Brian Werner: ‘Tell me when the next big drought comes, and you’re going to see people screaming about storage’

From the Fort Collins Coloradoan (Bobby Magill):

“Tell me when the next big drought comes, and you’re going to see people screaming about storage,” said Brian Werner, spokesman for the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District in Berthoud. “Their willingness (to consider building new reservoirs) ebbs and flows based on when your last drought was.”

The uncertainty about the mountain snowpack, which fluctuates every year, is the primary argument for building new reservoirs in the West, said Reagan Waskom, director of the Colorado Water Institute at Colorado State University. “The amazing thing is, it comes down to three or four big storms every year, whether they get them, or they bypass us,” he said…

One of five major proposed water storage projects in Larimer County that are in various stages of planning, [Northern Integrated Supply Project] calls for storing about 170,000 acre-feet of Poudre River water in the proposed Glade Reservoir north of Ted’s Place. A final decision could come sometime in 2013 or 2014…

The other four proposed projects include expansions to Fort Collins’ Halligan Reservoir and Greeley’s Seaman Reservoir, the Chimney Hollow Reservoir west of Carter Lake and the more uncertain Cactus Hill Reservoir proposed for a site on the Weld County line between Wellington and Nunn. If those projects are built, Waskom said, it’s hard to conceive of other such large projects being built in Northern Colorado regardless of the need because there are few other places to build them, at least in Larimer County. “Unless we can get Aaron Million’s project or a West Slope diversion built, we don’t have any more water left,” he said…

“All the easy projects have been built,” [Waskom] said. “Now we’re dealing with the hard projects. What comes after the projects, that’s the question, right? Where’s the water and reservoir sites, and where’s the political will to build projects?”

More infrastructure coverage here.

‘Rally for the Rivers’ asks EPA to protect the Upper Colorado River from diversions

Here’s the release from Colorado Trout Unlimited (Randy Scholfield):

More than 100 river advocates holding signs and chanting slogans gathered in front of the Environmental Protection Agency building in downtown Denver Thursday to ask federal regulators to protect the Upper Colorado River system from proposed water diversions to the Front Range.

“This is a moment of truth for the state,” said Sinjin Eberle, president of Colorado Trout Unlimited, which helped organize the gathering of Denver residents, kayakers, anglers, outdoor recreationists and other river supporters. “We have to do something to save our state’s namesake river from dying.”

Scores of signs at the event underscored that theme, including “Don’t Suck the Upper Colorado River Dry,” “Protect Our Flows,” and “EPA: Be a Hero.”

The rally is part of an ongoing campaign to protect the Upper Colorado River and its tributary, the Fraser River, and the mountain communities, businesses, people and wildlife that depend on them. The Denver rally, say organizers, was meant to show EPA and other federal decision-makers that Denver residents care about the state’s outdoor quality of life and the health of rivers.

The Defend the Colorado coalition is asking EPA–which Eberle called a “partner” on river protection–to take additional steps to ensure the health of the river in the face of two proposed water diversions.

Already 60 percent of the Upper Colorado is diverted to supply Front Range water users. The Windy Gap Firming Project proposal, along with a separate Moffat Tunnel water project, could divert as much as 80 percent of the Upper Colorado’s natural flows. The current proposed Windy Gap protections from the Bureau of Reclamation fall short of what’s needed to address mounting problems, such as low flows, rising temperatures, spreading algae and smothering sediment.

As Eberle told the lunchtime crowd, a state study released earlier this year shows that entire populations of native fish and the insects they feed on have virtually disappeared from the Colorado River below the Windy Gap Reservoir due to past diversions.

“Is this what we want to see happen to our rivers?” Eberle asked.

“NO!” the crowd responded.

Field and Stream magazine editor-at-large Kirk Deeter, a Colorado resident, said he was lucky enough to travel the world in his job but always looks forward to coming home to his home state and home waters. He called the Upper Colorado a ”special place” that deserves protection.

Also speaking was Jon Kahn, owner of Confluence Kayaks in Denver, who stressed the economic impact of water-based recreation, which he noted contributes “hundreds of millions of dollars” annually to the state’s economy. “I am just one of hundreds of business owners whose livelihoods depend on healthy flows in our rivers,” he said.

According to the Defend the Colorado coalition, additional steps must be taken to protect the rivers, including:

· Managing the water supply to keep the rivers cool, clear and healthy.
· Ensuring healthy flushing flows to prevent river habitat from filling in with silt.
· Monitoring of the rivers’ health and a commitment to take action if needed to protect them.
· Bypassing the Windy Gap dam to reconnect Colorado River and restore river quality.

“The health of the Colorado and Fraser rivers is critical to local communities and the state’s recreation economy,” Eberle said. “But many Coloradans don’t realize that these rivers are having the life sucked out of them. At some point, they cease to become functioning rivers—and we lose a huge part of what makes our state a great place to live. Our state and federal leaders need to finish the job of protecting these incredible places.”

The group is planning additional rallies and events this spring to highlight the plight of the rivers and demand action from state and federal decision-makers.

The Defend the Colorado coalition includes Colorado Trout Unlimited and a range of stakeholders, including conservation and wildlife groups, landowners, and outdoor recreationists. More than 400 western slope businesses have signed a petition asking state leaders to protect the Upper Colorado.

For more information, go to www.DefendTheColorado.org

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

Colorado conservation activists last week gathered outside EPA headquarters in Denver, asking federal regulators to protect the Upper Colorado River system from proposed water diversions to the Front Range.

More Colorado River basin coverage here.

Windy Gap Firming Project update: Chimney Hollow Reservoir could get a green light for construction later this year

From the Fort Collins Coloradoan (Kevin Duggan):

The reservoir, which would sit southwest of Loveland, is intended to shore up the water supplies of a dozen Front Range communities and water districts as well as Platte River Power Authority. An initial decision on its future is expected this year, possibly by summer.

The reservoir also would provide access to nonmotorized boating and miles of trails expected to be built on 1,800 acres of adjacent Chimney Hollow Open Space managed by the Larimer County Natural Resources Department. The open space is part of the larger Blue Mountain Conservation Area.

Chimney Hollow Reservoir would sit directly west of Carter Lake on the other side of a towering hogback formation. With the two reservoirs about a half-mile apart, the area is expected to attract a variety of recreation enthusiasts, said Kerri Rollins, manager of the county’s open lands program…

Its main purpose is to provide water storage for its participating entities, said Dana Strongin, communications specialist with the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, or Northern Water, which would build the project. The participants already own rights to the water, which would be drawn from the Colorado River and conveyed to the Front Range through existing facilities of the Colorado-Big Thompson Project. But they have no way to store the water for use during dry years…

After years of studies and public debate required by the National Environmental Policy Act, the federal Bureau of Reclamation late last year released a final environmental impact statement for the project that looks at various options. A record of decision, which would designate the preferred option and the steps that must be taken for it to be approved — such as mitigating its impact on wildlife — is expected later this year. The decision could come by summer, Strongin said…

The reservoir would be created with the construction of a 350-foot-tall dam on the north side of the valley and a smaller structure on the south. Underground pipes would carry water in and out of the reservoir. Chimney Hollow would be slightly smaller than Carter Lake. Building the project would cost about $270 million, Strongin said. Going through the environmental review process has already cost about $9 million.

More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

Colorado River Basin: What are the reasonable water management options and strategies that will provide water for people, but also maintain a healthy river system?

Here’s a guest commentary written by Eric Kuhn, David Modeer and Fred Krupp running in The Denver Post. The trio are issuing a call to arms of sort, asking for input for the Colorado River Basin Study. Here’s an excerpt:

Management of the Colorado River is a complex balancing act between the diverse interests of United States and Mexico, tribes, the seven basin states, individual water users, stakeholders, and communities. The challenges posed by new growth and climate change may dwarf anything we faced in the past. Instead of staring into the abyss, the water users, agencies, and stakeholder groups that make managing the Colorado River responsibly their business are working together, using the best science available to define the problem, and looking for solutions.

We’re calling our inquiry the Colorado River Basin Study, and we want your help. As Colorado River management professionals, we have a lot of knowledge and ideas, but we know that we don’t have them all. We want ideas from the public, from you, but we need your input by February 1. You can submit your suggestions by completing the online form at: http://on.doi.gov/uvhkUi.

The big question we need to answer is: What are the reasonable water management options and strategies that will provide water for people, but also maintain a healthy river system? We don’t believe there’s a single silver bullet that will resolve all of our challenges. We want to continue to explore the benefits and costs of every possibility, from conservation to desalination to importing water from other regions.

The West was built on innovation and hard work, and that spirit is still strong. Our landscapes and communities are unparalleled in their beauty, resilience, and character. The economic well-being of our rural and urban communities in the Colorado River basin is inextricably linked to Colorado River and its environmental health.

That’s why we are asking for the public’s input to help us craft a study showing a path forward that supplies our communities with the water they need to thrive and protects the health of the Colorado River-and the ecosystems and economies it supports.

More Colorado River basin coverage here.

Windy Gap firming project update: More water for Boulder County

From the Boulder Daily Camera (Laura Snider):

“It’s been a long haul for us, but we see a light at the end of the tunnel,” said Dana Strongin, spokeswoman for Northern Water, which is spearheading the project that will serve a number of local towns, including Louisville, Lafayette, Longmont, Broomfield, Erie and Superior. “We entered into this process in 2003. It takes a lot of work to take this water planning and put it into action.”

The goal of the Windy Gap Firming Project is to make the supply of water from the original Windy Gap project, which was finished in 1985, more reliable. The original Windy Gap project was never able to deliver all the water promised to towns on the Front Range because it has to piggyback on some parts of the Colorado-Big Thompson diversion system to make it across the mountains.

That’s a problem because in wet years — when there’s more water to divert from the river — the Colorado-Big Thompson system doesn’t have room to store the Windy Gap water in its already-full reservoir. During dry years, there’s room to store Windy Gap water, but the project’s water rights are so junior that it can’t draw water from the river.

