Southern Delivery System: Springs, Walker settle for $7.1M — The Pueblo Chieftain

July 3, 2015

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Colorado Springs Utilities and Gary Walker have reached a $7.1 million settlement for the damage to Walker Ranches from the Southern Delivery System pipeline.

The pipeline crosses 5.5 miles of the 63,000-acre property on its route from Pueblo Dam to Colorado Springs. The $841 million SDS project is scheduled to go online next year and will supply water to Colorado Springs, Fountain, Security and Pueblo West.

On May 6, a jury awarded Walker $4.75 million, which included a $4.665 million judgment beyond the $82,900 stipulated value of the easement across Walker Ranches. Damages plus interest would have brought the total payment to $5.78 million, according to a joint press release.

Utilities disputed the amount, and filed an appeal on May 7. Walker Ranches appealed the decision on May 14. Those appeals were dismissed as part of the settlement reached June 16, but announced on Thursday.

The final agreement resolves all claims for $7.1 million, the press release said.

Utilities will also install fencing on Walker Ranches to prevent cattle from entering the area of the SDS pipeline scar that is being revegetated, and will work with Walker to erect berms on the property to reduce erosion.

The agreement also commits both parties to work together in the future to protect the right of way.

Utilities said the settlement provides more certainty about the ultimate cost of the project, reducing the possibility of an expensive appeals process.

“It has always been our intent when working with property owners to use the court process as a last resort,” John Fredell, SDS program director, said in the news release. “By successfully resolving these issues with Mr. Walker, we can focus on completing the required revegetation on his property and finishing the SDS project on time and under budget.”

Walker, when contacted by The Pueblo Chieftain , declined to comment because of the conditions of the settlement.

During the trial, Walker claimed the SDS project had compromised a $25 million conservation easement on 15,000 acres he was negotiating with the Nature Conservancy. He has used about $13 million from past easements to expand the ranches, which is part of a long-term plan to prevent further urban sprawl in northern Pueblo County.

Ray Petros, Pueblo County’s special counsel, said he has not seen the settlement agreement, so he is uncertain about how the county’s 1041 permit for SDS would be affected. The county is teeing up compliance hearings later this year on revegetation and Fountain Creek flood control, which are referenced in conditions that are part of the 1041 permit.

More Southern Delivery System coverage here and here.

The Grand River Diversion turns 100 years old #ColoradoRiver

June 26, 2015
The Grand River Diversion

The Grand River Diversion

From the Associated Press via The Greeley Tribune:

Many people pass by and marvel at its size. At 14 feet high and 546 feet long, the Grand River Diversion Dam is one of the biggest roller dams in the world, and it just turned 100 years old.

“You know you see it with those orange towers and maybe a lot of people don’t know the significance of the dam,” said Palisade Historical District’s Charlene Weidner.

“I feel like this is a great opportunity to educate people and let them know it’s an important dam.”

The six 70-foot rollers move up and down depending on the amount of water to be let through. The water is siphoned off into the Highline Canal, sending water to 33,000 acres of farms, fields, and wineries.

“We know we live in a high desert it would just be too hot to live here, because it also waters trees, so we really wouldn’t exist without it, said Weidner.

Water first turned into the canal in 1915, and a caretaker has watched after the dam day and night ever since, KKCO-TV reported.

“I love it,” said current caretaker Alfonzo Gallegos. “The sound of the waterfall, the water sloshing up against the wall here, it is a great place to be.”

Gary Hines has a special relationship with the roller dam – his grandfather was the dam’s caretaker for 33 years.

“You walk up on the catwalk above the rollers and it still gives you that massive same impression that I had 55 years ago,” said Hines. “It’s incredibly special. I was about ten years old when my grandfather unexpectedly passed away and we kind of lost our passport to this magical land.”

A unique German design, it is one of four roller dams in the country. It is too fragile and hard to access for public tours.

Click here to visit the US Bureau of Reclamation webpage for the Grand Valley Project. Here’s an excerpt:


Water for project use is diverted into the Government Highline Canal at the Grand Valley Project Diversion Dam, about 23 miles northeast of Grand Junction. Approximately 4.6 miles below the main diversion, water for the Orchard Mesa Diversion is diverted from the canal. This water passes through the Orchard Mesa Siphon under the Colorado River, through the Orchard Mesa Power Canal to the Grand Valley Powerplant, or to the Orchard Mesa Pumping Plant, where it is pumped into Orchard Mesa Canals No. 1 and 2 for distribution to the water users.

From the Orchard Mesa diversion, the Government Highline Canal continues westward, approximately paralleling the river, distributing water to laterals of the Garfield Gravity Division. Water also is furnished to 8,580 acres in the Mesa County and Palisade Irrigation Districts which were served by private facilities prior to project construction.

