Sens. Bennet and Udall and Rep. Tipton are on board with Pueblo County’s application for Fountain Creek funds

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Plans for flood risk management on Fountain Creek through Pueblo have gained more federal support. U.S. Sens. Mark Udall and Michael Bennet, both Democrats, and Rep. Scott Tipton, R-Colo., sent a letter to the Army Corps of Engineers last week to support any federal efforts to remediate levee conditions on Fountain Creek through the East Side. The letter supports the Pueblo County commissioners’ request for a $3.5 million Army Corps project that could be applied to the levee for strengthening banks, planting native vegetation, improving wetlands and creating riparian buffer zones.

The project would stretch from Eighth Street to the confluence of Fountain Creek.

“Ironically, where we had a fire a few days ago could be turned into a beautiful riverside community park,” said Commissioner Sal Pace. “It’s about time Pueblo got its fair share.”

Vegetation on Fountain Creek near the East Fourth Street bridge caught fire Tuesday. The lower section of Fountain Creek is occasionally subject to flooding as well when rainfall upstream in the watershed is heavy.

The project was given high priority in a Corps study of Fountain Creek needs in 2009.

In January, commissioners requested congressional support for the project, also mentioning projects in El Paso County that could benefit Pueblo County as well. The letter highlighted cooperative efforts of the two counties through the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District.

A local match of 35 percent would be required for the project. Local money for the project is $1.225 million, which would come out of the remaining $1.9 million Colorado Springs Utilities paid to Pueblo County for dredging Fountain Creek under the 1041 permit for Southern Delivery System. Another $300,000 of those funds was spent earlier on a Fountain Creek demonstration project for side detention ponds and in-stream dredging.

More Fountain Creek coverage here.

Reclamation Seeks Public Input on Ruedi Contracts Draft EA

Here’s the release from the Bureau of Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

The Bureau of Reclamation is accepting public comment on a draft Environmental Assessment that analyzes site specific effects of proposed contracts for water out of Ruedi Reservoir as well as an administrative amendment of existing contracts.

Written comments will be accepted until close of business, Mon., July 1. To obtain a copy of the Draft EA, please visit: http://www.usbr.gov/gp/nepa/sopa.html#ecao.

Ruedi Reservoir is part of the federal Fryingpan-Arkansas Project. The reservoir helps compensate Colorado’s West Slope for project diversions made further upstream in the Fryingpan River Basin and also provides storage for West Slope use. Reclamation began marketing Ruedi water to the West Slope in 1982. In 2012, Reclamation received requests from 17 West Slope entities for the remaining 19,585.5 acre-feet of available contract water in the marketable pool.

Reclamation is preparing an Environmental Assessment in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act on site specific effects of the proposed 17 West Slope contracts along with the administrative action of amending 31 existing Ruedi Round I and II contracts to remove the expiration date and confirm their status as perpetual repayment contracts. Comments received will help Reclamation identify issues relevant to the proposed contracts and elements of the environment that could be affected.

Please send written comments via regular mail, fax or e-mail to:

Bureau of Reclamation
Attn: Lucy Maldonado
11056 W. County Rd 18E
Loveland, CO 80537
Fax: 970-663-3212
lmaldonado@usbr.gov

More Fryingpan-Arkansas Project coverage here.

Aspen: The city and the Colorado Water Trust work out a non-diversion agreement that will leave water in the Roaring Fork River

From the Colorado Water Trust via the Aspen Business Journal:

For decades, large water diversions have reduced the amount of water flowing in the upper Roaring Fork River; only a fraction of the native flow reaches the City of Aspen. At times, more than ninety percent of the native flow of the Roaring Fork is diverted from the river for transmountain delivery to the Front Range and many local water diversions serving various beneficial uses. To begin exploring long-term streamflow solutions for the Roaring Fork, the City of Aspen is leading local efforts this year by using one of its senior water rights to benefit flows through a critical reach of the Roaring Fork River. On Monday, the Aspen City Council authorized a nondiversion agreement with the Colorado Water Trust to bypass some water that Aspen would otherwise divert from this reach of the Roaring Fork.

The agreement was the result of an effort last March when Aspen water officials analyzed the City’s water rights with the help of the Colorado Water Trust, a nonprofit organization with expertise in restoring and protecting streamflows. Aspen saw that it could increase flows through the City by adjusting the amount of water it takes from the Roaring Fork River at the Wheeler Ditch, one the three most senior water rights in a critical 2.5 mile reach of the Roaring Fork from just above Aspen to Castle Creek. Aspen determined that it can reduce its Wheeler Ditch diversions when the river falls below the 32 cfs instream flow. This could add as much as 8 cfs to the river. This water will help maintain parts of the Colorado Water Conservation Board’s six mile long instream flow water right which extends from Difficult Creek to Maroon Creek.

Aspen has a longstanding commitment to streamflow protection, as well as to providing both treated and untreated water for a wide range of municipal uses. In the summer, amenities such as Aspen’s parks, mall fountain, and ditch system contribute greatly to the beauty and tranquility of Aspen’s mountain community. To accommodate this project, Aspen will lease less water to third parties than it has in the past, reduce outdoor water use, and redirect other water supplies to meet the City’s critical needs. City Council agreed to pursue these actions and enter into a nondiversion agreement with the Colorado Water Trust, who will help monitor flows in the reach and help oversee the project. The nondiversion agreement specifies how Aspen will adjust the amount of water it takes from the Roaring Fork at the Wheeler Ditch.

“The City has long considered ways to add flow to the river, but was not finding a way to make an appreciable difference. Our [Roaring Fork] water rights are small in comparison to the amount of water that would flow through the stream under natural conditions,” said Dave Hornbacher, Aspen’s Director of Utilities and Environmental Initiatives. “After seeing the river suffer a hard year in 2012, a brainstorming group was formed in March to review the City’s water rights and to explore options for using those rights to benefit the Roaring Fork.”

