Interbasin Compact Committee meeting December 2

Here’s the release from the Department of Natural Resources (Theo Stein):

Water planners and stakeholders will convene to discuss ways to mix and match multiple strategies for meeting Colorado’s future water supply needs at the 25th meeting of the Interbasin Compact Committee, to be held this Wednesday in Denver.

The focus of the meeting will be the introduction of an analytical tool to help the nine river basin roundtables identify the right mix of conservation, new supply development, agricultural transfers, and other strategies to help them meet their future water needs. The Interbasin Compact Committee (IBCC) is a 27-member committee established to facilitate dialogue between basins and to address statewide water issues.

The IBCC is organized around nine basin roundtables covering the South Platte, the Denver- Metro area, the Arkansas, the Rio Grande, the Gunnison, the Colorado, the Yampa-White, the Southwest and the North Platte. These roundtables are the primary forums for on-going discussions related to needs within each basin and the basins’ interactions with each other.

Date: Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Time: 8:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.
Location: Sheraton Denver West Hotel 360 Union Blvd. Lakewood, CO
Room: City Lights

All meetings are open and the public is encouraged to attend.

More IBCC — Basin Roundtable coverage here.

Arkansas Valley: Where is the tipping point for farm communities as farms are dried up?

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District Wednesday voted to help find the answer by folding the task into its existing research on the Arkansas Valley Super Ditch…

The Colorado Water Conservation Board already is funding research by the Lower Ark district in connection with the Super Ditch, a land-fallowing, water-leasing program that is seen as a possible answer to traditional buy-and-dry. The idea of the tipping point came out of a recent meeting of the Interbasin Compact Committee, looking at ways to share the state’s water in the future.

Implement dealers, farm supply stores and retail stores suffer as water leaves farming communities, but no one has determined a threshold. The IBCC would like to plug that sort of information into its model that looks at balancing various water supply strategies. “No one has done this before,” Nichols said. “In the past, you got models that told you nothing.”

More Colorado Water coverage here.

Precedent-Setting Decision Made by Colorado Water Conservation Board; First-of-Its-Kind Relationship Built Between Board and Pitkin County for Local Streamflows

From The Aspen Times (Janet Urquhart):

The nine voting members of the Colorado Water Conservation Board approved a trust agreement with the county Monday in Denver after a four-and-a-half-hour hearing. “Everybody had smiles on their faces — except the opponents,” said John Ely, county attorney, in a telephone interview at the close of the proceedings. The CWCB staff, Pitkin County and representatives of Trout Unlimited and the Colorado Water Trust spoke in favor of the trust arrangement, as did the city of Aspen’s water counsel, Ely said.

Opponents included the Basalt Water Conservancy District, Starwood Metropolitan District, Willow-Herrick Ditch Co. and the Roaring Fork Land and Cattle Co., he said. All of the opponents expressed concern that the county’s plan to devote some of its water rights to in-stream flows in the Roaring Fork River would impact their own water transactions. The Basalt Water Conservancy District, for example, essentially capitalizes on lower flows on the Roaring Fork by selling water to users upstream of the Fryingpan River’s confluence with the Roaring Fork, according to Ely. The users take water from the upper Roaring Fork; it is replaced by water the district owns in Ruedi Reservoir, which is released into the Fryingpan and flows into the Roaring Fork at Basalt.

The trust agreement approved Monday will allow the county to donate 4.2 cubic feet per second of water rights it holds on Maroon Creek to the CWCB, the only the only entity in the state that may hold in-stream flow rights to protect the natural environment. Other water rights can be added to the trust agreement — the allocations must also be approved by the state water court — or withdrawn over time. Or, the trust can be revoked in its entirety. The county doesn’t lose its water rights, it simply donates them to boost river flows for whatever period of time it wants to, Ely said. “We’re not giving it away,” he said. “We still own it.”

More coverage from the Aspen Daily News (Brent Gardner-Smith). From the article:

“It is in the best interest of the state as a whole if the CWCB acquires the water right,” Susan Schneider, an assistant attorney general in the state’s Natural Resources and Environment department told the CWCB board Monday.

After a five-hour hearing, the board approved the proposal unanimously…

The ditch water comes out of Maroon Creek, which flows into the Roaring Fork River just to the west of the Aspen Meadows resort property. To put the 4.3 cfs of water into context, there was 114 cfs of water in the Roaring Fork River below Maroon Creek on Monday. It was the first such trust entered into by the CWCB since the passage last year of Colorado House Bill 1280, which strengthened the ability of the CWCB to protect water rights it is holding for minimum stream flow purposes. The bill was sponsored by state Sen. Gail Schwartz of Snowmass Village.

“This is a precedent setting transaction,” said Amy Beatie, executive director of the Colorado Water Trust. “The trust agreement provides a model for all other water users in the state that have water rights that are not currently being used, such as municipalities that have developed water supplies beyond their immediate needs.”[...]