The key feature of the $270 million firming project, if approved, would be the construction of a new reservoir in Larimer County to solve the storage problem. The proposed Chimney Hollow Reservoir would sit just west of Carter Lake and have a capacity of 90,000 acre-feet. The water to fill the reservoir would largely be pumped through existing pipes and canals.

Environmentalists have been concerned about the effects the Windy Gap project could have on the upper reaches of the Colorado River, which already has been severely depleted. In particular, they worry that taking more water from the headwaters of the Colorado will cause an increase in water temperature, which can be lethal for fish, and a decrease in “flushing flows,” which are critical for cleaning out the sediment that can armor the bottom of riverbeds, smothering aquatic insects.

When the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Windy Gap Firming Project was released in 2008, Trout Unlimited was one of the groups that said the document was inadequate. Now, the nonprofit organization says the final version of the document is an improvement over the draft, though still not good enough.

More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

Windy Gap Firming: Recently released final EIS acknowledges potential declines in streamflow in the Upper Colorado River basin

From the Summit County Citizens Voice (Bob Berwyn):

Even more worrisome to conservation advocates are the projected declines in summer flows. Below Windy Gap Reservoir, July flows could drip by as much as 20 percent, according to the Bureau’s study, which also acknowledged that extensive mitigation measures will be needed to protect West Slope aquatic ecoystems…

But the proposed mitigation falls short of what’s needed to protect the Upper Colorado, according to Trout Unlimited, a cold-water fisheries conservation group.

Here’s the release from Colorado Trout Unlimited (Randy Scholfield):

A new federal report on the environmental impacts of a plan to expand the Windy Gap water diversion project in Colorado falls short of recommending what’s needed to protect the fragile Upper Colorado River, according to Trout Unlimited.

The Final Environmental Impact Statement, released by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation on Nov. 30, outlines the anticipated effects of the proposed project and recommends needed mitigation.

“This new document is an improvement over the previous version in that it acknowledges the Windy Gap project will worsen conditions in the Upper Colorado River and Grand Lake unless measures are taken,” said Drew Peternell, executive director of Trout Unlimited’s Colorado Water Project. However, the mitigation proposed by the bureau falls far short of what is needed and critical problems continue to be ignored. We urge the Bureau to require additional protective measures to preserve this irreplaceable natural resource.”

“Trout Unlimited’s concerns with the Environmental Impact Statement are echoed by the Upper Colorado River Alliance, a nonprofit group that is also seeking to require more mitigation to protect the river,” said Boulder attorney Steven J. Bushong, a representative of the Alliance.

The report comes out as Trout Unlimited is launching a petition campaign to protect the Upper Colorado River and its tributary, the Fraser River, and the mountain communities, businesses, people and wildlife that depend on them. The petition campaign, based online at DefendTheColorado.org, is being spearheaded by Trout Unlimited to engage advocates for the iconic but threatened rivers. The website allows advocates to sign on to a petition that will be delivered to decision makers before the bureau makes a final decision on the Windy Gap project. That decision is expected in early January.

“The good news is that the Bureau of Reclamation’s Environmental Impact Statement says additional mitigation measures may be added before the agency makes a final decision. That highlights the importance of taking action to stand up for the river now,” Peternell said.

Already 60 percent of the Upper Colorado is diverted to supply Front Range water users. The Windy Gap proposal, along with a separate Moffat Tunnel water project, could divert as much as 80 percent of the Upper Colorado’s natural flows. According to Trout Unlimited, steps must be taken to protect the rivers including:

· Managing the water supply to keep the rivers cool, clear and healthy.
· Funding to deepen river channels and create streamside shade.
· Monitoring of the rivers’ health and a commitment to take action if needed to protect them.
· Bypassing the Windy Gap dam to reconnect Colorado River and restore river quality.

“The Final Environmental Impact Statement continues to ignore existing problems that will be made much worse by the Windy Gap project,” said Sinjin Eberle, president of Colorado Trout Unlimited. “A study released by the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife earlier this year shows that entire populations of native fish and the insects they feed on have all but disappeared from the Colorado River below the Windy Gap Reservoir. The state study blames the reservoir and the lack of spring flows that clean sediments from the stream beds and warns that expansion of the Windy Gap project poses additional threats to the health of the river and the aquatic life in it.” See http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/op/wqcc/Hearings/Rulemaking/93/Responsive/93rphsTUexG.pdf

The Windy Gap project also impacts the health of Grand Lake. “Grand Lake – once a pristine lake of dramatic clarity and scenic beauty – has become cloudy, weedy and silty because of diversion water pumped into the lake from Shadow Mountain reservoir,” said John Stahl of the Greater Grand Lake Shoreline Association. “Nothing in the FEIS mitigation plan is helpful in addressing the existing problems–at best it maintains the status quo while more likely creating even bigger problems.”

The Environmental Impact Statement indicates that the Bureau of Reclamation will monitor to ensure that mitigation is adequate and will impose additional measures if necessary. “That’s helpful but needs to be more clearly articulated. Another critical addition is the construction of a bypass around the Windy Gap dam,” Eberle added.

The DefendTheColorado.org campaign highlights the people who depend on the rivers.

“The Colorado and Fraser rivers aren’t just bodies of water, they are the lifeblood for wildlife, local communities and the state’s recreation economy,” Eberle said. “But many Coloradans are unaware that these rivers are on the brink of collapse because of diversions. DefendTheColorado.org’s purpose is twofold – to raise awareness about the threats facing the Colorado and Fraser and to give people a way to stand up for our rivers.”

Eberle added, “We can’t afford to let these rivers literally go down the drain.”

A new feature of the website called “Voices of the Fraser” profiles local Fraser Valley residents and visitors who speak eloquently about their connection to the Fraser River and the need to preserve healthy flows. Among the individuals profiled are Olympic skier Liz McIntyre, logger Hoppe Southway and landscape artist Karen Vance.

“It would be a shame to see any of these tributaries dry up just for the sake of developing the Front Range,” said Southway in his profile. “It’s the water my children and grandchildren are going to want to see someday, and I hope it’s protected for future generations.”

Visitors to the site also have added their voices about why the river is important to them.

“I have fished and hiked the Fraser and Upper Colorado river regions for over 30 years and am deeply saddened by the degradation of these great watersheds,” a Golden, Colo., resident wrote.

A Bonita Springs, Florida, resident wrote: “I LOVE fishing that stretch of water and find such a simple peace of being in that area. Please don’t mess with such a special place.”

“As a visitor and fisherman to Colorado on a regular basis, my tourist dollars help the local communities,” noted a resident of Blue Springs, Missouri.

More Windy Gap Firming Project coverage here and here.

Conservationists worry that impacts to the Upper Colorado River basin have not been adequately addressed in the final EIS for the Windy Gap Firming Project

From The Denver Post (Monte Whaley):

…watchdog groups aren’t satisfied that the impact of the water-storage project on fish and wildlife habitat on the Western Slope has been adequately addressed. The report details how Chimney Hollow will increase diversions and reduce flows in the Colorado River below the Windy Gap reservoir, decrease some fish habitat and affect vegetation, wetlands and wildlife. “We have very serious concerns about this project and its intersection with projects and participants in the Poudre River watershed as well as its potential negative impacts on the Colorado River and Grand Lake,” said Save the Poudre executive director Gary Wockner…

Northern Water — the agency coordinating the project on behalf of 13 Front Range cities and water utilities — says it is working with other groups and agencies to mitigate the impact of the project. “In our minds, we have addressed the impacts, and we have gone through a long public process … to develop measures to protect fish and wildlife,” said project manager Jeff Drager.

More coverage from the Northern Colorado Business Report. From the article:

The FEIS states that the best course of action, according to the Bureau of Reclamation, is to construct Chimney Hollow Reservoir, a proposed 90,000 acre-foot reservoir southwest of Loveland. The construction of Chimney Hollow Reservoir is the project’s key feature and would increase the reliability of the existing Windy Gap project, which started delivering water to Front Range municipalities in 1985…

The FEIS was the last document in the Windy Gap project’s National Environmental Policy Act review. The project is now awaiting an official decision from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which is expected in early 2012.

Participants in the project include: Platte River Power Authority, Broomfield, Erie, Greeley, Longmont, Louisville, Loveland, Evans, Superior, Lafayette and Fort Lupton, Weld County Water District and Little Thompson Water District.

More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

Final EIS for Windy Gap Firming Available to Public

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

The Bureau of Reclamation announces the availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed Windy Gap Firming Project.

To access the Final EIS, Executive Summary, and supporting technical reports please visit www.usbr.gov/gp/ecao. A list of libraries where the Final EIS is available is also included on the website.

To receive a copy of the Final EIS on compact disk, please submit a written request to the attention of Lucy Maldonado through regular mail or e-mail:
Bureau of Reclamation
11056 W. County Rd. 18E
Loveland, Colorado 80537
lmaldonado@usbr.gov

The Windy Gap Firming Project was proposed to Reclamation by the Municipal Subdistrict of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Reclamation prepared the Final EIS in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.

The Final EIS discloses and summarizes the anticipated effects of the proposed project and four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative. It also recommends a preferred alternative and outlines environmental commitments and mitigations.

More coverage from Tom Hacker writing for the Loveland Reporter-Herald. From the article:

Chimney Hollow, just west of and slightly smaller than Carter Lake, is the key feature of the Windy Gap Firming Project and would store 30,000 acre feet of water. Thirteen municipalities and utilities, including Loveland, share ownership of the project…

The project, like its Colorado-Big Thompson predecessor, would divert Western Slope water from the upper Colorado River Basin to the east slope, where it would be stored at Chimney Hollow and delivered to Front Range water users.

