The Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District has contracted with the Pueblo Board of Water Works for a five year augmentation plan supply

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District will buy 500 acre-feet of water from the Pueblo Board of Water Works each year for the next five years under the lease agreement. The Lower Ark board approved the lease Wednesday, while the Pueblo water board is expected to consider it in November. The price is $196.54 per acre-foot, the same rate as paid by Two Rivers, which is using the water in its project to restore agriculture on the Huerfano-Cucharas Ditch in Pueblo County…

The water is needed to fill augmentation needs calculated under the district’s group plan that allows farmers to comply with state rules adopted last year. The district has other water resources, but some are dedicated to other purposes. The Pueblo water board, in nearly every year, has surplus water available for leases and has the option to curtail the deliveries if supplies run short. “We want to make sure we have a reliable supply of water for the Rule 10 plan,” said Jay Winner, general manager of the Lower Ark district.

State Engineer Dick Wolfe successfully guided the rules through Water Court to ensure that improvements such as large irrigation sprinklers, drip irrigation and canal lining did not increase consumptive use. Increasing consumptive use would decrease return flows used by ditches downstream and possibly reduce Arkansas River flows at the Kansas state line…

Rule 10 allows farmers to join a group plan rather than go through more costly engineering on individual systems. The Division 2 engineer’s office developed a model that assures compliance with the formula governing well augmentation under the federal lawsuit. More than 70 wells signed up for the Rule 10 plan under this year, its first year. More are expected next year. Lower Ark has the only group plan in the Arkansas Valley…

Water Division 2 Engineer Steve Witte said six owners of 10 irrigation sprinklers were issued notices of violation of the rules this year. One of those proved the sprinkler was installed prior to 1999, and thus exempt; one is in appeal; and the rest are apparently joining the Rule 10 plan.

More Arkansas Valley consumptive use rules coverage here and here.

Centennial: The League of Women Voters of Araphoe County and the Arapahoe County Library are collaborating on a hydraulic fracturing public forum on November 2

Here’s the release from the League of Women Voters via the Englewood Herald:

Explore the issues and find answers to your questions about the practice of fracking (hydraulic fracturing), a method used to release trapped gas and oil from the land, at a public forum Nov. 2 at 6:30 p.m. at Koelbel Public Library, 5955 S. Holly St., Centennial.

Sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Arapahoe County and the Arapahoe Library District, the forum will feature David Neslin, Director of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, Bryon Gale, Vice President, Environmental Health and Safety, Encana Oil & Gas (USA), and Charlie Montgomery, Energy Organizer, Colorado Environmental Coalition.
Topics will include:

What is fracking and where, when and why is it used in Colorado?

What are the potential problems and environmental consequences that may arise from fracking operations?

What operational and design safeguards are being used to avoid these problems?

What are the current rules regarding fracking and do we need regulations that are more stringent?

The program is free and open to the public, but registration is required. Call the Arapahoe Library District, 303-542-7279. For information about the forum call 303-798-2939.

More oil and gas coverage here and here.

U.S. District Judge William Martinez orders halt to the DOE approval of exploration, mining and all other activities on 31 leases in southwestern Colorado

From The Denver Post (Bruce Finley):

U.S. District Judge William Martinez ordered DOE officials to stop approving exploration, mining and all other activities on 31 sites leased to uranium companies. The ruling affects about 25,000 acres southwest of Grand Junction along the Dolores and San Miguel rivers. A 53-page opinion filed late Tuesday said the DOE “acted arbitrarily and capriciously in failing to analyze site-specific impacts” on people and the environment — especially given the history of uranium mining in the region. Martinez also found DOE officials violated the Endangered Species Act by failing to consult with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists about the impact of leasing uranium lands.

The decision means federal overseers of the nation’s push to develop fuel for nuclear energy must proceed far more carefully and conduct a detailed analysis — with full public participation — of the likely effects that renewed uranium mining and milling would have on air, land, water and people…

State health regulators this year issued a final permit, which local residents are challenging in court. The mill proposal led to several companies expressing interest in mining uranium. DOE officials responded by reconfiguring lease tracts in 2007, then issuing leases for 31 tracts in 2008 to six companies — Cotter Corp., Golden Eagle Uranium, Energy Fuels Resources, Gold Eagle Mining, U.S. Uranium Corp. and Zenith Minerals. The DOE has estimated 13.5 million pounds of uranium ore could be extracted and began approving exploration plans on five lease tracts in 2009…

It is unclear whether the agency will appeal the judge’s decision, said Laura Kilpatrick, manager of the DOE Office of Legacy Management’s uranium leasing program.

More coverage from Bob Berwyn writing for the Summit County Citizens Voice. From the article:

The court ruled that the U.S. Department of Energy acted arbitrarily and capriciously” by failing to analyze site-specific impacts when it approved a leasing program on 42 square miles of federal land in Mesa, Montrose and San Miguel counties. The Energy Department approved the leasing program under an environmental assessment, concluding with a formal “Finding of No Significant Impact.” A coalition of environmental groups challenged the approval and asked the court to order an in-depth environmental impact statement based on the potential for the mining and related activities to significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Judge Martinez declined to go that far, instead remanding the decision back to the energy department with orders to conduct a study that considers site-specific impacts. According to the ruling, the Energy Department has indicated it will do a complete environmental impact statement…

Conservation groups called this week’s decision a major victory for clean air, clean water and endangered species on public lands. “We are pleased that Judge Martinez agreed with the groups, as well as local governments, who have been requesting the federal government take responsible steps to disclose the full range of impacts of mining uranium on public lands in combination with the impacts from Energy Fuels’ proposed uranium mill,” said Hilary White, executive director of Sheep Mountain Alliance…

The Colorado Environmental Coalition, Information Network for Responsible Mining, Rocky Mountain Wild, Center for Biological Diversity and Sheep Mountain Alliance sued the Department of Energy and Bureau of Land Management in July 2008 for approving the program without analyzing the full environmental impacts from individual uranium-mining leases across more than 20,000 acres, and for failing to ensure protection of threatened and endangered species before authorizing the program. Plaintiffs were represented by attorneys Travis Stills of the Energy Minerals Law Center, Jeff Parsons of the Western Mining Action Project and Amy Atwood of the Center for Biological Diversity.

