From the Steamboat Pilot & Today (Mike Lawrence):

Philo Shelton said Thursday that he is confident in the city’s updated plan for $34 million worth of potential water infrastructure that would service future development west of Steamboat Springs. Shelton is director of Steam boat Springs’ public works department. On Tuesday, he presented a study by McLaughlin Water Engineers, of Denver, “Water and Wastewater Master Plan Updates,” to the Steamboat Springs City Council. The study includes projected water and wastewater demands and details the infrastructure needed to service those demands should potential development — including the proposed Steamboat 700 and 360 Village annexations — occur west of current city limits. “It does not raise concerns for me,” Shelton said about the city’s ability to meet future water capacity demands, costs and infrastructure plans. “This plan is a good plan to allow for treated water, as well as nonpotable irrigation water. … The other piece is that it allows for a new source of water and provides needed redundancy in our region.”[...]

The McLaughlin study projects a maximum water demand of 7.34 million gallons per day, or mgd, after build-out within city limits and in the west of Steamboat area, including potential annexations and other development. The city’s current water treatment capacity is 4.55 mgd, and the current city demand is 3.3 mgd, according to the study. Those figures do not include demands serviced by the Mount Werner Water and Sanitation District. Expanding existing city facilities — including additional filtration at the Fish Creek water treatment plant, which the city shares with the Mount Werner district — could boost the city’s treatment capacity to 7.65 mgd, just more than the 7.34 mgd future demand…

The $34 million cost of developing that service includes $5 million to buy the 1,000-acre site for a reservoir; $7.5 million to build the reservoir; $4.75 million to build a water treatment plant that initially would provide 2.5 mgd, and ultimately could provide 5 mgd; and other land, construction, legal and administrative costs…

The McLaughlin study said water infrastructure on the west side of the city is needed regardless of future development, to provide redundancy for what it called a “dead-end” city water treatment system that comes only from one side of the city. McLaughlin said building a 1-million-gallon storage tank near Steamboat Springs Airport is a high priority for the city and that a booster pump station will be needed if the Elk River supply is not developed.

More infrastructure coverage here.

From The Yuma Pioneer (Tony Rayl):

The day included presentations on the Colorado Ground Water Management Act, the history and development of Colorado Ground Water Commission rules, distinct rules by ground water management districts, and the new mandatory water metering. And that was just in the morning. Then came the afternoon, featuring a compact accounting update by RRWCD engineer Jim Slattery, State Engineer Dick Wolfe and Assistant State Engineer Mike Sullivan giving an update on getting approval for the proposed pipeline by the Republican River Compact Administration, and RRWCD leaders explaining the district’s current stance in continuing with the pipeline, and why they have done what they have to date.

Colorado invoked fast-track arbitration with fellow compact states Kansas and Nebraska after the RRCA rejected the pipeline on a 1-2 vote last August. It was the second time the RRCA, which consists of the state engineer from each state, rejected Colorado’s proposed pipeline, the first vote coming last April. Wolfe reported Monday that the state still had not selected an arbitrator, which was supposed to have been done two months ago. He later explained Kansas did not want to keep the arbitrator that decided another fast-track arbitration case earlier this year between Kansas and Nebraska. Wolfe said the new finalists all were expensive, particularly with all the states going through budget crunches, and Nebraska wanted to interview all of the finalists in person. He said he had hoped to announce the arbitrator Monday because Nebraska was done with the interviews. However, he had not heard on a final selection before coming to Yuma. When asked about sticking to the fast-track arbitration deadline, Wolfe said Colorado could force the other states to stick to the timeline with the hearings in February, and a final decision in March. However, he left the door open for Colorado allowing a slight extension…

Wolfe revisited the many concerns held by either Kansas or Nebraska in regards to the pipeline. Those include worries Colorado would pump too much one year and then not pump any water into the North Fork in following years, groundwater depletions by the use of the pipeline, the impact depletions could have on the Haigler Ditch in Nebraska, and Kansas’ continued assertion that Colorado must satisfy the South Fork obligations by pumping water into the South Fork, rather than satisfying that by pumping all of the water into the North Fork. Kansas has expressed its wishes that Colorado would extend the pipeline about 15 miles further south to pump water into a South Fork tributary. David Barfield from Kansas has told Colorado his state in theory supports the pipeline, but issues need to be resolved. There is a concern from Colorado’s end about the compact model dictating that groundwater depletions by the pipeline could result in Colorado receiving up to 20 percent less credit. Wolfe said the situation comes down to Kansas and Nebraska being worried they would lose all leverage in future negotiations if they approved the pipeline — even though Colorado has added provisions stating the other two can still seek compensation for past damages, as well as Colorado being obligated to any potential ruling on the sub-basin test…