More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

DefendTheColorado.org website launches to build awareness of upper Colorado River basin streamflow issues

Say hello to DefendTheColorado.org, a new website designed to connect interested people and raise awareness of the issues around transbasin diversions from the Upper Colorado River here in Colorado. Here’s a report from Tonya Bina writing for the Sky-Hi Daily News. From the article:

For the Trout Unlimted Project, [Editorial Photographer and Videographer Ted Wood of Story Group, Boulder] brought in Boulder colleagues Beth Wald, a photojournalist who of late has been covering environmental and cultural stories in Afghanistan, and Mark Conlin, a seasoned underwater photographer.

“We launched the project as a way to get more visibility of the stream-flow issues on the Fraser and Upper Colorado,” said Trout Unlimited’s Randy Schoefield. “What we’re trying to portray is the community’s deep connection to the river.”

The Story Group plans to add more portraits to the website in coming days and weeks. Eventually, Trout Unlimited hopes to host public events that display the portraits as well as work by other photographers, granting a full sense of the river’s significance in Grand County and the consequences of further transbasin diversions.

Click on the thumbnail graphic above and to the right for a map of Denver Water’s collection system. More Colorado River basin coverage here.

‘Future Horizons for Irrigated Agriculture’ tour recap: Greeley and other Weld County Communities are gearing up for population growth

Here’s an in-depth look at efforts by northern Colorado cities to water the expected growth in population from The Greeley Tribune. Click through and read the whole article and check out the photo gallery. Here’s an excerpt:

Water storage for the future is viewed as so vital to the northern Front Range that the 15 participating municipalities and water districts of the Northern Integrated Supply Project, or NISP, have spent about $10 million during the past seven years just to plan and analyze the endeavor. But there is no guarantee that NISP — a project that includes the construction of two new reservoirs in northern Colorado — will ever take shape. The federal government continues to analyze the Environmental Impact Statement…

Jon Monson, director of the city of Greeley’s Water and Sewer Department, said the city’s current supply will meet the needs of the community for only 25 more years, maybe less. In preparation, Greeley officials want to expand the Milton Seaman Reservoir, one of six high-mountain reservoirs from which the city draws its water. The reservoir holds about 5,000 acre-feet of water, and the proposed project calls for it to be expanded more than 10-fold to 53,000 acre-feet. The expansion would allow Greeley to pull 7,800 acre-feet of water off the reservoir annually, up from the 750 acre-feet it can pull now. Greeley uses about 45,000 acre-feet of water per year; demand is expected to grow to about 65,000 acre-feet by 2050. After initiating efforts in 2004, the draft Environmental Impact Statement for the project is expected by 2013, and a final EIS is expected by 2015. Afterward, construction would take two years and filling the reservoir could take another five to 10 years…

Another water storage effort is The Windy Gap Firming Project. The 25-year-old Windy Gap Project near Granby diverts water from the Colorado River to the Front Range via the Colorado-Big Thompson Project on a space-available basis. According to Monson, during wet years when water is available for Windy Gap diversions, Lake Granby is often full with little or no space for the water. During dry years, the water right can be too junior to come into priority, so no water is available to pump. Greeley is allotted 4,400 acre-feet of water annually from the Windy Gap Project, but that supply hasn’t always been available. The Windy Gap Firming Project was proposed to ensure reliable future deliveries. Nine other municipalities, including Evans, participates in the project, along with the Central Weld County Water District and two other districts. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is expected to publish the final Environmental Impact Statement for the Windy Gap Firming Project in November.

More Colorado Foundation for Water Education coverage here.

Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District tour attracts nearly 100 taxpayers, city officials, water district employees and students

From the Carbon Valley Miner and Farmer (Gene Sears):

Nearly 100 participants attended the tour, a mix of taxpayers, city officials, water district employees and students, split between two buses hired by the district for the trip. Starting at NCWCD headquarters in Berthoud, the tour headed northeast up Big Thompson Canyon, through Estes Park and onto Trail Ridge Road in Rocky Mountain National Park, headwaters for much of the district’s supply…

Built at a cost of $162 million, the project began full water deliveries in 1957. As it stands now, the Colorado-Big Thompson system consists of 12 reservoirs, 35 miles of tunnels, 95 miles of canals and 700 miles of power transmission lines. Spanning 150 miles east to west and 65 miles north to south, C-BT provides water to almost 700, 000 irrigated acres and more than 750,000 people in the South Platte River Basin.

More Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District coverage here.

Windy Gap Firming Project/Moffat Collection System Project update: Denver and Northern plan to fully mitigate project impacts

From the Boulder Daily Camera (Laura Snider):

The developers of the two water projects, Denver Water and Northern Water, say they plan to not only offset any future environmental problems created by their new projects in the upper Colorado River basin, but to also work together to voluntarily “enhance” the existing habitat in the area. “By fully mitigating our impacts, we keep (the basin) the same,” said Denver Water’s Travis Bray. “Through enhancement and through our cooperative efforts we’re making it better.”

But [Kirk Klancke], who works as a water manager in Grand County, and some Colorado environmental groups contend that more aggressive mitigation and rehabilitation plans are needed to save what’s left of the Colorado River. “Both of these (water utilities) wrote an environmental statement that said there would be no impacts,” said Klancke, who also serves as the president of the Colorado River Headwaters Chapter of Trout Unlimited. “But the third-grade class at Fraser Elementary can tell you what happens when you take 80 percent of a river.”[...]

Because Windy Gap’s water rights are relatively junior, the project only can divert water during wet years. But in wet years, Lake Granby — a critical storage reservoir for the Colorado-Big Thompson system — is often full, leaving no room for the Windy Gap water to travel to the Front Range. This makes the water supplied by Windy Gap to its original participants extremely unreliable…

If approved, the firming project calls for building a new reservoir west of Carter Lake in Larimer County. The Chimney Hollow Reservoir would be able to store 90,000 acre-feet of water, giving the Windy Gap water that can be drawn in wet years a place to go…

In Boulder County, Denver Water plans to offset the impacts of flooding hundreds of acres of land to expand Gross Reservoir by replanting woody riparian vegetation and by buying credits from buying credits from an approved “wetlands mitigation bank” to offset the two acres of wetland that will be inundated…

But what both water providers are most proud of is their cooperatively created “enhancement plan,” which they say will go beyond mitigating the impacts of the new project and actually improve the current conditions in the upper Colorado River basin. The idea is to restore the section of the Colorado River that lies downstream of both the Windy Gap and Moffat projects where the populations of giant stoneflies and sculpins, both of which are food for trout, have declined over the years. Together, Denver Water and Northern Water have agreed to spend $4.5 million on the restoration effort and put another $1.5 million into a reserve fund that can be used to tweak elements of the restoration project that aren’t working as designed. “This is not what we think is required by the state. We are not required to go back and make changes based on the impacts of past projects,” said Dana Strongin, spokeswoman for Northern Water. “This is a benefit — it’s something extra. We don’t have to do this, but we wanted to…

Mely Whiting, senior attorney with Trout Unlimited’s Colorado Water Project, said the plans don’t adequately address stream temperature problems and flushing flows. When the mountain snowpack begins to melt in the late spring and early summer, the influx of water “flushes” the rivers, scraping sediment off the streambed and, in some years, overflowing the banks and recharging adjacent wetlands. Because both of the new projects plan to draw water during the periods of high runoff, Whiting said the rivers are being robbed of the critical flush. When flows stay low throughout the summer, the sediment builds up on the bottom of the rivers and destroys the habitat used by aquatic insects. The low flows also increase the danger that stream temperatures will climb higher earlier in the summer…

The solution proposed by Trout Unlimited is to essentially reconstruct the habitat of the Fraser and the upper Colorado River to create narrower channels that would allow the remaining water to run deeper, faster and cooler…

Trout Unlimited commissioned a study to see how much it would cost to do the work that it believes needs to be done on the Fraser and upper Colorado rivers. According to the study, $3 million to $5 million more needs to be budgeted in the mitigation plan to adequately rehabilitate the Fraser and about $5 million more is needed for the upper Colorado River. Western Resource Advocates then analyzed how much an additional $5 million each from Denver Water and Northern Water would cost their customers. The result is that Denver Water customers would have to pay an additional $0.53 a year for 30 years and Northern Water customers would have to pay an additional $1.60 a year for 30 years. “Is protecting a river worth a dollar a year?” Beckwith asked. “It’s not a lot of money. People lose that much money in the couch.”

But Denver Water’s Travis Bray said it’s not fair to expect his utility and Northern Water to shoulder the entire burden of rebuilding the upper Colorado River basin, which has been degraded over the decades due to multiple projects. “In a perfect world, Denver Water and Northern Water would have unlimited funding and we could just make the whole Fraser River a gold medal (trout) river,” he said…

The final environmental impact statements for both projects are expected to be released late this year or next year. When each statement is released, the public will have the opportunity to give public comment before a final decision is made about whether to give the projects final approval.

More coverage from Laura Snider writing for the Boulder Daily Camera. From the article:

If a Denver Water plan to nearly triple the size of Gross Reservoir gets the final OK, hundreds of acres of shoreline, tributaries, wetlands and vegetated slopes in southwest Boulder County would be underwater. The construction necessary to raise the dam more than 100 feet also would require trucks laden with sand to make 44 round trips up to the reservoir each day during peak construction from sand quarries near Longmont. Denver Water estimates that it will take five years to complete the project. These impacts have raised concerns with the Boulder County commissioners as well as reservoir neighbors…

Earlier this year, Denver Water also released its proposal for how the utility plans to mitigate fish and wildlife impacts for the project. The plan, which was approved in June by the Colorado Wildlife Commission, calls for mitigating the loss of about two acres of wetlands by buying credits from an approved “wetlands mitigation bank.” Denver Water also plans to replant native woody riparian vegetation along the edge of the newly enlarged reservoir to replace the four acres of riparian habitat that would be flooded if the expansion goes forward. Since the reservoir is largely fed from water traveling through the Moffat Tunnel from the Western Slope and emptying into South Boulder Creek, Denver Water would also monitor the effects of a greater volume of water on stream bank stability. The Boulder County commissioners have said that they do not believe Denver Water’s mitigation plan adequately addresses the impacts of the reservoir expansion.

More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here and here.