Facility Descriptions

Grand Valley Diversion Dam

The diversion dam is on the Colorado River about 8 miles northeast of Palisade. This concrete weir is 14 feet high and 546 feet long. Flow over its crest is controlled by six roller gates. These gates were the first of their type designed in the United States.

Government Highline Canal System

The canal is on the west and north side of the river and extends from the Grand Valley Project Diversion Dam south and west a distance of 55 miles. It has a diversion capacity of 1,675 cubic feet per second, which includes 800 cubic feet per second for the Orchard Mesa Power Canal. The remaining flows are distributed through the Government Highline Canal and Price-Stubb Pumping Plant. The distribution system for the Garfield Gravity Division consists of 166 miles of laterals. The drainage system consists of 2 miles of closed drains and 110.5 miles of deep open drains.

The Price-Stubb Pumping Plant is on the canal near Tunnel No. 3 Outlet at the east end of the Grand Valley. It lifts 25 cubic feet per second of water 31 feet to the Stubb Ditch to serve land of the Mesa County Irrigation District. Power is provided to the hydraulic pump by water delivered to the Price Ditch for the Palisade Irrigation District.

Orchard Mesa Canal System

The Orchard Mesa Siphon conveys water from the Government Highline Canal to the head of the 3.5-mile-long Orchard Mesa Power Canal on the east side of the river. The siphon is reinforced concrete with a capacity of 800 cubic feet per second. Orchard Mesa Pumping Plant lifts water from the Orchard Mesa Power Canal to the distribution system. The plant contains four pump units: two have a combined capacity of 80 cubic feet per second and a lift of 41 feet to Canal No. 1; two have a combined capacity of 60 cubic feet per second with a lift of 130 feet to Canal No. 2. Water is conveyed to privately owned and operated laterals by Orchard Mesa Canals No. 1 and 2. The canals have capacities of 85 and 65 cubic feet per second, respectively, and a combined length of 31.6 miles.

Grand Valley Powerplant

The plant is about 1 mile south of Palisade at the lower end of the Orchard Mesa Power Canal adjacent to the Orchard Mesa Pumping Plant. It operates under a maximum head of 79 feet and has a capacity of 3,000 kilowatts. The plant was constructed by the United States with funds advanced by Public Service Company of Colorado. The company operates and maintains the plant under a rental agreement with the United States and the Grand Valley Water Users Association. Power generation averages approximately 19,350,600 kilowatt-hours annually…



Soon after their arrival in the Grand Valley in 1881, settlers began work on ditches to irrigate lowlands adjacent to the north side of the Colorado River. By 1886, the Grand Valley Canal (not part of the Grand Valley Project) was completed and the canal system expanded to serve approximately 45,000 acres of land. From 1886 to 1902, several attempts were made by private interests to construct a canal to higher lands in the valley, but because of initial technical difficulties private investors were unwilling to back the project.


After passage of the Reclamation Act in 1902, an evaluation of the proposed Government Highline Canal, now a part of the Grand Valley Project, was requested by the local citizens. In 1905, the Grand Valley Water Users Association was organized to cooperate with the Reclamation Service in developing a project. After investigation, the Reclamation Service proposed a project consisting of a diversion dam and distribution canal to irrigate lands at higher valley levels than those being operated by private interests. A board of engineers approved feasibility of the project on December 15, 1908.


The Grand Valley Project was one of the projects examined and reported upon favorably by a board of Army Engineers in accordance with the act of June 25, 1910 (36 Stat. 835) and approved by the President on January 5, 1911. The project was constructed primarily for agricultural and power generation purposes.


The Reclamation Service was authorized by the Secretary of the Interior on September 23, 1912, to begin construction on one of the smaller tunnels. Irrigation was first provided June 29, 1915, at which time the entire project was less than 60 percent completed. Cooperative drainage work in the Grand Valley Drainage District was begun in March 1918.

The Price-Stubb Pumping Plant was completed and water supplied through Government-constructed facilities to Palisade and Mesa County Irrigation Districts in April 1919. A powerplant was constructed in 1932-33 using funds advanced by Public Service Company of Colorado. Tunnel No. 3 on the Government Highline Canal collapsed in March 1950 because of landslides. In a dramatic effort to open the canal before the start of the irrigation season, a contract to construct a section of new tunnel to bypass the slide area was negotiated and the contractor broke all records in finishing the tunnel in time for the irrigation season.



Since it first delivered water in 1917, the Grand Valley Project has furnished a full supply of irrigation water to approximately 33,368 acres and supplemental water to about 8,600 acres of fertile land. The project has made possible diversified and intensified farming in the area, regularly bringing to maturity such late-season crops as fruit, alfalfa, beans, seed, corn, oats, barley, potatoes, and wheat. Favorable climate, cheap winter forage, and proximity to good range combine to make the area desirable for profitable raising of livestock. Dairying and poultry raising are also important to the project area.