David Robbins, legal counsel for the RRWCD, said Monday that when the district was formed earlier this decade, the understanding that removing about 30,000 acres from production would about do it in regards to Colorado coming into compliance, with Mother Nature taking care of the rest. With that in mind, the district immediately began working toward CREP and EQIP programs, which pay producers to turn off their wells — CREP for permanent retirement and EQIP temporary turnoffs of a certain amount of years. Robbins said all along Colorado knew it would eventually have to build a pipeline at some time in the future. However, he said that by 2007 it was clear the well retirements alone would not be enough, and the pipeline needed to be done sooner rather than later. Robbins explained why the RRWCD went ahead with purchasing the water rights earlier this year from the Cure family. The water rights are to 62 wells north of Laird, where a pipeline will be built to discharge the water into the North Fork within a half-mile of the Colorado-Nebraska state line…

He said there are a lot of problems with Kansas’ proposal of extending the pipeline to the South Fork. It would entail putting water into a dry creek bed, where it would then have to travel more than 40 miles getting to the gage in Benkleman…

Slattery, during his presentation, explained the importance of draining Bonny Reservoir to help Colorado come into compliance. It would be eliminate 3,300 acre feet per year currently counted against Colorado due to evaporation and seepage from the reservoir’s water. The figure used to be higher, but the reservoir is now being kept around 10,000 acre feet. In fact, Wolfe said he ordered the release of water from the reservoir again earlier this month, sending water down the South Fork, while also keeping Bonny’s level down. The state engineer said there are a lot of issues surrounding the Bonny situation that have to be worked out with a variety of agencies before it could ever be drained. He said he feels is getting close in coming months to getting all those issues settled…

Slattery’s presentations, letters from Kansas and Nebraska concerning the proposed pipeline, Colorado’s proposed resolutions and other important information concerning the pipeline and Republican River Compact, can be found at www.republicanriver.com.

From The Telluride Watch:

The City of Ouray has been awarded a $30,000 grant from the Colorado Governors Energy Office to install a 20 kilowatt micro-hydro generating unit to be located at the Ouray Hot Springs Pool…

The project will take advantage of an existing, currently underutilized pipeline adjacent to the pool site. The electrical output from the system will be net-metered to offset the electricity use of the pool complex, saving the city approximately $12,000 in annual electricity expenditures. The powerhouse for the project will be constructed by a shop class from Ouray High School. Once completed, the project will provide an added tourist attraction to visitors to Ouray Hot Springs. Over the 30 year life of the project, the city will save approximately $370,000 – not accounting for expected electricity price increases. The project will also provide an opportunity for local students to participate in development of a clean energy project, and will avoid approximately 224,000 pounds of annual carbon dioxide emissions.

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

From The Tri-Lakes Tribune (Lisa Collacott):

The basic rate will increase from $33.53 to $40.07. The increase is needed to fund the new water plant. There will be an $11.51 increase per tap per month. An additional $6.54 will be added to maintain a three-month reserve. The state has required the Town of Palmer Lake to create an emergency fund with the $6.54 that is collected. At the end of 2010 the $6.54 will be taken off the bill. The $11.51 will stay until the loan is paid off, which will be in 20 years. “We needed the money for the new plant,” said water commissioner, Max Stafford. “The old one was 30-years-old and it was hard to get parts for it.”

Palmer Lake has taken a $1.8 million loan from the state’s revolving fund for improvements. The loan is a low-interest subsidized loan. “There was no raise in the budget or employee benefits. It’s all about the loan,” Stafford said.

More infrastructure coverage here.

From the Cortez Journal (Shannon Livick):

Dolores residents will see their water and sewer bills go up next year, following a Monday-night decision by town board members to increase rates 3 percent. Interim Town Manager Ryan Mahoney said the increase was a must, to keep up with the rising costs of labor, chemical supplies and additional testing. The 3 percent increase will cost the average customer about $17 a year…

The base rate for water for in town residents up to 4,000 gallons will now be $24.36. The base rate for residential, in-town sewer will be $24.72…

Green said because the water and sewer rates are having difficulty paying for themselves, the increase was the only way to keep up with costs and continue to maintain the system. “We are not keeping up in the sewer fund,” Mayor Val Truelson said. The increase would give the town about $10,800 of additional revenue, Mahoney said. The revenue will go to the water and sewer enterprise funds because of escalating costs of doing business, needed maintenance and ongoing improvements.

More infrastructure coverage here.

From the Fort Collins Coloradoan (Bobby Magill):

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency documents show the EPA has been working closely with uranium mine developer Powertech USA for nearly two years on a permit application that would allow the company to contaminate an aquifer beneath its proposed Centennial Project in Weld County. All of the consultation was closed to the public, said Matthew Garrington of Environment Colorado, the group that obtained the documents from the EPA. According to the documents, the EPA, with the help of Powertech, has been developing internal guidance documents that will govern how the agency reviews Powertech’s application for a mine permit. The permit will allow Powertech to contaminate a portion of an aquifer with the company’s in situ leach uranium mining process…

“One reason the Centennial Project is receiving this level of technical scrutiny is because many residences located near the proposed Centennial Project rely on private wells for their drinking water, and many of those drinking water wells are completed in the same Fox Hills Formation aquifer [ed. the Fox Hills is part of the Denver Basin Aquifer system] as the mining zone aquifer,” according to one October 2008 internal EPA document. EPA spokesman Richard Mylott said Thursday that document does not reflect the agency’s current approach to Class III permitting.