More Windy Gap Firming Project coverage here and here.

Colorado River basin: Mitigating further declines to the riparian and stream environment from transmountain diversions in the upper river watersheds

A while back Trout Unlimited signaled pretty strongly that the Moffat Collection System Project and the Windy Gap Firming Project were in for a fight, even as Denver Water and Northern Water were making efforts to appease west slope concerns with increased diversions from the upper Colorado and Fraser rivers. Despite the historic agreement between Denver Water and west slope water wonks and the recently announced Colorado Division of Wildlife approval for mitigation there may be a long battle ahead for the two Front Range providers to move more water through the Adams and Moffat tunnels.

Here’s a guest commentary about new proposed diversions from Drew Peternell running in The Denver Post. Here’s an excerpt:

Earlier this month, Denver Water and the Northern District presented to the Colorado Wildlife Commission plans to mitigate the impacts of their projects. While the plans do include some meaningful provisions, they do not go far enough.

First, under the proposed mitigation, Denver can divert from the Fraser River even when diversions violate stream temperature standards designed to prevent fish mortality.

Second, the increased diversions could eliminate the spring high-water flows necessary to flush stream channels of sediment, which is choking many stretches of the river to death.

Third, the mitigation plans do not include a bypass of Windy Gap Reservoir, a measure that would reduce rainbow trout whirling disease and significantly improve conditions in the Colorado River downstream of the reservoir.

And fourth, while the mitigation plans include some funding for habitat projects to adapt the streams to the new, lower flow reality, the dollar figures fall short of what is needed by nearly $10 million, according to estimates by independent restoration contractors.

Yes, protecting the health of the upper Colorado River basin from the impacts of the proposed water diversions requires money. And $10 million may sound like a lot. But for Denver Water customers, it would be less than $1 a year per household, according to an analysis by Western Resource Advocates.

Denver Water and the Northern District won’t have to pay a nickel for the water they propose to take from the upper Colorado River basin, and they refuse to pony up the money needed to offset the impacts of their diversions, arguing that their customers won’t tolerate the rate increase.

Is saving our state’s namesake river worth a buck a year to you?

More Colorado River basin coverage here.

Trout Unlimited: Upper Colorado River Mitigation Package ‘Not Enough’

Here’s the release from Colorado Trout Unlimited (Randy Schofield):

Trout Unlimited today expressed disappointment in a June 9 Colorado Wildlife Commission decision to approve without changes mitigation plans offered by Denver Water and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District for two new water diversion projects, saying the plans fall short of what’s needed to protect the fish and wildlife resources of the upper Colorado River basin.

“We appreciate the hard work the commission and its staff have put into reviewing the proposed Moffat Tunnel and Windy Gap expansion projects,” said Drew Peternell, director of Trout Unlimited’s Colorado Water Project. “While the mitigation package the commission approved yesterday is an improvement over the plans Denver and Northern offered originally, it is not enough to protect the rivers and streams of the upper Colorado River basin from the impacts of the new projects.”

For decades, large-scale water diversions to the Front Range have severely depleted and damaged the upper Colorado River and its major tributaries, including the Fraser River. Already, transbasin water diversion projects, including Denver Water’s Moffat Tunnel pipeline and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District’s Windy Gap project, take about 60 percent of the native flows of the upper Colorado River basin. The proposed expansions of the Moffat Tunnel and Windy Gap projects would take an additional 15 percent of flows and further stress an ecosystem that is on the tipping point of survival.

Trout Unlimited vowed to seek additional mitigation conditions in the next phases of project permitting and urged Denver Water and Northern to do more to offset the impacts of the proposed projects on the Colorado River and its tributaries.

At the Wildlife Commission meeting in Grand Junction Thursday, several wildlife commissioners expressed concerns that the final mitigation plans submitted by Denver Water and Northern were inadequate, but the commission voted unanimously to approve the plans anyway, without changes.

“We’re disappointed that commissioners apparently believed they didn’t have the statutory authority to recommend additional protections,” said Mely Whiting, counsel for TU’s Colorado Water Project. “We don’t believe that’s an accurate reading of the statute.”

Last week, TU, West Slope landowners and other stakeholder groups urged the Wildlife Commission to include several provisions in the final mitigation package to ensure the health of the rivers:

- Reconnecting the Colorado River by creating a “bypass” around Windy Gap Reservoir.
- A halt to diversions when water temperatures are on the verge of state “impaired” standards – water warm enough to kill trout.
- Adequate spring flushing flows to keep the rivers healthy and sustain riparian areas that are critical to wildlife.
- An ongoing plan to monitor stream conditions and identify needed habitat restoration projects.
- An endowment fund to pay for those restoration projects as an “insurance policy” for river health.

TU leaders stressed that these were reasonable requests. “We weren’t asking for perfection,” said Whiting. “We were simply asking for adequate mitigation, an ‘insurance policy’ that provides the minimal level of protection needed to keep the rivers and streams of the upper Colorado basin healthy into the future. Yesterday’s decision puts these irreplaceable resources at risk.”

The Fraser River was a big loser in the decision, said TU. Under the plan approved by the commission, Denver Water can divert through the Moffat Tunnel even when those diversions violate stream temperature standards designed to prevent lethal effects on fish. And the project could take so much water that flushing flows critical to clean the stream of harmful sediment would no longer be available. The mitigation plans had several other deficiencies, including:

- Funding for stream projects to protect the Colorado River fell significantly short—between $3 and $5 million short, according to TU’s calculations, based on estimates by independent restoration contractors.
- Funding for a potential bypass of Windy Gap Reservoir, which could significantly improve downstream Colorado River conditions, was not included in the package.
- Northern’s plan allows chronic stream temperature problems and provides insufficient flushing flows in the Upper Colorado River.

TU thanked the commissioners for their efforts and acknowledged the complex, difficult nature of these mitigation decisions. But the sportsmen’s group said that the overriding goal of ensuring the future of the river’s wildlife habitat and fisheries was not achieved.

“The bottom line is that under this mitigation package, the health of the upper Colorado River and its tributaries will continue to decline,” said Peternell.

To learn more about diversion impacts on the river and watch TU’s short video “Tapped Out,” go to www.defendthecolorado.org

More coverage from Scott Willoughby writing for The Denver Post. From the article:

Several wildlife commissioners echoed the sentiment that the final mitigation plans submitted by Denver Water and Northern were not ideal, but the commission voted unanimously to approve the plans anyway. The projects’ Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plans now move to the Colorado Water Conservation Board, which has 60 days to affirm or modify the state’s position. Gov. John Hickenlooper will also have 60 days to affirm or further modify it before it’s submitted to federal permitting agencies…

Prompted by a coalition of stakeholders led by Trout Unlimited, both water utilities made concessions to plans previously submitted. Among the additional measures are improved safeguards for maintaining cool water temperatures and minimum flow protections, creation of contingency funds for unanticipated impacts and enhanced funding for river restoration plans. The restoration plans were not required by the permitting process but were offered by Denver and Northern to help address impacts from past water development. The agreements hinge on final federal approval of the water projects.

The additional measures are a step in the right direction, watchdogs say, but don’t go far enough. Trout Unlimited vowed to seek additional mitigation conditions in the next phases of project permitting and urged Denver Water and Northern to do more to offset the impacts of the proposed projects on the Colorado River and its tributaries…

Most significant among the stakeholders’ requests is a “reconnection” of the Colorado River by creating a yet-to-be- designed bypass around the 445-acre-foot Windy Gap collection pond that the group has pinpointed as a major problem area near the confluence of the Fraser and Colorado rivers. Most agree that the proposal has merit, although further study is required. “We feel that the reconstruction of the channel downstream is just as important,” DOW aquatic biologist Ken Kehmeier told the commission. “We feel that we can’t determine the necessity for a bypass until a study is done.”

More coverage from Janice Kurbjin writing for the Summit Daily News. From the article:

Trout Unlimited representatives say the plans fall short of what’s needed to protect the fish and wildlife resources of the Upper Colorado River Basin. They vowed in early June to fight the projects on several fronts, including at the federal permitting level, if the plan didn’t include strong protections for the Upper Colorado River. They are now focused on other permitting levels. “We want more,” said Drew Peternell, director of Trout Unlimited’s Colorado Water Project.

Groups such as the Fraser River Basin Landowners and the Upper Colorado River Alliance are on board with the fight…

According to the Division of Wildlife, restoration plans aren’t required by the permitting process but were offered voluntarily by the utilities. A DOW statement said the commission’s authority is limited to mitigating impacts from the proposed projects and restoring the river to a past condition is beyond the scope of commission authority…

Trout Unlimited and other West Slope landowners and stakeholders asked the wildlife commission earlier this month to include several provisions, they called it an “insurance policy,” to protect the health of the rivers. What’s been offered isn’t enough, they say. Despite flow and temperature monitoring proposed by Denver Water, Trout Unlimited claimed the utility is still allowed to divert through the Moffat Tunnel even when those diversions violate stream temperature standards designed to prevent lethal effects on fish. The diversions could also negatively affect flushing flows that clean the stream of sediment, they said. Both utilities agreed to a $600,000 “mitigation insurance policy” that falls between $3 and $5 million short, Trout Unlimited representatives said. In particular, there’s no funding for a Windy Gap Reservoir bypass, meant to improve downstream Colorado River conditions, nor was an endowment fund established to pay for future restoration projects that would be planned and monitored.

More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here and here.

More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

Moffat Collection System Project and Windy Gap Firming Project: The Colorado Division of Wildlife commissioners approve both mitigation plans

From The Denver Post (Mitchell Byars):

Now the plan must clear the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which is expected to release its final environmental impact study later this year. If the Army Corps gives the project the green light, construction on the expansion of Gross Reservoir in southwest Boulder County could start as early as 2015. The project is expected to take four years. The wildlife commission voted unanimously to accept Denver Water’s environmental mitigation plan. “We take this unanimous vote as an endorsement of our cooperative approach with local stakeholders,” said Denver Water’s planning director Dave Little. “Now we want to move aggressively towards implementing these measures.”[...]