Hydroelectric Power

Grand Valley Powerplant, completed in 1933, has a capacity of 3.0 MW. The powerplant was constructed by Grand valley Water Users Association. The powerplant is operated by by the Colorado Public Service Company under a lease of power privilege contract.

More Colorado River Basin coverage here.

Granby: “State of the River” meeting recap #ColoradoRiver

May 29, 2015
Historical Colorado River between Granby and Hot Sulphur Springs

Historical Colorado River between Granby and Hot Sulphur Springs

From the Sky-Hi Daily News (Hank Shell):

During the meeting, officials from the Upper Colorado River Basin’s biggest water interests including Northern Water, Denver Water and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation spoke about some of the basin’s biggest issues, including the state of runoff and snowpack in the region and the movement at Ritschard Dam on Wolford Mountain Reservoir.

Though snowpack seemed to falter during what proved to be a rather dry March, it’s been building steadily over the last three to four weeks, explained Don Meyer with the Colorado River District.

The variations in snowpack have pushed the basin into “uncharted territory,” he said.

“I think the message here is think 2010 in terms of snowpack,” Meyer said.

Though he added that snowpack is not analogous to runoff, Meyer said 2015 “will likely eclipse 2010 in terms of stream flow.”

Victor Lee with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation echoed Meyer, adding that recent cold temperatures across the region have allowed snowpack to persist.

Though snowpack is currently below average, it could linger past the point at which the average snowpack tends to drop…

If the current snowpack does translate into high runoff in Grand County, there may not be anywhere to put it, Lee said.

Front Range reservoirs are full, and storage in Lake Granby is the highest it’s ever been for this time of year, according to Lee’s presentation…

Though it could be a good runoff year for Grand County, Meyer said that snow-water equivalent above Lake Powell is still well below average, making it a dry year for the Upper Colorado River Basin overall.


Officials aren’t sure when the settling and movement at Ritschard Dam will stop, but it poses no threat to safety, said John Currier with the Colorado River District.

“We really are absolutely confident that we don’t have an imminent safety problem with this dam,” Currier said…


The Bureau of Reclamation will increase flows from the Granby Dam to 1,500 CFS around May 29 and maintain those flows until around June 8, Lee said.

The releases will be part of an endangered fish recovery program and will be coordinated with releases from other basin reservoirs to enhance peak flows in the Grand Valley where the plan is focused.

Wolford Mountain Reservoir will also participate in the coordinated releases, Meyer said.

The program hopes to re-establish bonytail chub, Colorado pikeminnow, razorback sucker and humpback chub populations to a 15-mile stretch of the Colorado River above Grand Junction.


After receiving its Record of Decision last year, the Windy Gap Firming Project’s next major hurdle is acquiring a Section 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers for the construction of Chimney Hollow Reservoir, said Don Carlson with Northern Water.

The permit regulates dredged or fill material into water as part of the Clean Water Act.

Northern Water hopes to acquire the permit this year, with construction possibly beginning in 2016 or 2017, Carlson said.

The project seeks to firm up the Windy Gap water right with a new Front Range reservoir. The project currently stores water in Lake Granby.

Because it’s a junior water right, yield for the project is little to nothing in dry years.

Northern Water also hopes to establish a free-flowing channel of the Colorado River beside the Windy Gap Reservoir as part of the Windy Gap Reservoir Bypass Project.

The new channel would allow for fish migration and improve aquatic habitat along the Colorado River.

That project still needs $6 million of its projected $10 million cost.


Moffat Tunnel flows are hovering around 15 CFS as Denver Water is getting high yield from its Boulder Creek water right, said Bob Steger with Denver Water.

The increased yield from that junior water right means flows through Moffat Tunnel will remain low through early summer, Steger said.

“The point is we’ll be taking a lot less water than we normally do,” he said.

Denver Water expects its flows through the tunnel to increase in late summer as its yield from Boulder Creek drops, Steger said.

Williams Fork Reservoir, which is used to fulfill Denver Water’s obligations on the Western Slope, is expected to fill in three to four weeks, Steger said.

More Colorado River Basin coverage here.

Southeastern Water board meeting recap: Lake Pueblo, swollen by 12,000 acre-feet of flood water

May 24, 2015
Fryingpan-Arkansas Project via the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District

Fryingpan-Arkansas Project via the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Water, water everywhere.

Not going to be a problem later in the year, right?

Hold on.

The Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Thursday considered the possibilities of how water comes through the Boustead Tunnel into Turquoise Lake under the Fryingpan- Arkansas Project.

All signs are pointing toward a more-or-less normal year in terms of water supply. Lake Pueblo, swollen by 12,000 acre-feet of flood water, is 132 percent of average. The flood water already was being released on Thursday, raising Arkansas River levels in the wake of the flood surge.