Most of the e-mails Environment Colorado obtained regard an “aquifer exemption,” and “aquifer exemption boundary,” which is the extent to which the EPA may allow Powertech to contaminate the aquifer as part of the uranium mining process. The e-mails between the EPA and Powertech partners, Knight Piesold Consulting and R2 Incorporated, discuss where the aquifer exemption boundary should be placed.

In an April 2008 e-mail between EPA Underground Injection Control staffer Valois Shea and an R2 Incorporated employee, Shea asks if draft figures in a Class III permit application checklist comport with R2’s expectations. “You will get to be the pioneering guinea pig that will make life easier for others following in your path,” Shea writes.

Powertech Vice President Richard Blubaugh said Thursday such consultation with the EPA was both informal and standard practice. Class III permit applicants are “encouraged to go in and meet with the agency to understand what the requirements are,” he said. “Their regulations are complex. It really is something everybody does. It’s just routine to go in and talk to find out how they interpret the rule and what they expect to see in the application.”

Mylott agreed, saying it’s both normal and in the public’s best interest for the EPA to discuss the technical aspects of in situ leaching with Powertech. The EPA’s underground injection control program, he said, is designed to protect drinking water. “Achieving that goal depends on a solid understanding of what the permit applicant intends to do and the steps that will be taken to protect drinking water sources,” Mylott said.

Thanks to the Colorado Independent (David O. Williams) for the heads up.

More nuclear coverage here and here.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

There is no question the rules are needed to keep Kansas at bay after 24 years of litigation over the Arkansas River Compact, State Engineer Dick Wolfe told about 75 irrigators gathered at the offices of the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District. “We’re acutely aware of our requirements under the compact,” Wolfe said. “It is the tail that wags the dog.”[...]

Wolfe convened a committee to reshape the rules after initial objections, including a meeting of the Lower Ark packed by more than 100 people objecting the early version. “It’s been a very effective process for us and useful to us in developing the rules,” Wolfe said. “The state is not against irrigation improvements . . . The rules allow systems to operate, but also preserve the priority system (of water rights).” During the committee process, changes favorable to irrigators were made, added Peter Nichols, water attorney for the Lower Ark District. Many on-farm improvements were taken off the table, leaving sprinklers and drip irrigation. The rules now also accommodate seepage from ponds. “The rules are an attempt to avoid a train wreck like we had on the South Platte in 2002-03,” Nichols said. “They’ve changed a lot, for the better.”[...]

One of those changes involves a compliance plan by the Lower Ark district, which would allow farmers to fill out a form once, make a payment and, barring major changes in irrigation, leave the engineering and water augmentation headaches to the district, said Gregg Ten Eyck, an engineer with Leonard Rice consultants. The Lower Ark has spent about $325,000 so far developing the compliance plan, which it plans to operate at cost. The fees for the plan have not been set. The plan would average out wet and dry years, transferring risks from irrigators to the district. It would draw water from numerous sources to be used at the right time and place to augment flows on the Arkansas River.

The state still would have to verify the plans were accurate, using water commissioners and satellite images to check on the written reports. “The enforcement action would be targeted at the individual farmer,” said Steve Witte, Division 2 engineer.

More Arkansas Valley consumptive use rules coverage here.

Here’s the release from the Environmental Protection Agency (Ernesta Jones):

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today released its most comprehensive study of the nation’s lakes to date. The draft study, which rated the condition of 56 percent of the lakes in the United States as good and the remainder as fair or poor, marked the first time EPA and its partners used a nationally consistent approach to survey the ecological and water quality of lakes. A total of 1,028 lakes were randomly sampled during 2007 by states, tribes and EPA.

“This survey serves as a first step in evaluating the success of efforts to protect, preserve, and restore the quality of our nation’s lakes,” said Peter Silva, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Water. “Future surveys will be able to track changes in lake water quality over time and advance our understanding of important regional and national patterns in lake water quality.”

The National Lakes Assessment reveals that the remaining lakes are in fair or poor condition. Degraded lakeshore habitat, rated “poor” in 36 percent of lakes, was the most significant of the problems assessed. Removal of trees and shrubs and construction of docks, marinas, homes and other structures along shorelines all contribute to degraded lakeshore habitat.

Nitrogen and phosphorous are found at high levels in 20 percent of lakes. Excess levels of these nutrients contribute to algae blooms, weed growth, reduced water clarity, and other lake problems. EPA is very concerned about the adverse impacts of nutrients on aquatic life, drinking water and recreation. The agency will continue to work with states to address water quality issues through effective nutrient management.

The survey included a comparison to a subset of lakes with wastewater impacts that were sampled in the 1970s. It finds that 75 percent show either improvements or no change in phosphorus levels. This suggests that the nation’s investments in wastewater treatment and other pollution control activities are working despite population increases across the country.

The results of this study describe the target population of the nation’s lakes as a whole and are not applicable to a particular lake.