The trust also includes a provision for the county to transfer another 34 different water rights, equal to about 20 cfs, that it owns into the trust arrangement with the CWCB. The county could also add water rights to the trust that it acquires through its Healthy Rivers and Streams fund…

The Stapleton Brothers Ditch water right owned by the county pre-dates the 1922 Colorado River water compact, which means that states downstream of Colorado, including Arizona, California and Nevada, could not demand that Colorado send the 4.3 cfs of water to them in a drought situation.

More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka). From the article:

The water rights are owned by Pitkin County and were acquired partly for conservation purposes. However, under Colorado water law, only the CWCB can own an in-stream flow right. Traditionally, senior water rights not put to use would become part of the stream flow and available to junior appropriators. Under the 2008 law, the state may buy or lease those senior rights purely for conservation purposes. In January, Pitkin County asked the CWCB to approve the donation of rights through a revocable trust, the first test of 2008’s HB1280. The flow of 19 cubic feet per second comes on Maroon Creek through the Stapleton Ditch, which once served Aspen’s Airport. It is the first of 34 potential water rights in Pitkin County that eventually could be donated.

More HB 08-1280 coverage here.

Precedent-Setting Decision Made by Colorado Water Conservation Board; First-of-Its-Kind Relationship Built Between Board and Pitkin County for Local Streamflows

Here’s the release from the Colorado Water Trust:

There will soon be more water for the fish who call the Roaring Fork River basin home. This boon is the result of collaborative efforts among Pitkin County, the Colorado Water Conservation Board (“CWCB”), and the Colorado Water Trust (“CWT”). Pitkin County has agreed to allow numerous water rights it owns to stay in local rivers, rather than be used for irrigation or other uses. It will do this by placing those water rights into a trust to be managed by the CWCB for use in Colorado’s Instream Flow Program. If all of the water rights in the trust agreement are used for instream flows, the Roaring Fork River basin could see up to a 19 c.f.s. increase in flows during the summer months (although that figure is only a raw estimate and does not consider needs of Pitkin County or changes that may be required in the water court process).

The State of Colorado has a long history of recognizing the importance of instream water uses in addition to more traditional water uses. The placement of an Instream Flow Program in the hands of the CWCB in 1973 was its clearest pronouncement. As of now, Colorado’s Instream Flow Program stewards more than 1,500 defensible water rights protecting nearly 9,000 river miles. But the CWCB has been working to increase the water available to that program. Pitkin County owns various water rights in the Roaring Fork Basin it has acquired through its Open Space and Trails Department and through its Airport Enterprise Fund. Pitkin County, with its location in the Roaring Fork Basin and significant portfolio of water rights, was a natural partner.
The trust agreement, formally approved by the CWCB today, is governed in part by House Bill 08-1280, groundbreaking bill passed by the Colorado legislature in 2008 that provides protections to and removes penalties that might accrue to water users who loan or lease their water to the CWCB for use in the Instream Flow Program.

The project is a groundbreaking project for the state’s instream flow program.  Here’s why:

This project is the first use of House Bill 1280.

The trust agreement provides a model for all other water users in the state that have water rights that are not currently being used, such as municipalities that have developed water supplies beyond their immediate needs.

If this transaction is approved, more than thirty additional water rights will be submitted by Pitkin County for acceptance into the CWCB’s instream flow program.  Furthermore, Pitkin County will add water rights to the trust agreement that it will acquire by using the proceeds from its new Healthy Rivers and Streams Fund.  Thus, the trust agreement will form the foundation for a long-term, perhaps perpetual relationship between Pitkin County and the CWCB to increase the water available to your local streams.

The trust agreement was fought by the Basalt Water Conservancy District, Starwood Metropolitan District, the Willow Creek Ditch and Herrick Ditch Company, and the Roaring Fork Land and Cattle Company. Those parties requested the hearing before the CWCB that, today, settled the matter. After an almost five-hour hearing, the Colorado Water Conservation Board voted unanimously to approve the trust agreement.

“We’re very pleased with the arrangement. Today is the beginning of a long-term relationship with the CWCB to improve streamflows in Pitkin County and everybody benefits, from the local fish to our local businesses dependent upon healthy streams in our County,” says John Ely, Pitkin County’s attorney. Speaking for the CWCB, Linda Bassi, Chief of the CWCB’s Stream and Lake Protection Section adds: “This is a great project for a critical area of the state. We’re looking forward to continuing to work with Pitkin County under this long-term, win-win arrangement.”

Contacts: John Ely, Pitkin County Attorney, at (970) 920-5190; Chief, CWCB Stream and Lake Protection Section, at (303) 917-5916; Amy W. Beatie, Executive Director, Colorado Water Trust, at (303) 525-4736

More HB 08-1280 coverage here.

CWCB: Live Water Supply Briefing — 2009 Water Year Review and 2010 Look Ahead, November 10

From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (Ben Wade):

In lieu of a Water Availability Task Force meeting this month CWCB will be partnering with The Colorado Basin River Forecast Center (CBRFC) for a Live Water Supply Briefing: 2009 Water Year Review and 2010 Look Ahead. Following the basin wide discussion there will be a Colorado specific presentation which will examine the current situation in Western Colorado, soil moisture conditions and a seasonal outlook. The entire webinar will last about two hours.

