San Luis Valley: Groundwater sub-district #1 rules ruling issued

Judge O. John Kuenhold issued his ruling on the management rules for the Valley’s groundwater Sub-district #1 on Wednesday, according to a report from Ruth Heide writing for the Valley Courier. From the article:

Although neither side may have been overjoyed with District/Water Judge O. John Kuenhold’s Wednesday ruling regarding the San Luis Valley’s first water management sub-district plan, the parties are ready to move forward with the judge’s guidance. The judge approved some portions of the sub-district’s management plan and sent other portions back to the board of managers for revisions…

[Rio Grande Water Conservation District] Attorney Ingrid Barrier on Thursday said Judge Kuenhold’s ruling this week provides clear direction not only to the water district and its sub-district but also at some level to the state and to future sub-districts waiting in the wings. She said the court’s directives provide a jumping off point for the sub-district’s board of managers to move forward in amending the water management plan. Barrier said the board of managers will probably meet the first part of March to begin reworking the management plan, and as in the past the process moving forward will be open to the public. She said the judge gave the board 120 days from the February 18 ruling to prepare and adopt an official plan and has scheduled a status conference on April 6. Barrier said Kuenhold’s ruling was “extremely thoughtful and very comprehensive,” and she was pleased that the judge called the water management plan the kind of document that would serve at water users’ disposal to appropriately manage the Valley’s valuable resources.

Barrier said the judge’s ruling did not scrap the management plan. “In fact the court specifically approved a number of actions the board of managers took,” she said. Those include: the administrative record; fee structure; data collection that engineer Allen Davey conducted in the unconfined aquifer storage; boundaries of the sub-district; and composition of the board of managers. The sub-district board still needs to clarify how injurious depletions to senior surface water rights will be calculated and repaired. “That’s the bottom line,” Barrier said.

[Kelly Sowards chairman of the San Antonio, Los Piños and Conejos River Acequia Preservation Association] said the legislation that permitted water management sub-districts required them to rectify injuries to senior surface water rights. “They have to be kept from having injury at any time.” Sowards said he believed the judge stood behind that intent by sending the water plan back to the sub-district board of managers for revisions. Sowards said the judge’s ruling on Wednesday gives the board members a chance to make sure their plan affords protection and reparation to senior surface rights. “I am looking forward to seeing what they will come up with,” Sowards said. He added that he and other senior water right holders could offer the board of managers some advice. He said senior water users provided comments to the board before the board finalized its management plan. “I haven’t seen any of the comments integrated into the water management plan so at least they heard us but as far as acting on anything we might have said I don’t think that it happened,” Sowards said. He added that was one of the reasons the judge could not let the management plan move forward as it was written.

More coverage from the Valley Courier (Ruth Heide):

The judge on Wednesday released his decision accepting some portions of the Valley’s first groundwater management sub-district plan and sending others back to the sub-district board of managers for revisions.

“The court specifically finds the current plan is conceptually compatible with SB 04-222 [the legislation permitting water sub-districts] and the constitutional principles governing Colorado water law, but the court also concludes that this plan should be referred back to the board of managers of the sub-district and the board of directors of the district for further consideration and amendment because it lacks detail, grants discretion with no guidance, fails to acknowledge the replacement of injurious depletions as a priority, and simply is not a ‘comprehensive and detailed plan’,” Kuenhold stated in his summary. He added, “the plan fails to give priority to the constitutional and statutory obligations that are a condition that must be met in order to qualify the plan for exemption from general regulation under forthcoming rules and regulations. This is a fundamental flaw …”

[More…]

A sub-district of the Rio Grande Water Conservation District, Special Improvement District No. 1 encompasses 174,000 acres of irrigated farmland and about 3,000 irrigation wells in the closed basin area of the Valley north of the Rio Grande. The sub-district’s goals are to curtail well pumping on a pay-to-play basis that will rebuild the Valley’s unconfined aquifer, protect senior surface water users and the Rio Grande Compact, keep the state from shutting down wells in the sub-district once state rules are in place, and allow farmers to continue pumping well water as long as they pay for it and someone else in the sub-district makes up for it by providing water or fallowing land. The plan anticipates pulling 40,000 irrigated acres out of production to meet the sub-district goals. Kuenhold stated that the 40,000-acre estimate may not be accurate and may need to be adjusted over time but added, “there can be no dispute that the proposal in the plan to reduce irrigated acreage is a reasonable step in the right direction.”

He later stated, “The plan submitted by Sub-district No. 1 is neither intended to be, nor could it be, a complete solution to the problems caused by mining the confined and unconfined aquifers of the basin. Rather, the plan is intended to be a management tool for the majority of the unconfined aquifer in the closed basin.” The judge said that although the plan “fails to adequately detail how it will act to protect the senior surface water rights,” and in doing so “fails on both statutory and constitutional grounds,” this kind of plan is still “exactly what the legislature intended to authorize” and the framework for such plans is consistent with the constitution and the Water Right Determination and Administration Act…

Kuenhold found that the plan’s goals are consistent with the state engineer’s discretion when adopting rules governing underground water.

The judge defended the plan on other fronts as well. For example, in response to objectors’ criticism that the plan only addressed the unconfined aquifer and did not adequately address the confined or deeper aquifer, Kuenhold replied that this plan “is aimed at the unconfined aquifer in the closed basin and the provisions of the plan are not inconsistent with the principle governing maintenance of the confined aquifer pressure.” He said increased water storage in the unconfined aquifer would benefit the artesian pressure in the confined aquifer. He added that testimony presented to the court indicated a separate sub-district addressing the confined aquifer would be forthcoming…

However, Kuenhold was not afraid to criticize the portions of the plan he believed required some work. For example, he said he could not approve a plan that did not take care of the senior water rights. “The requirement of complete replacement of injurious depletions to senior surface water rights is a prerequisite for court approval and continued viability of any plan of water management that seeks the benefits of exemption from regulation,” Kuenhold said, “and the plan fails to recognize this obligation in unambiguous terms. Any amended plan must be clear that whatever financial circumstances may ensue, unless there is replacement of injurious depletions … the plan fails and participants in the plan cannot expect to claim the benefit of exemption from curtailment by the State Engineer.” Kuenhold added that the plan lacked detail and although he understood the supporters’ argument that they could not provide details of how the sub-district would operate until the plan was approved and the sub-district had money to operate it, “the court also believes that either the plan or rules and regulations of the State Engineer must contain sufficient detail to allow the court to find that both procedurally and substantively the plan will operate as intended to prevent injury to senior water users, to prevent injury to Compact administration and to provide procedural protections for all affected parties.”

Kuenhold also questioned whether the sub-district board’s plan to use its resources to restore the hydraulic divide was feasible or wise. “This will become evident over time,” the judge said. He explained that several of the plan’s strategies to replace depletions to the Rio Grande and its tributaries due to well operations involved restoration of the hydraulic divide, a mound of groundwater north of the Rio Grande that would buffer pumping depletions on the other side of it. Experts from both proponents and objectors of the plan testified during last year’s trial that the divide does not currently exist, as far as they can tell. The sub-district plan proposes a restoration of that divide…

The details Kuenhold is seeking in an amended water management plan include: timeframe and methodology to determine depletions to the Rio Grande and tributaries from wells in the sub-district; timeframe and methodology for replacing those depletions; timeframe for annual review/calculations for the past irrigation season and how over- and under-deliveries will be addressed; template for the annual operating plan containing specific information about the operation of the plan in a coming year; and provisions for review of the plan’s operation at the end of the year.

Here’s the link to the ruling.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Arkansas Valley Conduit: New legislation may be helpful

Here’s a recap of yesterday’s Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District meeting, from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Legislation that could accelerate work on the Arkansas Valley Conduit is moving ahead, and new leadership at the Department of Interior could help the project’s chances. Those assessments were shared Thursday at the monthly meeting of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District by Christine Arbogast, a lobbyist for the district, which is sponsoring the project.