In the mitigation plan, Denver Water agreed to stop diverting water from July 15 through the end of August if temperatures in the river reached levels that could possibly threaten local fish populations. The utility also pledged money to enhance stream habitats in cooperation with local counties and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. “Make the river better, that’s sort of our mantra,” Little said. “We’ve addressed all of the impacts in the scientific study the Army Corps of Engineers did, which was an exhaustive effort. But we know the Corps did not capture the impacts that some others have brought up and that’s why we went above and beyond in our mitigation plan.”

More coverage from Tonya Bina writing for the Sky-Hi Daily News. From the article:

In a series of unanimous votes, the commissioners approved mitigation plans for Denver’s Moffat Collection System project and Northern’s Windy Gap Firming Project and also authorized the Colorado Division of Wildlife to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with Denver and Northern to help manage a significant restoration project for the upper Colorado River…

The votes came after Denver and Northern described to Commissioners several new or modified plan elements, which include enhanced temperature and flow protections, creation of contingency funds for unanticipated impacts and enhanced funding for river restoration plans. The restoration plans were not required by the permitting process but were offered voluntarily by Denver and Northern to help address impacts from past water development. The agreements hinge on the water providers obtaining final federal approval for their projects…

Prior to the vote, Wildlife Commission chairman Tim Glenn summarized concerns expressed by several commissioners regarding the complex package of plans and the potential that development of the projects may have unintended consequences for the Upper Colorado, Fraser and Williams Fork rivers. “Is it perfect?” Glenn asked “No. But staff has evaluated it inside and out and I’m confident that it’s better than where we are.” The Commission’s recommendation will now be transmitted to the federal permitting agency for each project…

To further address impacts from its Moffat Collection System project, Denver has agreed to new elements including increased safeguards for maintaining cool water temperatures and minimum flows in the Fraser during high summer and additional funds for aquatic habitat improvements in that river. Denver also agreed to reserve $600,000 for a “mitigation insurance policy” to address any new impacts identified by the Final Environmental Impact Statement being developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This is in addition to Denver’s previous proposal to fund a Colorado River cutthroat restoration project and other aquatic habitat restoration work on the Fraser. On the Colorado River, Denver would maintain two water temperature gauges and agree to release water in August if high temperatures threatened fish…

East of the Divide, Denver would allow Boulder and Lafayette to store water in the enlarged Gross Reservoir for release during winter months, replace wetlands inundated by the larger reservoir and monitor stream channel stability.

In its final proposal, Northern agreed to increase minimum peak flows during drought conditions to maintain fish spawning habitat, to further restrict or curtail pumping during extreme conditions to protect cool water temperatures and to reserve $600,000 for a “mitigation insurance policy” to address any new impacts identified by the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Windy Gap being developed by the Bureau of Reclamation. Northern’s proposal included mitigating impacts on the Upper Colorado River system by managing their pumping to maintain water levels in Lake Granby and keep water temperatures cool, looking for ways to improve flushing flows in the Upper Colorado River below Windy Gap Reservoir and contributing to water quality projects that reduce nutrient loading in Lake Granby, Grand Lake and Shadow Mountain Reservoir.

East of the Divide, Northern proposed to replace lost wetlands and improve enhance wildlife habitat near the new Chimney Hollow reservoir…

In their final plans, Denver and Northern agreed to add $1 million in funding to the Upper Colorado River Habitat Project to $4.5 million and increase money set aside to address future contingencies or operating and maintenance costs on that project to $1.5 million. Denver and Northern also pledged to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the DOW to manage the habitat project, and urged that the DOW be given a more direct role in developing and managing stream restoration projects contemplated under the Learn By Doing adaptive management process created by Denver’s global settlement with Grand County and other stakeholders…

Senior Northeast Region aquatic biologist Ken Kehmeier said Division staff believes that in total, the agreements, including those made with mountain communities, would not only address impacts from the new projects but also help repair impacts to the Colorado and Fraser rivers caused by previous projects.

More coverage from David O. Williams writing for the Colorado Independent. From the article:

Commissioners were generally still worried about the “unintended consequences for the Upper Colorado, Fraser and Williams Fork rivers” but felt the revised mitigation plans – including greater temperature and flow protections for aquatic life, more funding for river restoration and a contingency fund for unanticipated impacts – were a lot better than previous plans. “It has always been Denver Water’s goal to go beyond mitigating the project impacts to make the river better than it is today,” Denver Water’s director of planning Dave Little said: “We look forward to working with stakeholders on mitigation for the project and the significant enhancement plan also accepted by the Commission that will improve aquatic habitat in the Upper Colorado River Basin.”

The fish and wildlife mitigation plans still must be approved by federal regulators. Also on Thursday, Denver Water provided a statement on the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation report that includes one scenario in which water levels in the Colorado River decrease by 10 to 20 percent by the middle of this century as a result of global climate change.

More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here and here.

More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

Moffat Collection System Project and Windy Gap Firming Project: The Colorado Division of Wildlife commissioners approve both mitigation plans

Here’s the release from the Colorado Division of Wildlife:

The Colorado Wildlife Commission Thursday endorsed Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plans submitted by Denver Water and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District to mitigate impacts that would be caused by two proposed transmountain water development projects.

In a series of unanimous votes, Commissioners approved mitigation plans for Denver’s Moffat Collection System project and Northern’s Windy Gap Firming Project and also authorized the Division of Wildlife to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with Denver and Northern to help manage a significant restoration project for the upper Colorado River. Three members of the Colorado State Parks Board joined the Commission at the workshop, which was held at the Doubletree Inn on Horizon Drive.

The votes came after Denver and Northern described to Commissioners several new or modified plan elements, which include enhanced temperature and flow protections, creation of contingency funds for unanticipated impacts and enhanced funding for river restoration plans. The restoration plans were not required by the permitting process but were offered voluntarily by Denver and Northern to help address impacts from past water development. The agreements hinge on the water providers obtaining final federal approval for their projects.

Prior to the vote, Wildlife Commission chairman Tim Glenn summarized concerns expressed by several commissioners regarding the complex package of plans and the potential that development of the projects may have unintended consequences for the upper Colorado, Fraser and Williams Fork rivers.

“Is it perfect?” Glenn asked “No. But staff has evaluated it inside and out and I’m confident that it’s better than where we are.”

The Commission’s recommendation will now be transmitted to the federal permitting agency for each project. Denver Water’s Moffat Collection System project would firm up the yield from Denver’s existing water rights on the West Slope, primarily by enlarging Boulder’s Gross Reservoir and diverting additional water from the Fraser, Williams Fork and Blue rivers. Northern’s Windy Gap Firming Project proposes to firm up the yield from its existing water rights in the Upper Colorado River by diverting additional water to the proposed new Chimney Hollow Reservoir west of Loveland.

Since last fall, Denver and Northern have been in discussions with Division of Wildlife staff to address concerns voiced by the public and by Wildlife Commissioners. The two utilities have simultaneously been negotiating a complimentary set of agreements with a diverse group of stakeholders, including affected local governments like Grand County.

To further address impacts from its Moffat Collection System project, Denver has agreed to new elements including increased safeguards for maintaining cool water temperatures and minimum flows in the Fraser during high summer and additional funds for aquatic habitat improvements in that river. Denver also agreed to reserve $600,000 for a “mitigation insurance policy” to address any new impacts identified by the Final Environmental Impact Statement being developed by the Army Corps of Engineers.

This is in addition to Denver’s previous proposal to fund a Colorado River cutthroat restoration project and other aquatic habitat restoration work on the Fraser. On the Colorado River, Denver would maintain two water temperature gauges and agree to release water in August if high temperatures threatened fish. East of the Divide, Denver would allow Boulder and Lafayette to store water in the enlarged Gross Reservoir for release during winter months, replace wetlands inundated by the larger reservoir and monitor stream channel stability.

In its final proposal, Northern agreed to increase minimum peak flows during drought conditions to maintain fish spawning habitat, to further restrict or curtail pumping during extreme conditions to protect cool water temperatures and to reserve $600,000 for a “mitigation insurance policy” to address any new impacts identified by the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Windy Gap being developed by the Bureau of Reclamation.

Northern’s proposal included mitigating impacts on the Upper Colorado River system by managing their pumping to maintain water levels in Lake Granby and keep water temperatures cool, looking for ways to improve flushing flows in the Upper Colorado River below Windy Gap Reservoir and contributing to water quality projects that reduce nutrient loading in Lake Granby, Grand Lake and Shadow Mountain Reservoir. East of the Divide, Northern proposed to replace lost wetlands and improve enhance wildlife habitat near the new Chimney Hollow reservoir.

Under state statute, the Wildlife Commission’s authority was limited to mitigating impacts from proposed projects. Restoring the river to a past condition was beyond the scope of Commission authority. However, Denver and Northern voluntarily proposed to help enhance conditions for fish and wildlife resources on both sides of the Continental Divide.

The enhancement plans would support the Upper Colorado River Habitat Project, a collaborative plan designed to re-establish a functional channel system and improve habitat for trout and other important aquatic species on a roughly 14-mile stretch of river between Windy Gap Reservoir and the Kemp-Breeze State Wildlife Area.

In their final plans, Denver and Northern agreed to add $1 million in funding to the Upper Colorado River Habitat Project to $4.5 million and increase money set aside to address future contingencies or operating and maintenance costs on that project to $1.5 million. Denver and Northern also pledged to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the DOW to manage the habitat project, and urged that the DOW be given a more direct role in developing and managing stream restoration projects contemplated under the Learn By Doing adaptive management process created by Denver’s global settlement with Grand County and other stakeholders.

That global settlement, announced recently by Denver Water, would address longstanding concerns about the health of the Colorado River. The settlement includes funding for aquatic habitat and for an adaptive management process designed to help maintain river health.

Northern is also working on similar agreement with communities on the Upper Colorado River.

Senior Northeast Region aquatic biologist Ken Kehmeier said Division staff believes that in total, the agreements, including those made with mountain communities, would not only address impacts from the new projects but also help repair impacts to the Colorado and Fraser rivers caused by previous projects.

Commissioner David Brougham credited the Division, Denver and Northern for negotiating agreements which went beyond the Commission’s limited jurisdiction under the statute.

“I think in looking at this the Division has gone beyond and done more than that statute gives us the power to do,” Brougham said. “Denver and Northern could have said no, but they didn’t and I think that’s telling.”

Additional information regarding the Wildlife Commission’s review, including links to the mitigation and enhancement plans being offered by Denver Water and Northern, can be found on the Division’s web site at: http://wildlife.state.co.us/LandWater/Water/MoffatWindyGapMitigationProjects/.

During the morning session, North Park District Wildlife Manager Josh Dilley was presented with the 2010 Shikar-Safari Club International Officer of the Year Award. Dilley, who for the past three years has had responsibility for two wildlife management districts in the high mountain basin, was presented with the award by Bob Boswell of Shikar Safari Club International.

Dilley, who was surrounded by his family, said he was honored by the award. “I don’t have to go to work every morning, I get to go to work every morning,” Dilley told the Commissioners. “Wildlife officers in Colorado have a passion like no other. I work with my heroes every day.”

Grand Junction’s Lynn Ensley, who founded the nonprofit Pathways for Fishing, was recognized for his outstanding service in recruiting young anglers in Colorado. “I can’t say enough about Lynn’s continued dedication, his passion and his enthusiasm,” said Northwest Regional Manager Ron Velarde. “Since 1995, Lynn has introduced almost 15,000 kids to the sport of fishing.”

Ensley expressed to the Commissioners his appreciation for the Division’s support over the years, adding that he is looking to develop a new program to recruit young deer hunters.

Commissioners also received an update on draft black bear management plans for the northern Front Range, the Sangre de Cristos, the Uncompahgre and the Bears’ Ears area of northwestern Colorado, as well as an update on the impending July 1 merger of the Division of Wildlife with Colorado State Parks.

In other action, the Commission adopted final regulations removing bag and possession limits at Bonny Reservoir State Park and allow the use of trotlines and jugs. This action permanently implements an emergency regulation passed by the Commission at its last meeting in May 2011. Bonny Reservoir is scheduled to be drained in the fall of 2011, and this change is intended to allow the public to use all game fish prior to the draining of the reservoir.

The Wildlife Commission meets monthly and travels to communities around the state to facilitate public participation in its processes. The complete agenda for the June Wildlife Commission meeting can be found on the Wildlife Commission web page at:

http://wildlife.state.co.us/WildlifeCommission/Archives/2011/June92011.htm.

The Colorado Wildlife Commission is an 11-member board appointed by the governor. The Wildlife Commission sets Division of Wildlife regulations and policies for hunting, fishing, watchable wildlife, nongame, threatened and endangered species. The Commission also oversees Division of Wildlife land purchases and property regulations.

More coverage from Wayne Harrison writing for TheDenverChannel.com. From the article:

Plans for minimizing the effects on wildlife include ways to maintain cool water temperatures and minimum water flows, restoring fish habitat and increasing flows during drought to maintain fish spawning areas. Denver Water planning director Dave Little says the goal is to improve the rivers.

More coverage from the Boulder Daily Camera. From the article:

Members of the Colorado Wildlife Commission voted unanimously Thursday to accept a plan by Denver Water to mitigate the impacts of a proposed expansion to Gross Reservoir in southwest Boulder County. The mitigation plan addresses impacts in Boulder County as well as impacts to the headwaters of the Colorado River, where more water will be drawn to fill the enlarged Gross Reservoir.

More coverage from the Longmont Times-Call. From the article:

The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, which has its headquarters in Berthoud, provides water for agricultural, municipal, domestic and industrial uses in portionis of Boulder, Larimer, Weld, Broomfield, Morgan, Logan, Washington and Sedgwick counties. According to the Colorado Division of Wildlife, Northern has agreed: to increase minimum peak flows during droughts to maintain fish spawning habitat; to further restrict or curtail pumping during extreme conditions to protect cool water temperatures, and to reserve a $600,000 “mitigation insurance policy” to address any new impacts identified in a final Windy Gap environmental impact statement being developed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here and here.

More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

Vote Slated on Water Mitigation Plans

Here’s the release from the Colorado Division of Wildlife (Theo Stein):

The Colorado Wildlife Commission plans to vote on the adequacy of plans to mitigate impacts to fish and wildlife resources from two proposed transmountain water development projects during its meeting in Grand Junction.

The vote will complete the Commission’s 60-day review of the Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plans submitted by Denver Water and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District at the Commission’s April meeting in Meeker.

The Moffat Collection System Project proposes to firm up the yield from Denver Water’s existing water rights on the West Slope, primarily by diverting additional water from the Fraser, Williams Fork and Blue rivers to an enlarged Gross Reservoir in Boulder County. The Windy Gap Firming Project would firm up Northern’s yield from existing water rights in the Upper Colorado River by diverting additional water to the proposed new Chimney Hollow Reservoir west of Loveland. The mitigation plan review by the Wildlife Commission is part of each project’s federal permitting process.

Last month, Ken Kehmeier, a senior aquatic biologist with the Division, presented staff’s analysis of the plans during the Commission’s May meeting in Salida. Following Kehmeier’s analysis, Commissioners questioned whether additional protections might be needed to guard against high water temperatures and whether flushing flows contemplated by the plans would be enough to maintain channel health. They also asked for more consideration of mitigation and enhancement funding, and for a clarification of the role that the Division would play in developing and managing restoration projects.

As part of its mitigation package for the Fraser River and upper Williams Fork River, Denver has proposed to fund a Colorado River cutthroat restoration project and fund other aquatic habitat restoration work. On the Colorado River, Denver and Northern Water would monitor water temperatures and agree to release water in August if high temperatures threatened fish. East of the Divide, Denver would replace wetlands inundated by the enlarged Gross Reservoir and monitor stream channel stability in South Boulder Creek. Denver would also allow Boulder and Lafayette to store water in Gross Reservoir to boost minimum flows in the Boulder Creek drainage during winter.

Northern, for its part, has offered [to] manage their diversions to maintain water levels in Lake Granby and keep water temperatures cool in the Upper Colorado River below Windy Gap Reservoir. Northern also said it would contribute to water-quality projects designed to reduce nutrient loading in Grand Lake, Lake Granby and Shadow Mountain Reservoir. On the other side of the Divide, Northern would replace wetlands submerged by the new Chimney Hollow Reservoir and enhance nearby wildlife habitat.

Denver and Northern are also voluntarily proposing enhancement plans to improve conditions for fish and wildlife on a roughly 14-mile stretch of river between Windy Gap Reservoir and the Kemp-Breeze State Wildlife Area. The enhancement plans are not required by the Commission’s review process.

Once the Wildlife Commission adopts its final recommendation, the Colorado Water Conservation Board will have 60 days to affirm or modify the state’s position. Governor John Hickenlooper will also have 60 days to affirm or further modify it before it’s submitted to federal permitting agencies.

Recently, Denver Water announced it had reached a complex legal settlement with Grand County and 33 other groups regarding longstanding concerns about the health of the Colorado River. The settlement includes funding for aquatic habitat and for an adaptive management process designed to help maintain river health.

Additional information regarding the Wildlife Commission’s review, including links to the mitigation and enhancement plans being offered by Denver Water and Northern, can be found on the Division’s web site at: http://wildlife.state.co.us/LandWater/Water/MoffatWindyGapMitigationProjects/.

More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here and here.

More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

Colorado River basin: Wildlife Commission hears water plan concerns

Here’s the release from the Colorado Division of Wildlife:

Colorado Wildlife Commissioners heard a day of presentations and testimony Friday as they continued to evaluate draft plans to mitigate impacts to fish and wildlife resources submitted by proponents of two major transmountain diversion projects.

The public hearing came midway through the Commission’s 60-day review of mitigation and enhancement plans pertaining to Denver Water’s Moffat Collection System project and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District’s Windy Gap Firming project. The meeting was held at the Hampton Inn and Suites on Highway 50 in Salida.

Wildlife Commission Chairman Tim Glenn said he was encouraged that Denver and Northern had incorporated additional changes to their draft plans based on public input during the past several months.

“Denver Water and Northern have listened to the concerns about impacts to fish and wildlife in the Upper Colorado River system and improved their plans in response,” Glenn said. “I think everyone’s focus is the health of these rivers and we look forward to continuing these discussions through staff during the next month.”

Ken Kehmeier, a senior aquatic biologist with the Division, presented staff’s analysis of Denver’s and Northern’s plans for mitigating impacts from the proposed projects as well as enhancing existing conditions on the impacted streams and rivers.

Following staff and public testimony, Commissioners asked for additional information about whether the mitigation plans were sufficient to protect cool water temperatures in the headwaters of the Colorado and Fraser River systems.

They questioned whether flushing flows would be adequate to rejuvenate cobble beds important for trout spawning and trout forage that have been degraded by previous water development. Commissioners said that they would like to see additional funding to help restore healthy river conditions and a legally binding agreement to ensure restoration would occur. They also suggested the Division should have an integral role in developing and managing restoration projects through the adaptive management process known as Learning by Doing.

Denver Water’s Moffat Collection System Project is designed to firm up the yield from its existing water rights on the West Slope, primarily by enlarging Boulder’s Gross Reservoir and diverting additional water from the Fraser, Williams Fork and Blue rivers.

Northern’s Windy Gap Firming Project is proposing to firm up the yield from its existing water rights in the Upper Colorado River by diverting additional water to the proposed new Chimney Hollow Reservoir west of Loveland.

In addition to the Commission’s fish and wildlife mitigation plan process, Denver Water recently announced it had reached a complex legal settlement with Grand County and 33 other groups regarding longstanding concerns about the health of the Colorado River that includes funding for aquatic habitat and development of the Learn by Doing process.