Sampling for the National Rivers and Streams Assessment is underway, and results from this two-year study are expected to be available in 2011.

The draft study: http://www.epa.gov/lakessurvey

Folks on the South Platte Roundtable are trying to get the word out that Colorado needs a major water project to meet the needs of projected growth. They’re also hoping to convince the rest of the state that it is a statewide problem and that Colorado’s economic engine is primarily in the South Platte Basin and the area needs water to continue to generate that prosperity. Here’s a report from Bill Jackson writing for The Greeley Tribune. From the article:

That was the consensus [ag transfers falling short] Thursday when the South Platte Roundtable of the Colorado Water Conservation Board unveiled the findings of its study, Water for the 21st Century. The group is one of eight in the state developed by the Colorado Legislature following the drought years of the early part of the century.

The South Platte group, which has 50 members from Park County north to Larimer County and east to the Nebraska and Kansas borders, has met monthly for more than four years. The group believes that by 2050, the medium demand for Weld, Larimer and Boulder counties alone will require an additional 200,000 acre-feet of water just to meet municipal and industrial needs. An acre-foot of water is enough to supply two families with a year’s supply of water. “We will need another Colorado-Big Thompson Project or most of another Poudre River to meet those needs,” Harold Evans told a group of about 150 people at the meeting at The Ranch in Loveland. Evans, chairman of the Greeley Water and Sewer Board, is vice chairman of the South Platte Roundtable…

Gary Wockner of Fort Collins, with the Save The Poudre Coalition, said the study has serious, “and perhaps fatal, flaws and appears to be rooted in the river-destruction policies of the 19th century rather than the diverse Colorado interests of the 21st century.”

Evans said the roundtables have been asked to develop needs assessments for the future, not control growth. He said that Colorado water law will prevail to the use of groundwater. It looked at demands as of 2030 and on out to 2050.

More IBCC — Basin roundtable coverage here and here.

From the Loveland Reporter Herald (Pamela Dickman):

The water district is on track to begin building a hydroelectric plant late next year that would provide power to the Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association by spring 2012. “We’re taking advantage of the elevation difference between the water level at Carter Lake and the canal downstream,” said Carl Brouwer, project manager with Northern Water. “Right now all that energy is just dissipated. We want to turn that into hydroelectric energy.” Northern Water received preliminary approval in November from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. And Wednesday, the Larimer County Planning Commission gave its nod to the project.

The small facility would be built at the south dam next to a new water outlet in an area that already has been disturbed by construction. And it would use water that already is being transferred, so it wouldn’t affect levels in Carter Lake, Brouwer said…

The plant would produce about 10 million kilowatt hours of electricity per year. “It’s roughly enough to supply a couple thousand homes,” Brouwer said.

More hydroelectric coverage here and here.

Here’s an update on the proposed new rules for pumping in the San Luis Valley, from Ruth Heide writing for the Valley Courier. From the article:

The stated purpose of the rules is to optimize the use of water in the Rio Grande Basin (the San Luis Valley) while preserving the priority water rights system and protecting Colorado’s ability to meet its obligations to downstream states through the Rio Grande Compact.

The rules are also designed to regulate the confined and unconfined aquifers to maintain a sustainable water supply.

The proposed rules state that they do not relieve wells from their obligation to replace injurious stream depletions and do not allow illegal water uses or expansions.

The proposed rules are specific to the Rio Grande Basin in recognition that this basin is unique. For example, the Rio Grande Basin has an aquifer system that includes a shallow or unconfined aquifer above a deeper confined aquifer that consists of multiple layers and formations.

The rules will utilize a groundwater model to help evaluate how withdrawals from the underground aquifers are affecting stream systems and other aquifers.

The rules recognize, as the water court has also recognized in the Valley, that the basin is over appropriated and groundwater withdrawals that are injuring the streams must be remedied. These rules allow the state engineer to administer and regulate groundwater and to curtail injurious groundwater diversions that are not replaced through an augmentation plan, sub-district management plan or substitute water supply plan.

Once finalized, the rules will head to water court for ratification. Wolfe said he brought in as many people as he could, from as many sectors as he could, to help draft the rules so there would be less contention over them later on.

The committee has drafted rules that are becoming more refined with each monthly meeting. The committee met again this week to review the 19-page document. Sub-committees of the larger advisory group are also meeting to discuss vital portions of the draft rules, such as the irrigation season that will be defined in the rules.

More San Luis Valley groundwater coverage here and here.

From The Denver Post (Bruce Finley):

A proposed water-rate hike last year prompted the campaign to oust four members as irresponsible. Board members backtracked, but campaigners pushed on. The results — board president Mary Spencer survived by 30 votes, Root by 7, Mike Casey by 58 — won’t be final until Dec. 30, Douglas County Clerk and Recorder Jack Arrowsmith said. At least one race requires a recount.