Update: From The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Dennis Webb):

A federal judge on Tuesday suspended a 42-square-mile federal uranium-leasing program in southwestern Colorado over concerns potential environmental impacts have not been adequately considered. The ruling was made in response to a lawsuit brought by five conservation groups that sought to halt the Department of Energy’s leasing program, which they say threatens the Dolores and San Miguel rivers.

Here’s the release from the Center of Biological Diversity (Taylor McKinnon), The Sheep Mountain Alliance (Hillary White) and Rocky Mountain Wild (Josh Pollack):

In a major victory for clean air, clean water and endangered species on public lands, a federal judge on Tuesday halted the Department of Energy’s 42-square-mile uranium-leasing program that threatened the Dolores and San Miguel rivers in southwestern Colorado. Five conservation groups had sued to halt the leasing program, charging that the Department of Energy was failing to adequately protect the environment or analyze the full impacts of renewed uranium mining on public lands.

“We are pleased that Judge Martinez agreed with the groups, as well as local governments, who have been requesting the federal government take responsible steps to disclose the full range of impacts of mining uranium on public lands in combination with the impacts from Energy Fuels’ proposed uranium mill,” said Hilary White, executive director of Sheep Mountain Alliance. “This is an important ruling that will help ensure that any uranium mining and milling that may take place in the Dolores River watershed is protective of the environment and human health. We look forward to the Environmental Protection Agency’s leadership in disclosing the full impacts of uranium activity in this important watershed.”

The 53-page ruling invalidates the Department’s approval of the program; suspends each of the program’s 31 existing leases; enjoins the Department from issuing any new leases; and enjoins any further exploration, drilling or mining activity at all 43 mines approved under the program pending satisfactory completion of new environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act.

“This is a huge victory for public lands, rivers and wildlife in southwestern Colorado and a major setback for the uranium industry’s efforts to industrialize and pollute the Colorado Plateau,” said Taylor McKinnon, public-lands campaigns director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The Department of Energy has thumbed its nose at environmental laws for too long; today’s ruling is a big course correction.”

Conservation groups challenged the Department’s current leasing program for not complying with the National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act. In July the Department attempted to thwart the lawsuit by initiating a new “environmental impact statement” for the program but continued to administer the program under its prior flawed approval.

Uranium mining and milling resulting from the lease program will deplete Colorado River basin water and threaten to pollute rivers with uranium, selenium, ammonia, arsenic, molybdenum, aluminum, barium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, vanadium and zinc. Selenium and arsenic contamination in the Colorado River basin from abandoned uranium-mining operations have been implicated in the decline of four endangered Colorado River fish species and may be impeding their recovery.

“Even small amounts of some of these pollutants, like selenium, can poison fish, accumulate in the food chain and cause deformities and reproductive problems for endangered fish, ducks, river otters and eagles,” said Josh Pollock of Rocky Mountain Wild. “It is irresponsible for the Department of Energy to put fish and wildlife at risk by allowing uranium leases without adequate analysis of necessary protections to prevent pollution.”

The Colorado Environmental Coalition, Information Network for Responsible Mining, Rocky Mountain Wild, Center for Biological Diversity and Sheep Mountain Alliance sued the Department of Energy and Bureau of Land Management in July 2008 for approving the program without analyzing the full environmental impacts from individual uranium-mining leases spread over 20,000 acres and for failing to ensure protection of threatened and endangered species prior to authorizing the program. The Department refused to conduct a full EIS analysis in 2008, instead issuing a FONSI (“finding of no significant impact”), which was also struck down as part of the court ruling.

Plaintiffs were represented by attorneys Travis Stills of the Energy Minerals Law Center, Jeff Parsons of the Western Mining Action Project and Amy Atwood of the Center for Biological Diversity.

Download a copy of the ruling here.

More nuclear coverage here and here.

Lamar pipeline: The Lower Ark Board listened politely (and critically) to GP Resources’ project preview yesterday

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The board had questions about the projected yield of the project, the problem of brine disposal from a proposed treatment plant and the idea of moving water out of the Arkansas Valley — which goes against the mission adopted by the district after voters formed it in 2002. “I compliment your approach, opposed as I am to any water leaving the valley,” said Reeves Brown, a Beulah rancher who sits on the Lower Ark board. “There’s a limit to what we think agriculture can give up in order to support growth in Colorado.”[...]

Upon questioning from the Lower Ark board, Nyquist said the only definite use for the water is in Elbert County. The Cherokee Metro District in Colorado Springs and Castle Rock in Douglas County have been approached, but decided on other options, at least in the short term, Nyquist said. “Right now, the pipeline ends at Falcon,” Nyquist said.

“It’s only a short distance to Reuter-Hess Reservoir (in Parker), which has 60,000 acre-feet of empty storage space,” said Jay Winner, general manager of the Lower Ark district…

GP is looking at either deep injection of brine or a solar heating system that would evaporate the water [ed. by-product of the proposed reverse osmosis water treatment plant]. The heating system, which could also generate steam to power turbines, has not been tested on a large scale, Nyquist said. It would also generate 16 truckloads of salt per week. “It could be used as sidewalk deicer,” Nyquist said. “As a private business, we will figure out another manufacturing opportunity for something that would just be waste.”[...]

[Karl Nyquist] said the assessed valuation of the ground on which the treatment plant is built would be greater than the value of the ground dried up. The combined wages from jobs at the treatment plant, reservoir and continued farm operations would more than make up for the temporary farm jobs that would be lost as a result of the dry-up, Nyquist said.

More Lamar pipeline coverage here.