“Leaving some of the City’s water in the Roaring Fork through this short-term nondiversion agreement will allow us to understand the benefits additional water can provide to the natural habitat,” added Hornbacher. “We see this project as a first step in crafting a broader, long-term solution for rewatering the Roaring Fork, an effort that will require the help of our entire community. This agreement allows Aspen to meet its water needs while providing as much water as possible to our river this year.”

Last year, during severe drought conditions, reaches of the Roaring Fork were nearly dry in parts of June, July, August, and October. While the outlook for this year is not as dire, Aspen is interested in temporarily changing its operations to improve flows through town and benefit the environment in the short-term as Aspen continues to look for long-term strategies to bolster the Roaring Fork River. Because of Aspen’s innovative thinking, commitment to the community, and leadership in improving streamflows, the river will be better off in 2013.

“Aspen was enthusiastic about weighing the options and pursuing the best strategy for putting its water rights in the Roaring Fork to benefit the river this year,” says Amy Beatie, executive director of the Colorado Water Trust. “Thanks to its pioneering attitude and incredible leadership, this agreement gives Aspen a mechanism for adding water to their river with both flexibility and accountability. It is inspiring to see a decade of discussions put into action, and we’re eager to see how this agreement benefits flows in the stream.”

By entering into a nondiversion agreement with the Colorado Water Trust, Aspen will be partnering with an organization that has a proven track record conducting water transactions for environmental and streamflow benefits in voluntary partnerships. Aspen hopes the anticipated benefit to the Roaring Fork from its nondiversion agreement with the Colorado Water Trust will help the City further its stream protection goals while still maintaining the summertime ambiance that makes Aspen such a great place to be.

More Roaring Fork Watershed coverage here and here.

The Colorado Water Trust’s ‘RiverBank 2013′ event is just 5 days away

From the Colorado Water Trust website:

Join us for both live and silent auctions, appetizers, an open (beer & wine) bar, good company, and the presentation of the David Getches Flowing Waters Award. Come help us celebrate our successes over the past year and help us raise funds for our future efforts. We hope you’ll join us for a fabulous, fun evening!

Tuesday, June 18, 2013
5:30 – 8:30pm
McNichols Civic Center Building
Civic Center Park
144 West Colfax, Denver, Colorado

- See more at: http://www.coloradowatertrust.org/campaigns/riverbank-2013#sthash.IroBtGnn.dpuf

Denver Water: The June 2013 issue of WaterNews is hot off the press #COdrought #ColoradoRiver

Click here to read the current issue. Here’s an excerpt:

Spring snowstorms along the Front Range and in our mountain watersheds helped a lot with our dire water supply situation. But this is the second year in a row of below-average snowpack and drier- than-normal conditions in our watersheds. Denver Water’s reservoirs haven’t been full since July 2011, and our current projections show that reservoirs will still be below normal.

We never know what future weather is going to be like, so it’s always important to manage water supplies carefully. The snowpack in Denver Water’s watersheds ended up below the average peak. At this time, Denver Water and several other local water providers still expect to have the Stage 2 mandatory drought restrictions in place to save as much water as possible this summer. Area water utilities will know more about their water supply situations in July after the runoff.

More Denver Water coverage here.

San Miguel River watershed: Instream flow right granted in May should keep the river whole from stem to stern

From The Colorado Springs Gazette (Ryan Handy):

One of the last free-flowing rivers in Colorado, the San Miguel will continue to course through the western slope unchecked by mankind, thanks to a May 20 Colorado Water Court ruling granting it protected status. Granted “in-stream flow protection,” the San Miguel will continue to be a natural habitat for three fish species, as well as fuel the down-stream rafting economy, said John Fielder, a landscape photographer and champion of natural resources preservation. “Like the Yampa (River), the San Miguel is one of the last undammed major rivers in the state,” Fielder said.

The in-stream water rights guarantee that no one can take water out of the river, said Rob Harris, a lawyer for Western Resources Advocates, a resources conservation non-profit. Instead, the San Miguel’s water will be preserved for three native fish: the Roundtail Chub, the Flannel Mouth Sucker, and the Bluehead Sucker, Harris said…

To preserve the fish natural habitat, the Colorado Water Conservation Board applied for in-stream flow protection for the San Miguel in 2011, at the urging of Colorado Parks and Wildlife and the Bureau of Land Management. The in-stream protection protects a 17-mile segment of the river, which runs west of Montrose near Naturita.

More San Miguel River watershed coverage here and here.

Colorado-Big Thompson Project update: 250 cfs in the river below Olympus Dam

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

Earlier this morning, we saw run-of inflows to Lake Estes jump up. As a result, the water level elevation at Lake Estes has come up a few feet and we are increasing releases from Olympus Dam to the Big Thompson Canyon. Flows in the Big T canyon are increasing from around 125 cubic feet per second to about 225 cfs. We might only need to keep the 225 cfs release for a few hours. It is possible we could cut the release back slightly before noon.

More Colorado-Big Thompson coverage here.

Move water from west to east or dry up agriculture?

Hannah Holm recaps the Gunnison Roundtable discussion of the proposed Flaming Gorge Pipeline in this column running in the Glenwood Springs Post Independent. Here’s an excerpt:

One reliable way to rile up a room full of western Coloradans is to start talking about moving water from the Colorado River basin (“our water”) east across the Continental Divide for use by Front Range cities. You’ll hear lots of muttering, and someone will probably say something to the effect that not one more drop should go over while a blade of bluegrass remains in the Denver metro area.

It doesn’t even have to be water that resides in Colorado to get people’s backs up, as was demonstrated by the reaction to a proposal floated by entrepreneur Aaron Million to pump water from the Flaming Gorge reservoir in southwestern Wyoming east along the I-80 corridor and then south to a reservoir near Pueblo. In September 2011, billboards sprouted up along I-70 protesting providing funding to even study the idea. The billboards were funded by environmental organizations, but a host of resolutions approved by the City of Grand Junction, Mesa County and others roundly condemned the proposed project as well.