This first hour will take a basin wide look and will have two foci: (1) a review of the 2009 water year and an evaluation of the 2009 water supply forecasts and (2) a look ahead to 2010 including plans for future webinars and forecast services. The second hour, immediately following, will be led by Colorado Climate Center and the National Integrated Drought Information Service (NIDIS) and will focus on Western Colorado conditions as well as the NIDIS Upper Colorado River pilot project underway.

The briefing is composed of two parts, a telephone conference call and a web-based presentation. The conference call can be accessed by dialing 1-877-929-0660 a few minutes prior to the start of the call and entering the access code of 1706374. To view the web-based presentation, you will need to sign up prior to the briefing by clicking on REGISTER to sign up. A confirmation email will be sent to you and you can follow instructions from there to join the webinar.

For those unable to view the web-based presentation, you can follow the presentation by clicking web links that will be posted on the CBRFC site prior to the call.

Please contact Ben Wade atBen.Wade@state.co.usor 303-866-3441 ext. 3238 with any questions.

Here’s the link to the Interbasin Compact Committee Annual Report (pdf) published October 30. Here’s the link to the Water Supply Reserve Account Annual Report (pdf) also published on October 30.

More CWCB coverage here.

CWCB meeting November 16-18 in Denver

From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (Lisa Barr):

The Colorado Water Conservation Board is meeting on November 16-18, 2009, at the CWCB Offices, 1580 Logan Street, Suite 610, Denver, CO 80203.

The agenda is available on the CWCB website. CWCB staff memos and other materials will be available November 13, 2009, on our website.

The meeting will be “streamed” via the internet through the CWCB’s website. Click on the “Listen to the meeting LIVE!” link, found on our home page.

If you need more information about this Board meeting, please contact Lisa Barr at lisa.barr@state.co.us.

More CWCB coverage here.

Fountain Creek: 25 apply for director of the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District board took its first look at 25 applications for the position Friday, and assurances that $100,000 is now in place to fund administrative expenses of the district next year. The board could decide on an interim director at its Dec. 4 meeting, if the executive committee – made up of the board’s officers – is able to pare the list to a handful of finalists in early November. In any event, finalists will be interviewed. The district also will set its budget at the meeting…

Those who have applied for the interim director’s job are, in alphabetical order:

Steve Anselmo, president of a Pueblo engineering company.
Gary Barber, manager of El Paso County Regional Water Authority and a water rights broker. Barber is chairman of the Arkansas Basin Roundtable and played a key role in drafting legislation that set up the district as a member of the Vision Task Force.
Janna Blanter, a Colorado Springs financial consultant.
Mark Carmel, former Pueblo County administrator.
Heather Gunn, a Fountain media consultant.
Scott Hahn, of Salida, who most recently served as city manager of Cordova, Alaska.
Thomas Karwaki, director of economic development for the Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe near Seattle, Wash.
Ricky Kidd, engineer-administrator of the Pueblo Conservancy District and a private engineer.
Andy Long, owner Roberts Mortgage, Colorado Springs.
Kevin McCarthy, a Pueblo businessman and member of the Pueblo Board of Water Works.
James McGrady, general manager of the Castle Pines North Metro District
Dennis Maroney, Pueblo stormwater director and a key player on the Vision Task Force. Maroney serves on the district’s technical advisory committee.
Jim Munch, former Pueblo city planning director and most recently director of development for Pueblo Springs Ranch, a position he left in April. He now is a private consultant.
Randy Newman, a government contractor at Guantanamo Bay, moving back to Colorado Springs.
Allen Nichols, most recently marketing director for Cleveland Vocational Industries, Shelby, N.C.
John Plutt, a Colorado Springs businessman.
Ingrid Richter, director of development for InCompass Development, Colorado Springs.
Roberta Ringstrom, environmental scientist, Colorado Springs.
Alaina Ruscovick, a file clerk for a Colorado Springs law firm.
Rodney Scott, an Air Force supply specialist and administrative assistant in Colorado Springs.
Steven Shane, most recently a technology director for an electronic manufacturing firm, now living in Colorado Springs.
Bob Simmons, most recently, a lieutenant in the Aurora Fire Department.
Richard Stettler, Colorado Springs, University of the Rockies vice president and chief of staff.
Donald TeStrake, of Centennial, most recently site manager for an electronics consultant.
Eve Triffo, a lawyer and experienced grant writer living in Canon City.

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

The Southern Delivery System pipeline will cross Fountain Creek and discharge into the creek from a new reservoir on Williams Creek, the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District learned Friday. Those two actions are in the direct jurisdiction of the district. The district also will have an advisory role to the El Paso County commissioners in the permit process.