The Bureau of Reclamation is evaluating alternatives for the Arkansas Valley Conduit, the draft EIS should be out in 2012

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“This is a big step, and I’m thankful we’ve made it to this point,” said Bill Long, president of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District, sponsors of the conduit. “I’m optimistic that we’ll be able to meet the timelines.” Those timelines include completion of the draft EIS by next fall and construction of the 235-mile pipeline within a decade…

Wednesday’s session dug down into how the EIS will be developed and explained over the next year. Reclamation is attempting to make the process more understandable to the general public. “We’re trying to make it a much more readable document for the general public,” said Jerry Gibbens, a consultant for MWH Engineering.

The conduit will move about 10,000 acre-feet of water annually, and will be associated with a master contract for about 26,900 acre-feet of storage in Lake Pueblo. Together the projects involve about 20 percent of the municipal water supply, and 7 percent of the total water supply, Gibbens said. The impact throughout the Arkansas River basin, and particularly downstream from Pueblo Dam, will be studied. To help the public get a better idea, photographs of how the river looks at various stages along different reaches of the rivers will be included along with the traditional hygrograph in the online version of the draft EIS, once it is completed, Gibbens said.

More Arkansas Valley Conduit coverage here and here.

Public Invited to Open Houses on Plan for Glen Canyon Dam Operations

Here’s the release from the National Park Service (Barry Wirth/Maureen Oltrogge):

Public Invited to Open Houses on Plan for Glen Canyon Dam Operations

Beginning Nov. 7, the public will have an opportunity to attend public meetings on the development of a long-term plan that will determine the timing and volume of water flows from Glen Canyon Dam. Those flows affect hydroelectricity production, beach recreation, native fish and other river-related plants and animals, as well as archeological sites in Grand Canyon National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area.

The long-term plan will address routine operations as well as “experimental” flows that provide additional scientific information about how to protect endangered fish and lessen the effects of dam operations on downstream ecology and other resources. The plan will ensure that regulated flows on the Colorado River meet the goals of supplying hydroelectricity and water for communities, agriculture and industry at the same time they protect the ecologies of the Grand Canyon and Glen Canyon.

The meetings, to be held jointly by the Bureau of Reclamation and the National Park Service, will take place in:

- Phoenix, Arizona: Monday, November 7, 2011, 6 to 8 p.m., Sheraton Crescent Hotel, 2620 W. Dunlap Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85201.

- Flagstaff, Arizona: Tuesday, November 8, 2011, 6 to 8 p.m., Radisson Woodlands Hotel Flagstaff, 1175 W. Route 66, Flagstaff, AZ 86001.

- Page, Arizona: Wednesday, November 9, 2011, 6 to 8 p.m., Courtyard Page at Lake Powell, 600 Clubhouse Drive, Page, AZ 86040.

- Salt Lake City, Utah: Tuesday, November 15, 2011, 6 to 8 p.m., Hilton Salt Lake City Center, 255 South West Temple, Salt Lake City, UT 84101.

- Las Vegas, Nevada: Wednesday, November 16, 2011, 6 to 8 p.m., Ramada Las Vegas, 325 East Flamingo Road, Las Vegas, NV 89169.

- Lakewood, Colorado: Thursday, November 17, 2011, 6 to 8 p.m., Sheraton Denver West Hotel, 360 Union Boulevard, Lakewood, CO 80228.

- Web-based meeting: Tuesday, November 15, 2011, 1 to 3 p.m. Mountain Time. For specific information about the web-based meeting and how to participate, please refer to the project website at: http://ltempeis.anl.gov.

Work on the new plan, known as the Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan (LTEMP), is the first comprehensive review of Glen Canyon Dam operations in 15 years. The purpose of the LTEMP is to use current and newly developed science to improve and protect resources of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, Grand Canyon National Park, and Lake Mead National Recreation Area while also complying with the Law of the River, the 1992 Grand Canyon Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, and other applicable laws.The LTEMP process will determine the need for future modifications to Glen Canyon Dam operations, and whether to establish an Endangered Species Act Recovery Implementation Program for endangered fish species below Glen Canyon Dam.

Changes to dam operations and other actions taken by the Department of the Interior (DOI) will be evaluated as “alternatives” in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The EIS will document and evaluate impacts of the alternatives.

The public meetings announced today are part of the “public scoping” phase of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. Public scoping gives interested individuals and groups the opportunity to comment on a proposed action, recommend alternatives, and to identify and prioritize the issues to be considered in the EIS analyses. Scoping is the earliest, but not the last, opportunity for people to provide input on the Glen Canyon Dam LTEMP EIS.

Each public scoping meeting will include a welcome and project overview session (15 minutes) and opportunities for the public to review exhibits, informally discuss issues, and ask questions of technical experts and managers.

More information on the meetings will be announced through local media, newsletters, and the project web site: http://ltempeis.anl.gov.

The public can submit comments by the following methods:

Website: http://ltempeis.anl.gov. (the preferred method)
Mail: Glen Canyon LTEMP EIS Scoping, Argonne National Laboratory, EVS/240, 9700 S. Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439.

Reclamation and the NPS will accept comments that are received or postmarked by Friday, Dec. 30, 2011.

To have your name added to the mailing list for future information, visit the Glen Canyon LTEMP EIS website listed below or contact Beverley Heffernan, Bureau of Reclamation, Upper Colorado Region, Attention: UC-700, 125 South State Street, Salt Lake City, UT 84138-1147; facsimile (801) 524-3826.

Additional information, including a full copy of the Notice of Intent published yesterday in the Federal Register is available at the project web site: http://ltempeis.anl.gov.

More Colorado River basin coverage here.

CWCB: The City of Trinidad has applied for a loan to help offset the cost of the North Lake Dam rehabilitation project

From The Trinidad Times (Steve Block):

The Arkansas Basin Roundtable filed a $739,000 request for funds derived from a mineral severance tax levied to enhance the state’s ability to bring water to urban areas. The roundtable will contribute $50,000 to the project.

The state engineer’s office recently mandated the water level in the lake, Trinidad’s primary water source, be reduced by five feet to relieve pressure on the dam 30 miles west of the city.

