfall and streamflow is key.” Dawson observed on Friday last week’s H2O Outdoors students gathered to discuss water policy solutions. The Town Hall meeting was modeled after the Keystone Center’s process of bringing together public, private and civic sector leaders to take on environmental, energy and public health problems. The afternoon prior, students met with experts in the water field to inform them of the roles they would play at the meeting.
Beyond gaining a deeper understanding of water issues in the west, the program’s goal is for students to see collaboration at work — how personalities interact and the way difficult compromises are made. “It shows that we do work together. It’s not just about bumping heads,” said Matt Bond, Denver Water’s youth education program manager…
Mike Wilde of the Colorado River Water Conservation District added that H2O Outdoors, which was pioneered by the district, aims to change students’ awareness, attitude and action toward water issues. The experts were impressed with the students’ ability to learn so quickly, particularly amidst a learning curve Wilde said is “like drinking out of a fire hose for three days.”
More education coverage here.
Energy policy — oil and gas: Industry reps defend hydraulic fracturing at BLM public forum in Golden
April 28, 2011
From The Greeley Tribune (Chris Casey) via The Colorado Springs Gazette:
The forum, which included speakers from the Bureau of Land Management, state regulators and the oil and gas industry, drew about 300 to the Denver West Marriott in Golden. It was the third in a series of BLM-hosted hearings nationwide about fracturing, or fracking, and energy production on public lands. The BLM is contemplating new federal regulations, though the Environmental Protection Agency has found no evidence of water-quality degradation from fracking, said Dave Cesark of Mesa Energy. The EPA is conducting another study into fracking to be completed next year…
Dave Neslin, director of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, which regulates the industry on private lands, said Colorado ranks fifth in the nation for gas production and 10th in oil. He said most of Colorado’s 44,000 active wells rely on fracking to create permeability in the rock and open pathways for oil and gas to reach the surface. “This technology is absolutely vital to unlocking Colorado’s rich oil and gas reserves,” he said…
Rich Ward, a geologist with the Aspen Science Center, said there are seven layers of steel piping and cement that isolate the well from contact with subsurfaces, including water tables. “Well integrity is the absolute key in this whole process,” he said. That said, he noted it’s possible for a casing to be flawed but that if proper pressure checks are done, any such flaws can be quickly repaired…
Neslin said the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission’s regulations are similar to the BLM’s. He said the COGCC has investigated hundreds of complaints about contamination related to fracking “and to date we’ve not found any instances of groundwater contamination.” He said the agency is going beyond regulations with participation in a new website – www.fracfocus.org – where oil and gas producers voluntarily report the chemicals used in fracking. Thirty-five operators have so far registered to participate, including large operators such as Halliburton. Cesark said, in general, 99.5 percent of fracking materials are sand and water. The other 0.5 percent of materials used, he said, are chemicals commonly found in households, such as acids, antibacterial agents, corrosion inhibitors, lubricants and gels. He said there is typically a mile to two miles of separation between an aquifer and shale formations where fracking takes place. Between those layers is impermeable rock. “The risk of fracking fluid coming in contact with an aquifer is extremely remote and there really are a great many precautions that take place to prevent it,” Cesark said.
From the Colorado Independent (David O. Williams):
Citing concerns about safety and a lack of water, the Pueblo County commissioners Monday night unanimously voted down a zoning change request by a Pueblo attorney seeking to build a “clean energy park,” including a nuclear power plant, just outside the city. The vote was 3-0 to deny the zoning change…
Ultimately, the commissioners decided the potential jobs were outweighed by community concern over a lack of water to cool any future reactors and the potential safety and environmental concerns stemming from storing spent fuel on site.
The Colorado Farm Bureau counters the claim from ‘Save the Poudre’ that the Northern Integrated Supply Project will harm agriculture
April 28, 2011
Here’s a release from the Colorado Farm Bureau:
Statement by Don Shawcroft, President, Colorado Farm Bureau, Regarding Save the Poudre: Poudre Waterkeepers ‘Farm Facts’ Report
Alamosa rancher and Colorado Farm Bureau President Don Shawcroft had strong words for Save the Poudre: Poudre Waterkeepers upon reading their ‘report’ on the impact of NISP on northern Colorado agriculture.
“The so-called report is nothing but propaganda, spread by Save the Poudre in a vain attempt to derail the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP). Save the Poudre does not speak for Colorado agriculture, an industry forthright and vocal in its support for NISP. Their attempts to divide the ag industry are tiresome. They speak only for themselves and their attempts to stall a project supported by large majorities of northern Colorado citizens.
The NISP project is a crucial step in reducing the pressure from development on irrigated agriculture in Northern Colorado. Opponents of NISP would have us do nothing in the face of increasing water needs along the northern Front Range. Whether the Save the Poudre crowd likes it or not, more people are moving into the region served by the NISP participants. The project is a proactive, environmentally sound step to manage the growth along the Front Range and it will insure that irrigated farmers along the South Platte Basin will have access to their water for years to come.