Parker’s 12-month tussle reflects rising tension over water in Front Range suburbs, where water managers are struggling to obtain and divert renewable water from mountain rivers as local groundwater supplies dwindle. “This is the kind of battle we’ll see played out with greater frequency as the demands on these finite water resources intensify,” said water expert David Getches, dean of the University of Colorado law school and former state director of natural resources. “We’ve allowed, in Colorado, whole subdivisions and whole communities to be built on nonrenewable water supplies.” Parker’s five-member board oversees the water supply for more than 22,000 people southeast of Denver who rely on 30 wells, from 51 to 2,745 feet deep, that draw fewer and fewer gallons per minute. State data show water tables falling 30 feet a year…

Frank Jaeger, the water-district manager, is leading a drive to divert upper Colorado River Basin water to Denver suburbs from western Wyoming. The $230 million Rueter-Hess reservoir under construction near Parker — one of Colorado’s biggest water- storage projects in decades — would hold that water, along with creek runoff and reused water treated at a new high-tech chemical plant. Jaeger’s district, established in 1962, is one of dozens created after developers built subdivisions across semi- arid terrain and left decisionmaking to the residents. Now, boards face difficult decisions as economic doldrums limit residents’ abilities to pay higher water rates…

“What we learned is, we weren’t doing a very good job of educating the public,” [accountant Darcy Beard] said. “The cost of water in Colorado is never going to go down. We live in a high-desert environment.”

More Parker coverage here.

From the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Mike Wiggins):

…the council adopted a $57.9 million budget for 2010. The vast majority of that money — roughly $44 million — is dedicated to the construction of a new wastewater treatment plan and a community center.

More from the article:

Council members unanimously agreed to enact the city’s parks, open space and trails master plan, which calls for developers of subdivisions adjacent to primary trails identified in the plan to donate a portion of their project for a trail. For properties that abut canals and drainage ditches, trails would be built next to those waterways, assuming the land is developable. Under the plan, developers would have to dedicate 20 feet of right of way for the trail next to the canal easement. The trail requirement only applies to land as it’s annexed into and developed in the city. City officials emphasized they will not force landowners to sell or acquire land for trails through eminent domain. The plan to create trails next to canals has generated concerns from the agencies that own and operate irrigation canals. Even though the city said it will develop trails next to, rather than on top of, canal easements, some worry about the proximity of recreation to waterways. “We’re still concerned with any recreational use of the canal,” Robert Raymond, president of the board of directors of the Grand Valley Irrigation Co., told council members. The irrigation company maintains nearly 100 miles of canals in the valley.

More Colorado River Basin coverage here.

I’m pretty embarrassed that it took me over 10 months to find the super easy way to add a search text field to Coyote Gulch. WordPress comes through again!

If you want to search for certain keywords on Coyote Gulch scroll to the bottom of the page and you’ll find search right above the categories.

From The Norwood News (Ellen Metrick):

San Miguel County Commissioners met in Norwood last week to decide what kind of letter to send to the Colorado Water Conservation Board, asking for a delay in filing for instream flow appropriations on the San Miguel River. The water would be set aside to meet habitat requirements for threatened native fish species — flannelmouth sucker, bluehead sucker, and roundtail chub — and to preserve a section of the San Miguel River ecosystem…

Originally, San Miguel County commissioners had been looking at two potential actions: To support CWCB’s declaration go to water court in January 2010, but have December as the actual appropriation date; or, to ask CWCB to wait until March to declare, which would mean the hearing process would begin in July, giving public the first half of 2010 to assess needs and file for appropriations. The January 2011 appropriation filing date was added to the options after the meeting began. Mark Uppendahl, DOW In-Stream Flow Program coordinator, stated that the “DOW is in a conservation management plan to prevent these species from federal listing … 11cfs provides minimal depths and the fish may not migrate or survive.”[...]

Uppendahl said that if the threatened species are not protected, there could be federal intervention. He said, “It would be hard to say what would happen then.” Uppendahl listed possibilities that ranged from water curtailment to preservation of the entire hydrology system, and possible curtailment of future diversion projects.

Approximately 70 people attended the meeting, including Montrose County Commissioners David White and Ron Henderson, State Senator Bruce Whitehead (D-Hesperus), Southwest Water Conservation Board members, Sheep Mountain Alliance representatives, and TelSki CEO Dave Riley. In the end, SMC commissioners voted two to one to ask CWCB to hold off until December 2011. Commissioner Joan May wanted to ask them to file mid-year 2010. After voting, Commissioner Fischer said, “But, we have to see progress, not just lip service to a process that never really happens.”

More San Miguel Watershed coverage here and here.

Here’s the link to the webpage with all the dope on the symposium:

The 2010 Tamarisk Symposium will be held at Two Rivers Convention Center, 159 Main Street, Grand Junction, CO. The committee has finalized the agenda and the schedule is now available. If you would like to be considered, please contact Meredith B. Swett via email mswett@tamariskcoalition.org.

More tamarisk control coverage here and here.

From the Sky-Hi Daily News:

• All comments on the Draft FERC Hydropower License Amendment Application must be submitted in writing to Denver Water through the Denver Water Web site or by e-mail, mail or fax by: March 1, 2010.