However, if Front Range cities can’t take water from our side of the hill, they have to look elsewhere — and that usually means “buying and drying” agricultural land. Since western Coloradans tend to like farms, even if they are east of the Divide, this creates a bit of a quandary. While some claim that ramped up conservation could preclude the need for more water transfers, it’s not easy to see how to push conservation far enough to close the 500,000-acre-foot gap between supply and demand that is forecast to afflict the state by 2050 if measures aren’t taken. Besides, if the Front Range has to dry up lawns, we might have to do the same — and that becomes a more complicated conversation.

Despite the billboards and resolutions, the state did fund a committee to study the potential benefits and impacts of the Flaming Gorge proposal. It included representatives from each of Colorado’s major river basins, including many highly skeptical of the proposal as well as potential beneficiaries, and it met once a month for a year. In short order, the committee broadened its mission and ended up developing a series of questions to be addressed for any proposed major movement of water across the Divide, as well as criteria for what would be a “good” project. This report was presented to the Gunnison Basin Roundtable and Gunnison “State of the River” meeting in Montrose June 3.

More Flaming Gorge Pipeline coverage here and here.

Stormwater: It turns out that Colorado Springs did need a stormwater enterprise after all

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Colorado Springs has spent about $24 million toward $88 million in critical stormwater projects that would reduce the impact of Fountain Creek floods — those that were identified in 2005. Had its City Council not eliminated the stormwater enterprise in 2009, the full amount would have been nearly covered by now, Pueblo County Commissioner Sal Pace said. Although the city’s priorities have shifted toward new projects, it will continue working on the stormwater needs previously identified, Mayor Steve Bach and City Council President Keith King told Pace in a letter this week.

“Colorado Springs and its enterprises will continue to make substantial progress in high priority stormwater projects in the coming years, and (are) working diligently to design and implement a sustainable funding source and stormwater management structure to complete all the appropriate work,” they wrote. The city is concerned because the sufficiency of stormwater efforts required under Pueblo County’s 1041 permit for Southern Delivery System that have been raised by Pace, along with Commissioners Terry Hart and Liane “Buffie” McFadyen.

Colorado Springs plans to spend $46 million on stormwater projects this year, but much of that is for mitigation of damage caused by the 2012 Waldo Canyon Fire, airport drainage and Pikes Peak Highway projects that were not anticipated in 2005. The stormwater enterprise would have spent $17.6 million annually over five years to address the $88 million in critical projects that would reduce the impacts of flooding on Fountain Creek. Two of the projects were completed and $24 million was spent before the stormwater enterprise was dismantled by Council in 2009. Colorado Springs is reviewing its critical needs, and plans to address them, Bach and King said.

Pace plans to meet Monday with Colorado Springs City Council, with eight of the nine members newly elected since council’s decision to discontinue the stormwater enterprise. “They have spent about half of what was intended. Had they not eliminated the stormwater enterprise, they would have spent more,” Pace said. “The letter is positive, because it shows they recognize their obligation.”

From The Colorado Springs Gazette (Monica Mendoza):

The Pikes Peak Regional Stormwater Task Force set out this year to find a way to pay for the $900 million in regional drainage projects detailed in a report released in December. The group of business leaders, city councilors, county commissioners, water district representatives and Colorado Springs Utilities representatives has shortened its list to two funding options: a voter-approved tax or property fees. The task force expects to bring a final recommendation to the Colorado Springs City Council and El Paso County Commissioners in July.

[John Cassiani], who headed up a committee that examined several funding models, is pushing an option modeled after a stormwater authority in Arapahoe County that was formed in 2006 and includes the city, county and area water districts. The group, Southeast Metro Stormwater Authority, sets and collects stormwater fees to pay for construction, operation and maintenance of drainage projects. “The authority is a one-stop shop and responsible for taking care of all the issues,” said Cassiani, owner of RealTech Development. “It manages the programs and hires and contracts.”

In El Paso County, any mention of fees or taxes is risky business. The task force members know the political climate and voters’ reluctance to approve new taxes. In 2009, the Colorado Springs City Council ended a stormwater enterprise fund after voters approved Issue 300, which required the city to phase out payments from city-owned enterprises. But Cassiani thinks it’s time to try again. “We can’t be afraid of certain people in this community,” Cassiani said.[...]

The other model is the Southeast Metro Stormwater Authority, which includes Centennial, Arapahoe County and three water districts. The authority sets and collects fees, has a staff and oversees the projects for the region. Under that model, El Paso County voters would be asked to approve the creation a stormwater authority that has permission to set and collect fees. It’s a model that has more liabilities than the PPRTA model, said County Commissioner Amy Lathen. It would put a great deal of power in the hands of the authority, which would issue permits and be responsible for water quality, development and program management. Attorneys still are reviewing the legal issues of such an organization, she said.

More stormwater coverage here and here.

Aspinall Unit operations update: The Black Canyon Water Right one day peak flow target is 685 cfs #COdrought

From email from Reclamation (Dan Crabtree)

Based on the May 1st April-through-July runoff forecast of 335,000 ac-ft for Blue Mesa Reservoir, the Black Canyon Water Right one day peak flow target is 685 cfs. Today’s flow through the Black Canyon is 300 cfs.

Due to the dry conditions and low Blue Mesa Reservoir content, the Whitewater baseflow target for June and July is 900 cfs. Current flows at Whitewater are around 1600 cfs. As tributary flows to the Gunnison diminish, and Whitewater flows approach 900 cfs, Reclamation will increase releases to attempt to maintain the target at Whitewater. We will provide as much advanced notice as possible regarding these release changes. We anticipate this operation will allow the Black Canyon one day peak target to be met sometime in the latter part of June, however, if insufficient, we intend to supplement releases with additional power releases as necessary to meet the target. We will keep you updated as things progress.

More Aspinall Unit coverage here and here.