Jim Fernandez, city utility superintendent and roundtable board member said the dam has been leaking for several years and that the board’s approval for a grant request was a lengthy process. “We’re making progress and that’s always a good thing,” Fernandez said. “It took a long time before this request came before the board…

The existing dam will be reinforced with massive amounts of soil from a nearby borrow pit and the spillway will also be rebuilt. The city has spent $847,000 to design and build a new concrete outlet works and drain system and committed $389,000 to the project. Trinidad has applied for a low-interest construction loan of $739,000 with the state water conservancy board.

Using the dam to produce hydroelectric power is under consideration by the city engineering department. Fernandez said there isn’t much water flow at the lake in the winter, making consistent power generation a potential problem.

More Arkansas River basin coverage here.

The Castle Pines Metropolitan District nixes participation in the WISE project

From the Aurora Sentinel (Sara Castellanos):

In a letter sent Oct. 12 from Paul Dannels, district manager of the Castle Pines Metropolitan District, to Rod Kuharich, executive director of the [South Metro Water Supply Augthority], Dannels said the board of directors decided not to proceed with the project. “Simply stated, the high cost of the Project and the uncertainty of water delivery do not make sense for the District at this time,” Dannels wrote in the letter. “We wish you great success with the Project which appears more feasible for larger users. They can deal better with both the uncertainty of water availability and the high Project costs than smaller users such as the District.”[...]

Greg Baker, spokesman for Aurora Water said the project, dubbed the Water Infrastructure and Supply Efficiency partnership, doesn’t require that all 15 entities of the SMWSA take deliveries for the project to be successful. Roxborough and the East Cherry Creek Valley Water and Sanitation District have already indicated that they had other resources they could develop and wouldn’t take water from the WISE partnership, Baker said. “Each member of the SMWSA must assess the value of participation in relation to their individual systems and needs,” Baker said. “SMWSA has indicated that the commitments from many of the other members have already met or exceeded the initial 10,000 acre-feet provided for by the proposed delivery agreement.”

More Water Infrastructure and Supply Efficiency partnership coverage here.

McPhee Reservoir water year 2011 report: The Dolores Water Conservancy District’s 50th anniversary celebration will be November 12 in Dolores

From the Cortez Journal (Reid Wright):

“We’re in as good of shape as we have ever been,” [Dolores Water Conservancy District] Manager Mike Preston said. “We had 63 percent of active capacity in the reservoir. And that means that we’re carrying a good supply for next year.”

After a relatively dry winter, spring precipitation arrived later than usual, resulting in a full reservoir and prolonged dam spill for recreational boating on the Lower Dolores River. After the spill, a hot and dry summer resulted in heavy irrigation, Preston said, which was alleviated at the end of the irrigation season by fall storms.

As of Wednesday, the McPhee Reservoir stood at an elevation of 6,903.6 feet with an active capacity of 145,045 acre feet of water. The reservoir has a 229,182 acre foot maximum active capacity…

Meanwhile, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation released the September-end status of Jackson Gulch Jackson Gulch reservoir, which serves Mancos and the surrounding area, at a live content of 3,938 acre-feet with a 9,977 acre-feet maximum capacity and a 4,576 acre-feet average (1971-2000) end-of-month content. At Jackson Gulch, a daily maximum/minimum of 43/0 cubic-feet-per second was released into the Mancos River, and 29 acre-feet were released for municipal purposes.

This year marks DWCD’s 50th year in operation. The public is invited to a celebration scheduled for 12 p.m. Nov. 12 at the Dolores Community Center, 400 Riverside Avenue in Dolores. Call 565-7562 to RSVP.

More Dolores River watershed coverage here and here.

Denver: ‘Charting New Waters’ sponsors hear from state water officials about how Colorado is dealing water and growth issues

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The Johnson Foundation at Wingspread hosted a meeting attended by top state water officials at the Denver Botanical Gardens in an effort to learn how Colorado is dealing with water and growth issues. “We wanted to learn about some things that are working well in Colorado to inform a national population dealing with water issues, perhaps not in the same way,” said Lynn Broaddus, environmental program director for the foundation…

Charting New Waters stressed water conservation, sharing water and watershed protection as major strategies toward meeting the needs of growth with a reliable fresh water supply.

Speakers at Tuesday’s meeting included representatives from the Family Farm Alliance, Farm Bureau, Colorado Water Conservation Board, Denver Water and Aurora. Water managers and advocates from other states also spoke. More than 100 attended the meeting.

“I think they’re having a conversation about what we can do about water and population growth, and it’s a great opportunity for people from other states to compare notes,” said John Stulp, IBCC chairman and Gov. John Hickenlooper’s water policy adviser. “I think their goal is to provide leadership and not wait for a crisis to happen.”

2012 Colorado legislation: Proposal to mandate water saving toilets defeated in the Water Resources Committee along party lines

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Patrick Malone):

Rep. Keith Swerdfeger, R-Pueblo West, joined fellow Republicans in their reluctance to support a government-mandated type of toilet. He said conversations with a representative of the Pueblo Regional Building Department led to other objections. Swerdfeger said he has no doubts that toilets with 1.28-gallon flush capacities are basically as effective as the 1.6-gallon models that are the present flow limit, but he worries that the lower flow would not sufficiently move solid waste through below-ground sewer lines.

“The technology’s good, the intent is good, but we also have some unintended consequences below the toilet,” Swerdfeger said. He expressed concern that costly, premature replacement of sewer lines could result.

“We have some research that really disputes that,” said Sen. Angela Giron, D-Pueblo…

She said Republicans ignored the work of the Interbasin Compact Commission, which last year — after years of development — released a far-reaching strategy aimed at meeting the state’s agricultural and urban water demands in the future. The commission’s recommendations included elements as basic as low-flow toilets and water-conserving shower fixtures and as ambitious as massive water storage projects…

Jay Winner of Pueblo, who serves as the Arkansas River basin’s representative on the IBCC, shared Giron’s frustration. Resistance from Republican lawmakers who represent agricultural areas baffled him. He said the 20,000 acre-feet of water that the measure is estimated to conserve is that much less that will be available for agricultural use.