Colorado farmers and ranchers support the NISP project. Unlike the Poudre Waterkeepers, food producers in Colorado have been managing our states water resources for hundreds of years. If we support the development of a water project, you can bet it will help keep irrigated farmers on the land. The public knows this. Lawmakers know this. So does Gary Wockner and the rest of the Waterkeepers. They just won’t tell you that.”
More coverage from Bill Jackson writing for The Greeley Tribune. From the article:
“There’s nothing new in the filing. We can tear each one of their claims apart. Where’s the science come from?” Brian Werner said Monday. He’s the spokesman for the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, which filed a detailed EIS report with the Corps more than five years ago. The Corps, in 2008, asked for additional comment, and Werner said it is hoped the final EIS will be released later this year or early next.
In its filing, the Fort Collins group said if NISP is built, it would harm about 123,000 acres of agricultural land, or about one-sixth of all the irrigated land in northern Colorado. In addition, the group claims the project would accelerate the buy-up of farms for subdivision development, would accelerate salinization of productive croplands, would end most “free river” diversion opportunities and impact existing water users, and would submerge and divide productive agricultural land. It also says the initial filling of the two reservoirs and ongoing diversions into the two would likely come from northern Colorado and Western Slope farm water.
“There has not been, to our knowledge, one farm organization that has come out in opposition to the project. In fact, most of them are in favor of it. This latest filing is nothing but garbage. It’s not based in reality. We can easily refute anything they have said,” Werner said.
[ed. I'll be on radio AM 1310 in Greeley Thursday afternoon discussing surface water and Colorado's water supply gap sometime after 3:00 p.m.]
More Northern Integrated Supply Project coverage here and here.
The southern metro Denver suburbs are looking to surface water to lessen dependence on the Denver Basin aquifer system
April 28, 2011
This is not news to many Coyote Gulch readers. Here’s a in-depth report from Bruce Finley writing for The Denver Post. From the article:
Today, nearly every glass of water drawn by residents in Castle Rock, Castle Pines and Parker originates deep underground, data from utility managers show.
Twenty-five utilities between Denver and Colorado Springs are together pumping 38,742 acre-feet of water from 449 municipal wells each year, according to data provided by the water suppliers. That works out to about 400 gallons per second being squeezed from the Denver Basin aquifer. It’s not that the water in the vast aquifer is expected to run dry anytime soon. The problem is that pumping water from as deep as 2,200 feet below the surface is getting more difficult — and expensive…The water table and well-production data kept by some utilities show well levels falling by as much as 30 feet a year and that well flows in summer slow by as much as 20 percent…
When Two Forks was rejected, “the consensus was that groundwater was a very viable source that could be replenished,” said Jim Sherer, the Environmental Protection Agency’s regional administrator at the time, who favored the dam. “You could put water back in. What seemed to be easy answers 20 years ago is creating problems today.”
The prime alternative for some suburbs today involves diverting wastewater from Denver and Aurora and purifying it for use by others. Over the past year, 15 south metro suburbs have been been negotiating the Water Infrastructure and Supply Efficiency, or WISE, project. It would take advantage of Aurora’s new $660 million Peter D. Binney treatment plant, combined with the city’s 34-mile pipeline that diverts water from the South Platte River, downstream from Denver’s Metro Wastewater Reclamation facility…
But Denver’s participation depends on diverting more water from the west side of the Continental Divide, he said. The proposed Moffat Tunnel diversion project is under review. “The more water we bring over from the Western Slope, the more return flows (to the South Platte) we have,” Little said. “If we didn’t get the Moffat project, it could limit our ability to fully participate in the WISE project. I don’t think it would kill it.” Suburban leaders are counting on WISE. They anticipate receiving as much as 60,000 acre-feet of wastewater annually for reuse, said Pat Mulhern, who manages the Cottonwood, Inverness and Stonegate water districts. The cost has not been calculated.
More coverage from Bruce Finley writing for The Denver Post. From the article:
Their wells at the rim of the heavily subscribed Denver Basin aquifer first ran dry in 1997. Today some still run dry. The experience honed their survival skills. The southwest metro neighbors flush infrequently, redirect rainwater off roofs into gardens and redrill old wells. Most have buried 500-gallon cisterns near their homes…
When wells first went dry, about 150 homeowners formed the South Chatfield Water District. They bought rights to 69 acre-feet of surface water and arranged for Denver Water to deliver it through an extended pipeline. Below 10,000 gallons a month, each household pays $4 per 1,000 gallons. Above that, the fee increases to $60. Some have paid $1,000 a month trying to maintain lawns.