Western Resource Advocates: Historic Protection Approved for San Miguel River

Here’s the release from Western Resource Advocates (Jason Bane):

A major portion of the San Miguel River will be permanently protected under a precedent-setting water right after a Colorado Water Court ruling this week. In a ruling signed on May 20, the Water Court for Division 4 ruled in favor of an application for “in-stream flow” (ISF) protection that permanently safeguards a large section of the San Miguel River west of Montrose, Colo. The protection was sought by the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB), and Western Resource Advocates and The Wilderness Society intervened in support of the Board’s application.

“The San Miguel River is one of the last relatively free-flowing rivers in Colorado, and this water right will help ensure that it stays that way for generations to come,” said Rob Harris, Senior Water Attorney with Western Resource Advocates (WRA) and the lead counsel representing WRA and The Wilderness Society. “The Colorado Water Conservation Board recognized early on that this is an incredibly significant protection, and the Board did a great job of working with a diverse community to negotiate an outcome that is truly in the best interests of both the surrounding area and the entire state.”

The Water Court for Division 4 approved the dedication of an in-stream flow protection of up to 325 cfs (cubic feet per second), which amounts to one of the largest river protections in the history of the state—exceeded only by similar protections afforded the much-larger Colorado River (A typical ISF protection accounts for less than 10 cfs). The San Miguel ISF recognizes the importance of keeping water ‘in the stream’ to benefit the natural environment. Healthy rivers also benefit recreation, local communities, and the economy.

“We’re pleased to secure permanent protection for this scenic river in Colorado’s Red Rock Canyon country,” said Harris. “This really is a tremendous accomplishment, and we are incredibly proud to have played a part in the process.”

The CWCB and the Colorado Attorney General’s office amicably concluded negotiations that satisfied nearly every interested party to the case, including the Board of County Commissioners of Montrose County and Tri- State Generation and Transmission Association. Barring an appeal of the Water Court ruling to the Colorado Supreme Court, the May 20th decision concludes a process that began with an ISF application on Oct. 31, 2011.

The location of the San Miguel River protection is west of Montrose, near the town of Nucla.

More San Miguel Watershed coverage here and here.

Colorado-Big Thompson Project update: Granby Reservoir is 50 feet from full #ColoradoRiver

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

It’s Memorial Day weekend and time to kick off my annual communications about run-off.

Some of you might have noticed that we saw some peaking run-off at Willow Creek last week. Inflows to the reservoir were over 900 cfs. As a result, releases from the dam were bumped up to about 450 cfs on May 16th. They did not stay at that level for long.

Going into Memorial Day weekend, inflows from snow melt are anticipated to peak at about 700 cfs. Releases have been adjusted to around 100 cfs as we continue to store behind the dam. We do not plan to increase releases until the reservoir fills or we see much larger peak inflows.

Meanwhile at Granby Reservoir, we continue to release around 70 cfs. The reservoir is at a water level elevation of 8230.5–about 50 vertical feet down from full and the storage content is a little less than half full. The reservoir has started filling with some run-off flows already, bumping up ten feet in elevation over the past couple of weeks. We are anticipating seeing the reservoir water level rise another 20 feet as run-off continues.

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

It’s Memorial Day weekend! That means it’s time for my annual kick-off e-mail for the run-off and recreation season across the Colorado-Big Thompson Project.

We’re starting to see some run-off come from melting snow right on time for Memorial Day weekend. On the east slope of the C-BT that means we’re seeing snow that melts up in Rocky Mt. Natl. Park during the day run down the rivers, making it to Lake Estes late at night.

To manage the inflows to Estes at night, tonight, May 24 around midnight, we’ll bump up our releases from Olympus Dam to the Big Thompson River to about 250 cfs. The 250 cfs will likely remain in place throughout the holiday weekend.

Lake Estes is at typical water elevation levels for this time of year, fluctuating daily with power generation.

Project water being brought through the Adams Tunnel to Estes moves on to the C-BT’s southern power arm where it is used to generate hydro-electric power at three power plants. Pinewood Reservoir, which sits between two of those plants, is also at typical water elevation levels for this time of year, fluctuating daily with power generation. Likewise, Flatiron Reservoir is also fluctuating daily, as is normal. Those visiting Pinewood and Flatiron for the holiday weekend should be mindful of the daily fluctuations in water levels and please remember that there is NO swimming or boating of any kind in Flatiron.

The pump to Carter Lake has been turned off. Carter is ready for the weekend, sitting about 90% full with a water level elevation of 5748 feet.

Because we are generating hydro-power, the Big Thompson power plant at the mouth of the Big Thompson Canyon by the Dam Store will be running this weekend. Visitors to the area and downstream will notice about 400 cfs being discharged from the plant to the Big Thompson River. To learn more about Reclamation’s hydro-power program, visit here or here.

When the Big T plant goes on, flows to Horsetooth Reservoir will be cut back by about half. Beginning this weekend, around 175 cfs will continue to flow into Horsetooth. Currently, the reservoir is at an elevation of 5414, which is its average starting water level elevation for the recreation season and about 16 feet down from full. The water elevation is still rising.

More Colorado-Big Thompson Project coverage here and here.

Fryingpan-Arkansas Project operations update: There will be some water for the Voluntary Flow Program

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

Just a quick Memorial Day weekend update on Ruedi Reservoir.

Those of you who joined us for the State of the River meeting last night heard our projection that while we might get close, we do not anticipate filling Ruedi all the way to the top this year. However, we did catch up in portions of our snow pack in the upper reaches of the Fryingpan Basin with the late season snows.

Currently, Ruedi is at a water level elevation of about 7729 feet and rising. We are releasing about 110 cfs from the reservoir to the lower Fryingpan River. The Rocky Fork creek is starting to see some run-off, also, and is contributing an additional 10 or so cfs to the ‘Pan.

The Upper Colorado River Recovery Program and its reservoir operating partners announced today that they will not be employing the Coordinated Reservoirs Operations plan. That means, this run-off season we will not see by-passed inflows from Ruedi Reservoir for the endangered fish program.

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

Just a quick update about the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project reservoirs as we move into the Memorial Day weekend.

We are starting to see some run-off come into the West Slope Collection System, up above Ruedi Reservoir and Basalt, Colo. As a result, we are diverting and sending water through the Boustead Tunnel to Turquoise Reservoir. The reservoir is currently only about 30% full, but it has started to rise. Today alone it has gained just over a foot in water level elevation. At this time, we are not running water from Turquoise down to the Mt. Elbert Power Plant.

We have been generating power at the Mt. Elbert Power Plant and seeing some water come into Twin Lakes Reservoir. As a result, Twin is just over 60% full. Like Turquoise, we expect to see its water level rise with snow melt run-off.

Further downstream on the Arkansas, Pueblo Reservoir is currently about half full. That is slightly below average for this time of year, but still plenty of water for weekend recreation.

And, as most of you have probably already heard, there will be some water available for the Voluntary Flow Program this summer, thanks to the late season snows.

Granby: State of the Colorado River meeting recap #ColoradoRiver #COdrought

From the Sky-Hi Daily News (Leia Larsen):

A panel of water experts spoke at the public State of the River Meeting on Wednesday at the SilverCreek Convention Center to discuss the quality and quantity of the Colorado River Basin and its relationship to Grand County. Among the discussion topics were Wolford Mountain Reservoir, background on the Windy Gap Firming Project and wildfire planning. But benefits to Colorado’s water supply following April’s precipitation events dominated much of the discussion…

Current data from the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s SNOTEL sites places the Upper Colorado River Headwater Basin’s snow water equivalent at 106 percent of its median levels. Total precipitation is at 93 percent of average for the area. The recent influx of precipitation comes as a relief, especially after shortages in the 2012 season. According to [Don Meyer], last year’s water demands on Wolford Mountain Reservoir, located north of Kremmling, dropped its levels by 38 feet. But Meyer now feels optimistic. “We hope to fill the reservoir this year,” he said. “We had a ton of demands because of the drought, but this year is looking a lot better.”[...]

Granby Reservoir is projected to be at 90 percent of average, according to Andrew Gilmore of the Bureau of Reclamation…

Releases from Granby Reservoir to the Front Range will be at normal levels, Gilmore said. The water is transported via the Colorado-Big Thompson project…

The Windy Gap Firming Project continues to move forward. The Bureau of Reclamation is deliberating modifications to the current Windy Gap carriage contract. The carriage contract specifies the procedures and fees for water moving through the Colorado Big Thompson Project. The Bureau of Reclamation’s next step will be to issue a Record of Decision, then Northern Water and its participants will begin hashing out design plans for the project. According to Northern Water’s Eric Wilkinson, the design process will take at least two years. Actual construction will take around three years. “So the earliest we would see the Windy Gap Firming Project placed into operation is 2018 or 2019,” Wilkinson said…

While the recent influx of precipitation will provide relief to Grand County and the Front Range, especially after snowfall shortages last year, areas downstream remain in drought. SNOTEL data for the entire Colorado River Basin above Utah’s Lake Powell indicates that the year’s precipitation remains low, at 81 percent of average. Lower Colorado users below Lake Mead project mandatory shortages as early as 2015, said Eric Kuhn, general manager for the Colorado River District.

More Colorado River Basin coverage here and here.

An explanation of Colorado’s administration of the Rio Grande River Compact from Steve Vandiver

Here’s a guest column running in the Taos News written by Steve Vandiver, the general manager of the Río Grande Water Conservation District, that is in response to this letter published on May 6. Vandiver explains the origins and administration of the compact. Click through and read both letters. Here’s an excerpt from Vandiver’s letter:

The Río Grande Compact is a document that was approved by the states of Colorado, New Mexico and Texas in 1938 and then ratified by the Congress of the United States. Among other things, the compact sought to recognize and protect the then-existing uses of the waters of the Río Grande in each of the three states and to divide the waters of the Río Grande among the three states according to that use.

Colorado’s apportionment or right to those waters, is set forth in Article III of the compact, which protects the water uses which were occurring in Colorado at that time, but also significantly limited any future development. The apportionment in the compact is to the state of Colorado for the benefit its citizens, just as the compact apportionment of the Río Grande is to the state of New Mexico for the benefit of New Mexico’s citizens.

As a matter of comity, in the 1938 compact, the state of Colorado recognized existing plans of the United States government and the state of New Mexico to construct diversion works and tunnels to deliver water from the San Juan River into the Río Grande drainage for the sole benefit of citizens of New Mexico downstream from Española.

Colorado’s acknowledgment of New Mexico’s plans for those diversion works on tributaries of the Colorado River was included in the Río Grande Compact in order to allow New Mexico to fully realize its benefits from the Colorado River Compact that had been signed in 1922. It had nothing to do with existing uses that were occurring within Colorado’s San Luis Valley.

The Río Grande Compact, far from permitting the “dewatering of the mainstem of the Río Grande through Taos County” actually requires the State of Colorado to deliver water through that very reach of the river and limits the ability of Colorado’s water users, including farmers in the San Luis Valley, from consuming more water from the Río Grande than was used during the period prior to 1938.

The economy that serves the writer’s interest, based upon river rafting, did not exist at the time of the compact and only came into being 100 years after Coloradans were making use of the Río Grande for the purposes to which it is put to this day.
Colorado’s right to the waters of the Río Grande is no different than the rights claimed by irrigationists in New Mexico taking water through acequias which also reduce the flows in the river. Both states have historic uses that are entitled to respect and protection.

Each state is entitled to the beneficial use of its share of the Río Grande in the manner that it may so choose. Taos County and its rafting industry has no right to suggest that uses within the state of Colorado are less valuable, nor less entitled to protection, than uses within Taos County. New Mexicans are fully entitled to make whatever economic decisions they wish about the water to which they are legally entitled under the Río Grande Compact but they are not entitled to make decisions about the water to which Colorado is entitled.