Winner characterized the Republican opposition to the toilet restriction as dismissive of the IBCC’s work and recommendations. “Toilets are an easy step toward conservation. What happens when we bring a tough project like storage forward?” Winner said. “Is this just a waste of time for the IBCC? This vote does not give the IBCC a vote of confidence. I think it’s a blow to the IBCC.”

More coverage from Joe Hanel writing for The Durango Herald. From the article:

The panel shot down two bills Tuesday that sought water savings from toilets. Republicans expressed concerns about increased regulations and the effects on rural communities that depend on generous flushing from Front Range cities to fill eastern Colorado rivers.

The vote was a setback for the Interbasin Compact Committee, a group the Legislature created in 2005 to find a peaceful solution to the state’s West vs. East water wars. The IBCC last year endorsed strict statewide plumbing standards for a variety of appliances. The bill that failed Tuesday focused only on toilets, setting a 1.28 gallons-per-flush standard for new toilets sold in stores, tighter than the national standard of 1.6 gallons.

IBCC member Taylor Hawes urged legislators to vote “yes” to send the IBCC a message that its work matters, especially because the panel is proposing other options that are even more politically unpalatable. “This is the easy path. We have much, much harder choices in front of us,” Hawes said.

The bill failed on a 5-5, party-line vote Tuesday in the Water Resources Review Committee, with only Democrats supporting it. Had the bill succeeded, it would have received a powerful endorsement from the committee in January, when the Legislature begins its 2012 session…

The committee also turned down a bill to allow people to use “graywater” – domestic water that already has been used once in the house – for toilet flushing. [Sen. Ellen Roberts] sided with Democrats and voted for the bill, but the 6-4 tally was short of the supermajority the bill needed to get the water committee’s endorsement.

More 2012 Colorado legislation coverage here.

Colorado-Big Thompson Project update: Reclamation is gearing up for fall maintenance

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

Now that it is fall, we are into our annual maintenance schedule on the east slope of the Colorado-Big Thompson Project. That means there will be some changes across our reservoirs and canals.

The first update is actually a schedule change at Pinewood Reservoir. Previously, I had let you all know that Pinewood was going to be drawn down considerably in November. That is no longer the case. With the changes in place, Pinewood will now be full by October 28 and stay relatively high until the week of Thanksgiving. During that week, testing at the Flatiron power plant below will begin and the water level at Pinewood will slowly drop for about three weeks. At this time, we are anticipating the water level at Pinewood will start going back up in the middle of December.

While the test is going on at Flatiron, the contractor will be busy on the Pole Hill Canal box culvert project. With Pole Hill, Pinewood, and Flatiron under maintenance, it is very likely we will wind up running some water down the Big Thompson Canyon, releasing from Olympus Dam on Lake Estes. After October 28, flows in the canyon could be as high as 350 cfs. They could stay at that level into November.

Meanwhile, pumping to Carter Lake is scheduled to end on October 28. Currently the reservoir water level is slowly rising at a rate of about a tenth of a foot a day.

When pumping to Carter stops, delivery of water to Horsetooth will come back on. Water released from Lake Estes and sent down the Big Thompson Canyon will be recaptured at the Dille Diversion (just upstream of the Dam Store) and sent north to Horsetooth. That means that Horsetooth Reservoir’s water elevation will likely stay above 5400 feet–a very unusual situation. All boat ramps will be in the water all year.

We will likely keep water going to Horsetooth until mid-November.

The second update has to do with C-BT facilities in Estes Park. Annual maintenance at the Marys Lake Power Plant, dikes and related system will draw Marys Lake down to dead storage in the middle of November. While Marys is down, the water level at Lake Estes will fluctuate very little. Marys Lake will start going up again the middle of December, once maintenance work concludes.

More Colorado-Big Thompson Project coverage here.

The Bureau of Reclamation is evaluating alternatives for the Arkansas Valley Conduit, the draft EIS should be out in 2012

Here’s the link to Reclamation’s newsletter update about the conduit, from Kara Lamb. The Arkansas Valley Conduit — which would be a supply source for communities east of Pueblo — was originally part of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project but has not been built yet. The newsletter contains 7 possible alignments which will be evaluated in the environmental impact statement due out next year. Click on the thumbnail graphic to the right for the contact information and a flow chart of the conduit EIS process.

More coverage from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

The conduit will reach to Lamar, 130 miles from Pueblo, with spurs at Colorado 96 to serve Crowley County, and at Lamar to serve Eads. Water would be filtered but not disinfected for most users. Unfiltered water only would be delivered to the St. Charles Mesa Water Association.

A feature of most of the alternatives is an interconnect on Pueblo Dam between the North Outlet Works, now being constructed as part of Southern Delivery System, and the South Outlet Works, which serves the Pueblo Board of Water Works, Pueblo West, Fountain Valley Conduit and the future Arkansas Valley Conduit. The interconnect is seen as a way to deliver water to either the north or south side of the river in the event of emergency outages.

The conduit would create storage tanks at Fowler and La Junta, and would require pumping stations near the St. Charles Mesa treatment plant and at Lamar for the Eads extension. Otherwise, water would flow by gravity from Pueblo Dam.

More Arkansas Valley Conduit coverage here and here.

The need for more storage in the Arkansas River basin was a discussion point at last week’s meeting of the UAWCD

From The Mountain Mail (Joe Stone):

District Manager Terry Scanga said his counterparts Jim Broderick, Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District, and Jay Winner, Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District, attended the meeting, as did Alan Hamel, executive director with Pueblo Board of Water Works.

Scanga said the men agreed that more storage in the Arkansas basin is crucial for meeting future municipal and industrial water demand as identified by the Statewide Water Supply Initiative, which projects a significant supply shortfall by 2050.

Scanga also said new storage capacity would be needed if more Western Slope water were to be diverted into the Arkansas Basin and additional storage is needed to support effective environmental conservation along basin waterways.

The Multi-Use Project recently proposed by the Upper Arkansas district would increase basin storage capacity and has generated interest among other conservancy districts and municipal water providers, Scanga said.

More Arkansas River basin coverage here.

