The CWCB will take up the subject of funding the Flaming Gorge Task Force at their September meeting

From the Cortez Journal (Joe Hanel):

Although the pipeline would be far away from Southwest Colorado, it involves Colorado River water, so it could complicate interstate agreements that require Western Colorado to leave water in the rivers for use downstream.

The Colorado Water Conservation Board will consider funding the grant at its Sept. 13-14 meeting in Grand Junction.

Environmental groups are urging the board to deny the grant, citing the high cost of the proposed pipeline and the possibility for damage to trout and endangered fish below Flaming Gorge dam.

“The single most important element for those fish to continue is water,” Bart Miller, of Western Resource Advocates, said during a telephone town hall last month. “They’ve got to have water in the spring peak flow. They’ve got to have water in the base flow period when water is a little bit lower on the river. They’ve got to have it all the time.”[...]

The grant at issue before the Colorado Water Conservation Board would not favor either concept.

Instead, it is designed to find solid data to make decisions on the general concept of a Flaming Gorge pipeline, said Rod Kuharich, chairman of the Metro Basin Roundtable, one of the regional groups that submitted the grant request.

“It is not to move forward with the project. It is not to commit the state in any way,” Kuharich said.

More Flaming Gorge Task Force coverage here.

At the end of July McPhee Reservoir storage stood at 348,845 acre-feet while Jackson Gulch Reservoir storage stood at 8,594 acre-feet

From the Cortez Journal:

Jackson Gulch reservoir live content stood at 8,594 acre-feet with a 9,977 acre-feet maximum capacity and a 7,306 acre-feet average (1971-2000) end-of-month content. At Jackson Gulch, a daily maximum/minimum of 61/49 cubic-feet-per-second was released into the Mancos River, and 22 acre feet were released for municipal purposes.

McPhee Reservoir live content stood at 349,845 acre-feet, with a 381,051 acre-feet maximum capacity and a 335,208 average (1986-2000) end-of-month content. At McPhee, 4,612 acre-feet were released into the Dolores River, and 47,372 acre-feet were released for transbasin purposes. At McPhee, a daily maximum/minimum of 82/74 cubic-feet-per-second was released into the Dolores River.

More San Juan River basin coverage here.

Steve Adams named Director of Loveland Water and Power

From Loveland Water and Power via the Loveland Connection:

Steve Adams has been named director of the city of Loveland’s Water and Power Department after serving as interim director for the past three months.

Adams has worked for the city for 17 years. He was chosen over other applicants from across the nation.

Prior to joining the city, Adams worked for the engineering firm CH2M-Hill and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, where he served in Europe, Africa and the Middle East.

Adams is licensed as a professional engineer in Colorado and holds two master’s degrees, one in business administration from Boston University and one in civil and environmental engineering from the University of Oklahoma. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado.

Adams has been interim director since Ralph Mullinix retired from the position in May after serving in the department for nearly 40 years.

More South Platte River basin coverage here.

‘Everyone agrees, the Animas is worth preserving’ — part four of The Durango Herald’s series about the river

Here’s part four in the series from The Durango Herald (Dale Rodebaugh/Lynda Edwards). Click through for the slide show and to read the whole article. Here’s an excerpt:

At some points, the complexity of the law, the depth of the bureaucracy and the passions of the opposing sides make reaching a consensus seem unattainably ambitious.

But glimmers of good-faith collaboration are giving those toiling in the trenches reason to hope.

One such glimmer is the River Protection Workgroup, a coalition formed in 2006 as a result of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act approved by Congress in 1968.

Meghan Maloney, a former river-issues coordinator at the San Juan Citizens Alliance, said the coalition has been a model of community participation.

“Everyone who wants to be is part of the process,” Maloney said.

Similarly, the decision whether to declare the area around the Animas River’s headwaters a Superfund site because of leaking mine contamination has sparked controversy but also demonstrated each side’s deep commitment and love for the waterway…

“The notion that Durango and Silverton residents should just accept that the Animas will be polluted is unacceptable,” [Steven Way, on-scene coordinator for the EPA's emergency response unit] said. “It’s an important river historically and environmentally. OK, Cement Creek is never going to be Gold Medal trout fishing. But I truly believe it is possible to stop the mine contamination or alleviate it enough to protect the Animas and make it cleaner.”

Click here for the webpage with the whole series and many related articles, from The Durango Herald.

More Animas River watershed coverage here.

The Bull Moose Sportsmen’s Alliance calls out U.S. Representative Doug Lamborn for his amendment to zero out the federal Land and Water Conservation fund for fiscal 2012

It’s no mistake when a group name evokes the memory of the Wilderness Warrior, former President, Theodore Roosevelt. His efforts led to some of the boldest conservation actions in the late 19th and early 20th century. In recent years I’ve come to realize the remarkable job that Roosevelt and those he worked with did in protecting headwaters areas from development and ruin. As the bumper sticker on the Coyote Gulch Jeep says, “Sportsmen were the original conservationists.”

So say hello to the Bull Moose Sportsmen’s Alliance. They believe that our representatives in Washington, D.C. should pay a price at the polls if they vote against conservation issues. To that end they’ve funded a billboard in Colorado Springs blasting Doug Lamborn for his vote to zero out the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund. What fun. One can only hope that Lamborn and his staffers see the billboard enough times to get the message.