Finally, the writer does not acknowledge the severe drought that the San Luis Valley and Northern New Mexico are currently experiencing. The May 1 NRCS forecast for 2013 for the Upper Río Grande in Colorado is only 44 percent of normal. That equates to flows that are the fourth lowest since the period of record started in 1890.

More Rio Grande River Basin coverage here and here.

Arkansas River: ‘We’ll supply 10,000 acre-feet for rafting and the fishery’ — Roy Vaughan

From The Mountain Mail (Casey Kelly):

Arkansas River boaters can expect to see flows bolstered this summer by 10,000 acre-feet of water from the Voluntary Flow Management Program. Roy Vaughan, facility manager for the Bureau of Reclamation’s Pueblo Field Office, confirmed Monday that water will be available for the Voluntary Flow Management Program. “We’ll supply 10,000 acre-feet for rafting and the fishery,” Vaughan said.

The program will supply enough water to keep flows at the Wellsville station at 700 cubic feet per second from July 1 through Aug. 15 this year, according to Vaughan.

He said the bureau’s April 1 forecast called for bringing more than 24,700 acre-feet of water over from the Western Slope. Its May 1 forecast called for 47,230 acre-feet. “That’s almost double what we were forecasting,” Vaughan said. He said recent moisture “changed the outlook for us.”

Rob White, Arkansas Headwaters Recreation Area park manager, told a May 7 Salida City Council work session that outfitters were worried about another low water season and had been told a few months ago that water may not be available this summer for the Voluntary Flow Management Program. “Luckily we were saved by the late-season storms in both March and April,” White said. “As a matter of fact, I got a call from the Bureau of Reclamation (May 6), and they believe they’ll be able to deliver the full 10,000 acre-feet of water for us for the summer flow program.”

Rafting outfitter Mark Hammer, owner of The Adventure Company in Johnson Village, said he does about 75 percent of his summer business during the 6 weeks that augmentation flows will be available. “(The Voluntary Flow Management Program) is extremely helpful,” Hammer said. “The bell curve of river flows doesn’t necessarily coincide with our peak tourism, so this ensures we have enough water in the Arkansas during the later period of our season.”

He said a more average water flow season this year will help outfitters predict when river flows will peak, how high they will be and how long they will last. “We certainly appreciate the collaborative effort of the flow program,” Hammer said. “It’s a benefit to the public, outfitting companies and the whole area’s economy which relies on the river.”

Greg Felt, co-owner of ArkAnglers, said this year is shaping up to be a good year for the fishery. “We’ve been able to see some good hatches and good aquatic insect activity,” Felt said. “Looking ahead, it’s great to see snowpack improve as it has.”

Kara Lamb, Bureau of Reclamation spokeswoman, said, “What makes this program possible is the cooperation, understanding and willingness of those involved to work together. Their cooperation helps the diverse groups reach the mutual goals of the water owners, operators and users, municipalities and government agencies. The Flow Program has created a model for all rivers in the West, and one Coloradans can be proud of.”

More Fryingpan-Arkansas Project coverage here.

El Paso County Commissioners approve a regional stormwater approach for mitigation and management

From the Colorado Springs Independent (J. Adrian Stanley):

On Tuesday, the soon-to-be-overhauled City Council approved a resolution to support a regional approach to stormwater management on a 6-2 vote. In the past, such a move may have been considered little more than ceremonial — most experts have long agreed that stormwater is best approached regionally. But Mayor Steve Bach has lately turned the issue into a political football…

Many believe the mayor is afraid that a regional approach will suggest a new tax to solve the area’s dangerous backlog of needed infrastructure projects, estimated to exceed $900 million. The mayor signed a pledge saying he would oppose any new tax, no matter how vital. But Bach’s long reach may not be able to control this process. With assistance from El Paso County, a Regional Stormwater Steering Committee, made up of dozens of citizen volunteers, is already studying how best to approach the problem.

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

Fountain Creek: ‘What things are they doing to rein in the floodwaters that arrive in Pueblo County’ — Terry Hart

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Less than $2 million of the $46 million in stormwater projects on Colorado Springs’ list meet the criteria set out by Pueblo County commissioners for a 1041 permit for the Southern Delivery System.

The commissioners instructed water attorney Ray Petros to review the list submitted this week to commissioners and Pueblo City Council and he determined that most projects related to either the Waldo Canyon Fire or internal Colorado Springs issues.

“As a starting point, what we’re looking for is a list of major projects that have a significant impact for Pueblo County,” said Commission Chairman Terry Hart. “What things are they doing to rein in the floodwaters that arrive in Pueblo County and to assure water quality?”

The county still wants an accounting of the scope of stormwater control that was envisioned prior to 2009. While Waldo Canyon creates a new set of problems, Colorado Springs had agreed to address past problems on Fountain Creek through the stormwater enterprise, Hart said. Commissioner Sal Pace shared those concerns, adding that Colorado Springs needs to provide evidence of long-term funding, rather than shortterm emergency funds.

“That’s one-time money. What they need to do is show how there will be a continuous supply,” Pace said.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

In response to criticism of his city’s stormwater efforts, Colorado Springs Mayor Steve Bach visited with several Pueblo community leaders Friday to make the case that the city is working on a stormwater solution. Bach was accompanied by Colorado Springs Council President Keith King, Councilman Merv Bennett and City Attorney Chris Melcher. “What we’re working on are steps to develop a full and definite plan that we can take to voters,” Bach said. “We want to make sure that we’re taking the best approach.”

Bach stressed that the Waldo Canyon Fire, which destroyed 347 homes in Colorado Springs last summer, is the top priority. But the city also realizes its commitment to protect downstream users from disastrous floods. Bach has initiated an independent study after a regional study found nearly $700 million in stormwater needs for Colorado Springs and $900 million for El Paso County. He wants Colorado Springs, not a new regional authority, to confront the problem.

Bach acknowledged the fact that development in Colorado Springs, coupled with the burn scar from the Waldo Canyon Fire, has increased the risk of more dangerous floods on Fountain Creek.