“We would like to make a presentation with a summary of the project, saying ‘here are the impacts, and here are the recommendations for mitigation,’ ” Colorado Springs Utilities Fountain Creek specialist Carol Baker told the district’s board Friday. The board agreed to hear the presentation in January, after its technical advisory committee and citizens advisory group have had a chance to review the project and make recommendations. The district, by state law, has primary land-use authority in the floodplain of Fountain Creek, so will be able to tie its own conditions to the project…

The board also agreed Friday to adopt the March 2009 strategic plan of the Vision Task Force, the January 2009 Army Corps of Engineers management plan and appropriate local zoning and land use regulations in reviewing technical merits of projects.

Meanwhile, Teller County hopes to weigh in on Fountain Creek issues through the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District. Here’s a report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftian. From the article:

The Teller-Park Conservation District has asked the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District to include projects for flood impacts, erosion and water quality on Upper Fountain Creek, which extends about 12 miles into Teller County. “Property owners have incurred property damage and livestock (loss) due to flooding in this area, and several horse properties are located right within the floodplain of (Teller and El Paso) counties,” Vern Vinson, conservation district president, wrote in a letter to the Fountain Creek board. Woodland Park is trying to obtain a floodplain easement through the Natural Resources Conservation Service as well, and Vinson indicated there would be a better chance if the conservation district had a cooperative agreement with the Fountain Creek district…

When it came time to form the district, only Pueblo and El Paso counties were included in the legislation, because they were the primary areas causing an impact or affected by changes on Fountain Creek. The district board indicated it would be able to make a place for Teller County on its technical advisory committee and citizens advisory group, but that the membership of the Fountain Creek board was determined by statute. “We’re pleased to see you folks here,” Pueblo County Commissioner Jeff Chostner, a member of the Fountain Creek board, told representatives of the conservation district. “We do not want to leave the impression that Teller County was left out.”

Finally, the new district is using a $25,000 CWCB loan to evaluate how stormwater relates to land-use policies in the Fountain Creek watershed. Here’s a report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

The Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District board voted unanimously to oversee the grant from the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The grant aims at a process that has been envisioned for several years to develop uniform stormwater policies throughout the region…

“This project will implement many of the recommendations contained in the Fountain Creek Watershed Strategic Plan,” [Rich Muzzy, of the Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments] said. The strategic plan, along with the Corps study, will be used as policy guidelines until the district can develop its own. The district also will use local land-use recommendations as a guide…

The CWCB-funded project would synthesize existing information and develop a policy evaluation regarding how “non-point sources” – basically any discharge that is not covered by a state permit – are treated. The results would be reviewed by the district’s technical advisory committee and citizens advisory group. Then, workshops would held to determine how to implement strategies, and finally regional groups would be formed to put the information to practical use.

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

Colorado Water Trust

Here’s a shout out for Amy Beattie and the Colorado Water Trust, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Since state laws differ, trusts in other states operate under slightly different rules. In Colorado, a 1973 change in water law made the CWCB the only agency that could hold an in-stream water right or a right solely to maintain lake levels. Other water rights must be put to a beneficial use like municipal, industrial or agricultural rights. The state can do that by appropriating water, acquiring existing water rights or adopting policies that protect flows. New rights appropriated by the state are junior to most other rights on a stream. Flow protection usually requires court decrees to prevent injury to other rights.

Acquiring rights would yield the best results, but the problem in the past is that valuable senior water rights had to be donated to the state, without compensation, [Colorado Water Trust Director Amy Beattie] said. The trust acquires some rights, although its revenue sources are limited to grants or donations. It also works with land trusts or other conservation agencies to incorporate water rights into planning, Beattie said. “The Colorado Water Trust acts as a broker. It pays for rights to be donated,” she said Last year, the state Legislature set up two CWCB funds as a way to acquire senior rights. One is a $1 million appropriation for general water rights. Another $500,000 was set aside specially in a species conservation trust fund. “We collaborate with the CWCB,” Beattie said. “We pull from a whole menu of approaches to fix critically water-short stream reaches.”

More conservation easement coverage here.

Arkansas Basin Roundtable recap

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The CWCB plans to complete a feasibility study – actually an outline of new studies Arkansas Valley water users think they need – by the end of next year. Working with the engineering firm of Brown and Caldwell, the CWCB will inventory existing studies and interview various water users to find gaps in the data. The process was explained at Wednesday’s meeting of the Arkansas Basin Roundtable. Decision support systems provide a complete picture of water resources and stresses put on them by projects and activities. Such studies were completed for the Colorado River and Rio Grande basins in the mid-1990s and have played a role in developing fish recovery programs, reservoir level maintenance strategies and groundwater use rules. The Colorado River Basin study is playing a part in current evaluations of how much water remains to be developed in Colorado…

The South Platte River basin study began in 2001, and is about two-thirds complete, Moore said. It has not solved problems of meeting future water demands and could not avert a crisis in farm wells that were shut off last year because of over appropriation. “The purpose is to provide better tools for the state and water users to make better decisions,” Moore said…

The H-I model is an assumption of the consumptive use of water by agriculture on the main stem of the Arkansas River east of Pueblo Dam based on theory rather than actual measurements. It affects groundwater rights administration in the Arkansas Valley and is woven into the new surface rules as well.