Here’s a look at the Alliance from Chuck Plunkett writing for The Denver Post. Click through to read the whole article and see an image of the advertisement. Here’s an excerpt:

From the Bull Moose presser:

During the U.S. House of Representatives debate of the FY 2012 Interior funding bill, Congressman Lamborn sponsored and introduced an amendment to H.R. 2584 with the stated purpose of zeroing out any Land and Water Conservation Fund monies available to the Bureau of Land Management, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and the Forest Service to protect wildlife habitat and clean water.

In a time where lack of access to quality hunting and fishing opportunities is a reason for declining participation, Rep. Lamborn has proven his willingness to further degrade a unique American legacy of wildlife management and conservation prized by hunters and anglers throughout the nation. According to the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, nearly half of the nation’s 32 million hunters and anglers conduct a portion of their hunting activity on public lands.

The Land and Water Conservation fund has provided funding for projects and conservation efforts in Congressman Lamborn’s district including the Arkansas River, the Royal Gorge and Ramah Reservoir.

Lamborn’s office counters that the sportsmen are overstating the point, and that current levels of access to federal lands in Colorado won’t be affected.

Meanwhile, Ben Noreen lists some of the congressman’s political miscalculations this year in The Colorado Springs Gazette. From the article:

The Bull Moose outfit, named in honor of former President Teddy Roosevelt’s last political hurrah, registered its disappointment with a billboard, which bashes Lamborn near the intersection of Platte Avenue and Chelton Road, across the street from Sportsmen’s Warehouse, the outdoor recreation retailer.

“Surprised?” the billboard asks. “Congressman Lamborn voted to gut the Land and Water Conservation Fund, limiting access to hunting and fishing in Colorado.”

The GOP-controlled House reduced the fund drastically, to $62 million. Lamborn’s suggested number: zero.

“I was shocked when I saw the amendment,” said Gaspar Perricone, a Bull Moose Sportsmen’s Alliance spokesman. “It’s contrary to the hunting and fishing community.”

The Bull Moose people meet the definition of a special interest group, but the organization is not anti-Republican. A billboard is going up in Grand Junction, too — to praise GOP Rep. Scott Tipton, who has been supportive of the alliance’s interests.

Pam Zubeck has posted Lamborn’s response on the Colorado Springs Independent blog:

“The billboard has it all wrong.

“We are drowning in debt, and we have to draw the line somewhere. The federal government already owns more than a third of all land in Colorado. The people of Colorado enjoy tremendous opportunities to hunt and fish. Our priority must be on protecting and preserving the lands we already have.

“At a time when Washington is borrowing 40 cents of every dollar it spends, there is simply no money for buying new land. My common sense amendment would have saved taxpayers about $51 million.” — Doug Lamborn (CO-05)

More conservation coverage here.

Republican River basin: Kansas Gov’s letter to Coloradan leaves the State Engineer’s office wondering if he has been paying attention

From the Lawrence Journal World (Scott Rothschild):

In a recent letter to a Colorado resident, Brownback said the Bonny Reservoir in Yuma County, Colo., which abuts the border of northwest Kansas, is a valuable recreational area for many residents in surrounding communities. He added in the letter to Audrey Hase, who is trying to save the reservoir from being drained, “Because Colorado is a party to this compact, it is named in the lawsuit, but Kansas seeks no relief against Colorado at this time.”[...]

Colorado State Engineer Dick [Wolfe] said Brownback was off base. “I’m not sure what the basis for that statement is,” [Wolfe] said Monday. “We do know that it is wrong,” he said.

The release of water from Bonny Reservoir is necessary for Colorado to make up a water debt it owes Kansas and comply with the 2003 settlement of the 1942 Republican River Compact between Colorado, Nebraska and Kansas, [Wolfe] said…

Wolf said he spoke with Kansas water officials to make sure Brownback wasn’t signaling a change of plans. He said they told him the plan hasn’t changed.

More Republican River basin coverage here and here.

Colorado Water Congress annual summer meeting: Combining the meeting with the Colorado Coal & Power Conference deemed successful

From the Craig Daily Press (Joe Moylan):

Last week was the culmination of that partnership as more than 310 water advocates and energy leaders came together at the first ever Water and Energy Conference to discuss common challenges and opportunities facing their industries.

“I think we were very pleased,” said Jerry Nettleton of the Colorado Coal and Power Generation planning team. “The Water Congress has their fall meeting here every other year. We looked at it and decided there were a lot of common elements in terms of water and energy and some of the challenges and opportunities they face…

Doug Kemper, executive director of the Colorado Water Congress, said his board was pleased with the partnership and is already talking about returning to Steamboat next year.

“We’ve had a tradition of being in Steamboat every other year for about the last 15 years,” Kemper said. “When we’re not in Steamboat, we hold the Congress somewhere in the I-70 corridor. But my board has already asked me to look into bringing the conference and the energy partnership back to Steamboat next year.”

Kemper, who had never visited a power plant or a working coal mine, said the tours of Craig Station and Trapper Mine were the highlights of the conference.

More Colorado water coverage here.