Colorado Springs has to come up with a way to continue annual funding to address stormwater needs that had been identified before 2009, when Pueblo County issued a 1041 permit for the Southern Delivery System predicated on the idea that a stormwater enterprise was in place.

Melcher said the Colorado Springs City Council’s hands were tied by voters in November 2009 that effectively eliminated the stormwater enterprise approved by council in 2005.

Bennett said a sustainable funding source for stormwater projects is needed, and King, a former state legislator, suggested several ways that up-front funding could be leveraged.

Bach promised to share more specific information about what Colorado Springs intends to do by no later than this fall.

The WARSSS study on the Waldo Canyon burn scar made public on Thursday. #cowx ow.ly/kGuKp

— NWS Pueblo (@NWSPueblo) May 3, 2013

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

CWCB instream flow program scores water rights for the Upper Colorado River #ColoradoRiver

Here’s the release the Upper Colorado River Wild and Scenic Stakeholder Group and the Colorado Water Conservation Board (Rob Buirgy/Linda Bassi):

A broad-based stakeholder effort to protect the Colorado River received a boost last month when a state court granted water rights designed to keep flows in the river, creating three important instream flow water rights.

“The CWCB is very pleased that the stakeholder group worked through the state’s Instream Flow Program to protect this important reach of the Colorado River,” said Linda Bassi, Stream and Lake Protection Section Chief, Colorado Water Conservation Board. “This is a great example of how our Program can provide regulatory certainty to water users along with preservation of the natural environment.”

The year-round water rights range in flows from 500 to 900 cubic feet per second and will include about 70 miles of the Colorado River from the Blue River near Kremmling to the Eagle River. These rights were decreed to the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the only entity allowed to appropriate instream flow water rights for habitat benefits in Colorado. The decreed amounts reflect minimum flows necessary to “preserve the natural environment to a reasonable degree” – as provided by state law. In this case, the flows are designed to protect fish species, particularly trout.

“This is good news for a stretch of the river that is beloved by generations of anglers,” said Mely Whiting, counsel for Trout Unlimited. “It’s an example of what can be accomplished when working together.”

The 2011 priority date means these instream flow rights will have to be satisfied before water rights filed in later years can take their water.

The Colorado Water Conservation Board filed for the water rights in state water court at the request of the Upper Colorado River Wild and Scenic Stakeholder Group, a diverse group representing key interests, including Front Range water providers, Western Slope governments, affected landowners, conservation groups and recreation interests. The stakeholders have developed a local management plan designed to balance protection of the outstanding values within this segment of the Colorado River with water supply needs. The plan is awaiting approval by the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service.

Issuance of the water rights to protect river flows is a key component of the plan. “We are grateful for the support we receive from all our agency participants, especially the Colorado Water Conservation

Board, and for the concerted efforts of all our stakeholders who worked to bring this vision into reality,” said Rob Buirgy, Project Manager for the Upper CO River Wild & Scenic Alternative Stakeholder Group. “These decrees are an important new tool for us in maintaining the fishing and boating values on this stretch of the river.”

The Upper Colorado River Wild and Scenic Stakeholder Group is composed of American Whitewater, Aurora Water, Blue Valley Ranch, Colorado River Outfitters Association, Colorado River Water Conservation District, Colorado Springs Utilities, Denver Water, Eagle County, Eagle Park Reservoir Company, Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, Grand County, Middle Park Water Conservancy District, Municipal Subdistrict, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Northwest Colorado Council of Governments, Summit County, The Wilderness Society, Trout Unlimited, Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority, Vail Associates, Inc.

More Colorado River Basin coverage here.

Colorado-Big Thompson Project update: Carter Lake is about 94.5% full

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

You might have already heard, but today [May 3] we turned off the pump to Carter Lake. Carter is now about 94.5% full. With the pump to Carter off, about 508 cfs is now flowing north to Horsetooth Reservoir. Horsetooth is about 75% full and will continue to rise through May.

More Colorado-Big Thompson Project coverage here.

Southern Delivery System: Colorado Springs stormwater plans fail to address Pueblo county 1041 permit requirements

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Colorado Springs may be spending nearly $46 million on stormwater projects this year, but Pueblo County commissioners are trying to determine if the money is being spent in the right places. “It’s fine that they’re spending the money, but it really doesn’t answer our question about whether the list of pre-2009 projects is being addressed,” said Commissioner Sal Pace.

Colorado Springs Mayor Steve Bach and Council President Keith King Thursday responded to questions raised earlier in the week by commissioners about whether stormwater spending is fulfilling the 1041 permit conditions for Southern Delivery System designed to mitigate flooding on Fountain Creek caused by increased growth from SDS. “Considering these tough economic times and the daunting task of ongoing fire recovery efforts, we are pleased that staff was able to find a way to more than triple the initial projections of funding for stormwater improvements in 2013,” Bach and King wrote in a letter to commissioners and Pueblo City Council.

On Monday, Pueblo County commissioners expressed concern about the progress of a stormwater task force in El Paso County. The task force was formed last year and determined there are more than $900 million in stormwater needs that should be addressed on a regional basis.

Bach, however, is seeking an independent accounting of the $686 million in projects that represent Colorado Springs’ share of the burden. He has advocated for Colorado Springs taking care of its own obligations.

Pueblo County commissioners want to know which of the projects on the list are among the $500 million in identified needs in 2009, when Colorado Springs indicated a stormwater enterprise was in place as part of conditions for the SDS permit. Colorado Springs City Council abolished the stormwater enterprise on a split vote following a 2009 election. Last year, city attorney Chris Melcher offered an opinion that Colorado Springs should be spending at least $13 million annually on stormwater to fulfill its SDS obligations.

“It seems like there is a lot of additional money being spent to address new flooding threats because of the Waldo Canyon Fire,” Pace said Thursday. “Colorado Springs has to meet that need, but that doesn’t replace what they should already be addressing.”

More coverage from the Chieftain:

Colorado Springs this week provided an accounting of $45.7 million in planned expenditures this year to address stormwater concerns.