From the Vail Daily:
Vail Mountain logged 524 inches for the season as of Sunday’s closing day, but the inches just keep piling up. There wasn’t even dirt showing on the runs leading down to the base of the mountain Sunday, which also happened to be one of Vail’s latest closing days in history…
Mike Gillespie, the snow survey supervisor with the National Resources Conservation Service in Denver, said the Colorado River Basin is at 144 percent of average. “It’s turned out to be a pretty phenomenal snow year,” Gillespie said. “In the last 30 days or so, we’ve really seen some really remarkable increases in the snowpack.”[...]
Diane Johnson, spokeswoman for the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, said that as long as there’s not constant warm weather that causes everything to melt, combined with no rain, then the local water supply should be fine. “You just hope for a slow melt,” Johnson said.
[ed. I could not download the latest snowpack chart. The server appears to be down right now.]
Hello from the California Zephyr
April 27, 2011
Well I’m back. You have to love technology. I’m east of Sterling, Colorado, riding the California Zephyr. I have my Macbook Air hooked up via Wi-Fi with my iPhone.
Coyote Gulch outage: I’m heading down the line
April 26, 2011
I’m headed down the line towards Minneapolis and the annual May Day parade. I’ll see ya when I see ya.
San Luis Valley Advisory Committee meeting May 13
April 26, 2011
From email from the Colorado Division of Water Resources (Kathryn Radke):
Please note, the next meeting of the SLV Advisory Committee will be held on May 13, 2011 at the Adams State College, Room 309 of the Student Union Center. There will be a public meeting about the Irrigation Season Policy from 9AM – 10AM. The SLV Advisory Committee will meet from 10AM – 3PM. Lunch will be provided…
We will send out the next draft of the Rules and a draft Statement of Basis and Purpose in the next few weeks.
These documents will also be posted on our website in the next day or so at:
http://water.state.co.us/SurfaceWater/RulemakingAndAdvising/SLVAC/Pages/default.aspx
More Rio Grande River basin coverage here.
Finalists named for the annual ‘Leopold Conservation Award’
April 26, 2011
From the Ag Journal:
In celebration of Earth Day, the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association (CCA), the Sand County Foundation, the Colorado Cattlemen’s Agricultural Land Trust (CCALT) Encana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc., and Peabody Energy will present the Leopold Conservation Award to a landowner in Colorado. Each of these organizations believes in working lands conservation as it yields measurable conservation enhancements that benefit livestock production as well as wildlife species and habitats.
The Leopold Conservation Award, named in honor of world-renowned conservationist Aldo Leopold, is comprised of a $10,000 cash award and an Aldo Leopold crystal. The award is presented annually in eight states to private landowners who practice responsible land stewardship and management…
The 2011 Leopold Conservation Finalists are: The Fox Ranch; Wineinger-Davis Ranch; Pipe Springs Ranch; and the, Wagon Wheel Ranch…
The 2011 Leopold Conservation Award recipient will be honored Tuesday, June 21st at the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association’s Annual Convention in Steamboat Springs, Colo. The 2011 CCA/CCW/JCCA Annual Convention will be held at the Steamboat Sheraton in Steamboat Springs, Colo., June 20th-22nd. Individuals may register for this “must attend” event by referring to the April issue of Cattle Guard, visiting www.coloradocattle.org
More conservation coverage here.
Larry Small hired to lead the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District
April 26, 2011
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
Larry Small, a former board chairman, was hired Friday as executive director of the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District…Small will receive a monthly stipend of $2,500 — half of what interim director Gary Barber was paid. Barber resigned earlier this year for budgetary reasons…
In other action, the board:
- Agreed to administer a regional stormwater solutions white paper by Summit Economics. The district opted not to pay any of the $38,000 study itself, after Chostner maintained it is an El Paso County issue. Cities in El Paso County will bear the cost.
- Approved upgrades to a power line for Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association because one of the towers is in the Fountain Creek flood plain. District committees determined there would be no impact to the creek.
Meanwhile, Colorado Springs is revising the city’s rules on development in the Fountain Creek floodplain, according to Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
[Dan Bare, senior engineer with the Colorado Springs stormwater department] spoke to the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District at its monthly meeting Friday. The district’s technical advisory committee, developers and other interests have been working with Bare for two years in rewriting the drainage manual for Colorado Springs. When complete, it could be applied throughout the watershed to provide uniform protection to Fountain Creek through land-use policies.
One key idea is to build smaller, more effective drainage detention ponds, rather than more costly large basins that quickly fill with sediment, Bare said. “The developers are aware of what we’re doing and are pleased with the concept,” he said. Detention ponds would be designed to be multipurpose and more natural. “What we’re doing today just isn’t working.”
The new regulations also would provide for low-impact designs on new development that do not increase runoff into Fountain Creek. “What this does is change the way we develop so we don’t have the problems we do today with Fountain Creek,” said Dennis Maroney, stormwater consultant for the City of Pueblo.