Grand Junction: ‘Upper Colorado River Watershed Forum’ October 31

Here’s the link to the forum webpage. Thanks to Hannah Holm for the heads up. From the webpage:

The Upper Colorado River Basin Water Forum will provide an opportunity for water experts focused on the Upper Colorado River Basin to share information about current projects and ideas for future projects…

Lunch and refreshments are included in conference registration. Pre-forum events on Sunday afternoon and evening will include a 2:00pm hike in the canyons of the Colorado National Monument (learn about flash floods!) and a 5:00pm reception on the terrace of the University Center featuring artistic celebrations of water.

More Colorado River basin coverage here.

The Roaring Fork Conservancy maintains an active water quality program for the Roaring Fork River

From the Aspen Daily News (Andrew Travers):

[Chad Rudow] is the water quality coordinator for the Roaring Fork Conservancy, the Basalt-based conservation organization. The conservancy has partnered with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment to survey bug life in the Upper Colorado River Basin. Surveying the variety of creeping things in the water, Rudow explained, is key to determining water quality and stream health. “Looking at what lives in the river is a great way to find out how clean this water is,” he said as he dipped a water quality meter into the river to take some initial readings for acidity and temperature.

Rudow and a team of volunteers spent six days sampling bug life on the Roaring Fork over the last week. They went to 17 different sites on the Fork, along with some of its tributaries, including Brush Creek. They’re looking for aquatic macroinvertebrates. That’s science jargon for insects that live in the water and are big enough to be seen with the naked eye, Rudow explained…

…Rudow excitedly pointed out mayflies and stone flies, which cannot live in water with even minimal pollution. It’s a good initial indicator that the upper Roaring Fork is in good shape.

More Roaring Fork watershed coverage here.

Crested Butte: The town council approves a five dollar increase for monthly water bills

From The Crested Butte News (Mark Reaman):

In a work session on Monday, September 26 the Town Council reluctantly but firmly agreed to raise the monthly water bill from $22 per month to $27 for the basic 8,000 gallons per residence. According to a memo from Finance Director Lois Rozman and Pubic Works Director Rodney Due, “The increase in the base rate is necessary to cover operating costs (including depreciation) of the water division. There is no proposed increase for the wastewater division.” They estimated that leaving the water rate at the current level would result in a $98,000 operating loss. Even with the increase, the fund is expected to lose $11,000.

“We have seen a lot of efficiencies in the last three years,” explained Due. “And in fact we are saving about 50 million gallons of water a year compared to three years ago. But the fixed costs don’t go down and it is getting more expensive. Still, even with the new rate, our water is the best deal of any commodity around.”

More infrastructure coverage here.

Arkansas River basin: Water for agricultural use in total far exceeds other uses

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

More than 86 percent of the water diverted from the Arkansas River in Colorado goes to agriculture, but in some counties the rate is much higher. Even though water supplies have been depleted by urban transfers, irrigated agriculture is the mainstay of water use in the Arkansas Valley.

El Paso and Pueblo counties are the population centers of the basin, and water usage reflects the need to supply cities and power companies. In El Paso County, only 20 percent of water withdrawals are used for agriculture, while 41 percent of the water used in Pueblo County goes to farms, according to published estimates by U.S. Geological Survey. But in the four counties east of Pueblo, about 99 percent of the water that is diverted irrigates crops. About 250,000 acres of land have been irrigated, on average, over the past five years under the largest ditches and wells east of Pueblo…

“If you take the water off the land, you get grass and weeds,” [John Schweizer, president of the Catlin Canal and Arkansas Valley Super Ditch] said. “This year, the grass Aurora planted on the Rocky Ford Canal looks dead. This part of the country is not equipped to handle dry-land farming.”[...]

As it stands, about one-third of the farmland under the ditches east of Pueblo could eventually be dried up for other purposes — either because cities or power companies have purchased water rights or speculators purchased them with hopes of selling it to thirsty Front Range communities. Other large blocks of land were dried up after Kansas prevailed in a U.S. Supreme Court lawsuit on the point that Colorado irrigation wells were in violation of the Arkansas River Compact. A study last year by The Pueblo Chieftain showed 145,000 acres in the Arkansas River basin from Leadville to Holly could be dried up when water rights are fully developed. Figures from the Colorado Division of Water Resources show that 80,000 acres of farm ground already have been lost as water rights were transferred to cities, or well augmentation. More than 100,000 of the acres at risk are or were under the 20 largest canals east of Pueblo. Those canals at one time or another irrigated more than 300,000 acres. The canals today are unable to irrigate more than 50,000 acres in the Lower Ark Valley, mostly on the Colorado Canal and Rocky Ford Ditch, because Water Court decrees required drying up the land in order to remove the consumptive use of water — the amount once used to grow crops.

More Arkansas River basin coverage here.

Machiavelli and a possible reason for the resistance to climate science’s conclusion that the earth is warming due to anthropmorphic influences

I read his book The Prince years ago in a course about political philosophy. Here’s a quote from The New York Times weblog Dot Earth (Andrew Revkin):

“It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things. For the reformer has enemies in all those who profit by the old order, and only lukewarm defenders in all those who would profit by the new order, this lukewarmness arising partly from fear of their adversaries, who have the laws in their favor; and partly from the incredulity of mankind, who do not truly believe in anything new until they have had actual experience of it.” — The Prince.

Thanks to Loretta Lohman for the link.

October 12 issue of the Intermoutain West Climate Summary is now online

Here’s the link to the webpage. Here’s the summary:

Temperature — Temperatures for September were warmer than average across nearly all of the region.

Precipitation — September was generally drier than average across the region, and especially dry in Wyoming, northern Utah, and southeastern Colorado.

ENSO — After a brief hiatus this summer, La Niña conditions have re-emerged and are expected to persist through the winter season.

Climate Outlooks — Consistent with the La Niña conditions, in the late fall and winter seasons, the CPC seasonal outlooks call for some enhanced risk of warmer and drier conditions in the extreme southern portions of our region, and of wetter conditions in the northern portions.