The Wildlife Commission is scheduled to make a final recommendation on the adequacy of the mitigation plans at its June meeting in Grand Junction.

“Healthy river systems are critically important to the future of this state,” Glenn said. “The Commission’s review of these projects has been lengthy and we greatly appreciate all of the input we have received on how we can best fix the river. Water projects like this have to be done right if we’re going to have healthy wildlife and a healthy tourism economy.”

Additional information regarding the Wildlife Commission’s review, including links to DOW staff evaluations of the mitigation and enhancement plans being offered by Denver Water and Northern, can be found on the Division’s web site at: http://wildlife.state.co.us/LandWater/Water/MoffatWindyGapMitigationProjects/.

More coverage from Bruce Willoughby writing for The Denver Post. From the article:

The commission dedicated the day solely to public commentary on two controversial transmountain water diversion projects proposed for Colorado River headwaters, and river advocates crammed the docket with impassioned pleas for assurance that the projects won’t decimate fragile fisheries such as the Fraser River, Williams Fork, Blue River and the Upper Colorado itself. They came away with none…

Representatives from Grand County, Trout Unlimited, Northwest Colorado Council of Governments, Colorado River Landowners and Western Resource Advocates expressed concerns over the proposals by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District to annually draw thousands of acre-feet more water from Windy Gap Reservoir for Front Range storage and by Denver Water to increase diversions through the Moffat Tunnel to an enlarged Gross Reservoir near Boulder…

“I see dead brown trout on the bank every year in August because the water temperatures are too high,” said rancher Ron Jones, whose Fraser River frontage merits Gold Medal designation. “If they want to take the water, then they should put the money into doing what it takes to protect the rivers.”

It’s an interesting perspective — putting the health of the rivers ahead of the perceived need for more water elsewhere. There is some money on the table dedicated to enhancement of a portion of the Colorado, but consensus holds that it’s not nearly enough. And as currently proposed, many mitigation measures are conditional upon the volume of water already diverted and stored in East Slope reservoirs, not necessarily what’s happening in the rivers it’s being drawn from.

The Wildlife Commission, meanwhile, finds itself in the compromising position of attempting to address flaws it has identified in the proposals and finding a way to enforce its stance in the next month. After that, the Colorado Water Conservation Board will have 60 days to affirm or modify the commission’s recommendation as the state’s official position.

More Colorado River basin coverage here.

Colorado Division of Wildlife: Moffat Collection System and Windy Gap Firming projects hearings recap

From The Mountain Mail (Joe Stone):

Commission chairman Tim Glenn pointed out that authority of the commission is limited to review of mitigation plans to address impacts to fish and wildlife by the proposed projects.

Representatives from Grand County, Trout Unlimited, Northwest Colorado Council of Governments, Colorado River Landowners and Western Resource Advocates urged commissioners to seek more extensive measures than those proposed in mitigation plans. Specific issues during public testimony include higher water temperature, insufficient flushing flow, nutrient loading, effect of climate change, need for monitoring and adaptive management and adequacy of long-term financing…

Studies cited during testimony indicate mayfly species below Windy Gap Reservoir have been reduced from 17 species in 1983 to five species in 2010. Stonefly species have declined from 10 to four during the same time. Both insects are important food sources for trout.

Commissioners heard from the City of Broomfield and Platte River Power Authority who support mitigation proposals. They said reservoir projects would strengthen their operations…

Final recommendation from wildlife commissioners is due in June. After the wildlife commission adopts a final recommendation, the Colorado Water Conservation Board will have 60 days to affirm or modify it.

More coverage from the Associated Press via the Aurora Sentinel. From the article:

At a meeting Friday in Salida, Grand County was among those who told wildlife commissioners to better preserve stream flows so that river temperatures are cool enough for fish to thrive, and so that river systems can be flushed of sediment that can choke bugs that provide food for trout…

Both water suppliers have proposed steps such as not diverting water to their systems in the summer when stream flows drop below a certain level or when water temperatures get too high. Critics said diversions should be restricted whenever those thresholds are crossed, not just on certain dates.

More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here. More Windy Gap coverage here.

Colorado River basin: Anglers are still working on protection for upper basin streams

Anglers are still concerned with potential streamflow issues at the Colorado River headwaters, in light of the proposed Moffat Collection System and Windy Gap Firming projects, despite the euphoria over the Colorado River Cooperative Agreement announced a week ago. Here’s a report from Bob Berwyn writing for the Summit County Citizens Voice. From the article:

Altogether, the projects have the potential to reduce Colorado River flows to less than 25 percent of their historic native flows. Biologists and anglers have already observed increases in stream temperatures, algae blooms, and declines in fish populations throughout the Colorado River headwaters. Taking more water out of these rivers could be catastrophic if mitigation efforts fall short, according to Trout Unlimited. Both proposals are currently under review by federal and state agencies, with detailed mitigation plans at issue. The Colorado Wildlife Commission will take input on the mitigation plans Friday, May 6 at a public hearing in Salida, and Trout Unlimited, a coldwater fisheries conservation group, plans to ask the commission to make sure there’s an insurance policy in place for the Fraser River and the Upper Colorado.

“We think what we’re asking for is pretty reasonable,” Whiting said. “This is the only chance we’re going get to address some of these impacts. We need to have an insurance policy,” she added. Whiting said the environmental studies for the Moffat and Windy Gap projects dealt with some of the anticipated impacts in a speculative way, and that there’s no way of knowing exactly how the increased diversions — planned during the peak flow season — will play out. If the money currently earmarked toward enhancements is sufficient, great. But if not, there needs to be a pot of money in reserve to do the needed work, she said. Specifically, Trout Unlimited said that significant restoration work and monitoring will be needed to ensure healthy aquatic ecosystems on the Fraser and Upper Colorado rivers. The group estimates that it will cost about $14 million for the needed work, yet only a fraction of that funding is included in the mitigation plans…

Trout Unlimited also wants the Front Range utilities to make a commitment to stop diversions when the water gets too warm or flows drop too low. Removing too much water from the river during runoff or during critical hot summer months raises stream temperatures and eliminates flushing flows that are needed to keep river ecosystems alive. If flushing flows are not occurring or if temperatures rise above state standards, fish can die. Water providers need to make a commitment to stop diversions when stream temperatures approach state standards or if flushing flows are not occurring in accordance with the community-led Grand County Stream Management Plan. These commitments, combined with ongoing monitoring, are what is referred to by the concept of ‘Adaptive Management.’

More Colorado River basin coverage here.

Grand County: Denver Water and several west slope organizations to announce a deal on upper Colorado transmountain diversion projects on April 28

The negotiations have been under a nondisclosure agreement. Here’s the link to Allan Best’s analysis running in TheMountainNews.net. He writes:

No single part of this agreement stands out. This is not like a new dam or tunnel. Yet collectively, these elements of compromise may well represent the most important single water news since the veto of the Two Forks Dam in 1990.

Now, the various water agencies will have to sell the deal to their constituencies. Heartburn may be evident on both sides of the Continental Divide. Denver residents may very well question why, if Denver owns the water, it must “pay” Summit and Grand counties to use it.

And for the Western Slope, this does represent further export of water.

Some potential details:

- Key Western Slope organizations remove their opposition to Denver’s plan to draw more water from the close-in headwaters areas near Winter Park and in Summit County.
- The Western Slope also withdraws potential legal opposition to Denver’s plans to sell recycled water from its diversions to thirsty suburbs that now depend upon wells.
- The deal also requires Denver to step up conservation and reuse efforts.
- [The deal] specifies several tens of millions of dollars in grants to Western Slope water organizations
- [It will create] more flexible water-management regimes intended to achieve environmental goals and benefit recreational interests…

This settlement arguably represents a new template for Front Range-Western Slope relations, one that reflects a new balance of power in Colorado and also new sensibilities. This is in sharp contrast with attitudes and laws prior to the late 1960s and early 1970s.

More coverage from Mr. Best running in the Summit Daily News. From the article:

-The deal will also place limits on future diversions by both Denver and key suburbs.
- The agreement also obligates Denver to provide some of its existing water in Summit County for use by local jurisdictions
- The deal obligates Denver to keep Dillon Reservoir nearly full except in specified drought conditions.
- The agreement also requires Denver to provide cash for water projects in Summit and Grand counties.

I wonder where the Shoshone right sits in all of this?

More Colorado River Basin coverage here.

Colorado Division of Wildlife: Commissioners begin water plan reviews

From the Summit Daily News:

On Thursday, the Colorado Wildlife Commission received fish and wildlife mitigation plans from Denver Water and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District that describe the water providers’ proposals for addressing expected impacts from two transmountain diversion projects that would provide more reliable water supplies to the Front Range…

The May meeting in Salida should allow additional time for the public to comment and provide input on the two plans as well as two voluntary enhancement plans also being submitted by the water providers. That’s in addition to numerous public and stakeholder meetings since October…

When the Wildlife Commission submits its recommendation to the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the board will then have 60 days to affirm the Commission’s recommendation as the official state position or modify the recommendation. If the board makes revisions, the governor will have 60 days to affirm or further modify the recommendation, which then becomes the official state position with regard to mitigation.

More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here and here.

More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

Denver Water releases their Moffat Collection System mitigation plan

From the Boulder Daily Camera (Laura Snider):

…the “Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plan” released last week by Denver Water, which says the Gross Reservoir expansion is necessary to meet a projected shortfall of 18,000 acre-feet of water per year for its customers by 2030. The water to fill the newly expanded reservoir would be drawn from the Fraser and Williams Fork rivers — both tributaries of the Colorado River — and pumped across the Continental Divide to Boulder County via the Moffat Tunnel. The Colorado Wildlife Commission now has 60 days to review the mitigation plan, which addresses impacts on both sides of the divide, before providing a recommendation to the Colorado Water Conservation Board.