$14.2 million for new grade structures, stabilization projects, operation, maintenance and salaries.

$681,000 for Waldo Canyon Fire mitigation projects.

$12.8 million for Colorado Springs Utilities projects, including stabilization of lines crossing creeks, and repair of damage from washouts related to the Waldo Canyon Fire.

$8.8 million for Camp and Douglas Creek restoration.

$1.4 million for Colorado Springs Airport drainage projects.

$350,000 for Pikes Peak Highway drainage.

$7.5 million for remedial work on the Waldo Canyon Fire emergency watershed projects.

More Southern Delivery System coverage here and here.

Aspinall Unit update: Blue Mesa is expected to reach 7465 feet in elevation (400,000 af) at the end of June

Click here to read the notes from the recent operations meeting. Here’s an excerpt:

Precipitation in the Gunnison Basin in October and November, 2012 was well below 50% of normal; December precipitation was near normal. January precipitation was in 70-90% range and February dropped to 50-70%. Conditions improved in March and April with April precipitation at 150% of average to date. March and April temperatures have been below average which delays the runoff.

As of April 23rd, snowpack in the Gunnison Basin is 83% of the long-term average for that date. The current inflow forecast to Blue Mesa for April through July is 50% of the long-term average.

Blue Mesa content is now 340,583 af and has gained only 13,000 af through the winter. April 2012 content was around 533,000 af.

As of April 15th, the forecasted April-July inflow to Blue Mesa is 340,000 af, down from 370,000 af in January. 2013 falls in the Dry Year category and would be expected to be exceeded in 93% of years.

If this inflow forecast is maintained, it would represent the 5th lowest inflow since Blue Mesa was constructed (1977, 1981, 2002, and 2012 were lower).

The Black Canyon National Park peak flow will be based on the May 1 forecast; if the present forecast is maintained the peak would be 973 cfs. However, the drought provision in the water right (based on prior dry year and low Blue Mesa content) reduces this peak to 697 cfs. It is expected this flow will be achieved through normal operations; however a small increase may be necessary if conditions dictate otherwise.

Flow Recommendations call for a 900 cfs peak at Whitewater in a Dry Year based on the present forecasted inflow. Base flow targets at Whitewater are 890-900 cfs from May- August in this type year.

Under most probable conditions, Blue Mesa is expected to reach 7465 feet in elevation (400,000 af content) at the end of June which is 54 feet short of filling. By the end of the year, Blue Mesa is predicted to be 6 feet lower than the 2012 end of the year elevation.

Black Canyon flows January to April were around 300 cfs and may increase to 400-500 cfs in the summer. A peak of around 700 cfs will occur. Changing conditions always have the potential to affect these early predictions.

More Aspinall Unit coverage here and here.

Colorado-Big Thompson Project update: 100 cfs in the Big Thompson below Olympus Dam #ColoradoRiver

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

We’re starting to see a little bit of run-off come down the Big Thompson River and into Lake Estes. As a result, we’ll be bumping up releases from Olympus Dam on Lake Estes to the Big Thompson Canyon later tonight to pass the native flow on downstream.

We have been releasing about 45 cfs out of Oympus Dam to the lower Big Thompson River. Tonight, April 30, at midnight, we will bump releases up by about 60 cfs to around 100 cfs.

If the forecast storm for tonight and tomorrow cools things off, we could be making another change late in the night of May 1 to reduce releases again. I will keep you posted.

Fryingpan-Arkansas Project update: 110 cfs in the Fryingpan River below Ruedi Dam #ColoradoRiver

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

It’s been an interesting couple of weeks. We will be re-evaluating our spring operations at Ruedi Reservoir once we’ve had a chance to incorporate new information from the May 1 forecast into our own models.

Meanwhile, spring is here and it is time to change the release regime from Ruedi Dam to the Fryingpan River. Most years around May 1 we make this adjustment. We are required to release the lesser of inflow or 110 cfs. As a result, today at 5 p.m. and again tomorrow and 10 a.m., we’ll increase releases from the dam to the river by about 33 cfs. By this time tomorrow, the release from Ruedi Dam to the lower Fryingpan will be about 110 cfs.

We have seen quite a bit of snow in the upper reaches of the Fryingpan River Valley. Our crews spent the last two weeks in the high country opening the sixteen diversion dams of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project. To see photos, check out the Ruedi webpage.

Currently, Ruedi is about 60% full. It will likely continue to drop slowly until run-off. I will send notices when we make changes.

More Fryingpan-Arkansas Project coverage here and here.

El Paso County Watershed Assessment of River Stability and Sediment Supply meeting May 2

From the Colorado Springs Indpendent (J. Adrian Stanley):

Ever since the Waldo Canyon Fire charred our hillsides, Colorado Springs and the small communities that dot our foothills have been at extremely high risk for flooding. The WARSSS is an escape route — a detailed plan on how best to control the water, mud and debris.

The WARSSS will tell us how water moves and how to trap it. It will show us where to build the detention pond that will prevent the Pleasant Valley neighborhood from drowning, and how to control a wild rush of water out of Williams Canyon that is pointed at the center of Manitou Springs.

Thus, it is with excitement that I tell you the study will be presented to the El Paso County Commissioners on Thursday, May 2. Woo-hoo, indeed.

Waldo Canyon Fire WARSSS to be Presented May 2

Colorado Springs, CO, Thursday, April 25, 2013 — The Watershed Assessment of River Stability and Sediment Supply (WARSSS) Study will be presented by Dr. David L. Rosgen of Wildland Hydrology at 2:30 to 4:30 p.m. on Thursday, May 2, 2013, in the Hearing Room at the Pikes Peak Regional Development Center located at 2880 International Circle, Colorado Springs.

WARSSS is a technical procedure for water quality scientists use in evaluating streams and rivers impaired by excess sediment. It will predict how water, sediment and debris will move along and off the Waldo Canyon Fire burn scar. Based on its findings, it will assist in providing a list of prioritized mitigation projects.

More stormwater coverage here and here.