Thanks to the Summit County Citizens Voice (Bob Berwyn) for the heads up. Click through for Mr. Berwyn’s post on the issue.

Colorado Water 2012 launches their book club

Here’s the link to the webpage. Here’s what they have to say:

Welcome to the Water 2012 Book Club!

Please join Colorado authors Pete McBride, Jon Waterman, Craig Childs, Will Hobbs, Greg Hobbs, George Sibley and Patty Limerick as you read and discuss their books.

The theme of the Water 2012 Book Club is the adventure, fun and challenge of Colorado’s most precious resource, water.

As the 2012 year of water celebration unfolds starting this coming January when Governor John Hickenlooper kicks off the celebration, these authors will be presenting and discussing their books in person, online, and through live and recorded video, webinar, facebook and blog programs.

More details to follow! We encourage you to share this list with other book club members and we look forward to your participation!

Water 2012 Book Club Selections

The Statewide Books for 2012

General Audience:

The Colorado River, Flowing Through Conflict by Peter McBride and Jonathan Waterman

The Colorado River from it’s headwaters in Rocky Mountain National Park to its delta in Mexico is beautiful, used, stressed and deserving of protection. Peter McBride Jonathan Waterman

House of Rain by Craig Childs

The ancestral Puebloans of the Colorado River Plateau, how they lived on the land, adapted in a water short region and migrated to sustain themselves. Craig Childs

Young Adult Audience:

River Thunder by Will Hobbs

Three young women and three young men learn about themselves and how to pull together through the crashing waves of the Grand Canyon. Will Hobbs

Regional Programs: To Be Announced

First Quarter 2012:

The Colorado River, Flowing Through Conflict and House of Rain

Second Quarter 2012:

River Thunder and

Living the Four Corners, Colorado Centennial State at the Headwaters by Justice Greg Hobbs

There is nothing so inspiring and challenging as living in the Four Corners States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, where water is life and its careful use and preservation is a necessity. Living the Four Corners

Third Quarter 2012:

Conserving the Headwaters, The Colorado River District at 75 by George Sibley

The Colorado River Water Conservation District grows into its role of being the western Colorado steward of the state’s water treasure. CRWCD

Fourth Quarter 2012:

A Ditch in Time, Denver, the West, and Water by Patricia Limerick

How a great and growing city on the eastern plains learns to cross many political, legal, and cultural divides. Center of the American West

More Colorado Water 2012 coverage here.

The Town of Ophir joins Telluride lawsuit over the licensing of the proposed Piñon Ridge uranium mill

From The Telluride Watch:

The Town of Ophir has joined the Town of Telluride in seeking to intervene in a lawsuit challenging licensure of the mill because the public was not allowed to have a meaningful role in the process, as required by both state and federal law.

Public Justice, the national public interest law firm, represents both Ophir and Telluride, each about 50 miles from Piñon Ridge’s proposed location in the Paradox Valley of Montrose County, Colo. Critics note the potential dangers from milling uranium – namely, toxic and radioactive air and water contamination.

More nuclear coverage here and here.

Brush: The city council sets priorities, completion of the wastewater treatment plant, purchasing water rights, conservation and stormwater improvements are on the list

From the Brush News Tribune (Iva Kay Horner):

At Monday night’s meeting of the council, City Administrator Monty Torres presented the list, with the top priority for council targeted at completing the wastewater treatment facility. “We’re well underway with that project and expect it to be completed in the next 12 months,” Torres commented.

Also on the list is to continue improving water resources and upgrading of the water distribution system, with Torres further explaining that council consider, when given the opportunity, of purchasing water rights or shares if it will benefit the city. Along the same lines, the administrator noted that officials also continue with water conservation…

Listed at number five on the list is storm water improvements with the downtown area at the top of the list. “There are five areas in the city that have pretty significant flooding but the top priority is downtown where we are enlarging the water lines. We also are looking at the storm water pond,” the city administrator stated.

Here’s a post from last February that has been getting a lot of traffic on Coyote Gulch, Brush wastewater treatment plant construction update.

More South Platte River basin coverage here.

Fountain Creek: Colorado appeals court rules that the Pueblo District Attorney is not authorized to sue Colorado Springs for pollution under the Clean Water Act

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The decision by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals nixes Thiebaut’s intention to sue the city again for discharging pollutants from its sewage system into the creek. Thiebaut said, however, his 2005 lawsuit, under the federal clean water law, prompted Colorado Springs to improve its sewage system, which discharges into the creek. “It is important to take stock of what this suit has accomplished for our community,” Thiebaut said. “No one has ever stood up against Colorado Springs on behalf of Pueblo before this suit was filed.”[...]

Thiebaut said Wednesday his lawsuit “woke up Colorado Springs to the fact that they would no longer get away with their shoddy practices and cheap stream crossings. “To avoid the full power of the court, they began to spend a lot of money to clean up their act, improving their sewage treatment system and stream crossings — and they need to do even more,” he said…

The Denver-based appeals court’s 3-0 decision said Thiebaut had conceded he, as an individual citizen, was entitled to have sued Colorado Springs under the federal water law. He chose, instead, to sue in his official capacity as district attorney. The appeals court agreed with [U.S. District Court judge, Walker Miller, who threw out Thiebaut's lawsuit in 2007] that the Colorado law which outlines the duties of district attorneys does not give them authority to sue under the Clean Water Act.

Here’s the order from Leagle.com.

More coverage from Associated Press via The Durango Herald:

Thiebaut’s lawsuit in 2005 argued that discharges of sewage between 1998 and 2007 were violating the Clean Water Act, hurting Fountain Creek and affecting Pueblo County’s economy. His lawsuit sought civil penalties. On Wednesday, a three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with a district court that found Thiebaut couldn’t file a citizen Clean Water Act lawsuit in his official capacity. Thiebaut said his office was reviewing the ruling before deciding what’s next…

The Sierra Club also sued over the spills. A judge fined the utility $35,500 to settle the Sierra Club’s claims.