In Boulder County, the mitigation plan also calls for monitoring the stability of South Boulder Creek’s stream channel above Gross Reservoir, which would carry an increased amount of water if the expansion is approved. Denver Water would also add an extra 5,000 acre-feet of water to the reservoir that could be released in the winter to increase flows in South Boulder Creek below the dam.

The mitigation plan for the Gross Reservoir expansion was released at the same time as a mitigation plan for the Windy Gap Firming Project, which also seeks to bring more water to the Front Range from the Colorado River watershed. The Windy Gap project, which is being proposed by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, would bring more water to some Boulder County towns, including Erie, Superior, Lafayette, Longmont and Superior…

Managers for the two projects also worked together to create an “enhancement plan” for the upper Colorado River tributaries that would address some of the ecological issues caused by low water flow in the area. Enhancements could include narrowing and deepening the river channel in some areas…

“The heavy focus on what they call enhancements — they are fine and good — but they really address past problems,” [Drew Peternell, director of Trout Unlimited's Colorado Water Project] said. “What does this mean about these new projects?” Peternell said he also worries that the plan lacks teeth and clear thresholds for enforcement. For example, Trout Unlimited would like assurances that Denver Water will stop withdrawing water from the upper Colorado River if stream temperatures get too high, endangering fish. And they’re also concerned that spring “flushing flows” — which are ecologically important to the river — won’t be preserved.

Here’s the link to the Colorado Division of Wildlife website for the projects.

More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here and here. More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

Colorado Division of Wildlife: Commissioners begin water plan reviews

Here’s the release from the Colorado Division of Wildlife (Theo Stein):

The Colorado Wildlife Commission Thursday received Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plans from Denver Water and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District that describe the water providers’ proposals for addressing expected impacts from two transmountain diversion projects that would provide more reliable water supplies to the Front Range.

The meeting was held at the Fairfield Center in Meeker.

Under state statute, the Commission now has 60 days to evaluate the proposed mitigation and provide a recommendation to the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The Commission is expected to render its decision at the June Wildlife Commission meeting in Grand Junction.

Wildlife Commission Chairman Tim Glenn said that during the May meeting in Salida, the Commission would offer the public an extended opportunity to comment and provide input on the two mitigation plans as well as two voluntary enhancement plans also being submitted by the water providers. Commissioners have held numerous public and stakeholder meetings on the issue since October.

“We’ve said all along we’re going to take the time to do this right,” said Glenn, who added that he was grateful that Denver and Northern had already incorporated public input from the February release of pre-draft mitigation proposals into the plans presented last week. “And we’re going to allocate plenty of time in Salida to make sure everyone gets heard.”

The mitigation and enhancement plans, as well as other information regarding the projects, are posted on the Moffat and Windy Gap Mitigations Projects page on the DOW web site.

Denver Water’s Moffat Collection System Project is designed to provide 18,000 acre-feet per year of new water supply to firm up the yield from Denver’s existing water rights on the West Slope, primarily by enlarging Gross Reservoir near Boulder and diverting additional water from the Fraser and Williams Fork rivers.

This project’s likely impacts include reduced stream flows and increased temperatures in the Williams Fork, Fraser and Upper Colorado River systems. The lower flows may increase sedimentation in the affected reaches of these rivers and reduce their ability to support aquatic insects and fish life. The lower flows may also reduce the ability of the river channel maintain hydrologic function over the long term.

On the East Slope, the additional diversions would send more water through the Moffat Tunnel, down South Boulder Creek and into an enlarged Gross Reservoir. The project would create a larger reservoir for recreation, but longer periods of high flows in South Boulder Creek above Gross Reservoir would reduce its ability to support trout and other aquatic wildlife.

To mitigate likely impacts from the project on the Fraser River and upper Williams Fork River, Denver is proposing to fund a Colorado River cutthroat restoration project and other aquatic habitat restoration work. On the Colorado River, Denver would install two real-time temperature monitoring gages and agree to release water in August if high temperatures threatened fish.

East of the Divide, Denver would rebuild the Gross Reservoir Dam larger than necessary to allow Boulder and Lafayette to store water to maintain stream flows during winter months, create new wetlands to replace wetlands inundated by the larger reservoir and monitor stream channel stability to identify impacts from higher flows.

Northern’s Windy Gap Firming Project is designed to provide 30,000 acre-feet per year of new water supply to firm up the yield from its existing water rights in the Upper Colorado River by diverting additional water to the proposed new Chimney Hollow Reservoir west of Longmont.

West of the Divide, impacts could include a decrease of water level in Lake Granby, a reduction in trout habitat in the Colorado River due to lower stream flows and increases in water temperature. There would also likely be a reduction in river flows preferred by rafters and kayakers, with a potential impact on anglers who fish from personal floatation equipment. Fisheries east of the Continental Divide would benefit from potential development of a new flat-water fishery in the proposed Chimney Hollow Reservoir, though some wetlands and big game habitat would be flooded by the new reservoir.

To mitigate impacts from the project on the Upper Colorado River system, Northern is proposing to manage their pumping to maintain water levels in Lake Granby and look for ways to improve flushing flows and provide cooler summer water temperatures in the Upper Colorado River below Windy Gap Reservoir. Northern would contribute to water quality projects to reduce nutrient loading in Shadow Mountain, Lake Granby and Grand Lake. East of the Divide, Northern is proposing to replace lost wetlands and improve enhance wildlife habitat near the new Chimney Hollow Reservoir.

Under state statute, the Commission’s authority is limited to a review of plans to mitigate impacts from proposed projects. Restoring the river to a past condition is beyond the scope of the project approval process and Wildlife Commission authority. However, Denver and Northern are voluntarily proposing steps to address impacts of existing water development projects to fish and wildlife resources on both sides of the Continental Divide by enhancing current conditions.

The enhancement plans would support the Upper Colorado River Habitat Project, a collaborative plan that is designed to restore a more functional channel system and improve habitat for trout and other important aquatic species between Windy Gap Reservoir and the Kemp-Breeze State Wildlife Area.

With the plans submitted, the Division has 10 days to perform a completeness review of the proposals. When the Wildlife Commission submits its recommendation to the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the CWCB will then have 60 days to affirm the Commission’s recommendation as the official state position or modify the recommendation. If the CWCB makes revisions, the Governor will have 60 days to affirm or further modify the recommendation, which then becomes the official state position with regard to mitigation. The final state position is then transmitted to the appropriate federal permitting agencies.

Also during Thursday’s morning session, the Commission received a presentation on draft regulations to amend the existing prohibition on dogs at Lon Hagler and Lone Tree Reservoir State Wildlife Areas near Loveland.

Under the proposed change, dogs must be on a leash less than six feet long, unless they are on a boat. In addition, dogs would be prohibited from portions of both properties during certain times of the year except as an aid to hunting. The current dog ban would be maintained around the Lon Hagler annex pond and adjacent land to protect wildlife habitat. The Commission is scheduled to consider final approval of the change at the May meeting in Salida.

The Commission also heard a presentation on a mule deer research proposal for Middle Park that will help Division biologists better manage deer herds across the state. The proposed study is designed to measure natural buck survival under different harvest structures. During the study, buck hunting pressure would be maintained at current levels throughout the Middle Park data analysis unit for three years. During the following four years, harvest rates on half of the unit would be increased while harvest rates would be decreased on the remaining half of the unit. Natural buck survival would be measured on each half of the unit when hunting season is closed.

The results will help biologists understand the impact hunting pressure has on the survival of mule deer bucks and their subsequent availability for harvest, and improve the Division’s ability to inform sportsmen of tradeoffs between managing for big bucks and hunter opportunity.

The Wildlife Commission meets monthly and travels to communities around the state to facilitate public participation in its processes. During the rest of 2011, the Commission is scheduled to meet in Salida in May, Grand Junction in June and in locations to be determined from July through December.

The complete agenda for the April Wildlife Commission workshop, as well as a discussion of proposed regulation changes for Lon Hagler and Lone Tree state wildlife areas, can be found on the Wildlife Commission web page at: http://wildlife.state.co.us/WildlifeCommission/Archives/2011/April72011.htm.

More information on Denver Water’s Moffat Collection System proposal and Northern’s Windy Gap Firming Project may be found here: http://wildlife.state.co.us/LandWater/Water/MoffatWindyGapMitigationProjects/.

The Colorado Wildlife Commission is an 11-member board appointed by the governor. The Wildlife Commission sets Division of Wildlife regulations and policies for hunting, fishing, watchable wildlife, nongame, threatened and endangered species. The Commission also oversees Division of Wildlife land purchases and property regulations.

More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here and here. More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

Colorado River Basin: The impacted nature of the riparian environment at the headwaters should drive the environmental analysis of moving more water to the Front Range

Guaranteed flows would be a great start. Flushing flows at times. Something similar to the settlement over flows through Black Canyon. Click here for a video of the Crystal Dam Spill last May (William Woody and The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel).

Here’s a report about current impacts from Scott Willoughby writing for The Denver Post. From the article:

…the network of pipes eventually grows to include tunnels with names like Harold D. Roberts, Gumlick, Vasquez and Moffat that stretch across the Divide to move acres of water out of the Blue, Williams Fork, Fraser and other mountain streams. Rather than joining the collective headwaters that unite to form fish and wildlife habitat in the Colorado River, that water winds up in sprinklers and car washes, beer bottles and bathroom spigots along the Front Range.

More of that water is targeted for removal as Colorado’s population continues to swell. Proposals on the table from Denver Water and Northern Water Conservancy District to divert additional water from the Fraser, Williams Fork, Blue and Upper Colorado rivers are designed to keep water supply ahead of demand in municipalities from Denver to Greeley.

Yet, even as the water entities lay out plans required to mitigate the impacts on fish and wildlife from their Moffat Collection System and Windy Gap Firming Project, it’s increasingly evident that these troubled waters can’t accommodate the demands already placed on them. Aquatic species ranging from green drake mayflies to mottled sculpin minnows already have disappeared, whatever the blame. The whole situation is a hot mess. We can’t manufacture water. And apparently we can’t manage it very well, either.

More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here and here.