A new plan is moving forward that would include a 65 percent federal cost share, using revenues from excess capacity leases to repay the entire amount over time. Other parts of the project that have been underfunded, such as Ruedi Reservoir above Aspen, would be repaid as well under a proposal put together by the Southeastern District. The local share of the funding would be covered by a $60.6 million low-interest loan from the Colorado Water Conservation Board.s Authorization, but not funding, for the new plan is included in a public lands bill, which has passed the U.S. Senate but stalled last week in the House. The House is expected to take up the bill when it reconvenes next week, Arbogast said…

The chances for the bill to pass are good, since more than 150 separate projects in many states are included in the bill.

The district is pursuing a parallel path for stand-alone legislation that has failed to advance in previous sessions of Congress. At recent meetings with the Colorado delegation, Southeastern Executive Director Jim Broderick, President Bill Long and lobbyist Ray Kogovsek asked for identical bills in the House and Senate to prevent the sorts of challenges that occur when different versions of the same bill work their way through both houses, Kogovsek said…

Meanwhile, the district is hoping for up to $1 million in stimulus funding to advance planning activities on the conduit. The money would come from $1 billion allocation to the Bureau of Reclamation, specifically a $60 million fund for rural water supply projects. However, there will be additional rules and regulations to follow, as the district learned last year when it received a federal grant for $600,000 from the Environmental Protection Agency…

The district also is excited about changes in Reclamation, which is a bureau under the Department of Interior. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar was a strong supporter of the conduit during his tenure as U.S. Senator from Colorado. Top officials at Reclamation are aware of the district’s concerns and were more receptive during the recent visit, Broderick said. Reclamation has, over the past few years, actively opposed federal funding shares for the conduit. “Our relations with the bureau will strengthen with Ken Salazar in that position,” Broderick said.

DARCA: Annual meeting

The Ditch and Reservoir Company Alliance is holding their annual meeting in Pueblo this week. Here’s a recap from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

DARCA is focusing on ag to urban water transfers, a hot topic in both the Arkansas and South Platte valleys. It heard from panels discussing the pros and cons of water transfers and looked at state efforts to find alternatives for the traditional “buy-and-dry” sales of the past.

Crowley County holds a special place in the discussion, because it developed communities, railroads and irrigation ditches 10-15 years later than other counties in the Arkansas Valley. Then, after the collapse of a marginal sugar beet industry, it became the first large area of the state to fall victim to large-scale municipal buys. “To generalize, the developmental sequence of the Crowley County area can be characterized by big ideas, inadequate funding and repeated attempts to salvage the previous investments by making additional investments,” Weber said. It’s pointless to ask whether the collapse of the county’s economy caused water sales to Colorado Springs and Aurora or whether the cities’ thirst precipitated the sales, Weber said…

“We’re always facing a reduced water situation in Crowley County, but we’ve had a past and we have a future,” said Heimerich, talking about the current situation and future of Crowley County. While the county has only a few farms remaining, its population has stabilized with the addition of two prisons and suburban homes for commuters to Pueblo, he added. “After the last sale in 1987, 43,000 of 50,000 acres had no water rights – that’s an area of 67 square miles,” Heimerich said. “Of that, 37,000 acres were never given any revegetation.” The revegetation that occurred appeared to be successful, until some new owners began overgrazing that land, and it was dealt a death blow by prolonged drought from 2002-06, Heimerich said. “Revegetation works where there’s a cover crop and proper management,” Heimerich said. “No permanent cover was ever established. When it’s wet, they grew weeds. When it’s dry, the weeds blow.” Unfortunately, there are many fields that have been covered by weeds. These created a severe problem last year when a weed burn got out of control, scorched 7,100 acres, killed two firefighters and forced the evacuation of Ordway. Irrigators attending the conference asked Heimerich whether those who bought the water could be required to maintain revegetation and reclamation of land even when it changes hands after the sale.

New irrigation rules for the Arkansas Valley?

According to a report from Chris Woodka and the Pueblo Chieftain Kansas has submitted their comments on the proposed new consumptive rules for the Arkansas Valley. From the article:

In a letter to Colorado this week, Kansas attorney John Draper outlined several issues that already have been addressed by a committee assembled last year by State Engineer Dick Wolfe. The committee meets again Tuesday in Pueblo and is expected to discuss the Kansas letter…

Last year, Wolfe said the purpose in formally sharing the rules with Kansas was to obtain its input to avoid future disputes or litigation. Kansas, in turn has objected to fundamental points of the rules, as well as provisions added during past committee meetings. Kansas wants the rules to cover all surface improvements since 1949, not just those since 1999, and to change the implied purpose of the rules to include protection of senior irrigation rights in Colorado as well as Kansas, Draper said. “With respect to protecting the rights of senior Colorado surface water users, the relevant date would be even earlier,” Draper wrote. Kansas also wants to remove designated groundwater basins in House Creek and Box Springs that are excluded in the Colorado rules, wants continuing input recognized for the Trinidad Dam and Reservoir Project and to eliminate provisions for variances, according to Draper’s letter. All were added to the rules after committee discussions. Draper’s letter also indicates Kansas wants Colorado to enforce addition of gated pipe, which irrigators on the committee convinced Wolfe should be eliminated because of the difficulty of enforcing the rule.

Meanwhile heres a recap of a recent meeting about the new rules and what they might entail from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Farmers in the Lower Arkansas Valley will put meters on ponds that feed sprinkler systems this year to begin measuring seepage in an attempt to lessen their burden under proposed state consumptive use rules. “It will go a long way toward determining the pond loss, and I think it will be more than they’re giving us credit for,” said Dale Mauch, one of the farmers on the Fort Lyon Canal who has installed sprinklers fed from ponds in the past 10 years that would be subject to the new rules. “It all points to the fact that we jumped the gun on these rules.”[…]

There are already meters that measure how much water is coming out of the sprinklers, and the new meters will measure what is coming into the ponds, Mauch said. The meters cost roughly $1,400 each and have been installed on eight ponds so far, said Don McBee, another Fort Lyon Canal farmer. The federal Natural Resources Conservation Service paid half the cost for the meters. “We’re eating the rest,” McBee said.

Ryan Hemphill, of Colorado State University-Fort Collins, said the university is interested in setting up a study of 10 to 12 ponds and told the board he would come back with a request for about $20,000 to complete the study. Evaporation measurements also will figure into the equation, Hemphill said. The state Division of Water Resources is looking at consumptive use rules to head off future issues with Kansas over the Arkansas River Compact that could arise as farmers put in more water-saving measures such as sprinklers, drip irrigation, canal lining and pipes.

State Engineer Dick Wolfe and Division 2 Engineer Steve Witte maintain that greater efficiency in irrigation systems could increase the consumptive use and deplete return flows to users downstream. They are mainly concerned about sprinkler systems fed from surface water sources which have been installed since the last accounting of water use with Kansas in 1999. Well-fed systems already are covered in rules adopted in 1996 as a result of a 1985 U.S. Supreme Court lawsuit filed by Kansas against Colorado…

“The rules are coming, but we need to make them as workable as possible and base them on real, actual data,” said Peter Nichols, Lower Ark water attorney. “We also need to make sure farmers are able to get assistance from the Lower Ark and not face a penalty.”

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

CWCB: Water availability task force meeting February 25th

From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board:

The next Water Availability Task Force meeting will be held on February 25, from 1-3:30p at the Colorado Division of Wildlife Headquarters. The agenda will be posted on the CWCB website as soon as possible. Past meeting presentations and other materials can also be found at the CWCB website.