Colorado Springs Utilities’ pipes cross creeks dozens of times, leaving them somewhat at risk in times of rainstorms, utility spokesman Steve Berry said. He said that since 2004, before Thiebaut sued, the municipal utility has invested more than $147 million in improving its wastewater collection system, which he said is now among the best-performing systems in the state. It expects to have spent $250 million by 2018, he said.

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

USGS: Hydrogeologic Setting and Simulation of Groundwater Flow near the Canterbury and Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnels, Leadville, Colorado

Here’s the release from the U.S. Geological Survey (Wellman, T.P./Paschke, S.S./Minsley, Burke/Dupree, J.A.):

The Leadville mining district is historically one of the most heavily mined regions in the world producing large quantities of gold, silver, lead, zinc, copper, and manganese since the 1860s. A multidisciplinary investigation was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, to characterize large-scale groundwater flow in a 13 square-kilometer region encompassing the Canterbury Tunnel and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel near Leadville, Colorado. The primary objective of the investigation was to evaluate whether a substantial hydraulic connection is present between the Canterbury Tunnel and Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel for current (2008) hydrologic conditions.

Altitude in the Leadville area ranges from about 3,018 m (9,900 ft) along the Arkansas River valley to about 4,270 m (14,000 ft) along the Continental Divide east of Leadville, and the high altitude of the area results in a moderate subpolar climate. Winter precipitation as snow was about three times greater than summer precipitation as rain, and in general, both winter and summer precipitation were greatest at higher altitudes. Winter and summer precipitation have increased since 2002 coinciding with the observed water-level rise near the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel that began in 2003. The weather patterns and hydrology exhibit strong seasonality with an annual cycle of cold winters with large snowfall, followed by spring snowmelt, runoff, and recharge (high-flow) conditions, and then base-flow (low-flow) conditions in the fall prior to the next winter. Groundwater occurs in the Paleozoic and Precambrian fractured-rock aquifers and in a Quaternary alluvial aquifer along the East Fork Arkansas River, and groundwater levels also exhibit seasonal, although delayed, patterns in response to the annual hydrologic cycle.

A three-dimensional digital representation of the extensively faulted bedrock was developed and a geophysical direct-current resistivity field survey was performed to evaluate the geologic structure of the study area. The results show that the Canterbury Tunnel is located in a downthrown structural block that is not in direct physical connection with the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel. The presence of this structural discontinuity implies there is no direct groundwater pathway between the tunnels along a laterally continuous bedrock unit.

Water-quality results for pH and major-ion concentrations near the Canterbury Tunnel showed that acid mine drainage has not affected groundwater quality. Stable-isotope ratios of hydrogen and oxygen in water indicate that snowmelt is the primary source of groundwater recharge. On the basis of chlorofluorocarbon and tritium concentrations and mixing ratios for groundwater samples, young groundwater (groundwater recharged after 1953) was indicated at well locations upgradient from and in a fault block separate from the Canterbury Tunnel. Samples from sites downgradient from the Canterbury Tunnel were mixtures of young and old (pre-1953) groundwater and likely represent snowmelt recharge mixed with older regional groundwater that discharges from the bedrock units to the Arkansas River valley. Discharge from the Canterbury Tunnel contained the greatest percentage of old (pre-1953) groundwater with a mixture of about 25 percent young water and about 75 percent old water.

A calibrated three-dimensional groundwater model representing high-flow conditions was used to evaluate large-scale flow characteristics of the groundwater and to assess whether a substantial hydraulic connection was present between the Canterbury Tunnel and Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel. As simulated, the faults restrict local flow in many areas, but the fracture-damage zones adjacent to the faults allow groundwater to move along faults. Water-budget results indicate that groundwater flow across the lateral edges of the model controlled the majority of flow in and out of the aquifer (79 percent and 63 percent of the total water budget, respectively). The largest contributions to the water budget were groundwater entering from the upper reaches of the watershed and the hydrologic interaction of the groundwater with the East Fork Arkansas River. Potentiometric surface maps of the simulated model results were generated for depths of 50, 100, and 250 m. The surfaces revealed a positive trend in hydraulic head with land-surface altitude and evidence of increased control on fluid movement by the fault network structure at progressively greater depths in the aquifer.

Results of advective particle-tracking simulations indicate that the sets of simulated flow paths for the Canterbury Tunnel and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel were mutually exclusive of one another, which also suggested that no major hydraulic connection was present between the tunnels. Particle-tracking simulations also revealed that although the fault network generally restricted groundwater movement locally, hydrologic conditions were such that groundwater did cross the fault network at many locations. This cross-fault movement indicates that the fault network controls regional groundwater flow to some degree but is not a complete barrier to flow. The cumulative distributions of adjusted age results for the watershed indicate that approximately 30 percent of the flow pathways transmit groundwater that was younger than 68 years old (post-1941) and that about 70 percent of the flow pathways transmit old groundwater. The particle-tracking results are consistent with the apparent ages and mixing ratios developed from the chlorofluorocarbon and tritium results. The model simulations also indicate that approximately 50 percent of the groundwater flowing through the study area was less than 200 years old and about 50 percent of the groundwater flowing through the study area is old water stored in low-permeability geologic units and fault blocks. As a final examination of model response, the conductance parameters of the Canterbury Tunnel and Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel were manually adjusted from the calibrated values to determine if altering the flow discharge in one tunnel affects the hydraulic behavior in the other tunnel. The examination showed no substantial hydraulic connection.

The multidisciplinary investigation yielded an improved understanding of groundwater characteristics near the Canterbury Tunnel and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel. Movement of groundwater between the Canterbury Tunnel and Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel that was central to this investigation could not be evaluated with strong certainty owing to the structural complexity of the region, study simplifications, and the absence of observation data within the upper sections of the Canterbury Tunnel and between the Canterbury Tunnel and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel. There was, however, collaborative agreement between all of the analyses performed during this investigation that a substantial hydraulic connection did not exist between the Canterbury Tunnel and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel under natural flow conditions near the time of this investigation.

Here’s the link to the full report.

More Arkansas River basin coverage here.