While the state is spending millions to refine the model, any changes would have to be negotiated with Kansas and would be subject to a dispute resolution process under the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the case.

More IBCC and basin roundtable coverage here.

CWCB: Lower Blanco restoration update

From the Pagosa Sun (Randi Pierce):

The Lower Blanco Property Owners Association, working with Riverbend Engineering, was awarded $150,000 from the Colorado Water Conservation Board to move forward with the 2010 phase of the restoration…

The current phase, the fifth, according to Chris Pitcher of Riverbend Engineering, is slated to be complete by the end of October. The project focuses on habitat enhancement through the use of habitat rocks and rock structures in a 1.6-mile section of the river. LBPOA President Bob Hemenger said the group hopes to accomplish more in the current phase than originally planned, extending it past the current proposed completion date since the funding is available. Also planned during the current phase is the planting of native woody, riparian vegetation in flood plain areas. “This phase will improve river morphology by creating flood plain benches and adjusting the channel width,” Pitcher said. The rock formations and flood plain area work will also serve to slow down the river through narrowing and deepening of channels to alleviate possible flood issues on adjacent properties, while protecting the integrity of the river’s banks. “The purpose of the project is to restore aquatic life function that was lost,” Pitcher said…

Diminished fish and wildlife habitat, as well as changing overall dynamics of the river, affected portions of the Lower Blanco starting in 1971, when the Chama River diversion was opened, removing about 70 percent of the Blanco’s water to be sent to New Mexico. The restoration project began in 1997 and, after a hiatus, picked up again two years ago with the hiring of Riverbend. It aims to ultimately restore a nine-mile section of the Lower Blanco. The previous four phases combined have completed about five miles.

More restoration coverage here.

CWCB: $180,000 for Upper Ark groundwater study

From the Salida Citizen (Trey Beck):

A grant of $180,000 awarded recently by the Colorado Water Conservation Board will help the Upper Arkansas Water Conservation District to determine the amount of water in the Arkansas Valley. The study will investigate the availability and sustainability of groundwater and calculate the water needed to recharge underground resources. District General Manager Terry Scanga said that this information is a vital part of any discussion about current and future water use. “Determining the amount of water available will give municipal and land use planners a tool by which they can gauge sustainability,” said Scanga. The information will also help the District anticipate the need for new water projects.

More CWCB coverage here.

CWCB: Upper Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District scores $190,000 for water availability study

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The study was one of 14 grants totaling $3.3 million from the Water Supply Reserve Account, which is administered by the CWCB based on recommendations from the Interbasin Compact Committee and nine basin roundtables. The Upper Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District plans to use the $190,000 from the CWCB as part of a three-year, $400,000 study with the U.S. Geological Survey and other partners to determine water availability.

Also approved last week were three grants from the Rio Grande basin: San Luis Valley Resource Conservation & Development, $200,000 toward a restoration project of Willow Creek, a tributary of the Rio Grande near Creede with historic mine contamination. Trinchera Irrigation Co., $200,000 toward restoration of a diversion canal. Colorado Rio Grande Restoration Foundation, $31,500 for planning studies.

More CWCB coverage here.

CWCB: Governor Ritter nominates April Montgomery for board position

Governor Ritter has nominated Southwest Water Conservation District Board member April Montgomery to the Colorado Water Conservation Board. She will take over for Bruce Whitehead who is is exiting to the state senate. Here’s a report from Ben Fornell writing for the Telluride Daily Planet. From the article:

“It’s a very interesting group of representatives from across the state that sit on the board. I think this is the first time they’ve had a representative from the San Miguel Basin,” Montgomery said. “Maybe what I have to give to the process is I think, it sounds so trite to say, but I bring a balanced perspective. I’m very interested in rivers for their importance to the environment and recreation, as well as the fact that I understand that we’re dealing with municipal shortages and the needs of agriculture.”

Montgomery has been working with water issues in southwest Colorado for more than six years. In 2003, she was named to the Southwest Water Conservation District Board, which oversees nine water basins including the San Miguel. She was also appointed by the San Miguel County Commissioners to serve on the Southwest Basin Roundtable.

Montgomery said she sees water conservation as one of the most important issues Colorado faces in upcoming years.

“We have, in the past, been pretty isolated from water shortages,” Montgomery said. Places like Denver and Aurora are facing tremendous challenges, their consumption threatening to outpace their supply as the population there grows.

More CWCB coverage here.

Next Colorado Water Conservation Board meeting in Steamboat September 15-16

From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board:

The Colorado Water Conservation Board is meeting on September 15-16, 2009, at the Steamboat Grand Hotel, 2305 Mt. Werner Circle, Steamboat Springs, CO 80487. The agenda (pdf) is available on the CWCB website

More CWCB coverage here.

Colorado’s water future dependent on new transmountain diversions?

The Colorado Department of Natural Resources is looking at four pipeline concepts and two agricultural fallowing and dry up concepts as possible solutions to watering the unbridled growth along the Front Range. Here’s a report, from Bruce Finley writing for The Denver Post, about the pipeline plans from Flaming Gorge and the Green River proposed by the Colorado-Wyoming Coalition and the Million Resource Group. From the article:

Colorado municipal water suppliers are in discussions with their Wyoming counterparts exploring the feasibility. Separately, a private entrepreneur’s proposal to build a pipeline is under federal review. Colorado government officials — who have met with both contingents and are talking with Wyoming officials — recently included the “Flaming Gorge concept” among four options for diverting Western Slope water to the Front Range…

Huge hurdles remain, including financing and Colorado’s and Wyoming’s obligations to downriver states under an interstate compact. Conservationists object to the potential environmental impact of withdrawing the water…

The pipeline concept originated with entrepreneur Aaron Million and his Million Conservation Resource Group. In 2008, the group applied for a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which regulates construction in waterways and wetlands. An environmental review has begun, and engineers are sifting through a deluge of public comments, said Rena Brand, regulatory specialist for the agency. “The majority of letters are against it” and “push for the idea of conserving more along the Front Range,” Brand said. Federal wildlife officials are among those questioning possible impacts on endangered species and migratory birds…

Million must provide a list of likely customers by January to establish a need for the pipeline, Brand said. Last week, Million said that “ongoing negotiations with 20-plus” potential customers in Wyoming and Colorado “are going well.” He declined to name them. The project could be done in five years, he said. He wasn’t invited to the municipal suppliers’ discussions at a country club, a slight he calls unfortunate. “The lack of collaboration is problematic. It was the private sector that developed the water in the West” before federal agencies got involved, he said. “This is a return to the historical development of water resources, using the efficiency of the private sector to get things accomplished.”

Meanwhile, the municipal suppliers’ group was to continue discussions in Wyoming this week. They are close to formalizing a coalition, Jaeger said. He declined to name participants.

Colorado’s top natural resources officials say they’ve talked with Million and Jaeger. The state’s emerging strategies for meeting projected demand — which include conservation, the re-use of water and rethinking low-density versus high-density growth — assume that importing some water between river basins will be necessary, said Harris Sherman, executive director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources. “Whether it is a public or a private project, it must incorporate public benefits,” Sherman said. “Sometimes it’s easier to incorporate public benefits with a public project, because the sponsoring entity is the public, and it will be focussed on public benefits. But it’s not impossible for a private project to incorporate a wide variety of public benefits. “

More Flaming Gorge pipeline coverage here and here. Colorado-Wyoming Coalition coverage here.

Next water availability task force meeting August 26

From email from the CWCB (Ben Wade):

The next Water Availability Task Force (WATF) meeting is scheduled for August 26, from 9:30-11:30a at the Division of Wildlife Headquarters in the Bighorn Room. The agenda will be posted on the CWCB website.

In the event you are unable to attend the meeting in person, you can attend the meeting via the web using services of See N’ Share and a conference call in. The See N’ Share software allows you to access the desktop of the computer used to run the PowerPoint presentations. An email will be sent to you shortly before the meeting starts with a link to the conference and a conference phone number to call in. Instructions are given in the email to connect to the online conference.

For any other questions or if you will be joining us thru the web, please contact Ben Wade at 303-866-3441 ext. 3238 or at ben.wade@state.co.us by August 25.

More Colorado Water Conservation Board coverage here.

Pitkin County: Water rights for instream flow transfer to CWCB delayed by two valley districts

From the Aspen Daily News (Brent Gardner-Smith):

Pitkin County’s effort to place 4.3 cubic-feet-per-second of water into a trust managed by a state agency, for the benefit of the Roaring Fork River, has been challenged and delayed by the Basalt Water Conservancy District and the Starwood Metropolitan District. The two districts have asked for a formal hearing on the county’s proposal before the Colorado Water Conservation Board. “We just had concerns,” said Art Bowles, a board member of the Basalt Water Conservancy District. “We are not at all opposed to them donating water, but we want to just make sure it doesn’t affect us down river.”[...]

“This is the first time that the board has received a request to hold a hearing on a proposed water acquisition,” Linda Bassi, the head of the CWCB’s Stream and Lake Protection section, wrote in a March 9 memo to the CWCB board of trustees. On the other hand, the county’s innovative proposal to place water into a trust agreement administered by CWCB is also the first one the CWCB has received. The proposal was made possible by legislation passed in 2008 which strengthened the state agency’s ability to hold water rights for environmental purposes…

If the trust agreement is approved by the CWCB board, it would set up an arrangement where Pitkin County would be able to easily put under the trust an additional 34 cfs of water rights it owns — primarily from its open space purchases — to the benefit of the river. However, in February, attorneys for the Basalt Water Conservancy District and the Starwood Metropolitan District, sent a letter requesting a formal hearing to review the potential water acquisition. “The Basalt Water Conservancy District supports the minimum stream flow program and it supports instream flows that have designated historical use and are appropriate for that purpose,” said Christopher Geiger, an attorney Balcomb & Green, P.C. in Glenwood Springs…

But [Christopher Geiger, an attorney Balcomb & Green, P.C. in Glenwood Springs], who also represents the Starwood metro district, was critical of the CWCB process to date. “They haven’t provided anyone with the explanation with how the water right is going to be measured or administered in the river for instream flow purposes,” Geiger said. “They haven’t shown that it is going to have any appreciable benefit to the natural environment. At the same time, based on how the CWCB chooses to operate the water right, it might prevent the district from exercising its water rights.”[...]

One of the results of the Basalt and Starwood request for a hearing is an additional physical analysis of the stretch of the Roaring Fork River that the county’s water right would flow through. The analysis is to provide better information about the actual minimum amount of water needed in late summer to “protect the environment to a reasonable degree.” That analysis is best accomplished by looking at the river in late August. Pitkin County has agreed to an extension of the normal CWCB timelines so the data can be gathered and analyzed…

“Administrative agencies are entitled to a significant amount of deference in their decision making process,” said Amy Beatie, the executive director of the Colorado Water Trust, which has worked in support of Pitkin County’s decision. “They are asking for water court-type preparedness in order for a preliminary decision to be made.” Beatie said many of the concerns raised by Basalt and Starwood are typically covered in water court, which is a required next step after a CWCB review and approval.

More Coyote Gulch instream flow coverage here and here.

CWCB: July 21-22 meeting in Crested Butte

From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board:

The Colorado Water Conservation Board is meeting on July 21-22, 2009, at the Elevation Resort, 500 Gothic Road, Crested Butte, Colorado. The agenda is now available on the CWCB website. CWCB Staff memos and other materials will be available July 17, on our website. The meeting will be “streamed” via the internet through the CWCB’s website. Click on the “Listen to the meeting LIVE!” link, found on our home page…If you need more information about this Board meeting, please contact Lisa Barr at lisa.barr@state.co.us.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

CWCB: Hearing for water rights acquisition for instream flows in Maroon Creek

Here’s the link to the notices page at the Colorado Water Conservation Board. They’re gearing up for an, “acquisition via a long-term loan of certain water rights associated with the Stapleton Brothers Ditch to be used for instream flow purposes on Maroon Creek and the Roaring Fork River,” according email from Rob Viehl.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

CWCB: Water availability task force meeting July 16

From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (Ben Wade):

The next Water Availability Task Force Meeting will be held on July 16 from 9:30-12:00pm at the Division of Wildlife Headquarters in the Bighorn Room. The agenda can be found on the CWCB website.

Since the last WATF meeting in May, conditions have continued to improve statewide. The only region with continued dry conditions is the southern Front Range. Reservoir storage remains strong. June 1 storage data shows the highest positive departure from average volumes since late summer of 1999. For the first time in many years, several basins are at or near their total storage capacity.

If you have any questions, please contact Ben Wade at 303-866-3441 ext 3238 or ben.wade@state.co.us.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

CWCB: How to bridge the water gap

Here’s a recap of the CWCB’s presentation last week to the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District meeting, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Conservation, alternative ag transfers and new supply projects will all fit into the equation, but no single plan would meet all the needs, [Eric Hecox of the Colorado Water Conservation Board] said.

In conservation, the state water board is looking at the impacts of conserving 20 to 40 percent of the water used in cities in 2000. The problem has been in establishing a baseline, since most cities have not filed conservation plans with the state. Many cities restricted water use during the drought of 2002 and have continued to see lower per capita water use in the years since. While conservation is not seen as an effective strategy to meet future supply needs, it does reduce the demand side of the equation, Hecox said. The state is looking at several ways to decrease the pain of water transfers for rural communities. The Arkansas Valley Super Ditch, a water marketing concept that keeps water rights in the hands of farmers by combining the resources on seven ditch systems, is in the forefront of these studies.

The CWCB has two separate studies looking at new supplies. One will evaluate water transfer projects from Flaming Gorge, the Yampa River and the Colorado River, as well as pipeline projects within the South Platte basin and from the Arkansas River basin to the South Platte. Hecox was careful to point out that the state is not endorsing any of the concepts, but is simply evaluating them. The IBCC and roundtables also have asked the CWCB to look at smaller projects. Earlier this month, the Arkansas, South Platte and Metro roundtables voted to ask the CWCB to also consider transfers from the Gunnison River basin. “With the smaller projects, you might have to have 10 to compare against one 250,000-acre foot project,” Hecox noted.

The second study, which will be completed in 2010, is looking at the amount of water in the Colorado River basin that is available for Colorado’s use under 1922 and 1948 interstate compacts. Colorado is entitled to develop between 445,000 and 1.4 million acre-feet, explained Randy Seaholm, who has been the CWCB’s point man on the Colorado River for years. While the state could be subject to a compact call from the downstream states – California, Arizona and Nevada – the known hydrology of the Colorado River supports development of the additional water with little risk.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

CWCB: Potential Division 4 Instream Flow appropriations in 2010

From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (Rob Viehl):

The Stream and Lake Protection Section of the Colorado Water Conservation Board is meeting with interested parties to discuss recommendations received for potential Division 4 Instream Flow appropriations in 2010 on Alpine Gulch, Big Dominguez Creek, Blue Creek (increase), Cebolla Creek, Cochetopa Creek, East Beaver Creek, Little Dominguez Creek, North Tabeguache Creek, Red Canyon Creek, San Miguel River, Spring Creek, Tabeguache Creek, and Willow Creek.