Sun powered device converts CO2 to methane

Here’s a report about a new device from researchers at Penn State that uses a wider spectrum of light to convert CO₂ to methane (and other organic compounds), from Jon Evans writing for New Scientist. From the article:

Although other research groups have developed methods for converting carbon dioxide into organic compounds like methane, often using titanium-dioxide nanoparticles as catalysts, they have needed ultraviolet light to power the reactions. The researchers’ breakthrough has been to develop a method that works with the wider range of visible frequencies within sunlight…

The team found it could enhance the catalytic abilities of titanium dioxide by forming it into nanotubes each around 135 nanometres wide and 40 microns long to increase surface area. Coating the nanotubes with catalytic copper and platinum particles also boosted their activity. The researchers housed a 2-centimetre-square section of material bristling with the tubes inside a metal chamber with a quartz window. They then pumped in a mixture of carbon dioxide and water vapour and placed it in sunlight for three hours. The energy provided by the sunlight transformed the carbon dioxide and water vapour into methane and related organic compounds, such as ethane and propane, at rates as high as 160 microlitres an hour per gram of nanotubes. This is 20 times higher than published results achieved using any previous method, but still too low to be immediately practical.

If the reaction is halted early the device produces a mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen known as syngas, which can be converted into diesel.

Fountain Creek: Some things are looking up along and in the creek

Here’s a look at some positive news about the management of the Fountain Creek Watershed, from a report from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

On Wednesday, the Lower Ark board heard presentations from Corridor Master Plan consultant Kevin Shanks and the Colorado State University-Pueblo team studying water quality on Fountain Creek. Shanks is heading up a team under a two-year, $600,000 joint project of Colorado Springs and the Lower Ark district. So far, that plan has developed four projects along the creek that will begin to address stretches of the creek that are out of shape by restoring natural curves and wetlands. At the same time, the projects will decrease the erosion that daily dumps tons of sediment into the creek. “What are we going to do to improve Fountain Creek? We’re going to emulate nature wherever possible. It’s that simple,” Shanks said. He said about 60 percent of Fountain Creek already is in excellent shape, but the rest needs work…

Shanks explained the purpose of each project:

The EcoFit Center is a way of fighting “apathy” about Fountain Creek for the average person in Colorado Springs. Families using the El Pomar recreation facilities would gravitate to the creek activities. Fitness grants, stormwater enterprise funds and foundation grants could be used.

Clear Springs Ranch is on the list of possible projects under the stimulus bill and is listed among commitments to Pueblo County if the Southern Delivery System is built from Pueblo Dam.

The Pueblo Springs project is supported by the Fountain Creek Foundation and could receive support from the developer of the proposed housing and commercial center north of Pueblo, although the time frame has become less certain.

The Confluence Park is generating increasing interest with the city of Pueblo and East Side groups. It would use sediment in the creek to build a park that could replace aging unsightly levees on the Lower East Side.

“You guys should pat yourselves on the back,” Shanks told the Lower Ark board. “Colorado Springs Utilities is looking at putting the whole thing (Clear Springs Ranch) into a conservation easement. That’s something that wouldn’t have happened 12-14 months ago.”

The CSU-Pueblo study of Fountain Creek has identified both sources and non-point areas of selenium loading on Fountain Creek, said Jason Turner, a graduate student who has taken the lead on that portion of the study. The study, started three years ago, also is looking at other metals, E. coli bacteria sources and other water quality issues on Fountain Creek. “We’re moving into the next phase: what is it doing? We’ll be testing invertebrates and fish,” Turner said. “We’re moving past the water analysis and into the ecosystem analysis.”

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Project WET

From the Highland Ranch Herald: “Great Western Institute, a Highlands Ranch nonprofit, has become the project host for an international water education organization. Tracy Bouvette, a founder of the institute, said the institute trained 60 Douglas County schools teachers so far in Project WET (Water Education for Teachers) curriculum.

“Project WET provides school curriculum in 29 countries and 49 states. The programs are aimed all though the school grades and teaches the water cycle and how human disturbances impact it. WET also looks at watersheds, wetlands and the wildlife that dwells in them, with a cooperative agreement with Ducks Unlimited.”

Wallace Stegner’s 100th

NewMexiKen is running his sort of annual Wallace Stegner tribute on the author’s 100th birthday and writes, “Stegner is first in fiction, second in non-fiction; now that’s a writer.”

Ginn Development Co high bidder for Columbine Ditch

Ginn Development Co was the high bidder for the Columbine Ditch. The Pueblo Board of Water Works gets to bank $30.48 million, according to a report from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain.

Aurora will get one more shot at the ditch. From the article:

The sale of the Columbine Ditch to a developer of a ski mountain at Minturn was approved by the Pueblo Board of Water Works on Tuesday, but Aurora still has one more chance to bid on the transmountain ditch.

Under its 1997 contract to lease water from Pueblo, Aurora has the first right of refusal until 2013 on the sale of any transmountain asset – a ditch or tunnel that brings water from the Western Slope into the Arkansas River basin. The Pueblo water board has several of those assets and wants to sell the Columbine Ditch to help pay for its purchase of Bessemer Ditch water shares.

Meanwhile the board is busy leasing water, according to a report from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Long-term leases of 200 acre-feet for $350 an acre-foot per year for 40 years went to the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District and Evergreen Land Development of Dallas. The Upper Ark will use the water in its blanket augmentation plan for users in Chaffee, Custer and Fremont counties. Evergreen will use the water at the Mount Massive Golf Course and associated development.

Aurora bid $250 per acre-foot for 1,000 acre-feet the first year, and increased the amount and the price over a 20-year period. The water board followed Purchasing Agent Kathy Stommel’s recommendation to reject the bid because it failed to meet minimum requirements.

The water board had offered up to 5,000 acre-feet of water for long-term leases.

The short-term leases are for 10,690 acre-feet for one year only and range from $25-$75 per acre-foot. Ward said the timing of the leases – many want the water delivered before June 1 – would be good for the water board because it would not have to release water it already has stored in accounts.

Judge Maes to appoint 5 to Southeastern board

From the Pueblo Chieftain: “Five seats on the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District are up for reappointment this year…

“Applications must be sent to Dennis Maes, chief judge of Pueblo District Court, no later than March 17. Maes, who also serves as Division 2 water judge, will make the appointments in consultation with district judges from the respective counties before the April 16 meeting of the Southeastern district.”

SB09-141: Fountain Creek Watershed District

The Pueblo city council is taking a long look at the IGA between the towns and counties that will enable the authority. SB09-141 is the enabling legislation. Here’s a report from Chris Woodka wrting for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Council is the last governmental body to sign on to a proposed intergovernmental agreement on Fountain Creek among Pueblo County, El Paso County, cities in both counties and the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District. It will take at least two meetings, one next week and one in March, to approve an ordinance entering the IGA.

The agreement and SB141, which would create the Fountain Creek Watershed District, envisions a nine-member board that could funnel money into projects to improve the creek, charge fees and even – if voters desire – levy taxes. The primary goal is to control the periodic floods which eat up parts of Pueblo and other communities further up the creek, but there is also plenty in the IGA and bill about recreation, wildlife and wetlands.

In SB141, authority is limited to the narrow corridor of the 100-year flood plain from Fountain to Pueblo, fee authority to the watershed, although all of both counties would be included as a possible tax base. The documents even suggest a nine-member board which would include a representative from the City of Pueblo.

Colorado Springs Utilities has plans for stimulus dough

Colorado Springs Utilities has plans for some of the stimulus dough from the bill President Obama signed yesterday, according to a report from the Colorado Springs Gazette. From the article:

Utilities submitted requests for funding for four projects:

• $5.8 million for improvements to Fountain Creek on Clear Spring Ranch south of Colorado Springs, including a fish ladder, creek realignment, wetlands development, bank improvements, and off-channel detention.

• $13.3 million for work at 20 locations where sewage lines cross creeks and are at risk of overflowing during storms.

• $10 million to extend the nonpotable water system in northern Colorado Springs.

• $600,000 for a demonstration project on low-impact development at the Mesa Environmental Center.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Mary’s Lake water treatment plant upgrades

Here’s an update on the Mary’s Lake treatment plant in Estes Park, from Juley Harvey writing for the Estes Park Trail Gazette. From the article:

Marys Lake Water Treatment Plant has negotiated an agreement with the Upper Thompson Sanitation District (UTSD) for the discharge of 15,400 additional gallons of discharge and has received a January invoice from the UTSD.

The anticipated completion date for the Marys Lake plant is April. The Town is operating a temporary 1-million-gallon-per-day water treatment plant through completion of the project. Utilities Director Bob Goehring told the Utilities Committee at last week’s meeting at the Municipal Building that the Marys Lake Water Treatment Plant’s additional backwash discharge capacity will double — from 2 million gallons a day (mgd) to 4 million mgd. The waste treatment discharge will increase from 4,600 gallons a day to 20,000 gallons per day at capacity, requiring .5 percent more treatment, up from 1 percent to 1.5 percent. A change in treatment technique to membrane filtration is included. Goehring noted that the discharge from the Marys Lake plant mostly involves filtered dirt from the water and is not the UTSD’s typical discharge. According to the intergovernmental agreement for wastewater treatment, the user rate for metered customers will be charged at the current rate at the time of billing. The current 2009 user rate for metered customers is $6.25 per 1,000 gallons, with an additional quarterly access charge of $5.25 per month.

Dry Gulch Reservoir public meeting February 23rd

From the Pagosa Daily Post (Sheila Berger): “The Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District and San Juan Water Conservancy District will host a public presentation of the Dry Gulch Project on Monday, February 23 from 6 to 8 pm at the Pagosa Lakes Vista Clubhouse. The presentation will cover all aspects of the project, including revised future growth and water demand projections, project infrastructure, planned reservoir size, project financing and Capital Investment Fees and plans for reservoir public use. A question and answer session will follow the formal presentation.”

Potential Colorado well fee increases

From the Pueblo Chieftain (Charles Ashby): “…[State Senator Abel] Tapia said that one of the more controversial fee proposals calls for an increase in water well and supplemental water supply plan fees, which would bring in about $500,000 for the rest of this fiscal year and $2.5 million next year. Fees for new wells would go from $100 to $665, while supply plan fees would increase from $300 to $2,000. Tapia said the current fees don’t cover the actual cost to the state to process the applications. ‘These are fees that haven’t been raised in a long time,’ Tapia said. ‘That’s a significant increase, but it also means that the general fund was backfilling that amount. Although a person doesn’t drill a well everyday, those fees are percentage-wise very high, and that will get the attention of the people who deal in that industry.'”

Voters to decide future for Fraser Sanitation District?

From the Sky-Hi Daily News (Autumn Phillips): “A petition containing 103 signatures has been turned in to the Fraser Sanitation District requesting that the possible merger of the district with the Town of Fraser be decided by voters. The signatures have been approved by Grand County Clerk Sara Rosene, but a date for the election has not been set. A hearing date to discuss the election has been set in District Court for March 31. Once the election date is set, voters will be asked whether they would like to dissolve the Fraser Sanitation District board and put sewer services under the management of the Town of Fraser.”

Colorado Springs Utilities to build new hydroelectric plant

Colorado Spring Utilities is retro-fitting Crystal Creek Reservoir for hydroelectric generation. The small hydro plant will help offset the utilities’ requirements for renewable energy. Here’s a report from R. Scott Rappold writing for the Colorado Springs Gazette. From the article:

Colorado Springs Utilities will begin construction Tuesday on a new $4.5 million hydroelectric plant in Cascade. It will be the fourth hydro plant in Colorado Springs Utilities’ system, and the 850 kilowatts of electricity it generates will power about 530 homes. The plant will be near U.S. Highway 24 south of Cascade…

Utilities gets 8 percent of its energy from hydro plants, and officials are also planning to buy additional wind power to meet the new standards. The new plant will be completed in about six months. The turbine will be powered by water rushing down a pipeline from Crystal Creek Reservoir on Pikes Peak. It is on the site of a pressure-reducing station, which slows water coming off the mountain and will be torn down after the hydro plant is completed. The funding comes from Clean Renewable Energy Bonds, a federal program that provides interest-free, tax-exempt loans for renewable energy projects.

The other hydro plants run by Colorado Springs Utilities include Manitou, built in 1905, Ruxton, built in 1925 and Tesla, at the Air Force Academy, built in 1997.

A dry look at Dry Gulch

Here are the links to part one, part two and part three of Bill Hudson’s series about Dry Gulch Reservoir from the Pagosa Daily Post.

Colorado Water Conservation Board instream flow workshop

From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (Rob Viehle):

2009 CWCB Instream Flow Workshop

Date: Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Time: 10:00 AM – 2:00 PM
Location: REI Flagship Store, 1416 Platte St., Denver, CO 80202

Please note that lunch will be available at a cost of $ 8.00 per person and will include assorted sandwiches, cookies, and beverages. Please RSVP to Rob Viehl at rob.viehl@state.co.us by Friday, February 20th if you would like to have your lunch reserved and please bring cash on the day of the workshop if you are interested in this option. You may also bring a brown bag lunch or purchase a sandwich from the Starbucks café which is located on the REI premises. Sandwiches at Starbucks start at $6.50.

Stimulus package dough for water in Colorado

From the Denver Business Journal: “WATER: $34.6 million through the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund to improve drinking-water delivery systems. $31.8 million through the Clean Water State Revolving Fund to improve water cleanliness.”

Snowpack news

From the Summit Daily News: “Based on the latest snowpack data, [Mike Gillespie, snow-survey supervisor for the Natural Resources Conservation Service] is predicting a good run-off season. ‘Statewide, we’re about 114 percent of average,’ he said. The highest reading comes from the Rio Grande Basin, at 128 percent of normal. Only the South Platte drainage is slightly below average, at 98 percent. The Colorado River Basin is at 118 percent of average, while the Blue River drainage, defining much of Summit County, is at 125 percent.”

From the Cortez Journal (Kristen Plank): “Total precipitation, or liquid equivalent, for February has reached 0.73 inches so far, with a normal liquid equivalent of 0.96 inches for the entire month. This puts February at 77 percent of normal, [Jim Andrus, regional weather observer for the National Weather Service] said, but light snow is forecast for the remainder of the week. January had 69 percent of average precipitation, Andrus said. In January 2008, total snowfall reached 275 percent of normal. February 2008 was 211 percent of normal. Snowfall of the season, beginning with the first flakes in November, has totaled 34.6 inches through February. December saw 22.1 inches of snow. ‘Last year we had almost 4 feet of snow for the whole season,’ Andrus said. ‘This season we’ve received almost 3 feet of snow so far.’

“Mike Preston, manager of the Dolores Water Conservancy District, said McPhee Reservoir is in good shape, especially with the recent snow. He said the reservoir was sitting at 119 percent of average at midnight Sunday but jumped to 128.5 percent as of midnight Tuesday. The reservoir is approximately 104,000 acre-feet below full, but based on the current snowpack, has a forecast inflow of 330,000 acre-feet based on the existing snowpack, Preston said.”

Animas-La Plata Project: Lake Nighthorse uses

Here’s an update on potential uses for Lake Nighthorse, part of the Animas-La Plata project, from Dale Rodebaugh writing for the Durango Herald. From the article:

What kind of recreation will there be at Lake Nighthorse, which will have a surface area of 1,500 acres (the surface of Vallecito Reservoir covers 2,700 acres) when the basin is full in 18 months to three years? A skull session Thursday at a meeting of the Animas-La Plata Water Conservancy District produced some talking points for the first public discussion of the matter, scheduled March 5 at the Durango Public Library…

The lake will have a boat ramp because the federal Bureau of Reclamation, which oversees the Animas-La Plata Project, took on that job after the cash-short Colorado State Parks Department backed out last year. The federal agency has $750,000 in severance-tax revenue and $2.25 million from the federal Wallop-Breaux Fund. The Wallop-Breaux Fund is fed by motorboat fuel tax. What hasn’t been decided is what types of craft will be allowed on the water. Noise from power boats or Jet Skis would be audible to residents in nearby subdivisions to the west…

Other possible amenities mentioned are camp sites, picnic areas and hiking trails. A more sophisticated operation could involve a concessionaire, showers and a Laundromat to accommodate long-term visitors. Board members spoke by telephone at the meeting with David Merritt, a retired Colorado River Water Conservation District employee now working for a Glenwood Springs engineering consultant. Merritt described the development of recreation at Ridgway State Park north of Ridgway and Wolford Mountain Reservoir near Kremmling.

In its only formal action Thursday regarding Lake Nighthorse, the board authorized Whitehead to negotiate a single-appearance contract for Merritt to attend the March 5 public meeting…

The first public meeting to discuss recreation at Lake Nighthorse is scheduled from 5:30 to 9:30 p.m. March 5 at the Durango Public Library. Lake Nighthorse will be the body of water behind the Ridges Basin dam three miles southwest of Durango. The federal Bureau of Reclamation, which is in charge of the project, expects to start filling the lake this spring.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Oak Creek moving on installation of water meters

From the Steamboat Pilot & Today (Melinda Dudley): “Water meters have been expressed as a goal by Oak Creek town boards for years, and the current Town Board is stressing their installation both to increase the fairness of town water billing and to encourage water conservation, [Mayor J. Elliott] said.

“The board budgeted $5,000 for preliminary work this year to install water meters for Oak Creek’s water customers and move to a tiered rate structure, instead of its current flat rate fees. A preliminary scope of work presented Thursday by Jones puts the price tag on a feasibility study, completed in July, at $14,250 — with the town paying for 20 percent, or $2,850, and grant funds covering the rest.

“If the town decides to proceed with water meter installation, after the completion of an eventual feasibility study, Jones estimated the project would take about five months. One crew can install about three meters a day, and Oak Creek would need to install about 490 meters to serve its existing customers, he said.”

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

San Luis Valley groundwater sub-district #1: Looking for federal funding

Here’s an update on funding for the San Luis Valley’s first groundwater sub-district, from Matt Hildner writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

The valley’s first groundwater subdistrict, which is currently under review by the Division 3 Water Court, has forwarded a $125.8 million proposal to the U.S. Department of Agriculture that would pay farmers to bring land out of production. The federal government would carry 80 percent of those costs under the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, but the subdistrict would need to come up with $27.3 million for a local match. Tim Davis, a consultant for the subdistrict, said he hopes the federal government will sign off on the proposal in time so landowners can enroll in the program by Oct. 1. But before that happens, Davis said the program may need to see some funding shake loose…

Once the program’s open for enrollment, the greatest incentives will go toward landowners along the Rio Grande between Del Norte and Monte Vista. By reducing groundwater pumping along that stretch, the subdistrict hopes to create a hydraulic divide that would prevent river water from entering the aquifer on the north side of the river. Producers may be allowed to graze cattle on some of the retired ground, but that decision would be made by the Natural Resource Conservation Service, Davis said.

The idea for the subdistrict was advanced as a way to avoid mandatory state rules, while allowing irrigators to reduce pumping and protect senior surface water users and the state’s commitment to deliver water downstream for the Rio Grande Compact. Should the water court sign off on the subdistrict’s management plan, as many as eight other groups from around the valley could follow with similar plans.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Southern Delivery System: Fremont County alternative

Here’s a look at the discussion prompted by Colorado Springs’ proposed Southern Delivery System route through Fremont County, from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

If the westerly route is chosen over the proposed action at Pueblo Dam, water providers in Fremont County could benefit, said Bruce McCormick, Colorado Springs water services chief. How, exactly, they can benefit is still a matter of negotiations that were occurring on the eve of the Fremont County hearing and will continue over at least the next two weeks. “We feel it’s best to meet with stakeholders and get down to their concerns,” said John Fredell, SDS project director. Colorado Springs verbally committed to adding hydrants for fire protection and improving Florence’s river park as benefits to Fremont County at the public hearing last week. Holcim Cement concerns were mollified. Minimum flows in the Arkansas River for a regional sanitation plant and for rafters seem to be assured.

Some tougher questions loomed. The toughest dealt with the possibility of adding the Penrose Water District to the SDS line. Colorado Springs amended its plan in Pueblo County in 2007 to include a tap for Pueblo West if the project comes from Pueblo Dam. That change allowed full evaluation of Pueblo West as an SDS partner under the Bureau of Reclamation’s environmental impact statement. It also provided a tangible benefit for ‘Pueblo County that is missing in Fremont County. Pueblo West is contributing just $1 million toward SDS under its 2007 agreement with Colorado Springs, Security and Fountain to participate in the project. The cost of building a river intake if the pipeline goes to Fremont County could be as much as $8 million.

The Penrose Water District could realize a similar savings. In 2006, the district bought water rights from Denzel Goodwin, a western Fremont County rancher. It applied for, and received, an $8.9 million loan from the Colorado Water Conservation Board toward a $9.7 million project to develop a well field, pipeline and storage for the water that it would gain. SDS would be a much more attractive option. It would be relatively simple and less costly for the Penrose Water District to tap into the pipeline or share the intake at the Lester-Atterbury Ditch. The Penrose district has little money to put toward SDS or the revised EIS that would be needed should it become a partner, said Lissa Pinello, president of the district. Additionally, the district’s board had not formally met on a course of action.

The Beaver Park Water District, which has 530 shareholders and sells water for Penrose is further along in negotiations, said Gary Ratkovich, president. The district and Colorado Springs are talking about ways to bring water into Penrose from the Arkansas River as well as the Beaver Park drainage. One sticking point has been money, since Beaver Park also would have to pay to play in the SDS project. Beaver Park has a history of dealing with Colorado Springs, purchasing the Golden Cycle water rights it now owns from Colorado Springs in 1976. Ratkovich asked commissioners for a two-week delay to give the district time to negotiate a contract with Colorado Springs that would include both supply options and conditions for future water district projects.

Commissioners also had a late request from the Natural Resources Conservation Service, a federal agency, to coordinate proposed flood protection projects in the Penrose area that in some cases share a footprint with the pipeline.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Stagecoach Dam to be raised by 4 feet

The Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District plans to raise the level of Stagecoach Reservoir 4 feet, according to a report from Melinda Dudley writing for the Steamboat Pilot & Today. From the article:

The Upper Yampa Water Con servancy District is awaiting permits from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Routt County and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to raise the water level in Stagecoach Reservoir by 4 feet. If the permitting process goes through without any hitches the dam-raising would take place this fall, though delays could push it back another year, [Kevin McBride, district manager of the Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District] said.

“I’ve learned not to second-guess the permitting process,” McBride said Thursday, sitting in Fetcher’s office in the Mount Werner Water and Sanitation District building…

To raise the water level of Stagecoach Reservoir, construction to the dam itself will be pretty simple, requiring a 4-foot cap to be placed on top of the dam’s existing spillway, McBride said. Raising the water level by 4 feet will increase Stagecoach Reservoir’s capacity from 33,273 acre-feet to 36,460 acre-feet, McBride said…

The surface area of the reservoir will increase from 771 acres to 819 acres, and the water will encroach anywhere from 4 to 40 feet on the existing shoreline, depending on terrain, McBride said.

Expanding the footprint of the reservoir will require a wide range of mitigation work on the Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District’s dime, including infrastructure work for Stagecoach State Park, raising the boat ramps, and wildlife, wetland and waterfowl mitigation projects. The district worked extensively with the Colorado Division of Wildlife and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on wildlife mitigation plans. The water district will reconstruct some of the existing wetlands around the reservoir — which will be inundated when the water level rises — develop a new waterfowl habitat area and do preventative work to discourage pike breeding, McBride said.

Raising the water level in Stagecoach Reservoir and the associated mitigation projects will cost a total of about $3 million, McBride said. Because of the uncertain economy, the Upper Yampa Water Conservancy Dis trict has not determined exactly how the project will be financed, though McBride said the district can fund it almost entirely out of reserves if need be.

Four years of Wyoming cloud-seeding efforts

Here’s an update on Wyoming’s 5 year cloud-seeding project, from Wes Smalling writing for the Casper Star Tribune. From the article:

[Bruce] Boe is one of several scientists working on the five-year Wyoming Weather Modification Pilot Project, an $8.8 million research program funded by the state of Wyoming. The project’s scientists, along with state water managers, hope to find proof of whether the decades-old practice of seeding clouds — trying to squeeze more precipitation out of passing storms — actually works and that it’s a practical option for increasing the state’s water supply. Members of the world’s science community — cloud-seeing advocates and skeptics alike — are watching the project closely. “For a scientist doing research, this is it. As far as in terms of the research, it is the biggest in the United States by far,” Boe said…

The Wyoming project is in its fourth year, only the second winter in which cloud seeding in earnest has actually been performed. The first two years involved mostly taking measurements and weather readings, obtaining permits from the U.S. Forest Service, gathering other statistical data and getting equipment in place…

While Boe’s company is contracted to perform the cloud-seeding operations, independent teams of scientists from the Colorado-based National Center for Atmospheric Research and the Desert Research Institute in Nevada are independently evaluating whether any increases in precipitation that occur are from cloud seeding or from just normal variations in the weather. That’s the real trick to proving if it works. Cloud-seeding scientists estimate that, if done properly, pumping silver iodide into a cloud will increase snowfall in most cases by about 10 to 15 percent. That’s roughly the same percentage of natural variability possible in normal weather patterns…

It’s too early to say with any certainty that Wyoming’s cloud seeding is working to make more snow, but the scientists are beginning to amass a massive amount of vital information from the project. They still have much more data to collect. They conducted 26 four-hour seeding events in southern Wyoming last winter and more than 30 this winter. Ideally, they would like to have more than 200 cases to examine by the end of the five-year project…

While clouds are often seeded from airplanes, the seeding on the Wyoming project this winter is all being done from the ground by generators on 20-foot towers. Inside a generator placed upwind, a propane flame heats the silver iodide solution, and a nozzle sprays it into the air. It rises into the cloud and is carried by the wind to a target area, which is where the scientists want it to snow. There are eight generators in each mountain range, the Snowies and the Medicine Bows, and another seeding site on the west side of the Wind River Range that has 10 generators.

Meteorologists determine when conditions are right for seeding and tell the technicians which generators to turn on. The technicians, sitting many miles away at computers, activate the generators remotely through satellite modems. Boe, using a machine in his cabin called an acoustic ice nucleus counter, checks the outside air during seeding operations to detect the presence of silver iodide to make sure the particles are reaching the target area…

Before, during and after seeding events, the weather is monitored closely. Independent evaluation teams from NCAR and DRI check the snow for the presence of silver iodide and to collect other statistical data. Seed generators are never turned on at the same time in both the Snowy Range and Medicine Bow Mountains — only randomly either in one mountain range or the other. The forecasters and evaluators are not told which mountain range was seeded, which should eliminate any bias in their predictions and conclusions, said Dan Breed, lead scientist for NCAR. Seeding only one range at a time also allows researchers to collect a double dose of data from each storm — one from a seeded mountain range and one that only received natural snowfall. Comparing results between the two ranges could help determine if increases in snow were a result of seeding or that ever-elusive variability that occurs with natural snowfall…

Periodically this winter, [University of Wyoming] professor Bart Geerts and graduate students will fly over snowstorms in a Kingair research aircraft as cloud-seeding experiments are going on to study how the clouds are affected. Using technologies called cloud radar and LINAR, short for Light Detection and Ranging, the crew will take snapshots of the clouds similar to the three-dimensional slices of a medical MRI scan. “We are basically trying to look at it in the finest detail in time and space. We’re actually looking at the cloud as it is injected with silver iodide,” Geerts said. When a cloud is seeded, “The idea is that silver iodide injected into a cloud is going to turn all that liquid water into ice pretty quickly. We want to see if that really happens.”[…]

University of Tennessee professor Glen Tootle is leading a study on the effects of an increased snowpack on spring and summer runoff. The university experiment could determine what a small snowpack increase in the Medicine Bow Mountains would mean for the North Platte River drainage. No one knows for sure if 10 percent more snow created from cloud seeding would necessarily produce 10 percent more water for the state’s supply. “Those basic questions have not been answered,” Geerts said.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Eastern Fremont election to join Upper Ark upheld

Here’s an update on Eastern Fremont County’s voters approval for joining the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District, from Rod Sering writing for The Mountain Mail. From the article:

Inclusion of eastern Fremont County in the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District was confirmed by the recent Colorado Supreme Court dismissal of a contested election suit, district directors learned Thursday. Julianne Woldridge, attorney for the water district, told directors during their regular meeting, “The inclusion was confirmed and is still in effect. I believe we are done with litigation in this. “The court made a very brief decision and dismissed the case because it was untimely.”

More coverage from the Cañon City Daily Record (Charlotte Burrous):

The Colorado Supreme Court recently dismissed the case, virtually upholding the election results of 4,680 for the inclusion to 2,274 against it. “The Supreme Court found in our favor,” said Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District general manager Terry Scanga. “The decision was two lines. The first sentence said the court agreed to jurisdiction over the case. The second sentence was a dismissal of the appeal because (Ivan Widom and Mark Emmer) filed too late. That ended it right there.”[…]

After the 2007 election, Cañon City resident Widom and Salida resident Emmer argued through their attorney, Bill Alderton, that the election was illegal. “They protested the vote because they said we didn’t” follow the election statues or TABOR rules, Sandefur said. “But the Upper Arkansas is a special district. Special districts are not under TABOR.”

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Standley Lake/Clear Creek Source Water Protection Planning group meeting

From YourHub:

The Standley Lake/Clear Creek Source Water Protection Planning group is having its first stakeholder meeting on behalf of the Standley Lake cities and the broader Clear Creek Watershed. It will be from 10 a.m. to noon, Thursday, Feb. 19, at Consolidated Mutual Water District, 12700 W. 127th Ave., in Lakewood. The group is developing the Clear Creek Watershed Source Water Protection Plan, which aims to identify sources of nitrogen and phosphorus in the water and ways to limit these pollutants from entering Clear Creek.

More than 18 public water suppliers treat water received from Standley Lake and Clear Creek. Some of the recipients of this water include residents of Arvada, Idaho Springs, Georgetown, Golden, Northglenn, Thornton and Westminster. The group will present information about the different levels and sources of nitrogen and phosphorus in the Clear Creek watershed. The public is welcome to ask questions or give their opinions on how to voluntarily limit these pollutants…

For more information on the project and future meetings, go to http://www.standleyswp.com.

Water Tables 2009

Here’s a press release from Colorado State University for the their Water Tables 2009 fundraiser for the Water Resource Archives:

Colorado State University Libraries will host Water Tables 2009, its annual fundraiser for the Water Resources Archive at 5 p.m. Saturday, Feb. 21. The event starts with a reception and tour of the Archives at the Library before moving to the Lory Student Center main ballroom for dinner.

The theme of this year’s event is “Compact Issues and Conflict Resolution,” with Stewart Environmental Consultants Inc. as the presenting sponsor. Nineteen water experts will host tables discussing relevant topics while a gourmet meal is served. The evening will begin with a reception and open house for the Water Resources Archive in Colorado State’s Morgan Library…

Reservations can be made online at http://lib.colostate.edu/watertables09 or by calling (970) 491-1833. Reservations will be filled on a first-come, first-served basis; limited seating is available.

For more information about the event contact Jane Barber at (970) 491-5712 or jane.barber@colostate.edu.

Northern Integrated Supply Project: Participants plan greater push during supplemental EIS

According to this report from John Brennan writing for the Fort Morgan Times the 15 participants in the proposed Northern Integrated Supply Project plan to be much more proactive while the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are issuing their supplement environmental impact statement for the project. From the article:

The 15 participants in the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP) plan to take a more proactive and aggressive approach to generating support than they did the first time around. NISP will be going through a supplemental draft environmental impact statement (EIS) process, Carl Brouwer of the Northern Water Conservancy District told the Fort Morgan Water Advisory Board at its meeting Thursday. That process, which involves more study of specific issues raised in the initial draft EIS process as well as another round of public comments and hearings, will delay the project, said Brouwer, the project manager for NISP. Under a previous timeline, Northern Water had projected starting construction in 2011, but that has been pushed back until at least 2013, Brouwer said…

The supplemental draft EIS should be completed late this year or in early 2010, he said, with the comment period likely to be in the spring of ’10. The NCWCD now hopes to have a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers by the end of 2010…

While the delay pushes back Fort Morgan’s financial obligation for NISP — projected at more than $36 million over the next 14 years — the uncertainty of whether NISP will ever actually be built leaves the city wondering about its water future. Mayor Jack Darnell said at Thursday’s meeting that his question is whether Fort Morgan needs to be more aggressive in buying up more Colorado-Big Thompson water, which is most of its current supply. “Should we go out and get a loan to buy more?” Darnell asked Brouwer. Darnell said the city has been budgeting for about $500,000 a year to buy C-BT water, which will only buy 40 to 60 units. At that rate, Darnell said, “it will take a long time to get where we need to be.”

Brouwer said Fort Morgan’s long-range water needs, including new growth, have been estimated at about 9,500 acre-feet, and the city currently owns rights to about half that amount. C-BT units are roughly an acre-foot each, but because those units are distributed subject to annual “quotas” based on snowpack, runoff and other factors, each unit yields only a percentage of an acre-foot that can vary from 40 to 70 percent. Brouwer said the city might need about 9,000 more C-BT units to meet its long-range needs…

Fort Morgan would get about 3,600 acre-feet — without quotas — from NISP, in which it is the third-largest participant in terms of investment and share of water, according to figures presented by Brouwer. Brouwer also mentioned that if an Army Corps permit is denied, the Glade Reservoir portion of NISP could be moved to Cactus Hill, which the Corps has said is “non-jurisdictional” and would not require a permit…

Brouwer said the 15 NISP participants, which include municipalities as well as water districts including Morgan County Quality Water, will soon be asked to become part of a formal association that will work for approval of the permit. “The message will be to let the science work and protect the Corps from the politics,” he said.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

State budget crisis effecting DNR water enforcement

The Colorado Department of Water Resources is cutting back on overtime for and new hires, according to a report from Charles Ashby writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

The Department of Natural Resources wants to hike water permit fees to raise nearly $2.5 million. At the same time, it’s proposing not to fund about $250,000 in overtime pay for its 120 water commissioners around the state at a time when a freeze in new hires has prevented the Division of Water Resources from filling 25 positions, including nine ditch riders whose jobs are to ensure that everyone’s water rights are respected. The proposed fee increases, which could go into effect as early as next month, had several state lawmakers up in arms when they first learned about them Wednesday…

Theo Stein, spokesman for the department, said that the bad economy and the need for all of state government to make more than $1 billion in cuts this year and next is driving these proposals. “DNR is looking at some very difficult decisions on how to allocate limited resources,” he said. “The overtime, it’s probably one of those programs that in a tough year you have to take a second look at.”

Meanwhile, the department is proposing a slew of fee increases – including hiking new well fees from $300 to $665 and general substitute water supply plan fees from $300 to $2,000 – but that additional revenue is not being directed toward the water commissioners. Other proposed fee increases include late registration, monitoring well and change permit fees, which can be as low as $60, would go to as high as $665. The department also is proposing to hike fees for extensions and requests to determine water rights from $60 to $760. Lawmakers said that while some fee increases may be appropriate, these seemed exorbitant.

In addition to the nine water commissioner positions that have been frozen, the division also has openings for division engineers, well inspectors, hydrologists and other support staff that are subject to the hiring freeze.

Aurora’s bid for Columbine Ditch rejected

Aurora will not be purchasing the Columbine Ditch, according to a report from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Aurora’s bids failed to meet the minimum price criteria outlined for both the sale and the lease according to staff recommendations that the board will see at its meeting Tuesday. Instead, staff is recommending approval of two other bids to lease water at the minimum price specified in the bids and selling the Columbine Ditch to Ginn Development Co., which is developing a world-class ski area near Minturn…

Ginn bid the minimum $30.48 million for the Columbine Ditch, which brings water across the Continental Divide about 15 miles north of Leadville. Minturn is located in the Eagle River basin and Ginn would, presumably, leave the water in the watershed. Aurora bid $30.5 million for the ditch, but its payment proposal of six years did not meet the time frame of the water board, according to the staff report. Alternatively, Aurora offered $25 million immediately. Ginn, on the other hand, offered immediate payment of the entire amount. Aurora also bid only $250 per acre-foot in a 20-year long-term lease of up to 3,000 acre-feet of water. By the end of 20 years, the price would escalate to $350 per acre-foot. The water board specified minimum bids of $350 per acre-foot for up to 5,000 acre-feet of water. Bidders who met the minimum requirements were the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District and Evergreen Land Development for use on the Mount Massive Golf Course near Leadville.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Southern Delivery System: Fremont County alternative

Here’s an update on the deliberations over Colorado Springs’ proposal to run the Southern Delivery System through Fremont County, from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

That left commissioners in Fremont County – the fallback option for Colorado Springs, Security and Fountain – wondering when the mitigation for impacts in their county would be developed. “How do these mitigations transfer to Fremont County?” asked Mike Stiehl, chairman of the Fremont County commissioners. “Many would stay the same,” explained Keith Riley, a Colorado Springs Utilities staffer working on SDS. Riley said parts of the EIS might have to be written if Colorado Springs chooses to run the pipeline through Fremont County, an alternative it is considering if it becomes too difficult to obtain a 1041 land-use permit in Pueblo County…

Stiehl closed public comment on the application for the project after Tuesday’s hearing and noted commissioners have 45 days to make a decision under their own guidelines. Commissioners will meet again on the issue on Feb. 24. Pueblo County commissioners will next take up deliberations on the 1041 permit at 6 p.m. Feb. 25 at the Pueblo County Courthouse.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

The San Luis Valley Agricultural Conference and Trade Fair recap

From the Valley Courier (Ruth Heide): “The final session was scheduled to discuss the status of the Valley’s first water management sub-district, but the group still had no decision from District Judge O. John Kuenhold regarding the sub-district’s management plan that was the issue of a trial before Kuenhold last year. Earlier this week Rio Grande Inter Basin Roundtable Chairman Mike Gibson told that group that in a recent lunch with Kuenhold, the judge had told him he was not yet ready to release his decision but when he did, nobody would be happy with the result.”

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

San Luis Valley Advisory Committee appointments

Here’s the list of apponitments for the advisory committe Dick Wolfe is forming. He hopes that the committee will generate a bottom-up solution for pumping that will help protect senior rights holders and Colorado’s responsibilities under the Rio Grande Compact. Thanks to the State Engineer’s office for the information.

Appointees to the Rio Grande Basin Well Administration Rules Advisory Committee

1)The Advisory Committee shall be composed of representatives nominated by appropriators and entities including:

a)One representative from each of the following Districts:

Alamosa – La Jara Water Conservancy District – John Shawcroft – Alternate – Dwight Martin
Conejos Water Conservancy District – Mike Willett
Rio Grande Water Conservation District – Steve Vandiver – Alternates – Ray Wright, Lewis Entz
San Luis Valley Irrigation District – Michael Entz – Alternate – John Slane
San Luis Valley Water Conservancy District – Dee Greeman – Alternate – Chuck Lavry
Trinchera Water Conservancy District – Monty Smith – Alternate – Alvin Kunigi

b)One representative from each of the following geographic areas or water user associations:

Acequia Preservation Association – Kelly Sowards – Alternate – Tom Martinez
Alamosa-La Jara area – Allen Miller
Carnero/La Garita area – Mike Spearman
Costilla/Culebra area – Harold Anderson
Saguache area – Tim Lovato – Alternate – Ed Nielsen
Rio Grande Senior Water Users – Cory Off – Alternate – Rick Davie
San Luis Valley Well Users Association – Kirk Thompson – Alternate – John Shawcroft
Rio Grande Water Users Association – Doug Shriver
Empire Canal Water Users – Lawrence Crowder
Rio Grande Canal Water Users Association – Clay Corzine
Trinchera Irrigation Company – Conrad Trujillo – Alternate – Ty Ryland
Costilla Acequia Association – Joe Gallegos
Sanchez Ditch and Reservoir Company – Jerry Lorenz – Alternate – Tom Caldon

c)Up to one representative from county commissioners from each of the following counties in Water Division 3:

Alamosa – Greg Higel
Conejos – Lawrence Gallegos
Costilla – Franklin Kuhn
Mineral – Zeke Ward
Rio Grande – Doug Davie
Saguache – Mike Spearman

d)Up to one representative of each of the following State and Federal agencies:

Bureau of Land Management and United States Forest Service – Bruce Rittenhouse – Alternate – Roy Smith
Colorado Division of Wildlife – Ed Perkins – Alternate – Jay Skinner
National Parks Service – Great Sand Dunes National Park – Andrew Valdez – Alternate – Fred Burch
Natural Resources Conservation Service – Frank Riggle – Alternate – Rodney Clark
United States Fish and Wildlife Service – Meg Estep – Alternate – Mike Blenden, Clarke Dirks
Bureau of Reclamation – Ken Beck
Colorado Water Conservation Board – Travis Smith

e)Up to one representative from each of the following municipalities:

Alamosa – Don Koskelin
Ft. Garland – Stan Allaart
Blanca – Rodger Wakasugi
Creede – John Mattingly – Alternate – Clyde Dooley
Saguache – Dan Pacheco
Sanford – Vaughn Miller
Romeo – Don Martinez
La Jara – Bill Yohey

f)And, at least five additional appropriators of waters of the Rio Grande basin in Colorado, engineers, or water attorneys who practice in Water Division 3, to be selected by the State Engineer.

Romero Ditch Co. – Sam Vance
Engineer – Alan Davey
Prairie Ditch – Bill Mckinley II
Manassa Land & Irrigation Co. – Nathan Coombs
Alamosa River – Rod Reinhart
At large – Amy Kunugi
At large – Robert Mathis
At large – Tim Walters
At large – Leroy Salazar

At large – Norman Slade

At large – Tom Corzine
At large – Lynn Kopfman, Alternate – Lynn McCullogh
Attorney – Erich Schwiesow
Attorney – Tim Buchanan
Attorney – Bill Paddock

Here’s a report from Ruth Heide writing for the Valley Courier From the article:

Deputy State Engineer Michael Sullivan, promoted last year from division engineer of the Rio Grande Basin (Water Division 3), told water users attending the agricultural conference in Monte Vista on Friday that the state engineer had pared down a list of 90-100 nominees to 56 people who will serve on an advisory committee to assist the state in coming months.

“We decided to focus on folks that could help us represent a large constituency,” Sullivan said.

He said the group will help State Engineer Dick Wolfe answer a multitude of questions as Wolfe crafts rules to govern groundwater use in this basin. Sullivan said the committee is so large because the state wanted to incorporate representatives from as many different groups as possible. He added that all of the advisory committee’s meetings will be open to the public, and the first one will likely be held in a location such as Ski Hi Park that will afford enough space for all those wishing to attend. The group’s first meeting date has not yet been set.

Committee members were just notified this week of their appointments.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

SB09-141, Fountain Creek Watershed District

Senator Tapia’s bill to establish the Fountain Creek Watershed, Flood Control and Greenway district was approved by the Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee hearing yesterday, according to Charles Ashby writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

The 60-page bill creates a district that has four boundaries, each with varying degrees of authority. The full boundaries of the district include all of El Paso and Pueblo counties, but the fee and taxing area called for in the bill is smaller than that, but larger than the actual Fountain Creek basin. The last, and smallest boundary is the flood plain area, a narrow strip that is nearly equal on both sides of the county line that extends from the south end of Fountain to Pueblo’s northern side. Only there would the district have powers over land-use issues.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Stimulus bill dough has lots of uses in Colorado

Here’s an update on the stimulus bill’s effects on Colorado water projects, from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

About $30 million is being sought from the federal economic stimulus package by Colorado Springs for water projects already on the drawing board. Statewide requests from large cities total for at least $67 million in water projects, including about $32 million from Denver Water. The state has identified $180 million in shovel-ready projects and the Colorado Municipal League says more than $750 million in projects for 439 communities under 5,000 population are waiting in the wings. There are no guarantees that any of the requests would be funded, as the stimulus package would provide about $6.4 billion for water projects nationwide. Colorado already is dealing with the possibility of a $30 million cutback in mineral severance funding for water projects. On the other hand, the state is holding open its funds for water and wastewater projects until the stimulus impacts are clear…

The largest chunk requested from the economic stimulus pool by Colorado Springs is $13.3 million to maintain, rehabilitate and replace 20 wastewater crossings on tributaries to Fountain Creek. The crossings are in danger of overflows that could affect water quality. Colorado Springs also is asking for $5.8 million to improve a three-mile stretch of Fountain Creek at Clear Springs Ranch, located about 15 miles south of Colorado Springs. The project, one of four identified as part of the Corridor Master Plan, would improve conditions for fish, stabilize banks, protect wetlands and provide minor flood detention basins. The Clear Springs Project and stream crossings stabilization have been identified as part of SDS mitigation. Colorado Springs also has asked for $10 million to expand its nonpotable water system in the northern part of the city, increasing the reuse of water. Finally, Colorado Springs has asked the federal government for $600,000 for a low-impact development project that would show how designing subdivisions and lots could reduce runoff…

The Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District is requesting $1 million toward its $330 million Arkansas Valley Conduit, said Executive Director Jim Broderick. The money would go toward investigating the alignment and rights of way needed for the project, which would provide drinking water from Pueblo Dam for 42 communities between Pueblo and Lamar. It would also free up some funds from an existing federal grant to be used for other purposes, Broderick said. The conduit is included in public lands bill that was to be considered this week, but was pushed back as Congress focused on the stimulus package.

Wiggins June referendum to decide strategy for sustainable water supply

The Wiggins Town Council is going the populist route and letting voters decide the towns strategy for a sustainable water supply. Here’s a report from Dan Barker writing for the Fort Morgan Times. From the article:

Mayor Mike Bates said he met with Fort Morgan city officials Monday to clear up what the city is willing to offer in terms of cost to buy water. The Fort Morgan City Council seems to be behind the latest offer. However, the Wiggins council seems to be “spinning its wheels,” so it would be better to have an election to let Wiggins voters decide between three different options, Bates said.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

New home for Coyote Gulch

Hi all. I’m moving in here since Radio Userland — running on my home server — is broken.

I’ve always wanted to host my own data so Radio was a great program for that, except that a restore from backup didn’t work tonight.

New home for Coyote Gulch: http://coyotegulch.blog/

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: