Blue Mesa Reservoir may be home to a pre-1922 water bank for Front Range suppliers in case of a Colorado River Compact call
February 12, 2012
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
The Arkansas Basin and Gunnison Basin roundtables are collaborating on a project to see whether water from pre-1922 water rights in the Gunnison River basin could be banked in Blue Mesa Reservoir as a hedge against a Colorado River Compact call…
A call could affect transmountain diversions like the Colorado-Big Thompson project, Denver Water’s diversions, Twin Lakes and the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project because they rely on post-1922 water rights. There also could be an impact on Western Slope water rights claimed after 1922…
The joint roundtable group plans to meet again on March 19 and report on the progress of the water bank plan at the meeting of the Colorado Water Conservation Board the following day, [Jim Broderick, executive director of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District] said. There also are questions about whether Blue Mesa Reservoir can be operated for water bank storage, but the state should develop a specific proposal before that can be explored, Broderick said.
More IBCC — basin roundtables coverage here.
Protect the Flows hopes to galvanize business interests the are dependent on wet water in the Colorado River
February 4, 2012
From the Summit Daily News (Janice Kurbjun):
[Zeke Hersh], the owner of Frisco’s Blue River Anglers joined a contingent of six who voiced the message of Protect the Flows, a brand-new, grassroots organization dedicated to raising awareness of water supply and related jobs in the Colorado River system — from the headwaters to the delta. The group represented river-related business interests from Colorado, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada, Hersh said, adding that the group isn’t just gaining traction by sitting with legislators and leaders in the nation’s environmental governance. It’s also building a broader base, growing from 170 companies to 370 companies involved in the effort from its start in summer 2011 to today.
The goal in going to D.C. was to urge the Department of the Interior and legislators to consider plans that will employ smart, common-sense strategies to keep the Colorado River flowing when they finalize the Bureau of Reclamation’s Colorado River Basin Supply & Demand Study this summer.
Now that the “Options and Strategies Phase” of the Colorado River Supply and Demand Study is closed, submitted proposals will be considered and evaluated through June 2012. Upon completion, the study will define current and future imbalances in water supply and demand in the Colorado River Basin over the next 50 years, and will provide adaptation and mitigation strategies to resolve those imbalances…
As an angler, a guide, and a mountain biker who likes to cruise Moab, Utah and cool off afterwards in the lazy Colorado River that flows through town, Hersh said he can help provide valuable, first-hand insight into the river’s impact throughout the West. It goes far beyond drinking water needs and agricultural impact, he said. The message of Protect the Flows is that more than 800,000 jobs in the West (107,000 and more than $10 billion into the Colorado’s economy alone) come directly from the river, and those people must be considered when the fate of the water supply is considered…
While in DC, the business leaders asked the Department of Interior to implement a plan that will improve urban conservation, improve agricultural efficiency and provide options for existing water storage that will allow for keeping more water in the river. The coalition touts these measures as a way to balance supply and demand to continue to serve the 36 million who rely on the waterway for drinking water and protect the 800,000 river-related tourism and recreation jobs across the seven Colorado River Basin states.
“Department of Interior’s keen leadership is the key to ensuring that the Colorado River Basin Study results in solutions that will benefit all parties,” said Sarah Sidwell, sales director for Tag-A-Long Expeditions in Moab, Utah and member of the Moab Area Chamber of Commerce…
In D.C., they presented some viable ideas for handling the plethora of water issues facing the West, including the extremely difficult task of reworking the complicated water law. Water banks are first on the list, Hersh said. Initiated in Arizona, it allows those holding water rights to override the “use it or lose it” rule of thumb in years of excess flows. These folks can use what they need, and bank the rest for credit later. In the meantime, someone else can buy or borrow the water…
“Jobs are very important right now. We do not want to lose one job,” Hersh said … as we decide how to manage the water in the Colorado River and its tributaries.
More Colorado River basin coverage here.
Chris Treese (Colorado River District): ‘We’re very concerned about any large project of any kind for Eastern or Western Colorado’
February 4, 2012
Mr. Treese was speaking at the Southern Colorado Water Forum this week. Here’s a report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
“We’re very concerned about any large project of any kind for Eastern or Western Colorado,” Chris Treese, external affairs manager for the Colorado River Conservation District, told the Southern Colorado Water Forum earlier this week…
Colorado’s weather has been, and will continue to be, unpredictable, however. Water availability is dependent on snowpack, and some climate projections claim there will be less snow in the mountains in the next century. But while warmer temperatures appear to be certain, the jury’s still out on the effect on precipitation levels. “It could be more or it could be less,” Treese said. “One thing is certain: The growing season will be longer, driving up demand.”
At one point, Treese portrayed the Colorado River district as a David facing two Goliaths: demand from Colorado’s Front Range for more water and demand from downstream states in the Colorado River Compact…
If one hiked along the western side of the Continental Divide in North-Central Colorado, only three streams that are not part of a diversion project would be crossed, Treese said…
Last year, several counties and water districts announced the Colorado River Cooperative Agreement with Denver Water that set out certain payments and water deliveries that will allow Denver to divert and store more water in Gross Reservoir, located in Boulder County. Such cooperative deals make sense and show that the Western Slope does not deserve its “Not One Drop” reputation, Treese said.
More Colorado River basin coverage here.
Pre-1922 water bank
June 9, 2009
Here’s a look at the pre-1922 water bank proposed by the Southwestern Colorado Water Conservancy District and the Colorado River District, from Dale Rodebaugh writing for The Durango Herald. From the article:
A call on the river – as it’s known – has never occurred. But board members of the Southwestern Water Conservation District and the Colorado River Water Association are interested enough in the consequences that they took up the matter last week at a meeting in Durango. A presentation by Tom Iseman of The Nature Conservancy, who spent six months researching issues, served mainly as a primer for future debate. The two water groups, which together represent all counties on the Western Slope, commissioned the study.
On the Western Slope, agricultural interests whose claims predate 1922 hold the rights to about 1 million acre-feet. An acre-foot of water covers a football field to the depth of 1 foot. But under what Iseman calls a water bank, early right-holders on the Western Slope would be compensated financially for putting their allotment temporarily at the disposal of junior users, who could lose their total allotments if there were a call by downstream consumers. Senior right-holders would receive further compensation if their water was actually used. Junior right-holders could use loaned water only in the case of an actual or imminent downstream call and then only for critical purposes.
State agencies – the Colorado Water Conservation Board and the Division of Water Resources – have been briefed on issues Western Slope water suppliers are discussing, Whitehead said. Also, the boards have presented their plan to most water districts on the Front Range.
Colorado River District: Pre-1922 water bank
June 8, 2009
Here’s a look at the plan to bank water rights in priority before the Colorado River Compact, from Bob Berwyn writing for the Summit Daily News. From the article:
The Colorado River Water Conservation District and the Southwest District met in Durango last week to discuss details of the plan, which would put senior water rights into a bank where they could be tapped in case of such a compact call.
Water users with pre-1922 rights (those senior rights are not affected by a downstream call) would be compensated for offering their senior water rights to junior users for temporary critical uses like drinking water and firefighting. The temporary use would only be permitted if a compact call were in effect or imminent.
Under the 1922 interstate contract, Colorado is obligated to deliver an average of 7.5 million acre feet of Colorado River water downstream annually. In a worst-case scenario, Colorado water users could be forced to cut some of their existing uses if the downstream states demand their full allotment. Water rights established before the compact was signed are not subject to the agreement.
Most of the water rights available for such a bank are held by ranchers and farmers.