Energy policy — oil and gas: Select Energy Services Acquires Salt Water Disposal Well in Weld County, Colorado

Here’s the release from Select Energy Services via Business Wire:

Select Energy Services, LLC (“Select”), a water solutions, oilfield service and supply company headquartered in Houston, TX, announced today the acquisition of Lone Star, LLC (“Lone Star”), a salt water disposal facility in Weld County, Colorado.

Lone Star currently holds a 37-acre property and salt water disposal facility in Weld County, Colorado, in the heart of the DJ Basin and Niobrara Shale activity. Currently, there are 23 rigs running within a 20 mile radius of the Lone Star property and therefore the new facility should be advantageous for operators in the region due to the current shortage of disposal facilities in Weld County.

“The acquisition of Lone Star will provide Select with a valuable entrance point into salt water disposal services in the Rocky Mountain region and further compliment our current service offerings in the region,” said John Schmitz, CEO of Select. “We look forward to providing a cost effective solution to the region’s water solution and transportation needs.”

This transaction will augment Select’s current position in the Rockies and further bolster its regional water solutions division. The local demand for salt water disposal is robust and growing with the increased emphasis in the Niobrara Shale. Select’s entry into water solutions and transportation in Weld County marks a significant step forward in both Select’s presence and growth potential in the Rocky Mountain Region.

More oil and gas coverage here and here.

Part three of The Durango Herald’s series, ‘The Animas in a Changed Climate’

Here’s part three of The Durango Herald’s (Lynda Edwards) series titled The Animas in a Changed Climate. The article takes a look at the future of the river and what Durango water users might face in the coming years. Here’s an excerpt:

[Durango’s 2011 Water Efficiency Management Plan] urges Durango to consider expanding an existing ordinance that restricts some new developments from planting high-water-use trees and plants not grown for human consumption. It also requires low-water-use plants on certain slopes and water-efficient irrigation. The study asks Durangoans to consider expanding and enactingthese restrictions across the city.

The plan also suggests adopting a “green building” ordinance for all new development. The plan does not mention what the ordinance would say.

Sandra Henderson of Project BudBurst, a program that recruits local residents to help document climate change, said: “Doing nothing about environmental problems creates stress. Doing something is empowering. Durangoans can take their city’s future into their own hands.”

Click through for the photos of the installation of a xeriscape garden and drip irrigation.

More Animas River watershed coverage here.

Energy policy — oil and gas: Gothic shale play in the Paradox Basin has conservationists organizing early to, ‘do it right’

From The Durango Telegraph (Missy Votel):

This week, the San Juan Public Lands Center released a draft environmental impact statement on what is expected to be the next hot spot for oil and gas development in Southwest Colorado. Known as the Gothic Shale Gas Play, the 646,403-acre area located primarily within Montezuma, Dolores and San Miguel counties (with a small sliver of La Plata County) could be home to nearly 3,000 new wells over the next 15 years. Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service lands make up 57 percent of the area, with Paradox Basin and the Dolores River Corridor at the epicenter, accounting for nearly 1,800 of the potential wells.

“It’s a really big deal,” said Jimbo Buickerood, of the San Juan Citizens Alliance. “There are huge resource values that we are concerned about and we know the citizenry is concerned about.”

The gothic shale EIS is actually a supplement to the 2007 San Juan Public Lands Center Draft Land Management Plan, which is undergoing its first major revision since 1985. The 2007 EIS projected only 1,185 new coalbed methane wells for the entire San Juan Lands planning area, much of them overlapping the general area of the Gothic Shale Play. However, the original EIS did not account for the potential of tapping into the thin shale underlayer, which has recently become possible due to technological advances. As a result, land managers went back to the drawing board to revise numbers, adding a possible 1,769 new shale wells to the area on both federal and nonfederal lands…

Of the four suggested alternatives4 (including the requisite “do nothing,”) preferred Alternative B recommends 776 new wells on federal lands, 250 miles of new roads and a disturbance of 2,592 acres. According to the EIS, half of the area is classified as “working forest and rangelands” and has a history of multiple use, including timber harvest, mining, grazing, recreation, and oil and gas development. However, Buickerood said there is concern some development could encroach on the Dolores River, which has been identified as a candidate for Wild and Scenic River status.

“We aren’t saying ‘no natural gas drilling.’ We’re saying ‘Let’s do it right, and here are some ideas,’” said Buickerood, who is heading up a response to the EIS on behalf of several local conservation groups. “The three main factors we’re concerned with are: how many wells, over what area and over what period of time.”[...]

Another major concern is water. Millions of gallons are required to drill a well and in the fracking process. Although some can be re-used, a plan for proper treatment and disposal of the waste water will be needed. The question of where the water will come from for drilling operations is another consideration. Bill Barrett currently pulls water earmarked for municipal and industrial use from the Dolores River Project.

More oil and gas coverage here and here.

Energy policy — oil shale: Dan Whitney of Shell Exploration and Production Co says rewrite of oil shale programmatic environmental impact statement by the BLM is, ‘a waste of taxpayer money’

From The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Gary Harmon):

Whitney spoke during a congressional oversight field hearing conducted by two Colorado representatives, Scott Tipton and Doug Lamborn, both Republicans serving on the House Natural Resources subcommittee on energy and mineral resources…

The new study is holding back applications for three new leases, limiting the kind of innovation and variety of experimentation that will make oil shale a commercial resource, Whitney said…

Another witness, former Grand Junction Mayor Jim Spehar, called on the committee to support the establishment of an oil shale trust fund or similar mechanism to help communities prepare for and deal with the effects of growth if an oil shale industry is to take shape. A relatively small, 500,000-barrel-per-day oil shale industry could add 50,000 new people to northwest Colorado, Spehar said. “That’s why I’m concerned about getting a head start” on development if and when oil shale development does take place, he said. “Current taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for it.”[...]

Anu K. Mittal of the Government Accountability Office said a study of the potential use of water over the life of an oil shale project can range from one to 12 barrels of water per barrel of the equivalent of oil for an in-situ project, to two to four barrels for an above-ground, retort project. Another analysis offered by the University of Utah’s Institute for Clean and Secure Energy, suggested an average water consumption rate of 2.5 barrels for each barrel of oil from shale, according to Jennifer Spinti, research associate professor at the university.

More oil shale coverage here and here.

Animas River watershed: Part two of series about the river, ‘Want water, take a number’ from The Durango Herald

Here’s Part Two of the four part series about the Animas River from Dale Rodebaugh and The Durango Herald. Mr. Rodebaugh outlines how uses of the river have changed over time, from prehistoric times to the filling of Lake Nighthorse (full on June 29 this year), part of the Animas-La Plata Project. Here’s an excerpt:

Durango’s early exploitation of the Animas was as a conduit to get logs to sawmills, where they were turned into lumber and railroad ties.

Today, most of the water pulledfrom the river is for irrigation and consumption, but the city of Durango in 2007 obtained a decree that guarantees a certain amount of flow for a whitewater park at Smelter Rapid. Several entities have won such rights for recreation since legislation establishing recreation rights was enacted in2001.

Also, a certain amount of water is reserved to protect two fish species in the San Juan River – the Colorado pikeminnow and humped-back chub,which are federally listed as endangered.

Click through for the whole article and the slide show.

Here’s a look at how the USGS measures streamflow, from Dale Rodebaugh writing for The Durango Herald. From the article:

The USGS maintains more than 7,000 gauging stations on rivers and lakes across the country. The Durango office manages 41 stations in La Plata, Archuleta, Montezuma, San Juan, Dolores, San Miguel, Ouray and Montrose counties.

The station near U.S. Highway 550 and 14th Street went into service in 1895, only six years after the first one ever was installed in New Mexico on the Rio Grande River to help determine whether there was sufficient water for irrigation.

The USGS computerized its gauging nationally in 1983 and first made real-time data available online in 1995.

Click through for the whole article and the video of hydrologic technician Jennifer Dansie at work on calibration chores.

Meanwhile, the Environmental Protection Agency is considering superfund status for parts of the upper Animas River watershed, according to Mark Esper writing for The Telluride Daily Planet. From the article:

And EPA officials said that while the collaborative approach to water quality in the upper Animas spearheaded by the Animas River Stakeholders Group has been successful, the worsening situation on Cement Creek has compelled the agency to study a possible Superfund listing.

“The problem is worsening water quality,” said Sabrina Forrest, site assessment manager for the EPA in Denver. Forrest explained that while the EPA considers the problem to be worthy of the National Priorities List (NPL) under the Superfund law, local support would be required as well as a sign-off from the governor.

“It’s eligible for listing, but community support is needed for that,” Forrest said. And if the Gladstone sites were to be eventually put on the NPL “the community would still have a huge voice on how this would be done.”[...]

Meanwhile, the EPA is planning a Sept. 16 site tour at Gladstone for those interested in getting a better idea of the situation on the ground up there. Forrest says the EPA hopes it can determine by Dec. 20 if there is enough local support for NPL listing to proceed. Under that timetable, the listing could be made official by March 2012.

The preliminary assessment work focused on a cluster of mine sites at and above Gladstone, including the American Tunnel, Gold King Number 7 level, the Mogul and Grand Mogul and the Red and Bonita mines. Peter Butler of Durango, a steering committee member for the Animas River Stakeholders Group, which was formed as a collaborative approach to water quality issues in 1994, said Cement Creek has seen a steady increase in metals loading since a treatment plant at Gladstone was shut down in 2004. Up to 845 gallons per minute of acid mine drainage is pouring into Cement Creek from just four abandoned mines above Gladstone…

At this point, Butler said possible solutions include various scenarios for a water treatment plant on Cement Creek, bulkheads for the four mines discharging the most, or some combination of that. Then comes the question of who pays. Butler said options include seeking damages from Sunnyside Gold’s parent company, Kinross; luring a large mining company to reopen the Gold King and take on the cleanup liability; taking an incremental approach with a pilot treatment project that could be expanded; invoking Superfund; or a combination thereof.