Denver Water Fax: (303) 628-6852, Attn: Brian Gogas Email: moffatproject@denverwater.org

Mail Code 415 Web site: www.denverwater.org/moffat

1600 West 12th Avenue, Denver, CO 80204

• All comments on the Moffat Collection System Project Draft EIS and Section 404 permit application must be submitted in writing to the U.S. Army Corps by e-mail, mail or fax by: March 1, 2010.

Scott Franklin, Moffat EIS Project Mgr. Fax: (303) 979-0602

Corps Denver Regulatory Office Email: moffat.eis@usace.army.mil

9307 S. Wadsworth Blvd. Website: www.nwo.usace.mil/html/od-tl/eis-info.htm

More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here.

From the Associated Press (Kevin Freking) via The Durango Herald:

As part of the new approach, EPA officials said the agency would pay particular attention to chronic violators and said in some cases they would ask small water systems to restructure or merge to improve their safety records. The hearing came after an Associated Press investigation showing that about one in five schools with their own wells violated the Safe Drinking Water Act in the last decade, a problem that until now has gone largely unmonitored by the federal government…

Cynthia Giles, an assistant administrator for enforcement at EPA, said the agency will focus on regulating the most important violations, but did not elaborate on how that would apply to schools. She acknowledged that some smaller water systems have had historical problems complying with the law, and that the agency’s main database of these violations contained errors.

“We share the frustration of trying to work with some of these smaller systems to get them into compliance,” Giles said in an interview after the hearing.

More water treatment coverage here.

From the Valley Courier (Ruth Heide):

…recent storms have brought the [Rio Grande Basin] snowpack up to 110-115 percent of average, Division of Water Resources Division 3 Division Engineer Craig Cotten said on Tuesday. Reporting to a well rules advisory committee in Alamosa, Cotten said this type of pattern is similar to what has occurred in the past two years. “Going into December we were quite a bit below average and in December we shot up pretty good. That’s kind of the pattern we are seeing this year. Hopefully it will be like the last couple of years and it will continue to go on up.” Cotten added that although the basin is over 100 percent of average, the basin only has 39 percent of the total snowpack over the season.

Cotten added that although the basin is over 100 percent of average, the basin only has 39 percent of the total snowpack over the season. He added that the snowpack is widely varied throughout the basin with the highest reported snowpack at the Cumbres Trestle Snotel gauge at 160 percent and Beartown sitting only at 81 percent. At year end, it appears Colorado is in good shape with its obligations to downstream states through the Rio Grande Compact, Cotten said. Of the approximately 595,000 acre feet indexed on the Rio Grande this year, the state was obligated to send 160,000 acre feet downstream…

He said Colorado will be slightly over on its deliveries this year on both the Rio Grande and Conejos Rivers. At the beginning of December, the over-delivery was anticipated to be about 1,700 acre feet on the Rio Grande and about 700 acre feet on the Conejos. Cotten said those numbers could vary when the final water accounting is completed…

One of the main storage reservoirs for Rio Grande Compact water is Elephant Butte Reservoir in New Mexico. Cotten said that as of Monday, Elephant Butte had 360,000 acre feet of usable compact water in it. That is up from last week and will continue to rise short term. However, at the beginning of the year the usable amount of compact water will decrease significantly because portions of that water will be calculated for over deliveries from Colorado and New Mexico, Cotten explained. New Mexico will particularly have a fair amount of over delivery this year. As long as that usable compact water is less than 400,000 acre feet in Elephant Butte, storage is restricted in post-compact reservoirs such as Platoro Reservoir, Cotten added. He did not anticipate the 400,000-acre-foot number to be reached until the run-off season next spring.

From The Douglas County News Press (Ashley Dieterle):

Board president Mary Spencer had 1,976 votes to retain her in office, edging out the 1,946 votes to recall her by only 30. Mike Casey earned 1,983 votes to keep him in office versus the 1,925 votes to recall him. Sheppard Root had the narrowest lead Tuesday night with the 1,962 votes to retain his seat beating the recall tally of 1,955 by only seven votes. The one vacant position will be filled by Randall Huls wining 1,415 votes over Darcy Beard (1,217) and Tracy Hutchins (753).

More Parker coverage here.

FromThe Pueblo Chieftain (James Amos):

The board of the Pueblo West Metropolitan District approved next year’s $24.3 million budget on Monday. The budget included a 7.9-percent raise in water fees and a 3.2-percent raise in sewer fees. Steve Harrison, the district’s director of utilities, said the raises sound large but only amount to a few dollars a month for modest-sized homes.

More Pueblo West coverage here.

From the Boulder Daily Camera (Erica Meltzer):

In a discussion of a new master plan for the Boulder Reservoir, council members expressed concern about maintaining water quality and preventing invasive species from entering the reservoir. Several council members asked what the city could do to pressure the managers of Six Mile Reservoir, which feeds into the Boulder Reservoir, to maintain water-quality standards similar to Boulder’s. The answer was not much, except exert regional pressure.

More water pollution coverage here.