Two separate public meetings are scheduled on May 27th to discuss the proposed recommendations.

9:00 AM to Noon
Montrose County Administration Building
BOCC Board Room
161 S. Townsend Ave
Montrose, CO 81401

5:30 PM to 7:30 PM
Lake City School
614 North Silver St.
Lake City, CO 81235

The Stream and Lake Protection staff will provide a brief presentation on the ISF program as a background for the discussion. For additional information on these segments, please visit the CWCB’s website at: http://cwcb.state.co.us/StreamAndLake/NewAppropriations/ISFAppropriationNotices/2010ProposedAppropriations/2010Appropriations.htm

Questions about new appropriations may be directed to Jeff Baessler at 303-866-3441 ext 3202 or Jeffrey.Baessler@state.co.us

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

CWCB: Wetlands grant at John Martin Reservoir, Neenoshe Reservoir and Fountain Creek

From the Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The $148,975 grant to the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District was approved after the Arkansas Basin Roundtable gave it the nod in March. It is one of the few grants which has been awarded through the Water Supply Reserve Account for a strictly nonconsumptive use…

The grant also includes wetlands on Fountain Creek already being studied by the Lower Ark district through a cooperative project with Colorado Springs. They were included primarily to fulfill a requirement for local cost-share. The grant would include in-kind contributions from the Colorado Division of Wildlife and Audubon Colorado.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Colorado Water Conservation Board: Geoff Blakeslee named as new chairman

From the Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Geoff Blakeslee, a Steamboat Springs ranch operator, was elected chairman, and Eric Wilkinson, executive director of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District was elected vice-chairman.

Gunnison lawyer John McClow was sworn in as a new board member by Colorado Attorney General John Suthers. Blakeslee and Wilkinson both commended outgoing chairman Travis Smith, a Del Norte rancher, for his two years of leadership on the board…

Smith, representing the Rio Grande, is considered to be from the Eastern Slope, although Wilkinson quipped it should be called the “South Slope.” Carl Trick, repre- senting the North Platte watershed, and Wilkinson were reappointed to the board and sworn in Tuesday. Other voting members of the CWCB are Reed Dils, Arkansas River basin; Barbara Biggs, metro area; Bruce Whitehead, Southwestern Colorado; and John Redifer, Colorado River basin. Harris Sherman, executive director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources is an ex-officio voting member.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Colorado Water Conservation Board workshop tackles supply gap

Here’s a recap of Monday’s workshop seeking solutions to Colorado’s supply gap, from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

The state water board is looking at a few big water projects, new ways to share water and conservation as ways to address the impending gap between future municipal water supplies and identified projects to meet the gap. But there are no good numbers on how much water could be conserved, whether lease-fallowing programs will work the way they’re intended or which project to bring Western Slope water to the Front Range could be pursued.

The board has been looking at the gap in the state’s water supply since 2002, and its latest estimates show that water demand will begin to outpace known projects to meet that demand as soon as next year. By 2030, there could be an 18 percent shortfall in water supplies and the number will only get bigger as the state’s population doubles by 2050. The search for an answer brought out a variety of viewpoints from board members, who reflected some of the attitudes about water and growth that were shared at a meeting of Front Range roundtables last week…

The big elephant in the room, however, was the limited reach of the water board. Urban conservation measures saving up to 40 percent of water could be easily obtained without drastically altering how Coloradans take showers, wash clothes and water their lawns, said CWCB drought planning chief Veva Deheza. But she was unable to estimate exactly how much water that would save without full reports from state water users. “We need 100 conservation plans, but we only have a quarter of them,” Deheza said. “Without those plans we can’t run the numbers.”

The board would have little authority for cities to set conservation goals, added Dan McAuliffe, deputy director of the CWCB. “We can’t say you need a conservation plan, much less set a goal,” he said.

The board also is limited in which major project could be used to help fill the gap. Front Range roundtables last week identified three projects last week that would provide 50,000 to 250,000 acre-feet of water each from the Colorado River basin: Green Mountain, Yampa pumpback and Flaming Gorge pipelines. While all would apparently fall within Colorado’s entitlement from the Colorado River Compact, it’s not clear who would provide the impetus to actually build projects. Roundtable members last week accepted those concepts, while rejecting the Big Straw plan to pump back water from Grand Junction. A Blue Mesa pumpback also was discussed by the roundtables, but did not appear to have much traction…

The board also looked at ways to minimize the pain to rural economies if agricultural water sales continue, the default option for Colorado. While CWCB Director Jennifer Gimbel told the roundtables last week there is no silver bullet to avoid the dry-up of ag land, the board and its staff will continue the hunt for proper ammunition. “No strategies rose to the top last week,” said Eric Hecox, who directs in-state water concerns for the CWCB. “A couple fell to the bottom.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.