Todd Hennis of Golden, who described himself as the “unfortunate owner of the Gold King and Mogul mines,” said the EPA has been spinning “fairy tales.” “The problem started in 2000 when water started coming out of the Mogul,” Hennis said. He said that was a result of the American Tunnel bulkheads causing water to back up. The water table has since risen an estimated 1,000 feet, causing acid mine drainage to seep from ever higher points on the mountain. Hennis accused state officials of engaging in “pollution trading” with Sunnyside Gold, with a consent decree letting the mining firm off the hook for water quality problems in the Gladstone area. “The state of Colorado has a huge responsibility for this situation,” Hennis said. “Sunnyside walked out of this district and their $5 million bond was returned.” Hennis said the best solution would be for a mining firm to reopen the Gold King and assume responsibility for the water quality issues. Hennis said he thinks there is $700 million in gold still retrievable from the Gold King mine.

Here’s an article that details the course of the Animas River, including the geology, from its headwaters to the San Juan River, from Dale Rodebaugh writing for The Durango Herald. Here’s an excerpt:

At one time, [David Gonzales, a professor and chairman of the geosciences department at Fort Lewis College] said, gravel impelled by a glacier created a dam to form a lake in the Animas Valley. Later erosion of the debris drained the lake but caused the relatively flat and wide channel. The farthest reaching glacier, which receded about 12,000 years ago, carried gravel as far as 32nd Street, Gonzales said.

More Animas River watershed coverage here.

Flaming Gorge pipeline: Frank Jaeger (Parker Water and Sanitation District) and others are urging the state to continue looking at the proposed project

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“While we are encouraged that the Flaming Gorge discussion sponsored by the roundtables and state of Colorado will attempt to foster agreement on key issues and take a fair look at the project, we are concerned that many groups are engaging in a political attempt to intimidate the participants and bias or terminate the process,” Parker Water and Sanitation Manager Frank Jaeger wrote in a recent letter to key state officials.

Environmental groups last month announced opposition to the study of the project by roundtables…

The [Colorado-Wyoming Cooperative Supply Project] is awaiting U.S. Bureau of Reclamation modeling of the Colorado River basin, expected to be complete later this year, before it wraps up its feasibility study launched in 2010. Since then, the group has further defined its needs: 105,000 acre-feet annually from the project to meet growth estimates to the year 2070…

The Colorado-Wyoming Coalition’s proposed project helps meet several positions taken on water by Gov. John Hickenlooper, Jaeger said. Those include:

- Protecting agricultural water.

- Providing an adequate supply of water to promote a strong economy.

- Helping to fill the municipal water gap identified in the 2010 Statewide Water Supply Initiative.

- Supporting the portfolio of strategies identified by the Interbasin Compact Committee: reuse, conservation, alternative agriculture-municipal transfers, completing identified projects and developing new projects.

More Colorado Wyoming Cooperative Supply Project coverage here.

Animas River watershed: ‘Our river is ailing’ part one of a four part series from The Durango Herald

Here’s the link to part one of Dale Rodebaugh’s four part series running in The Durango Herald. The focus is mining and agricultural runoff. Here’s an excerpt:

In 1978, Lake Emma, under which miners had bored the Sunnyside tunnel, collapsed. The ensuing torrent of water spewed timbers, equipment and tons of debris from the mine. Miraculously, no lives were lost because it occurred on a weekend.

When Sunnyside Mining Co. closed its operations in Silverton in 1991, it was facing an annual expense of $800,000 to treat 1,200 to 1,600 gallons a minute of contaminated waste.

Instead, the company negotiated a court decree with the state to install bulkheads to plug draining adits.

Todd Hennis, who has an ownership stake in a couple of the leaking mines, said that agreement in the mid-’90s was a grievous error because it allowed a $5 million bond to be returned to Sunnyside despite the potential for future contamination.

Later contracts with other companies to treat waste didn’t work out, and since 2004, contaminants have been flowing freely from the mines.

Click through and read the whole article. They’re also running a slideshow and video.

More Animas River watershed coverag here

Republican River basin: It’s twilight for Bonny Reservoir after labor day

From 9News.com (Matt Flener):

Nebraska, and ultimately Kansas, are about to receive approximately 4 billion gallons of water from Colorado’s Bonny Reservoir in Yuma County, under a decades old agreement between the three states to share water. Bonny Reservoir, which sits on the south fork of the Republican River, holds the best potential to make up a water debt owed to Kansas under the 1942 Republican River Compact, Colorado officials say…

In 2003, Kansas won a Supreme Court battle to force Nebraska and Colorado to make up for water they reserved from the river in violation of the compact. “We have spent four years looking for a better solution than draining Bonny,” Colorado Assistant Director for Water Alex Davis said. “It is really a tragedy that we have to take this step.

Here’s a look at the South Fork of the Republican River from Tony Rayl writing for The Yuma Pioneer. From the article:

The South Fork of the Republican River, which actually is more like a nice creek, still runs in places, but in others it mostly comes to a standstill thanks to a huge amount of cattails and silt. “They’re like one big sponge,” said Fred Raish, supervisor of the Yuma County Pest Control District.

Raish is leading an effort to clean up the cattails and Russian-olives along the South Fork, east and west of Bonny Lake State Park. The hope is eradicating the cattails, which are extremely thick immediately west of the reservoir, will help break loose the water and get it flowing at a higher rate into Bonny and beyond into Kansas. Raish led the same effort on the North Fork in recent years, putting more than $350,000 toward eradication of Russian-olives, salt cedar, and now cattails, over the past four years.

He noted that he grew up in a flood irrigation family in Montrose and La Plata counties with the idea that “if you’re not cleaning up your ditches, you’re not fully utilizing your water.”[...]

“This is not a water project, it’s a restoration project,” Raish said as he drove the bumpy trails along the South Fork where a hired crew is eradicating the Russian-olives west of Bonny. “Water just happens to be a main part of the equation.” He explained that the idea is to restore the river banks to the native species, which in turn helps with the wildlife. There has been $300,000 in grant money put toward the efforts in recent years, along with funds donated by Colorado Corn, Republican River Water Conservation District and W-Y Well Testing, along with wildlife groups, some federal money, and state funds through the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The current project entails cleaning up a two-mile stretch west of Highway 385, as well as a stretch on the east side of Bonny. The east side was cleaned up last year, and the native grasses already have returned where machinery left nothing but dirt a year before. Raish said Landsman Creek, which flows into the southwest corner of Bonny, also needs to be cleaned up to create a better flow. There have been some huge numbers thrown about in regards to how much it would cost to fully dredge and clean up the South Fork, some estimates have been put as high as $35 million.

Here’s the link to a set of photos of the South Fork of the Republican River from The Yuma Pioneer.

More Republican River basin coverage here and here.

Summitville Mine superfund site: Open house Wednesday for opening of new water treatment facility

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Matt Hildner):

State environmental officials will host an open house Wednesday for the opening of a new water treatment facility at the Summitville Mine Superfund site…

The open house will run from noon to 4 p.m. and include a grand-opening ceremony from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. Site tours will be offered at noon and 2:30 p.m.

More Summitville coverage here and here.

Colorado Water Congress summer meeting: State Senator Gail Schwartz — ‘There will be a bare-bones level of funding for water projects’

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“Because of the budget environment, we will continue pulling (mineral severance fund) money away to the general fund,” state Sen. Gail Schwartz, D-Snowmass Village, chairman of the Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee, told the Colorado Water Congress this week. “There will be a bare-bones level of funding for water projects.” Some projects have continued to receive funding, such as $36 million over three years for the Animas-La Plata development. The state also distributed $6 million last year and has $7 million budgeted this fiscal year for water supply reserve accounts through basin roundtables. Other programs such as satellite monitoring, weather modification and watershed protection have suffered, Schwartz said…

On several occasions at the summer conference of the Water Congress, [State Representative Jerry Sonnenberg] advocated building more storage in order to capture some of the large flows from melting snow in both the South Platte and Colorado river basins this year. Reps. Cory Gardner and Scott Tipton, both Colorado Republicans, also stressed the need for more storage and hydroelectric power generation…

Colorado will need to spend $5.32 billion over the next 20 years to maintain municipal water infrastructure and $2.13 billion for wastewater improvements, said Tom Iseman of the Western States Water Council.

More Colorado Water coverage here.

Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway board meeting recap: The district is trying to stretch their seed money until the Southern Delivery System bounty hits in 2016

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“I just want to make sure we can stretch this money as far as we can until 2016,” Executive Director Larry Small told the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway district board Friday. “Financially, we are in good shape.”[...]

When the Southern Delivery System comes on line, scheduled in 2016, the district gets the balance of $50 million, paid by Colorado Springs under its 1041 land-use permit with Pueblo County. Until then, the district will continue to live on $200,000 provided to it through an agreement with Colorado Springs and the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District…

Although its operating budget is tiny, the district manages about $500,000 of funds through the agreement with Colorado Springs and the Lower Ark. The Fountain Creek Corridor Master Plan will be completed this year, and the U.S. Geological Survey is working on a study of potential dams on Fountain Creek.

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

San Luis Valley: Yesterday the 12th Judicial District forwarded three nominations to take over for Judge O. John Kuenhold to Governor Hickenlooper

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Matt Hildner):

The three nominees are:

- Alamosa County Court Judge Michael Gonzales, who was a deputy district attorney in the San Luis Valley before his appointment to the bench in 2007.

- Kimberly Wood, a Costilla County Court judge and domestic relations magistrate for the entire district. Before her appointment to the county bench in 2003, she was a sole practitioner.

- Erich Schwiesow, a partner at the Alamosa firm of Lester, Sigmond, Rooney and Schwiesow and also serves as counsel to the city of Alamosa.

More Rio Grande River basin coverage here.

Energy policy — oil shale: Congressmen Scott Tipton and Doug Lamborn hold a Committee on Natural Resources subcommittee field hearing in Grand Junction

From the Grand Junction Free Press (Sharon Sullivan):

At Wednesday hearing in Grand Junction, Congressmen Scott Tipton (R-CO) and Doug Lamborn (R-CO) repeatedly criticized the Obama administration, claiming the administration is hindering the domestic development of oil shale…

The few non-industry witnesses allowed to testify at the hearing mentioned other factors hampering oil shale development: Technological challenges, low oil prices discouraging investment, and concerns about environmental impacts…

“Oil shale has relatively low energy content and companies have yet to demonstrate net gains in energy production. In essence, commercial oil shale production could use more energy than it would produce,” Frank Smith, of Western Colorado Congress, said.

[Anu Mittal director of Natural Resources and Environment Division at the U.S. Government Accountability Office presented a] report [that] focused on impacts of potential oil shale development on water resources. “Oil shale will require large amounts of water — a resource that is already in scarce supply in the arid West where an expanding population is placing additional demands on water,” Mittal said.

Some analysts project that large scale oil shale development in Colorado would divert water away from agricultural and urban development. Companies have acquired significant water rights within the Colorado and White River Basins of Colorado, and may apply for additional water rights in the future.

Another panelist attending the hearing, Jennifer Spinti, a research associate professor at the University of Utah’s Department of Chemical Engineering and Institute for Clean and Secure Energy, mentioned that the public also needs to be aware of “ancillary water use” of oil shale development. Construction and operation of a nearby power plant to provide energy for an oil shale project would consume significant amounts of water, as well as would water needed to control dust, she said. Potential water contamination is also a concern, Spinti said…

Tipton questioned Helen Hankins, Colorado State Director of the BLM, about the need for another PEIS.

Hankins replied: “The industry is in its infancy. Water, sage grouse, and plants are potentially threatened. There was litigation in 2009 challenging the PEIS — that’s why the (Interior) Secretary is taking a fresh look. It does not affect the six existing (research and development) leases.”

Tipton repeated “regulatory uncertainty is a factor in delaying oil shale research.”

Hankins responded again that a new PEIS will not affect companies’ research and development on private lands, or on the existing leases. “We’re yet many years away from environmental approval and commercially viable oil shale development,” Hankins said. “It gives us time to review the rules.”[...]

“Energy development is one of the key priorities of Secretary Salazar,” Hankins said. “Oil shale is one component of energy development. When it is commercially viable, and environmentally proven, it will be a source.

“However, the BLM’s mission is ‘multiple use.’ Land use plans consider a variety of factors — watershed health, wildlife habitat, as well as energy.”

More coverage from Meghan Gordon writing for Platts. From the article:

Representatives Doug Lamborn and Scott Tipton, both Colorado Republicans, criticized the Department of Interior’s February decision to take a new look at a November 2008 federal rule for commercial development of oil shale. At a field hearing of the House Energy and Minerals Resources Subcommittee in Grand Junction, Colorado, the pair couched the oil shale policy in the same terms House Republicans have approached other energy issues this session, saying federal regulations should not stand in the way of industry creating jobs, reducing oil imports and increasing national security…

“The road to viability for the oil shale industry is reliant on a predictable regulatory structure and an environment in which companies can invest in research and development and create jobs,” Tipton said. “The proper implementation of our environmental and safety regulations already on the books is a far better strategy than adding additional layers of bureaucracy to the process.”[...]

Dan Whitney, Shell’s upstream manager for heavy oil development in the Americas, said the producer understands the importance of water to western states and is committed to using it responsibly. He said the company would address the issue by maintaining a diversity of water rights to give operations the flexibility of multiple sources, developing extraction and processing technologies that need less water and to honing water-management practices such as recycling and storage.

Shell holds three “research, development and demonstration” leases for oil shale development in Colorado.

More coverage from the Associated Press (Catharine Tsai) via The Denver Post. From the article:

Dan Whitney of Shell Exploration and Production Co. said his industry needs a stable regulatory environment and one in which numerous companies can lease public land for research projects.

Researchers noted their need for funding and suggested a specific program focused on Western oil shale.

And Anu Mittal of the GAO said the U.S. Interior Department should be responsible for gathering data on water conditions now, so any potential effects of oil-shale activity can be detected years in the future. Her agency in October had recommended collecting baseline data.

They were among 10 speakers at the Grand Junction field hearing of the House Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee. Rep. Scott Tipton and subcommittee chairman Doug Lamborn, both Colorado Republicans, conducted the hearing.

More oil shale coverage here and here.

Southern Delivery System update: Denver companies are playing a large role in the construction of the pipeline

The Denver Business Journal (Cathy Proctor) is running profiles of 5 Denver area companies that are involved in the design and construction of the project. She lists Reynolds, Inc., Garney Construction Company, CH2M Hill, Northwest Pipe Company and MWH Global.

More Southern Delivery System coverage here and here.

Colorado Water Congress summer meeting: Deputy State Engineer Mike Sullivan — ‘The state engineer cannot curtail diversions from another state’

I’ve thought for a long time that Aaron Million’s proposal is akin to him driving a tanker truck across the Colorado/Wyoming border — not subject to Colorado water law — and that any water moved would count against the Upper Colorado River Compact. That’s the way the deputy state engineer sees it as well. Here’s a report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

“The state engineer cannot curtail diversions from another state,” Deputy State Engineer Mike Sullivan told the Legislature’s water resources review committee Tuesday. “We can’t go into Wyoming and padlock a headgate.” Sullivan and State Engineer Dick Wolfe told the committee they have concerns about proposals to take water from Flaming Gorge Reservoir and the Green River in Wyoming and send it through a pipeline to Colorado’s Front Range.

Wolfe explained that such plans could interfere with water rights administration in Colorado, particularly if lower basin states in the Colorado River Compact were to put a call on the river. Flaming Gorge Reservoir and the Green River are both part of the Colorado River basin, which supplies 80 percent of Colorado’s water. Under the compact, Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming and Utah are required to deliver 75 million acre-feet of water over a 10-year period at Lake Powell. If they fail to do so, Arizona, California and Nevada could demand water, calling out junior rights in Colorado [ed. the compact has a 1922 priority, senior, for example, to the Colorado-Big Thompson Project]…

Fort Collins entrepreneur Aaron Million is claiming a Wyoming water right as the basis for his Flaming Gorge project, which would make enforcing it difficult under Colorado’s priority system. The Colorado-Wyoming coalition, led by Frank Jaeger of Parker Water and Sanitation, plans to work with the Bureau of Reclamation, and could claim the Flaming Gorge priority date. “There’s no authority in place for dealing with Flaming Gorge,” Wolfe told the committee.

Meanwhile, meeting attendees were treated to a discussion of population estimates yesterday. Here’s a report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

The state population grew to more than 5 million in 2010, from 4.3 million in 2000. Colorado grew at a 17 percent rate over the decade, compared with 9 percent for the nation as a whole…

[Elizabeth Garner, state demographer] gave a detailed analysis of counties, showing that the Eastern Plains and San Luis Valley were flat or lost population in the past decade, while the Front Range and Western Slope were the fastest growing parts of the state…

But the picture gets more complicated because baby boomers are getting older. Colorado’s population over age 65 is expected to grow by 150 percent in the next 20 years, which could also contribute to smaller household sizes, changes in water consumption patterns and the tax base. “We are becoming very different,” Garner said. “For the last decade, the largest part of our population has been the most productive . . . In the next 10 years, 1 million people will be leaving the labor force.”

More Colorado water coverage here.

Lamar Pipeline: Karl Nyquist — ‘Our entire focus is on El Paso and Elbert counties…There is enough demand in those two counties’

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“Our project will continue to move forward, the service plan amendment would have allowed Elbert County to participate in the benefits,” said Karl Nyquist, a partner in GP Water. “The service plan amendment was certainly not necessary for the project as proposed and we will move forward as planned.”[...]

Bill Long, president of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District, doubts the cost figures that GP has shared so far, and said the pipeline would do little to meet the state’s municipal water gap. “I’m not at all surprised they pulled the Elbert County proposal,” Long said. “My hope is they could get behind a better long-term solution than one which has such a detrimental impact to one small area in a basin that is already water-short. In my mind, they aren’t even close to being a part of the solution.”[...]

The expansion of the authority of the Elbert County and Highway 86 Commercial District, which was formed by the GP partners to provide area water service, would have expedited both water plans and provided additional revenue to Elbert County, but Nyquist said there are other ways to pursue the project.

Hundreds who attended a Wednesday Elbert County commissioners meeting cheered when it was announced that the proposal to expand the district was withdrawn. GP Water hosted two public meetings in the county, but apparently did not convince enough people it was good for the county…

The pipeline would be designed to pump up to 12,000 acre-feet annually, but GP estimates its yield from water rights it owns would be an average of 8,000-10,000 acre-feet annually. Nyquist says treated water will sell for $6-$7 per 1,000 gallons, a competitive rate. Negotiations with several potential end users are under way, including the Cherokee Water District near Colorado Springs. Nyquist said other negotiations are confidential, but focus on El Paso County.

More Lamar pipeline coverage here.

Fryingpan-Arkansas Project update: 213 cfs in the river below Ruedi Dam for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

August seems to be upholding its reputation for traditionally being the hottest and driest month in Colorado. As a result, flows in the Colorado River have dipped slightly. In response, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is calling for water for the identified habitat of the endangered fish.

To meet that call, we are increasing releases from Ruedi Dam to the Fryingpan River by 25 cfs. This will put about 213 cubic feet per second at the Ruedi gage just below the dam.

More Fryingpan-Arkansas Project coverage here.

Wastewater: The Metropolitan Wastewater Reclamation District’s new plant near Brighton is ‘an opportunity to sharpen our vision and expand our practice of sustainable treatment,’ says General Manager Catherine Gerali

From the Commerce City Sentinel (Kevin Denke):

Members of the Metro Wastewater Reclamation District’s board of directors gathered on the site of a former auto salvage yard at U.S. Highway 85 and Weld County Road 2 ½ to shovel ceremonial clumps of dirt. In doing so, they celebrated what district leaders hailed as a new era in regional water treatment.

Metro Wastewater District Manager Catherine Gerali highlighted the technological advancements the district will utilize at the plant. “We have used this plant as an opportunity to sharpen our vision and expand our practice of sustainable treatment,” she said. “Like our existing facility (in Commerce City), this new, advanced treatment plant will rely on the beneficial reuse of bio-solids and will recycle methane gas, which is a byproduct of the treatment process, to generate heat and power for this facility.”

The new plant, scheduled to go online in 2015, will be spread out over 90 acres of land, which starts at the northwest corner of U.S. Highway 85 and Weld County Road 2 (168th Avenue). At the completion of Phase 1, the plant is expected to serve 300,000 residents in five communities and treat 24-million gallons of water a day.

More Wastewater coverage here.