From email from Reclamation (Peter Soeth):

Reclamation Develops Equipment Inspection and Cleaning Manual to Prevent Spread of Invasive Species

The Bureau of Reclamation has developed and released an Equipment Inspection and Cleaning Manual to help prevent the spread of invasive species through contaminated equipment use. This manual provides recommendations for inspection and cleaning of vehicles and equipment as a prevention tool to limit the spread of invasive species.

“This manual will help equipment operators gain a better understanding of how invasive plants and animals are spread by contaminated equipment into new locations,” said Reclamation Invasive Species Program Coordinator and co-author Joe DiVittorio. “This manual has broad applications for many organizations and agencies.”

The manual is organized to present equipment inspection techniques, equipment cleaning methods, and finally the identification of invasive biology and habitats of some of the common invasive species that are of potentially high consequence to Reclamation. Examples include quagga and zebra mussels, purple loosestrife, giant salvinia, eurasian watermilfoil, and hydrilla. These and many other invasive species can be inadvertently introduced into new sites on contaminated equipment.

Not all types of equipment are described in the manual, but a process is presented to guide field personnel through general inspection and cleaning decisions for any equipment type.

This manual was developed with the assistance of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

To obtain a copy of the manual, please visit www.usbr.gov/pps.

Media Contact: Peter Soeth, psoeth@usbr.gov, 303-445-3615

More invasive species coverage here.

Posted in Climate Change, Colorado Water, Invasive Species ]]> http://coyotegulch.wordpress.com/2009/12/15/u-s-bureau-of-reclamation-manual-for-fighting-invasive-species/feed/ 0 coyotegulch A picture named quaggamussels.jpg http://coyotegulch.wordpress.com/2009/12/15/save-the-poudre-joins-waterkeeper-alliance/ http://coyotegulch.wordpress.com/2009/12/15/save-the-poudre-joins-waterkeeper-alliance/#comments Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:13:16 +0000 coyotegulch http://coyotegulch.wordpress.com/?p=7915 ]]>

Below is a release from Save the Poudre (Gary Wockner):

The battle to Save The Cache la Poudre River of northern Colorado was bolstered this week by two important announcements. First, the Save The Poudre Coalition’s proposal to start a “Poudre Waterkeeper” was accepted by the Waterkeeper Alliance, a growing worldwide alliance of 192 local water preservation organizations founded and directed by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. The Alliance, based in New York, helps local communities stand up for their right to clean water and for wise and equitable use of water resources.

Second, to help jump-start Save The Poudre’s new status as the “Poudre Waterkeeper,” New Belgium Brewing of Fort Collins donated $40,000 to ensure the Save The Poudre’s continued success. New Belgium has an active philanthropy program committed to improving the health of the natural environment and inspiring people to joyously embrace sustainable choices.

“We are proud to have this new Poudre Waterkeeper and its Save The Poudre Coalition join our ranks,” said Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Waterkeeper Alliance President. “And we are proud to support the fight to protect and restore the beautiful Cache la Poudre River.”

“The Save the Poudre Coalition is doing excellent work,” said Jenn Orgolini, Sustainability Director of New Belgium Brewing. “We want this Poudre Waterkeeper to grow and thrive as it works to protect this great river that flows through Fort Collins right in front of our brewery.”

“The citizens of northern Colorado are extremely fortunate,” said Gary Wockner of the Save The Poudre Coalition. “The Waterkeeper Alliance is a visionary and effective group, and New Belgium Brewing is a visionary and extremely generous company. The battle to save the Poudre is growing stronger every day.”

Attention is increasingly being focused on the Poudre River by regional, statewide, and national interests, as well as by the Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The proposed dams on the Poudre represent the next big phase of dam building in the American Southwest — the Poudre’s outcome may foreshadow the future of many of the Southwest’s rivers.

“The environmental community is taking a hard stand here in Colorado because if we can save the Poudre, we can likely save other Southwest rivers,” said Gary Wockner. “If we lose the Poudre, we could lose them all.”

More coverage from the Fort Collins Coloradoan (Bobby Magill).

More Cache la Poudre River coverage here and here.

Posted in Climate Change, Colorado Water, Instream flow, Poudre River Watershed, South Platte Basin ]]> http://coyotegulch.wordpress.com/2009/12/15/save-the-poudre-joins-waterkeeper-alliance/feed/ 0 coyotegulch A picture named cachelapoudre.jpg http://coyotegulch.wordpress.com/2009/12/15/arkansas-valley-highline-ditch-shareholders-meeting-recap/ http://coyotegulch.wordpress.com/2009/12/15/arkansas-valley-highline-ditch-shareholders-meeting-recap/#comments Tue, 15 Dec 2009 12:38:02 +0000 coyotegulch http://coyotegulch.wordpress.com/?p=7911 ]]>

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

High Line shareholders Monday agreed to Aurora’s request for more engineering on the ditch that sold Aurora water in a lease agreement to speed the city’s recovery from the 2002 drought. The decision came after a long day of re-examining the past deal with Aurora, complaints from shareholders that they are not being kept informed and debates about the merits of forming a leasing company vs. joining the Super Ditch. “We want to know if we should begin working on the engineering to move forward to get a permanent water right to lease to Aurora or others,” said Tom Simpson, Aurora engineering supervisor for the Arkansas Valley. “Do the shareholders want to move forward?” About five hours later, shareholders voted to allow Aurora to continue the engineering studies that will make future water deals easier.

Aurora and the High Line Canal jointly filed for an exchange water right in 2005 after a two-year lease program that was deemed successful by all involved. Aurora was able to replenish its badly depleted reservoirs, while High Line farmers had an instant source of income after a couple of tough farming years. The exchange right, however, still would require a substitute water supply plan from the state Division of Water Resources. Aurora wants to get started on a change of use decree in water court because it would save time in the future…

Simpson said the 2008 agreement is merely a framework and does not obligate shareholders. In fact, it benefits High Line by providing a $15,000-$25,000 annual maintenance payment. In the past two years, High Line has taken the payment by leasing water from Aurora for prices of $5-$10 per acre-foot. “We did not intend to say that anyone has to lease to Aurora rather than anyone else,” Simpson said. Aurora also has had preliminary discussions with the board about long-term leases in the future. The city is limited by a 2003 agreement with the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District about how much water it can lease from the Arkansas Valley.

High Line is also exploring forming its own water leasing company, Superintendent Dan Henrichs said, in explaining a $70,000 grant from the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The canal wants to spend $30,000 of that toward setting up a company, and $40,000 to study water quality at the point on the river near its headgate. The idea would be to build a pipeline on land the canal owns on the north side of the river to serve customers in northern El Paso County or the South Platte River basin, Henrichs said. Other ditches could be brought into the plan, which might not materialize for 25 years, Henrichs said…

One board member candidly expressed his dismay over the afternoon’s arguments: “I’m disappointed,” said Vernon John Proctor. “I thought we were going to have a meeting about what was best for the High Line Canal Co., not talk about the Super Ditch and the Lower Ark.”

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

The biggest immediate problem facing the 87-mile-long ditch in Pueblo and Otero counties includes a stretch of canal that has washed out in recent years. If the canal were to break during irrigation season, it could mean three months without water for 23,000 acres of farmland.

The ditch company also had to take out a loan to build a new caretaker’s home at Boone and spend down reserves to repair another house in Manzanola. Those are the type of routine concerns large ditches traditionally face. But much of Superintendent Dan Henrichs’ time is spent outside the routine jobs, attending regional or state water meetings on behalf of the High Line board. He also is developing a project that eventually could lead to a program to sell water through leases outside the ditch.

In 2008, Henrichs applied for a $325,000 state grant to fund steps that lead to a leasing program, a future pipeline north and water quality studies. The ditch company was awarded $70,000 for part of the studies by the Colorado Water Conservation Board. “The board’s thinking in applying for the grant was maximizing the value of our water,” the board’s president, Stan Fedde, told shareholders who questioned why the canal company was moving in that direction…

Many farmers are older, and may be looking to retire. Selling water at higher prices is a way to pay off debts or may be the closest thing they have to a 401(k) plan. That’s played out in different ways throughout the valley in the past few years:

Most of the remaining shares on the Rocky Ford Ditch were sold to Aurora, which bought half of the ditch in the 1980s. Aurora and Colorado Springs bought the vast majority of the Colorado Canal in the 1980s as well.
The Fort Lyon Canal agreed to allow High Plains A&M (now Pure Cycle) to move water from the canal as long as it was done in rotation. High Plains bought about 20 percent of the ditch.
Nearly half of farms on the Amity Canal were purchased by the Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association in order to use the water in future power projects.
The Pueblo Board of Water Works bought 27 percent of shares on the Bessemer Ditch for future water use.

The High Line was faced with the same pressures during the drought and many shareholders were looking at selling. Instead, they held on to their water rights by selling water to Aurora under a lease agreement…

The arrangement with Aurora has had other benefits for the ditch, other than an infusion of cash that paid down debt, bought new equipment and allowed repairs on farms. Aurora improved structures on the ditch and built an augmentation station that will allow future leases. Henrichs pointed out that Aurora has helped High Line by providing crews to burn ditches when weeds became a problem. Shareholders Monday also recognized the value of Aurora’s engineering studies of the canal, voting to give the city permission to develop more studies toward a 2005 exchange case and Aurora’s plans for an upcoming water court case to change the use of High Line water. The Aurora lease agreement also opened the door for other cooperative ventures. The High Line wants to draw in other canals, at the ditch-board level, to sell water. Meanwhile, the Super Ditch has formed with shareholders from seven canals and an agreement in hand to enter a long-term lease with Pikes Peak Regional Water Authority in 2011.

More Arkansas River Basin coverage here.

Posted in Arkansas Basin, Arkansas Valley Super Ditch, Aurora, Climate Change, Colorado Water, Infrastructure, Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District, Transmountain/transbasin diversions ]]> http://coyotegulch.wordpress.com/2009/12/15/arkansas-valley-highline-ditch-shareholders-meeting-recap/feed/ 0 coyotegulch A picture named arkbasinditchsystem.jpg