Turquoise and Twin Lakes are above average in the upper reaches of the Arkansas River, while John Martin Reservoir has begun filling again to its highest level since 2010, about 82,000 acre-feet on Thursday.

Snowpack levels in the headwaters of both the Colorado and Arkansas Rivers are back to normal, but it’s late in the season and both basins fell short of peak moisture levels this year.

But very little transmountain water has come over so far, just 4,254 acre-feet of a projected 53,000 acre-feet for the season.

“It all depends on how it comes off,” said Roy Vaughan, Fry-Ark manager for the Bureau of Reclamation.

Cold temperatures are preventing the snow from melting at prime rates, as it does at this time of year in some cases.

“The tunnel hasn’t started to run at full capacity, so we’re behind,” Vaughan said.

If it warms up too quickly, the Fry-Ark structures won’t be able to capture it. And river levels have to be met on the Western Slope, Vaughan explained.

In the past decade, the Southeastern district has adopted new policies to avoid over-allocating water early in the season, so it holds back 20 percent of the allocation.

More coverage from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain:

Farms will get a boost in water supply, with nearly average allocations from the Fryingpan- Arkansas Project, but reduced requests from cities for water.

The Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Thursday approved allocations from the project, based on snow forecasts, which have improved since projections of water supply were made May 1.

The district projects that 53,000 acre-feet (17 billion gallons) of water will be brought through the Boustead Tunnel into Turquoise Lake. That would mean almost 45,700 acre-feet available for allocation.

Of that, about one-third will go to cities and two-thirds to farms. Under the district’s allocation principles, the split would be closer to 53 percent municipal and 47 percent agricultural.

Initially, just 80 percent of the water will be allocated in case conditions change and imports are less than expected. The remaining 20 percent will be available when imports reach the target.

If more water above the target is brought over, there could be a second allocation.

Cost of the water is $9 per acre-foot for farms and $9.75 for cities.

Municipalities reduced their requests significantly this year.

The Fountain Valley Authority (Colorado Springs, Fountain, Security, Stratmoor Hills and Widefield) requested and received 7,216 acrefeet, but was eligible for 11,625 acre-feet.

The Pueblo Board of Water Works was eligible for 4,568 acrefeet, but requested and received no water, since Pueblo Water has ample water in storage this year.

Cities east of Pueblo took slightly less water than authorized, mainly because St. Charles Mesa Water District took just one-sixth of its share. Fowler, Crowley County and Joseph Water all took significantly more water than authorized, while most others were close to average.

Cities west of Pueblo took slightly more. All received the full amount requested.

Pueblo West and Manitou Springs, which get water that was redirected from agriculture when Crowley County farms were dried up by Aurora, will each get full allocations of about 155 and 160 acre-feet, respectively.

The net effect was moving about 9,000 acre-feet to the agricultural side of the ledger, said Garrett Markus, district engineer.

On the agricultural side, Fort Lyon Canal will received the largest allocation, with 10,653 acre-feet, and it will use 3,135 acre-feet of return flows under a pilot project that allows the ditch to use its own return flows for replacement water under state irrigation rules. Only 58,618 acres of the ditch are eligible for Fry-Ark water. The ditch irrigates 93,000 acres, but owners with more than 960 acres, including Pure Cycle (which has 14,600 acres) are not eligible.

As usual, requests for ag water far outpaced the available water.

Farmers asked for 106,570 acre-feet to cover 146,000 acres on 25 canals, ditches or farms. Only 30,024 acrefeet were allocated.

Another 7,431 acre-feet of agricultural return flows were allocated, 95 percent to the three major well augmentation groups in the Arkansas Valley.

More Fryingpan-Arkansas Project coverage here.

USBR: Learn about our 2 new grants to help water users take a proactive approach to drought

May 19, 2015

Happy #NationalRiverCleanupDay – @usbr

May 16, 2015

New Reclamation map of the #ColoradoRiver Basin includes Mexico

May 14, 2015

From InkStain (John Fleck):

It’s a nuance, but of such subtleties are progress often made.

In the Bureau of Reclamation’s new “Moving Forward” report on the future of the Colorado River Basin, a subtle change to the bureau’s canonical map:

Colorado River Basin including Mexico USBR May 2015

Colorado River Basin including Mexico USBR May 2015

There, at the bottom. See that little bit poking down into Mexico? That’s the Colorado River Delta. The Bureau’s official map used to cut off its depiction of the Colorado River Basin at the U.S.-Mexico border…

On the heels of the enormously successful Minute 319 environmental pulse flow down through that Mexican Delta, a quiet recognition that the Colorado River Basin is a thing changed.

More Colorado River Basin coverage here.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,245 other followers

%d bloggers like this: