Arkansas Basin Roundtable meeting recap

Here’s a recap of yesterday’s meeting of the Arkansas Basin Roundtable, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

President Gary Barber wants to evaluate the potential effectiveness of plans, projects and methods considered by the roundtable so far. Projects like the Arkansas Valley Conduit, Southern Delivery System and the stalled Preferred Storage Option Plan would be rated along with smaller projects like municipal water projects in Westcliffe and Las Animas, grander plans like the Fountain Creek Vision Task Force and defensive measures like zebra mussel control. Methods such as rotational agricultural fallowing, underground water storage and voluntary flow agreements also would be evaluated without specific reference to any ongoing proposals, Barber said. He suggested looking at how viable, bearable and equitable those plans are…

Some members have either forgotten the details of some of the proposals over four years on the roundtable. Others joined after the actions were approved. Barber backed up and agreed to provide descriptions of the projects and give members more time to evaluate them.

Others wanted to add other projects to the list, including some that may not happen for years, such as Pueblo’s proposal to enlarge Clear Creek Reservoir, suggested by Alan Hamel, executive director of the Pueblo Board of Water Works. Tom Brubaker asked that agricultural dry-up, the likely outcome of no action, be added for evaluation…

Barber wants the evaluation to complete a report on the progress of the roundtable he plans to submit to the Interbasin Compact Committee later this year.

More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Members of the Arkansas Basin Roundtable are perturbed that state agencies are not responding to requests from the Front Range to include the Gunnison River basin in its studies of future water supplies. They also have asked the state to look at the potential water that could be gained from drying up Western Slope agriculture, rather than solely looking at taking water from farms in the Arkansas and South Platte basins…

[Jeris] Danielson said he was frustrated that the roundtables, which were formed in 2005 to develop ways to look at corroboration in water projects between basins, have been slow to get to that point. He also said the IBCC is weighted toward Western Slope interests. Danielson brought up the issue at the July meeting in Crested Butte and received immediate rebuke from several Western Slope members of the IBCC. At its meeting last month, the IBCC declined to discuss a July 13 letter from Arkansas Basin Roundtable President Gary Barber – approved by the Arkansas roundtable in June – that asked for a study of Gunnison River basin exports and consideration of Western Slope dry-up. “The letter was suppressed at the state level,” said Wayne Vanderschuere, a Colorado Springs Utilities executive who was appointed to the board by former Gov. Bill Owens…

The Colorado Water Conservation Board already is looking at other proposals to bring water from the Western Slope to the Front Range, including proposals from the Yampa River, Colorado River return and Flaming Gorge reservoir in Wyoming that would bring water from further reaches than the Gunnison concept. Despite four years of IBCC meetings, any of the concepts would likely face a heated political battle. “They’re still saying ‘not one drop,’” said Reed Dils, who represents the Arkansas basin on the CWCB. “I still see a strong split between the East and West Slope.”

More IBCC and roundtable coverage here and here.

Southern Delivery System: Stonewall Springs Reservoir?

Colorado Springs area residents Mark and Jim Morley are trying to sell their potential gravel pit reservoir at Stonewall Springs to Colorado Springs as terminal storage for reusable water from the proposed Southern Delivery System. Here’s a report from J. Adrian Stanley writing for the Colorado Springs Independent. From the article:

Morley, his brother Jim, and their partners own this land. But they’re offering most of it to Colorado Springs Utilities for the apparently bargain-basement price of $38.8 million. The Morleys say Utilities needs this land for the Southern Delivery System water project. And here’s the cherry: If Utilities bites, the Morleys will donate $12 million to the city for use in funding the just-revised U.S. Olympic Committee retention deal. The clock is ticking for Utilities’ decision and, like any proposal involving water, this one’s full of details. Here’s what is certain: The city could use the money. And the Morleys know it. In fact, everyone in City Council chambers knows it…

What the Morleys want to sell is basically a swath of gravel-packed soil. For people in the water business, though, it’s prime. It can be dug up to create storage reservoirs that could hold 34,400 acre feet of water. The gravel that’s removed in the process can be sold, or used for another purpose, like, say, bedding for the SDS pipeline. The Morleys’ project is also fully permitted, which means Utilities could avoid a lengthy, expensive approval process.

And, the Morleys say, the location is ideal. Here’s why: In the SDS system, treated wastewater from Colorado Springs will flow down Fountain Creek to Pueblo, where it meets the Arkansas. Colorado Springs owns this water and wants to be able to sell it to as many people as possible. But right now, that water just flows on by the ditches of many possible buyers, and ends up in a reservoir over 60 miles away. Two things happen in that process. First, a lot of water evaporates. Second, by passing by all those ditches, the Springs loses a lot of customers for its water — unless it wants to pay to pump the water back uphill. With the Morleys’ land, Utilities could store the water much sooner, which minimizes evaporation and gives the Springs more possible downstream buyers. Also, gravity will draw the water into the reservoir, and back out of it as well, eliminating the need for expensive pumps. The Morleys say their reservoirs could replace one of two reservoirs Utilities plans to build, at less than a fifth of the cost. The kicker: Utilities doesn’t need to make a payment to the Morleys for five years…

So the Morleys get a small profit, the city gets $12 million (which the Morleys will get by taking out a loan), and Utilities saves money. Not a bad deal. Only problem is, Utilities wasn’t planning on even thinking about its reservoir issue until 2016, and as good as the Morleys make it sound, Utilities may see drawbacks. Another possible negative: The Morleys paid just $6.275 million for the whole lot of land in 2005, and now they want nearly $40 million for just one part of it. The Morleys say it’s worth the extra cash — and then some — because the land is permitted and the reservoirs are partially engineered. But Utilities may disagree.

More Southern Delivery System coverage here and here.

Windy Gap Firming Project not without its detractors

Here’s a joint release from Clean Water Action, Fort Collins Audubon Society, Sierra Club PCG, Colorado Environmental Coalition, Environment Colorado and Western Resource Advocates. From the release:

WGFP engages the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Water Act, the Federal Water Supply Act, and the Endangered Species Act. Because of this engagement with federal environmental laws, the process is likely to be long, expensive, and high risk. Specifically, such engagements often boil down to a yes/no permitting decision after years and millions of dollars have already been spent. Additionally, any farmer, city, oil shale company, county, water district, organization, or member of the public can challenge these decisions, thus resulting in potentially more time and expense. Consider examining recent water-supply examples where delay, expense, and conflict have occurred: Two Forks (Colorado), Animas La Plata (Colorado), and King Williams Reservoir (Virginia). Alternatives to WGFP that are less time-consuming, expensive, and risky should be immediately investigated and implemented.

WGFP participants, including PRPA and Fort Collins, should be aware that the WGFP water right is a junior right that is junior to many of the oil shale rights placed on this same Colorado River water.

More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

Southern Delivery System: Rate payers shoulder the burden of paying for the project

From the Colorado Springs Independent (J. Adrian Stanley):

This year, water rates jumped 41 percent. With ratepayers bearing SDS costs, rates should rise another 10 percent in 2010, 12 percent annually from 2011 to 2017, and about 4 percent in both 2018 and 2019. Taking inflation into account, that means the average monthly water bill would go from $34.80 in 2009 to a projected $91 in 2019.

Project director John Fredell notes that Utilities has cut $50 million off a price tag that had ballooned to $930 million for the first phase, which will cover the pipeline and the necessities that go with it, like a water treatment plant, permitting, land, mitigation and pump stations. Phase two, estimated to cost $520 million, will include two reservoirs and system expansion.

Chief planning and finance officer Bill Cherrier says Utilities also spread out costs as much as possible, while still making the progress needed to keep its hard-won permits. That meant water customers didn’t see 26 percent rate hikes two years in a row. And that Utilities maintains its enviable AA bond rating, which keeps interest rates on SDS loans low. If the rating fell two notches, interest could run an extra $15 million to $27 million a year, Cherrier says…

But the financial structuring does lead to uncertainty. The project will start before scores of needed permits are obtained, before land is purchased and before the project is fully engineered — which means costs could rise. As for rate hikes, if the city grows faster, you pay less. And if growth is sluggish, well …

More Southern Delivery System coverage here and here.

Coyote Gulch outage

I’m setting up my shiny new Macbook Air. See you tomorrow.

Laporte: Property owners to allow Greeley pipeline surveys on their land but vow to continue to fight the project

Larimer County residents battling the city of Greeley’s plans to replace aging infrastructure have agreed to allow surveys for the project, according to a report from Monte Whaley writing for The Denver Post. From the article:

Planning for the project to replace an aging, smaller line the city installed more than 50 years ago began in 2005. Greeley gets its water from the Poudre River after it’s treated at a plant in Bellvue, northwest of Fort Collins. The city went to Larimer County District Court to seize a portion of the Humstone property — as well as two other properties near Laporte — to allow crews to do exploratory drilling, seismic surveys and other work on the grade. In the settlement agreement, crews will be allowed onto the properties under certain conditions. They will do biological and archaeological studies, as well as some core drilling, Humstone said.

The grade, which dates to 1881, was part of the Greeley, Salt Lake & Pacific Railroad, which was built to haul locally quarried sandstone to construction projects and sugar-beet factories…

Greeley officials say taking the 30-mile pipeline along a public right of way would go through downtown Laporte. They also say they need to get on the properties to map out a plan to protect the historic structures. The agreement “will help determine the best route and to gather biological, historical, geotechnical and economic data for the Bellvue water pipeline project,” said Jon Monson, Greeley’s water and sewer director. “This settlement will be to the benefit and the best interests of everyone involved.”

More Greeley coverage here.

Pueblo: City study contradicts FEMA floodplain assessment

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“We’ve restructured our estimates for the basin using FEMA’s recommendations and determined the peak flow would be much less,” said Dennis Maroney, Pueblo stormwater director. “Now we have to make sure the model was applied correctly.” The city’s engineers determined the peak flow would be about 11,000 cubic feet per second, or half the amount predicted by FEMA’s consultants. “As you reduce the flows in Wild Horse Creek, the flood plain drops. It wouldn’t overtop the levees and wouldn’t flood Downtown,” Maroney said. The catch is getting FEMA to accept those findings. FEMA officials in April said they would work with the city in determining the correct numbers. The city also is developing plans for remediation if its numbers are not accepted or further modified.

Fort Carson contains about 12 square miles of the 80-square-mile Wild Horse Dry Creek drainage basin and Pueblo West covers most of the remaining area upstream from Pueblo. The creek enters the Arkansas River just downstream from City Park. The city is hoping to develop cooperative regional detention projects with Fort Carson and Pueblo West, but does not yet have information about where such projects would be located, Maroney said.

More infrastructure coverage here.

H.R. 3481: To provide for the protection of the quality of water in the Lower Colorado River and the development and implementation of a comprehensive plan for the prevention and elimination of pollution in the Lower Colorado River and the maintenance of a healthy Lower Colorado River ecosystem

From the Imperial Valley News (Green Liver):

The bill will provide for the development and implementation of a comprehensive plan for the prevention and elimination of pollution in the Lower Colorado River and the maintenance of a healthy Lower Colorado River ecosystem. “The habitat along the Colorado River has been altered by dams, human interference, and non-native plant and animal species,” Grijalva said. “The effects of the massive population growth in the Southwest have threatened the Lower Colorado River. The bill will work to reduce the destruction to the River and thereby protect it from future damage.”

The Colorado River supplies drinking water for more than 25 million people and irrigates over 80 percent of winter vegetables consumed in the United States. The Colorado River and its tributaries are home to many rare and unusual species including 36 native fish species (not including two that have already gone extinct), of which 25 are found nowhere else.

Preserving the water quality of the Lower Colorado River is essential to the health, economy, security, and ecology of Arizona, Southern California, and Southern Nevada. As the climate changes and the population of the region grows, the Lower Colorado River will come under increasing stress. The Lower Colorado River Protection Act will safeguard the region’s add drinking water supply and protect its precious natural resources.

More Colorado River Basin coverage here.

Tapped trailer

He’re the link to anti-bottled water documentary Tapped. Thanks to Salida Citizen for the link.

More Nestle Waters Chaffee County Project coverage here.

Greater Arkansas River Nature Association and Trout Unlimited offering free class on stream ecology

From the Greater Arkansas River Nature Association via the Salida Citizen:

GARNA and Trout Unlimited are teaming up to offer a free class on stream ecology. Topics will include factors that make up good fish habitat, and how water quality and bug presence influence fish health. The group will collect water samples and run quality tests including pH, dissolved oxygen and hardness & alkalinity. The class will do a “kick” in the pond and river and analyze collected sediment under a microscope—learning something about the variety of insect populations. The class is on Saturday, August 15 from 8:00 to about 10:30 AM. Meet instructor Ed Eberle from Trout Unlimited at the upper parking area of Sand Lake in Salida and please bring water, a snack, and shoes that can get wet. A Habitat stamp is required for anyone under age 64 and can be purchased at the Division of Wildlife. This class is free but please pre-register by calling GARNA at 719-539-5106. Limit 15 participants.

More Arkansas Basin coverage here.

Energy policy — nuclear: Workers during the 1950s exposed to cancer-causing levels of radiation

From The Durango Herald (Jo Hanel):

Public Health Service official Duncan Holaday was in charge of the study, and he quickly found evidence that unventilated mines were exposing workers to cancer-causing levels of radiation. Vents would have helped lessen the danger. But the Public Health Service couldn’t get access to the mines without permission from mine owners. To get permission, inspectors promised the mine owners not to warn workers of radiation hazards, Holaday testified in a lawsuit brought by Navajo uranium miners. “You had to get the survey done, and you knew perfectly well you were not doing the correct thing … by not informing the workers,” Holaday said, according to the Openness Project report.

More energy policy nuclear coverage here.

Southwestern Water Conservation District looking into state’s 10,460 acre-feet share of the Animas-La Plata project

From The Durango Herald (Dale Rodebaugh):

But if Colorado doesn’t exercise its option – pay its share of project construction costs by the time final cost calculations are made – its 10,460 acre-feet of water (5,230 acre-feet of depletion, as it’s known) pass in equal shares to the Southern Ute Indian Tribe and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe. The two tribes already own the majority of the A-LP water. Neither Ute tribe responded immediately to a request Monday to comment on the possible use of extra water. Southwestern Executive Director Bruce Whitehead said at the Silverton meeting that the district could be called on someday to help hands-on water districts or water providers acquire water. Southwestern addresses only broad issues of water supply and demand that affect six counties and parts of three others in the watersheds of the Animas, San Juan, Dolores and San Miguel rivers. “If we can help other districts or water providers, it might be worth looking at the state water,” Whitehead said…

Two recently formed water-interest groups already have told the state they could use some of its water. They are the La Plata-Archuleta Water District, organized to bring drinking water to southeast La Plata County and southwest Archuleta County, and the La Plata West Water Authority, which would do the same for southwest La Plata County. La Plata West already has 700 acre-feet of usable A-LP water through the Animas La Plata Water Conservancy District, an A-LP sponsor, but it hasn’t found funding to pay for it. The conservancy district also acquired 1,900 acre-feet of usable water for the city of Durango. The Ute tribes joined La Plata West in paying for a $6 million water intake structure on Lake Nighthorse to serve the southwest corner of the county. In exchange, the tribe can use the La Plata West treatment plant and trunk lines for its own projects.

More Animas River watershed coverage here.

South Boulder Creek: Water for instream flow to be part of Gross Reservoir expansion?

Here’s a look at a proposal to add 5,000 acre-feet or so to Denver Water’s expansion of Gross Reservoir for instream flow in South Boulder Creek, from Clay Evans writing for the Boulder Daily Camera. From the article:

Denver Water authorities are pursuing permission to draw even more water from the Fraser River to nearly triple the storage in Gross Reservoir. While that will put a much bigger “straw” into the Fraser — and, of course, the Colorado — some are asking that the plan be slightly expanded to provide much-needed water for South Boulder Creek.

The cities of Boulder and Lafayette and Trout Unlimited, the national conservation organization with an office in Boulder, aren’t exactly thrilled with the idea of further allocating water from the Fraser. But if it’s going to happen, as most expect it will, they’d like to see 5,000 acre-feet of storage added to the proposed 72,000-acre-feet expansion and use it to ensure adequate winter flow in South Boulder Creek. “It’s a stream that needs help,” said Drew Peternell of Trout Unlimited.

The problem, as always, is how to pay for it all. The additional storage for South Boulder Creek would cost around $8 million. Lafayette, Boulder and Denver have said they’d help fill the pitcher, but not enough to top off the project, according to Denver Water.

More instream flow coverage here.

Here’s a release from Denver Water via YourHub.com:

This summer’s wet weather has many people shutting off their lawn sprinklers to take advantage of what Mother Nature is offering, and Denver Water couldn’t be happier. Customers are using less water this year compared to recent years, but that’s prompted some to ask what it means for the utility’s revenues.

In March 2009, Denver Water reduced its operating budget by 12 percent and adjusted its 2009 revenue expectations downward by 5 percent to respond to the downturn in the economy. However, due to the unusually wet weather, the utility anticipates an additional $16.4 million – or 8 percent – less revenue than expected for the year, which will be covered by reserves the utility maintains for seasonal variations.

“We aggressively encourage conservation and wise water use and plan our budget accordingly,” said Chips Barry, manager of Denver Water. “Our customers continue to do a great job using water efficiently, so we expected water usage to be down because of our conservation plan. However, we’ve had an unexpectedly wet summer, and as a result, actual water use through July is even lower – about 18 percent less than we anticipated compared to recent years. Our financial planning routinely factors in variables like Denver’s weather, so a single year of extra precipitation doesn’t force us to do anything out of the ordinary.”

Denver Water’s rates are based on mostly fixed costs for infrastructure and on operating expenses that don’t change if water use fluctuates. While it is too early to know what Denver Water’s rates will be for 2010, the utility says customers can expect rate increases over the next 10 years to upgrade, repair and maintain its 2,650 miles of pipe and aging infrastructure – some of which is more than 100 years old. The public agency is not funded by taxes, but instead is funded by water rates and new tap fees (also called system development charges).

“In the long-term, we are planning for customers to become more efficient and use less water in the future,” said Barry. “We live in a dry climate and are glad to see customers taking advantage of the rain and not watering. Ten years ago, we wouldn’t have seen this type of response in rainy weather. Conservation is critical to having a reliable water supply in the future.”

Denver Water proudly serves high-quality water and promotes its efficient use to 1.3 million people in the city of Denver and many surrounding suburbs. Established in 1918 as a nonpolitical municipal agency independent of city government, it is Colorado’s oldest and largest water utility.

More Denver Water coverage here.

Rural water systems face myriad problems

Here’s a report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Water service has been out for more than a week in the Zinno subdivision on St. Charles Mesa; Olney Springs was under a state boil order last month; and Rye came off a yearlong boil order in May. The problems faced by those water systems could affect numerous others in the Arkansas Valley and around the state. While the number of incidents statewide is not alarming, there are common problems that should be addressed…

There are almost 2,000 water systems in the state, and nearly half of those are community water systems – cities, districts or private companies that provide water to multiple households – according to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. About 90 percent of those serve less than 10,000 customers. Many, like the Joseph Water Co. that serves the Zinno subdivision, have small populations around 100 customers or fewer. Some companies serve only 15 or 20 customers. Zinno residents found themselves at the mercy of a faulty pump without a backup plan last week. The problem is complicated because the water system is operated by an out-of town company. Once the problem is corrected, the system must be certified by the state health department…

The state health department investigates about 50 cases a year where water quality might be suspect, and about three-fourths of those result in boil or bottled water orders, said spokesman Mark Salley. Currently, there are 13 water systems in the state under such orders, including Zinno, affecting about 2,000 customers. There are about 60 companies statewide doing the same work as H2O consultants, the Woodland Park company that has managed Zinno since July 1. Most have more than one client and are not always located near the water systems they serve.

“They provide certified operators, who are becoming harder to find,” said Hayes, who sits on the state board that certifies operators. The level of certification depends on the type of water treatment and size of plant. Some of those in the private consulting businesses are retired from or even actively employed by the larger municipal systems in the state. A small system usually can’t afford to hire or train its own operator to the level of certification needed…

…when salmonella was found in the Alamosa water system last year, the city’s 8,500 residents were under a bottled water order. The situation took the tone of a relief operation, as outside agencies – including the Pueblo water board and the Rural Water Association – sent people to Alamosa to get the system up and running again.

More stringent state regulations also are putting pressure on the smaller systems. Many of the wells rural customers rely on will be subject to new standards on radium and uranium levels and are looking at potentially spending millions of dollars to treat the water to standards…

Coupled with an aging infrastructure – about $1 trillion in repairs to water systems are needed nationwide – and the difficulty in finding trained workers in rural areas, small water providers face a daunting task. While larger systems are looking at expanding, smaller districts may be just trying to survive. Hayes said the current economic conditions have slowed growth in some areas, and noted larger systems have to be maintained as well. The large municipal providers may be better equipped to maintain them than smaller communities with aging populations.

More infrastructure coverage here.

Roaring Fork watershed plan: Phase II kickoff meetings August 20, September 24 and October 15

From email from the Colorado Watershed Assembly. (Click through for the details).

The meetings on Phase II of the Watershed Plan will be held at the Eagle County Community Building in El Jebel on August 20th; in Redstone at the Church at Redstone on September 10th; in Woody Creek at the Community School on September 24th; in Glenwood Springs at the Community Center on October 1st; and in Aspen at the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies on October 15th. Each meeting will concentrate on the local elements of the watershed where the meeting is being held. So, for instance, the El Jebel meeting will focus on the Fryingpan River and that part of the Roaring Fork between approximately Wingo Junction and Carbondale, including East and West Sopris Creeks. “We welcome all comments on all parts of the watershed,” said Fuller, “but we hope to make it more relevant by spreading the public meetings around the various sub-watersheds in the valley. Although every part of the watershed affects every other part, we know that the concerns of a fly fisherman in Aspen might be different than those of a rancher in Carbondale or a riverside home owner in Glenwood Springs.”

More Roaring Fork watershed coverage here.

South Platte Roundtable vacancy recruitment

From email from the IBCC:

The South Platte Roundtable needs to fill a vacant At-Large seat, they will be appointing the replacement at their September meeting therefore resumes must be submitted no later than August 31, 2009.

Anyone who is interested can send their resume either via email or regular mail to:

Viola Bralish

1580 Logan St, Suite 200

Denver, CO. 80203

More South Platte Basin coverage here.

Arkansas Valley: Officials plan to unleash an additional 100,000 or so tamarisk leaf beetles

From The Denver Post (Bruce Finley):

Colorado agriculture officials are widening their battle against the West’s most voracious invasive weed, tamarisk, by deploying a controversial leaf-eating Chinese beetle east of the Continental Divide. State teams have planted 100,000 of the yellow- striped Diorhabda beetles along banks of the Arkansas River. They plan to release another 100,000 along the river this week, placing them on tamarisk, a water-sucking weed that chokes off native life such as cottonwoods and willows. “We want them to feed like crazy,” said Dan Bean, director of biological pest control for the Colorado Department of Agriculture…

But there are concerns. The Diorhabdas may threaten an endangered bird, the southwestern willow flycatcher, which uses tamarisk in New Mexico and Arizona for nesting. The federal government recently was forced by a lawsuit to suspend its releases of Diorhabda beetles in eight Western states — where tamarisk has gobbled more than 1.5 million riparian acres. Yet Colorado biologists contend the beetle is relatively benign and are pressing ahead — determined to suppress tamarisk with fight-the-enemy-with-its-enemy tactics that so far have proved successful…

“We very much recognize that biological controls are an important aspect” of suppressing invasives, said Chris Diogini, acting executive director of the National Invasive Species Council. Co-chaired by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, the council is charged with coordinating federal, state and local responses to biological invaders — and refereeing disputes. Federal researchers now track some 50,000 exotic species, which unlike chemical pollutants that can be banned and eventually break down, can cause ever- growing problems. But one major challenge “is making sure you don’t get rid of one invasive species only to see it replaced by another,” Diogini said…

This was the first year the state had enough beetles to attack tamarisk along the Arkansas River, Bean said. The first 400 beetles, delivered from northwestern China, have multiplied to more than 50 million, he said. Most live wild along rivers and have the ability to move up to 20 miles a day on their own — into neighboring states. Should this beetle work on tamarisk, others could be tried on such invasive species as Russian knapweed, Oriental fruit moths and alfalfa weevils.

More tamarisk control coverage here and here.

Silverton: Acid mine drainage workshop

Here’s a recap of yesterday’s acid mine drainage workshop held up in Silverton, from Dale Rodebaugh writing for the Cortez Journal. From the article:

An all-day workshop Saturday, one of the Moving Mountain Education Seminar series sponsored by the Mountain Studies Institute here, brought together 20 people interested in talking about and seeing the consequences of acid-rock drainage – the leaching of minerals into waterways. The workshop was led by David Borrok, a professor in the geological sciences department at the University of Texas at El Paso, and Rob Runkel, Richard Wanty and Andy Manning, all with the U.S. Geological Survey in Denver…

Workshop participants, who spent the day in Prospect Gulch a few miles north of town, got an eyeful and an earful of information. Runoff from numerous Prospect Gulch tributary watersheds feed Cement Creek, whose yellowish-colored channel is evidence of the presence of iron. In fact, the caravan stopped twice to view ferricretes – iron oxide formations with their telltale reddish hue that are created when iron reacts with water and air. An ancient ferricrete was visible in a creekside cliff. The other – a terraced formation adjacent to the stream – is still forming. Iron also is responsible for the color of terrain on nearby Red Mountain Pass – the reaction of pyrites (fool’s gold) with air…

The presence of ferricretes is evidence that some streams in the region were metal-rich and acidic before mining came into its own in the region in the late 1870s, Runkel said. “Minerals are stable in the ground but react with oxygen and water when brought to the surface,” Runkel said. “No one knows the quantity of metals in the water before mining started.” He cautioned that accurate hydrological studies are required to establish standards for cleaning up contaminated mines and waterways.

Later in the day Runkel demonstrated how the dilution of a tracer solution shows the level of metal loading from different sources. Runkel poured half a bucketful of rhodamine, an organic dye, into a rivulet on the upper reaches of Prospect Gulch. A sonde with a sensor that emits light at the same wavelength as the fluorescent dye traces the flow of the additive as it moves downstream. Similar studies have been conducted on Cement Creek and other streams above Silverton as part of the Abandoned Mine Lands Initiative, he said. At the Galena Queen mine, workshop participants tested the acidity and electrical conductivity of water in the shaft. They also compared the qualities of the mine water to surface water. At a well on a bench immediately above Cement Creek, Manning explained how to age-date water. Tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen (one of the components of water) has a half-life of 13 years, meaning that in 13 years half of any tritium decays to become helium-3. Consequently, the ratio of tritium to helium in water indicates its age. Rain will have a high ratio of tritium to helium-3 while the reverse is true for slow-moving subterranean water. “Age-dating will tell how an aquifer works and how much water it can supply,” Manning said.

More water pollution coverage here.

Vacancy committee chooses Bruce Whitehead to take over Jim Isgar’s state senate seat

From the Associated Press via the Summit Daily News:

Isgar left his seat July 20 to join the U.S. Department of Agriculture as the Colorado state director for rural development. A vacancy committee chose Whitehead to replace him Saturday. A date wasn’t immediately set for him to be sworn in. Whitehead worked for 25 years for the Colorado Division of Water Resources and is the executive director of the Southwest and Animas-La Plata water conservation districts. Gov. Bill Ritter appointed him last year to serve on the Colorado Water Conservation Board.

More coverage from the Montrose Daily Press (Mallory George):

Bruce Whitehead of Hesperus, Colo., will fill the Colorado Senate District 6 seat vacated by Democrat Jim Isgar, not former Montrose County Commissioner Bill Patterson…

Bev Rich, chairperson of the committee, said there were four candidates for the position. Patterson said he knew Whitehead really wanted the senate seat and that he was willing to quit his job as the executive director of the Southwestern Water Conservation District to be a full-time senator if he was chosen. Patterson told the committee before it made the final decision he would support Whitehead.

More coverage from State Bill Colorado:

Colorado’s Senate has a second civil engineer. A Democratic vacancy committee on Saturday selected water expert Bruce Whitehead to succeed Jim Isgar in Colorado’s 6th Senate District. Isgar took a post in the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Both men live in Hesperus, an incorporated town west of Durango, the La Plata County seat…

To keep his seat beyond January 2011, Whitehead must stand for election to a four-year term in November 2010. Ellen Roberts, a Republican state representative from Durango, already has announced her intention to run for the seat. Democrat Brian O’Donnell and Republican Lew Webb have said they are running to succeed Roberts…

The 6th District covers Archuleta, Dolores, La Plata, Montezuma, Montrose, Ouray, San Juan and San Miguel counties. According to 2002 data, the district has 123,839 constituents. More than 101,000 are white, and 14,163 are of Hispanic origin.

Steamboat Springs: Water rights discussion around Steamboat 700 development

Here’s a look at the water rights issues around the Steamboat 700 development, from Brandon Gee writing for the Steamboat Pilot & Today. From the article:

Steamboat Springs City Coun cil is nearing a vote this fall on whether to annex the proposed development that could include as many as 2,000 homes during a 20-year build-out. At least one candidate in this year’s City Council election, former City Council President Kevin Ben nett, is accusing council members of encouraging “growth without water,” while the developers think they are paying more than is necessary and that they have been misled at every turn.

As it stands, the city will require Steamboat 700 to pay $960,000 during two years to firm up existing but unused wa ter rights the city holds in Fish Creek, Stagecoach Reservoir and the Elk River. The city will spend the money on preliminary legal and engineering work required to ultimately bring an additional 966 acre-feet of water — the estimated amount needed to serve the development — into the city’s system…

The current council, its attorneys and city staff said they instead were comfortable accepting about $1 million earmarked for water projects, because the city’s Water Supply Master Plan found that the city has a reliable long-term source of raw water but that it should “increase redundancy in the community’s water supply.”

Criticisms that the city is letting Steamboat 700 off the hook for water appear to have legs when compared to what is being required of developer Bobby Ginn in Minturn. Minturn is requiring Ginn to give the town enough actual water rights to serve his massive planned development on Battle Mountain that includes a ski resort, golf course and 1,700 luxury homes. Ginn offered the Pueblo water board $30 million for 1,337 acre-feet of water from the Columbine Ditch near Leadville, according to The Denver Post. That amounts to about $22,000 per acre-foot of water. Steamboat 700 is paying about $1,000 for each acre-foot of water it is helping the city use…

City officials argue that the Brown agreement [1993 agreement with the former owners of the the Steamboat 700 site] does not exempt Steamboat 700 from the city’s recently adopted water dedication policy. Adopted in May, that policy requires developers of land outside the municipal water utility service area to bring water rights — or money to help develop the city’s existing water rights, through means such as infrastructure — to the table as a condition of approval. Council members began debating the policy in January and voted in March not to require Steamboat 700 to provide “wet” water rights, instead requiring payment for water infrastructure…

Council members didn’t bend and decided to stick to their staff’s recommendation to require the payment throughout a two-year period.

More Yampa River Basin coverage here and here.

Salida: Water tower upgrades to start in September

From The Mountain Mail (Christopher Kolomitz):

Upgrades include replacement of a failed storage tank roof covering and erection of security fencing. The tank is made of concrete and was part of two open reservoirs. It was covered with a concrete roof during the early 1970s, later tar paper and gravel roofing was applied. Failed sections of roof coating can be lifted and contaminants can potentially enter the tank, Schmidt said. A new roof covering will be constructed of PVC membrane, water plant manager Lonnie Oversole said. The site consists of an infiltration gallery, chlorination system and the tank. Water from the tank is pumped into the city water system. Bid notices are set for publication Aug. 12 and 19 with work scheduled to begin Sept. 7, Schmidt said.

More infrastructure coverage here.

Nestlé Waters Chaffee County project: Commissioner’s meeting recap

From The Mountain Mail (Jennifer Denevan):

Forty-seven conditions on the 1041 permit application filed by Nestlé North American Waters were reviewed by board members Wednesday. Commissioner Tim Glenn said he felt the county has given Nestle plenty of time to review the conditions formed, in part, using public comment and that portion of the process is closed. Board members indicated they wanted to continue movement and review stipulations individually, ensuring they all understand what is meant and the language is what they want. Barbara Green, county 1041 special legal council, said there are different types of conditions – one of which is to hold Nestlé to promises the company has already made.

After discussion Wednesday, commissioners set the next deliberation meeting for 9 a.m. Aug. 19…

The 47 conditions reviewed Wednesday were within categories including general, water and wildlife habitat; access, easements and exception, construction, economy, project water supply, water rights, augmentation, traffic and air quality and mitigation fund. Jim Culichia of Felt, Monson and Culichia, LLC., discussed water rights and supply conditions with commissioners. He drafted those conditions and serves as water counsel to Chaffee County. Some conditions, such as the mitigation fund, were rephrased to reflect what commissioners want to accomplish with the conditions. Green noted having two funds might be a possibility to solve mitigation issues. One fund could be for on-going expenses, she said, and the second would be for unexpected expenses including litigation.

More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain (Tracy Harmon):

To try to assuage the commission’s fears about impact to the watershed, water attorney Jim Culichia of Colorado Springs drafted 10 of the conditions. The complexity of the task, he said, was making conditions that would be enforceable through Nestle when it is the city of Aurora that plans to lease Nestle the 200 acre-feet of augmentation water annually. “We don’t have any control over what Aurora does, but we do have some control over what Nestle does. They (Aurora) have created a demand they did not have before this lease (with Nestle),” Culichia said. Specifically, Culichia drafted a condition that would require Nestle to temporarily stop pumping if water is in such short supply that Aurora has to use exchange water downstream of Pueblo. The idea, he said, is to have the augmentation water flow through Chaffee County to offset what is being pulled from the Arkansas basin in Chaffee County by Nestle. “We also would require (that) Nestle provide detailed accountings to prove water provided meets the agreement,” Culichia said.

In the event that Nestle continued to pump during lean water times, Culichia said he sought to make the condition enforceable by having a penalty associated with it. “For each acre-foot of water pumped during those times, they would have to give up two additional acre-feet,” Culichia said. For example, if Nestle pumped 10 acre-feet when prohibited, it would therefore be giving up 30 acre-feet of pumping rights, Culichia said.

Conditions also would limit the number of wells at two and limit pumping to 200 gallons per minute or 16.66 acre-feet per month…

In terms of economic impact, commissioners mulled permit conditions that would require local construction jobs be given first to Chaffee County residents or, if not possible, expanded to contractors within 25 miles of the county. The board also is considering requiring Nestle to purchase materials and supplies locally as well as hire no less than 50 percent of its water-truck drivers from Chaffee County.

Other conditions getting fine-tuning Wednesday dealt with limiting truck traffic to one truck per hour between 11 a.m. and 6 p.m. from Memorial Day to Labor Day, fishing access, a conservation easement, groundwater and wetlands monitoring and much more. The commission also directed county staff to revamp a condition dealing with a mitigation fund. The draft condition sets the fund at $50,000 but Chaffee County Commissioner Dennis Giese said he thought that was not enough.

More Nestlé Waters Chaffee County project coverage here and here.

CU installs dual-flushing toilets for water conservation

From the Boulder Daily Camera (Brittany Anas):

Partly because of the conservative flushing, CU’s Boulder campus has gone from using 412 million gallons a year to 290 million gallons a year since 2003, said Dave Newport, director of CU’s Environmental Center. During that same time, the school’s building space has grown 12 percent, he said.

More conservation coverage here.

Energy policy — nuclear: Uranium boom on the horizon?

Southwestern Colorado is looking at another potential uranium boom. Nuclear power is widely held to be part of the solution to global warming by many. Others feel that the storage of the waste and byproducts is an unfair burden to scores of future generations of humankind. Here’s a report from Joe Hanel writing for the (Cortez Journal). From the article:

Uranium proponents in Nucla and Naturita point to hopeful signs. A U.S.-Russian program to use old Soviet nuclear weapons for fuel in American power plants is set to expire in 2013. The United States already is heavily dependent on uranium imports – it produced only a tenth of the uranium it used in 2006, according to the Energy Information Administration. People here follow uranium news so closely that Nucla’s local newspaper, the San Miguel Basin Forum, prints the market price of uranium every week on its front page. It’s hovering around $52 – well below its high of $138 during a speculative bubble in 2007, but more than double the price during the 1980s and ’90s.

The price was right for George Glasier, a local rancher with a long career in the uranium business, to form Energy Fuels Corp. three years ago. Glasier wants to build a mill in the Paradox Valley to process uranium and vanadium, an element that’s used to harden steel. At $50 a pound, uranium mining makes sense in Colorado as long as there’s a mill, Glasier said. His company is here to stay, he said, unlike some firms that make money by “mining on Wall Street.”

“This is a company that has experienced guys,” Glasier said. “We’re producers, not promoters.”[…]

Lawsuits might dog the Piñon Ridge mill, too. Glasier said he wouldn’t be surprised to be sued over the mill. His county permit, if it’s approved in August, gives him five years to get the mill built. Stills also is working with mill opponents. He and his allies say the mill will have troubles with water supply and might pollute groundwater – a charge Glasier disputes. “It’s non-issue. We aren’t going to affect anybody’s water rights,” Glasier said. The mill will use 130 gallons a minute – less than he uses to irrigate the hay field at his ranch, he said. The Paradox Valley’s farms are mostly on the lush west side, where the water table won’t be affected by the mill’s wells, Glasier said. Opponents also say dust from the mill will be blown out of the windy Paradox Valley east to Telluride. But Glasier says dust will not be a problem. The mill keeps the uranium wet, so the dust will never be dry enough to fly away, he said. Glasier said he will make whatever health and safety improvements anyone suggests to the mill, but he won’t back away from it altogether. “The environmental community ought to be involved in a dialogue to make this mill better, not to stop it,” Glasier said.

The area still shows effects of past mining activity. Here’s a report from Joe Hanel writing for the Cortez Journal. From the article:

5,000 tons of uranium ore that remains on the surface from Colorado’s last boom, according to a Department of Energy environmental study. Five thousand tons of rock is only a few months of production from a mid-sized mine, but it’s enough to concern Travis Stills, a Durango lawyer who is leading the legal challenge to the DOE’s plan to lease Colorado land for uranium mining…

Piles of waste rock at uranium mines could cause trouble if water runs off them into creeks, said Angelique Diaz, an environmental engineer for the Environmental Protection Agency’s Denver office. The piles are radioactive and give off radon gas, but not in significant quantities, Diaz said…

The BLM has asked the state to put several old mines in the Paradox Valley on its list, [Loretta Pineda, director of the Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety abandoned mines program said. She had a project on tap near Uravan a few years ago, but they put it on hold when people started staking claims in the area. Anyone who opened a new mine would have to clean up the old pollution first.

In other nuclear news the Nunn Town Board recently rejected approval for a resolution in support of Powertech’s proposed in-situ uranium mining operation near the town. Here’s a report from Collin Lindenmayer writing for The Greeley Tribune. From the article:

“Most people who live here don’t want this,” said Gerrit Voshel, who lives outside of Nunn near the Centennial Project site, during a short recess from the meeting. Voshel said the risk of contaminating groundwater — even if the risk is slight — is not worth the gamble. “The population density is far too great to risk that,” he said. “If they make a mistake, they’ll shrug their shoulders and move on.”

At a town meeting in July, Powertech Chief Operations Officer Wallace Mays and CEO Dick Clement noted the corporation’s track record and the potential economic benefits as reasons to support building the mine. The resolution in support of Powertech was introduced as a starting point for dialogue between the corporation and the town. It dealt with safety procedures and possible infrastructure stresses that could be caused by mine usage.

More nuclear coverage here and here.

Animas-La Plata news

From Fox Business:

BTrenchless, a division of BT Construction, Inc. in Henderson, CO, recently completed two tunnels vital to the construction of the Animas La Plata Reservoir in Durango, Colorado. The tunnels, 370 and 130 feet in length, were completed utilizing a Robbins Motorized SBU. Unique to this project, the boring equipment was recovered mid-air employing a hydraulic crane in a 15-foot diameter shaft, 118 feet deep.

More Animas River coverage here.

Grand County: Testing resumes at Grand Lake and Shadow Mountain, Granby, Willow Creek and Windy Gap reservoirs for cyanobacterial toxins

Cyanobacterial toxins are released by blue-green algae into surface waters. There is a risk to anyone that gets their supply from a reservoir where a bloom is present. Here’s a report from the Sky-Hi Daily News:

Cyanobacteria have been documented in the Three Lakes since the 1950s, though methods for detecting toxins only recently became available. In 2007, toxin levels were just above that which the World Health Organization says is safe for an adult to drink for a lifetime, and resulted in advisories to both drinking water and recreational users. As a precaution, in 2008, Grand County began weekly monitoring for cyanobacterial toxins from early July to September. Levels were very low throughout 2008…

Grand County, the Bureau of Reclamation, Colorado River Water Conservation District, Greater Grand Lake Shoreline Association, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Three Lakes Watershed Association, and Town of Grand Lake are sharing the costs of the sampling and analyses.

Fraser: Riverstock celebration August 9

From the Sky-Hi Daily News:

Riverstock, in the 40-year anniversary of Woodstock, is a day of fish, peace and music in the beautiful Fraser Valley…

11 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sunday August 9 at the Lions Club Fishing Ponds in Fraser.

IBCC reports about population growth and water needs

Last week the IBCC reported about Colorado’s population growth and water needs and several projects that may or may not help, if they ever get built. Here’s a report from Joe Hanel writing for The Durango Herald. From the article:

Reports from the Interbasin Compact Committee predict a doubling of the statewide population, with most of the growth happening on the Front Range. But the population of Southwest Colorado will grow at least that fast, to between 202,000 to 260,000, up from about 100,000 today. All those new Coloradans will need water, and the reports predict a shortfall for cities and industry of 320,000 to 1.4 million acre-feet by 2050…

But Western Slope water experts aren’t in a hurry to talk about sending mountain water to the Front Range. One of the IBCC’s reports released last week considers six major projects to import more water to Front Range cities. Two siphon water from Front Range farming areas, while the other four would be pumpbacks from the Western Slope. They include a 400-mile pipeline from Wyoming’s Flaming Gorge Reservoir and the much-maligned “Big Straw” from the Colorado River on the border with Utah.

Eric Kuhn, director of the Colorado River Water Conservation District, called the potential big projects “a recipe for disaster.” But he thinks they face large obstacles before they are built. “Bigger projects are bigger targets. They’re billions and billions of dollars. I think everybody assumes somebody else is going to pay,” Kuhn said…

Indeed, the Northern Colorado Water Conservation District has floated a plan to pump Yampa River water to the north Front Range, but it couldn’t build the pipeline without help from the state government, said Northern spokesman Brian Werner. Right now, cities in Northern’s service area get their new water from buying out the water rights of farmers, which can devastate rural economies. “The bottom line is more people are going to be living in urban areas. And if we don’t provide some options, the next option is to buy and dry,” Werner said.

Kuhn thinks the Front Range hasn’t been serious enough about conservation. Southern California has doubled its population without any new water, Kuhn said…

IBCC members are also waiting for the first part of a study on how much water Colorado can legally claim from the Colorado River Basin. The results should be in by December or January, said Eric Hecox, who coordinates the IBCC for the Colorado Water Conservation Board.

More IBCC coverage here.

Bob Abbey confirmed as director of the Bureau of Land Management

From the Associated Press via the Summit Daily News:

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar praised the U.S. Senate confirmation of Bob Abbey, saying he has a “proven record of strong leadership and accomplishments” that will make him an outstanding overseer of the 258 million acres managed by the BLM across the West.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who recommended Abbey for the national post, echoed Salazar’s accolades. “Coming from Nevada where nearly 90 percent of the land is federally managed, Bob understands the challenges that our state can sometimes face and will be very helpful in addressing them,” Reid said in a statement.

Abbey served eight years as the BLM’s director in Nevada, retiring in 2005. He also helped former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt complete a Utah wilderness inventory 10 years ago. More recently, he has been in private practice as a Nevada-based consultant. Before coming to Nevada, he was state BLM director in Colorado, and also worked for the agency in various positions in Arizona, Wyoming, Washington, D.C., and Mississippi. In all, he spent 25 years at the BLM, and 32 years in the public sector.

Centennial: New flood plain maps

From the Centennial Citizen (Peter Jones):

Area residents are invited to attend an open house this month to review and comment on proposed flood-insurance rate maps for unincorporated Arapahoe County and the city of Centennial. The maps may drive changes in flood insurance requirements for property owners. The open house will be held Aug. 25, 4-7 p.m., at the Arapahoe County Fairgrounds, 25690 E. Quincy Ave. in Aurora. The modifications to the county’s flood maps were last updated in 1995. The updates are part of a larger effort by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to update and modernize the nation’s flood maps. The latest update will include converting all maps from paper to digital format as well as incorporating new data on flood plains and flood risks.

Cherokee Metropolitan District regulatory filing snafu leads to shutdown of four wells

From the Colorado Springs Gazette (Jon Lentz):

Cherokee’s attorneys submitted the paperwork on three of the wells in 2005, but not within the required two-year period after each became operational. The attorneys also were two days late on the application for the fourth well in 2006. “The judge made his ruling that late is late, and vacated those water rights,” said Kip Peterson, Cherokee’s general manager. The district will file for reconsideration Thursday with the Pueblo Water Court, which ruled against Cherokee on July 28. “If that fails, there would be a Supreme Court request,” Peterson said.

The order comes nearly three years after a state Supreme Court decision reduced the district’s water well production by 40 percent, leading to strict watering rules for residents. The latest ruling cuts the district’s 2006 production by more than half, Peterson said…

The motion to shut down Cherokee’s wells was filed in January by the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District. The group oversees the Upper Black Squirrel Creek groundwater basin, where Cherokee gets a portion of its water. In certain cases, the group can limit how much water Cherokee withdraws. In 2006, Cherokee lost a state Supreme Court battle with Upper Black Squirrel Creek after committing to supply customers within its boundaries, but outside the basin…

“These are water rights that should’ve been filed five years ago, in some cases seven years ago,” Peterson said. “This is definitely a decision that the district did not anticipate.”

More Cherokee Metropolitan District coverage here and here.

Sterling: Costs for new treatment plant to push rates through the roof

From the Sterling Journal Advocate (Forrest Hershberger):

[Tom Ullmann of The Engineering Company] said without the new water system, the city will need a rate increase of about 9 percent over the next couple of years. However, with the cost of a new water treatment plant, that number skyrockets to as much as 190 percent. Since 2008, the city has had a growth in water customers of about .15 percent and water plant investments of about $35,000, equal to about 28 new taps. The inflation rate shown by Ullmann to the city council indicates labor costs for the city’s water treatment plant have gone down slightly, about 1.33 percent. Meanwhile, power costs have gone up just above 7 percent. The real increase can be attributed to the EPA and state health department, Ullmann said — testing, at an increase of 15 percent. The new plant is expected to cost more than $27 million. Additionally, chemicals for city water treatment are estimated to cost about $500,000, and labor $250,000. Ullmann said the average monthly water bill for Sterling residents is $21 per 10,000 gallons used. By 2012, that cost needs to average $61 per 10,000 gallons consumed. He said in comparison, Fort Morgan residents are paying about $56 per 10,000 gallons.

More water treatment coverage here.

Pagosa Springs: Water supply and wastewater treatment plant bids due in August

From the Pagosa Daily Post (Sheila Berger):

Bidding for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) – funded Highlands Wastewater Treatment Facility Elimination project opens [August 6]. [Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District] held an informational meeting for contractors on July 29 in order to prepare them for the contractual requirements of this project by providing an overview of key federal and state mandates and conditions of the federal stimulus funding…

Tentatively scheduled for the third week in August, PAWSD will solicit bids for the Hatcher Water Treatment Plant upgrade and expansion project. This project, funded by a very low-interest loan from the Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority, will provide upgraded technology for the Hatcher facility in order to meet more stringent state and federal drinking water requirements as well as to provide for future capacity expansion of the plant.

More wastewater coverage here. More water treatment coverage here.

Kremmling awards $662,000 water line replacement contract

From the Sky-Hi Daily News (Drew Munro):

Brannan Construction won the bid to replace leaking steel water lines in part of the town after it submitted a bid that was $117,000 lower than the next lowest bid, which was offered by Grant Miller Inc. of Breckenridge. Trustee Erik Woog said he and other council members were concerned about how the large Front Range company might handle sensitive portions of the project. But the cost differential cannot be ignored, he said…

This phase of the project entails replacing more than 10,000 feet of 6-inch and 4-inch water lines, primarily in Kremmling Country, Soltis said. It is being funded in large part by a $1 million Colorado Department of Local Affairs grant. (The low bid will allow the town to replace more line than originally anticipated.) The project is scheduled to begin immediately and be completed by mid-November.

Bids for an upcoming project to replace another 10,000 feet of the 6- and 4-inch lines will be solicited in a few weeks, he said. That phase will be funded exclusively by a $2 million federal stimulus grant. It is scheduled to begin Sept. 30 and be completed next spring…

Before the project began last year, Moses estimated the old pipes were leaking about 60 percent of the town’s treated water into the ground. That’s not only expensive, officials said, it was causing the town water treatment plant to work overtime, accelerating the time frame in which the town would face the costly prospect of replacing the plant.

More infrastructure coverage here.

Chatfield Watershed Authority

Here’s a release from the Chatfield Watershed Authority via YourHub.com which describes the role of the the organization:

It was June of 1965. My dad had just finished letting his hunting dogs run the open fields near the Platte River. I still vividly remember the ominous skies, but being ten, I never could have imagined what happened next. Almost instantly, water came from nowhere, roaring down fast and furiously licking its riverbanks and leaving their containment like a tiger on hunt. We were trapped. As the raging current began to rise, my dad shouted for us to get into the Jeep. No sooner were we inside the Jeep, when the water quickly cut off our access to safety. Water was everywhere and it was quickly rising up above the tires to the bottom of our Jeep’s windows. Before I could stop him, my dog, Charlie, jumped out of the window. He must have felt it was his only chance. I bit my lip, fought back the tears, and watched as he worked his way downstream using the current. It seemed like hours had passed, but it could have only been a few minutes. I remember thinking that my dad would get us out of the situation. Because at ten, that’s what dads do. And I just couldn’t realize the full enormity of something so huge. Earlier, I heard there had been some talk about constructing a dam on the South Platte River. But, like dragging a cat by its tail over carpet, it just didn’t seem necessary. Instead, the South Platte became a waste dump of abandoned cars, refrigerators, and construction debris. I remember all the junk, because as kid, I would inner tube with my friends down the Platte River. And where the Chatfield Reservoir is now used to be a Mexican restaurant/bar and a gas station. It was known as “Malfunction Junction” by many of those that frequented the location. Yes, they were less litigious times and definitely before anyone really understood the magnitude and probability of a flash flood.

This was before the days of Doppler radar and other advance weather warning technology. It was also before appropriate flood control measures were taken. The great South Platte River Flood of ’65 wasn’t the first flood to hit the Littleton area or devastate the lives and property of Coloradans. But, it was the biggest and most costly of its time. Twenty-eight people died in the flood of 1965 and property damages came to over $540 million. It was time to build a dam. The year was 1972 when the massive cleanup and construction of the Chatfield Dam began; it was completed in 1975, paving the way for municipalities to turn the valley into the beautiful recreational site thousands of people enjoy each year.

Today, the Chatfield Reservoir serves as one of the State’s most actively used recreational areas and is home to abundant wildlife and natural ecosystems. Built by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the task of making sure the water basin is kept clean falls under the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). But, in 1984, under the authority of the CDPHE, a little known entity called the Chatfield Watershed Authority (CWA) was established with a mission to promote the protection of water quality in the Chatfield Watershed for recreation, fisheries, drinking water supplies, and other beneficial uses.The hands-on CWA group members are your local wastewater and stormwater management entities such as the Town of Castle Rock, Roxborough Water & Sanitation District, and many others. (See complete listing at http://www.ChatfieldWatershedAuthority.org.)

The Authority members continuously review wastewater treatment planning at the various points at which water originates and then mixes with natural environmental flow downstream and into our water infrastructure, i.e. Chatfield Reservoir. Individual Authority members are also responsible for stormwater management and permitting. According to Amy Conklin, Manager of the CWA, “Our number one priority is to protect the water quality in Chatfield’s Watershed and we do that by monitoring activities that could potentially degrade the water or its environmental quality.”

Additionally, there is an environmental factor, nutrients in the water, which the CWA also monitors. If water in the basin contains too many nutrients, it can deter people from using the reservoir for its intended purposes, such as swimming, fishing and boating. For example, if the water contains too much chlorophyll, the Reservoir can actually bloom with algae. But, here’s the good news. The CWA constantly monitors what goes in to Chatfield Reservoir. You don’t have to nod off, like I did, in learning about phosphorus and other nutrients. That’s why I’m not going into details of how the whole chemistry thing works. There’s no need because it’s being taken care of by the members of the CWA. Whew, believe me, that’s a relief.
And here’s some other good news. While the population in the Chatfield basin is projected to more than double by 2035, [Source: DRCOG Chatfield Technical Appendix] the CWA is well into its long-range water quality management plan to meet anticipated growth, water supply, public safety, wildlife, and environmental challenges.

“Today, helping to protect water quality in the Chatfield Watershed for recreation, fisheries, drinking water supplies, and other beneficial uses has become a shared responsibility. So we are asking everyone to actively participate in helping to maintain a clean and reliable water source,” says Amy.

Yes, I survived the South Platte River flood of ’65. A Colorado State patrolman came out of nowhere and tossed my dad a towrope. Hooking the towrope to the front of the Jeep, my dad was able to steer the vehicle out of harm’s way. As for Charlie, he must have floated downstream working his way to higher ground. Because when the Jeep was pulled from the roaring waters, he was ready for a ride home. So was I.

I am truly pleased about what Chatfield Reservoir has become. She has evolved from solely being a silent protector to an obvious symbol of life. Children now enjoy her banks, boats sail her winds, birds nest in her trees, fish swim her waters, and we can rely on her beauty daily. While the initial purpose of the Dam may soon be forgotten, what the Reservoir has become is protected by the Chatfield Watershed Authority. Learn more by visiting http://www.ChatfieldWatershedAuthority.org

Additional notes:Chatfield Reservoir was built in 1975 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers at the confluence of the South Platte River and Plum Creek to control flooding. The reservoir currently has the ability to store more than 350,000 acre-feet of water. One acre-foot is equal to 325,851 gallons of water. The main purpose of the reservoir is for flood control, but it also provides storage space for conservation (or “multipurpose”) water, which is used for municipal, industrial, agricultural, and recreational uses, as well as maintaining fisheries and wildlife habitat.

More South Platte Basin coverage here.

Glenwood Springs: Frac’ing seminar Saturday August 8

From the Glenwood Springs Post Independent (John Colson):

Area residents interested in learning more about the gas-drilling procedure known as hydraulic fracturing, or “frac’ing,” might want to attend a seminar on the subject being held on Aug. 8 at the Ramada Inns and Suites of Glenwood Springs. The seminar, scheduled from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., is being sponsored by the American Institute of Professional Geologists and the Mountains & Plains Education and Research Center, and is billed as being an impartial look at the issue. The cost of the seminar is $60 for AIPG members, and $75 for nonmembers, and includes a boxed lunch and a beverage. Attendees may either register online at http://www.aipg.org or at the door on the day of the event.

More oil and gas coverage here.

Energy policy — solar: A Carbon-Neutral Energy Supply for Each Individual

From the Telluride Daily Planet (Lisa Christadore):

Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Henry Dreyfus Professor of Energy, Daniel Nocera, is tackling the alternative energy dilemma head on. He has designed a system that mimics photosynthesis to generate hydrogen fuel in the laboratory just as plants do in nature. On Tuesday, Nocera will present the Pinhead Town Talk, “Personalized Energy: A Carbon-Neutral Energy Supply for Each Individual (x 6 Billion People).” He will illuminate how his revolutionary invention captures sunlight and creates enough energy to potentially meet the entire world’s needs by 2050.

More energy policy coverage here.

Nestlé Waters Chaffee County project: County commissioners still deliberating permit

Update: Here’s a recap of the meeting from the Ark Valley Voice (Sterling R. Quinton). From the article:

[Nestlé Waters North America] submitted a request to put off a decision by the Commissioners until such time as the contractual conditions for the permit could be “word-smithed” with input from NWNA. To some, such overtures appeared to be the company angling for negotiations. Possibly anticipating such an accusation, NWNA Regional Manager Bruce Lauerman stated that, “We’re not writing these conditions, but we have some suggestions.”

Chaffee Citizens for Sustainability’s John Graham requested that any potential decision be held off until a public-comment period could be held for community input on the contract conditions. Graham suggested that the public and various consulting firms should be able to offer input on conditions of such magnitude. The Commissioners denied both requests.

From The Denver Post (Jason Blevins):

Chaffee County commissioners spent hours Wednesday deliberating a proposal by Nestle Waters to ship Arkansas River Valley spring water to Denver for bottling…The commissioners will take up the Nestle plan again Aug. 19.

More coverage from The Colorado Springs Gazette (R. Scott Rappold):

Since last fall, Chaffee County commissioners have been wrestling with the project and harsh public reaction to it. On Wednesday, they went over a long list of conditions under which they would approve Nestle’s plan. But the board, which held a half-dozen marathon public hearings in the spring and has debated it twice in meetings since, again balked at taking a vote on a land-use plan. Commissioners set Aug. 19 for the next meeting, at which county staff will present refined conditions…

The commissioners denied requests by Nestle to delay the discussion and by opponents to reopen public comment.

“We have worked a long time reaching this point where we have these conditions,” said Commissioner Frank Holman, “Even though I believe we need to go through them and ask a number of questions and clarify and perhaps request staff do some more work on them, I, for one, believe we have the input we need.”

Among the 47 conditions are the hiring of local workers, limitations on the number of trucks per day on U.S. Highway 285, requirements for monitoring ground water in the area and stipulations that the city of Aurora, from whom Nestle is buying replacement water, release water upstream from the springs. The wells would have to be shut off in years when extreme drought compels Aurora to lease water from downriver farmers.

More Nestlé Waters Chaffee County project coverage here.

CSU forum on emerging contaminants: Plants can absorb chemicals from effluent

From the Fort Collins Coloradoan (Trevor Hughes):

University of Arizona professor Charles A. Sanchez is conducting research on the Colorado River, looking into where such chemicals are found and at what levels they can be found in plants irrigated with treated wastewater. Speaking at a Colorado State University forum on emerging contaminants, Sanchez said his tests showed what he considered very low amounts of illicit drugs such as methamphetamine and ecstasy, along with antibiotics, present in crops such as melons, cantaloupe and spinach irrigated with the effluent. “We found a little bit of ecstasy in Bermuda grass,” Sanchez said. “We think the risk is negligible.”[…]

Fort Collins does not widely use effluent for irrigation, said Steve Comstock, the city’s water reclamation and biosolids manager. Comstock said some effluent is used to irrigate the lawns around the city’s two treatment plants, but that’s it. He said Sanchez’s research builds on what many people in the industry already know. Multiple studies, including on the Poudre River, have shown the presence of everything from caffeine and antibiotics to birth control in treated wastewater. Federal regulations don’t require the removal of such contaminants, but that day is likely coming, Comstock said. “It’s something that everybody sort of knows that’s on the horizon,” Comstock said. “The suspicion out there is that this will be regulated before long.”

More wastewater coverage here.

HB 09-1067, Instream Flow Tax Incentives

From email from the Colorado Water Trust:

On June 4, 2009, Colorado Governor Bill Ritter signed HB 09-1067 (pdf) into law. This new legislation becomes effective today, August 5, 2009. This exciting piece of legislation creates the Instream Flow Tax Credit program, which provides a tax credit of up to 50% of the value of a water right donated to the Colorado Water Conservation Board (“CWCB”) for use in the state’s instream flow program. This program encourages voluntary water rights donations to preserve Colorado’s streams and lakes. Please note, however, that the amount of annual revenue which the legislature can spend is limited by state statute. The ISF tax credit will not be allowed in years (such as this year) in which revenues are not expected to exceed this limit.

Here’s the link to their FAQ on the legislation.

More 2009 Colorado legislation coverage here.

Coyote Gulch outage

Update: I believe that my computer keyboard fell victim to a 4 year old that watches firefighter videos online. He eats treats from the neighborhood ice cream truck at the same time. Multitasker.

I have computer problems this morning. It may be tomorrow before I’m back online.

Posted from my iPhone.

California Gulch superfund site: EPA proposes altered cleanup plan

From the Colorado Independent (Katie Redding):

In 1997, under pressure from media, including NBC Nightly News, as well as from citizens, preservationists and state representatives, incredulous EPA authorities agreed to leave several remaining tailings piles in the Leadville Mining District in place, divert most runoff around them, and send any contaminated runoff down Stray Horse Gulch, into an old mine shaft and through a series of convoluted mine workings to a treatment plant on the other side of town.

But in the intervening years, according to EPA Remedial Project Manager Stan Christensen, dye tracer tests have shown that not all the 300 to 500 gallons of contaminated water generated each year actually makes it to the plant. Depending on the day, the plant recovers somewhere between 12 percent and 75 percent of the contaminated water that comes its way, he said. No one is sure where the rest of the water goes.

More California Gulch coverage here and here.

Kansas and Colorado turn the last page on lawsuit over instream flows in the Arkansas River Basin

From the Associated Press via the Kansas City Star:

The two states filed an agreement with the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve the final technical issues about monitoring Colorado’s use of water from the river. The agreement is designed to prevent the river’s depletion as it flows into southwest Kansas.

More Kansas v. Colorado coverage here.

Rio Grande Basin roundtable: First groundwater sub-district scores $31, 500

Note: The post below is a little old. I failed to publish it on July 15.

From the Valley Courier (Ruth Heide):

The goal of the sub-districts of the Rio Grande Water Conservation District is to reduce well pumping in the San Luis Valley in order to protect senior surface rights, stabilize the aquifers and ensure the state meets its water delivery obligations to downstream states through the Rio Grande Compact. The first sub-district encompasses 1,500-1,600 sprinklers and about 3,500 wells. Its management plan is pending legal action, and a trial is scheduled for this September.

The roundtable group had approved an earlier funding request, of about the same amount, for the CREP application process. The funding requests are coming through the Rio Grande Restoration Foundation because it is an eligible nonprofit group. Rio Grande Water Conservation District Manager Steve Vandiver served as spokesman to present the request to the roundtable on Tuesday afternoon…

Vandiver said CREP would make available about $126 million over a 15-year period to irrigators in the first sub-district (north of the river) to reduce the amount of irrigated cropland by up to 40,000 acres. This federal program under the U.S. Department of Agriculture would only require 20 percent local cost share, Vandiver explained. The local match would likely come from sub-district fees paid by landowners within the sub-district’s boundaries…

Participants would receive $15,000-25,000 a year, Vandiver estimated. Over 15 years that would amount to $126 million throughout the sub-district, with about $94 million of that amount coming from U.S.D.A.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Littleton: Bobbie Sheffield named Western Welcome Week’s Grand Marshal

From the Littleton Independent (Holly Cook):

no one knows more about conservation than Bobbie Sheffield, who has been named Western Welcome Week’s Grand Marshal. Sheffield’s title of grand marshal is based on 12 years as the chair of the South Metro Land Conservancy, which goes hand in hand with the 81st annual event. “I’ve always loved the outdoors,” Sheffield said. “When the world gets crazy, if I go walk around South Platte Park, it sets the world right again. It feeds your soul.”

Here’s the lowdown on Western Welcome Week, from Holly Cook writing for the Littleton Independent.

More South Platte Basin coverage here.

Colorado Trout Unlimited: 40th birthday bash

From Colorado Trout Unlimited:

CTU’s 40th Birthday Bash

Colorado Trout Unlimited is Over the Hump!

Where: D Note music venue and restaurant
7519 Grandview Ave., Arvada, CO 80010

When: Friday, August 28th, 6:00 PM – 11:00 PM

How Much: $10.00 cover charge (proceeds benefit Colorado Trout Unlimited)

Advance Tickets: Go to http://www.cotrout.org and click on the fish wearing a party hat to purchase your ticket in advance.

What Else: Raffle and door prizes include: hats, t-shirts, posters, books, DVDs, reels, rods, jackets, vests, white water rafting trip for four and much, much more!

10,825 acre-foot pool for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program

Here’s a release from the Colorado River District:

A proactive environmental program designed to recover four endangered fish in the Colorado River has prevented the legal and social upheavals involving the Endangered Species Act experienced in other parts of the country while allowing the public to benefit from continued water development for a growing population and agricultural uses.

The Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovering Program employs a tool box of initiatives to aid fish recovery, including the construction of fish ladders at dams, fish screens in irrigation canals, fish hatcheries, water conservation by irrigation companies and the contribution of stored water from reservoirs and water users to support habitat.

One of the agreements between water users and the Recovery Program for stored water is up for renewal in 2010 and is this year subject to a pending environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act. The Colorado River District is leading an effort to help fund the assessment and has gained support from a number of Western Colorado entities that have benefited from the Recovery Program.

Contributors include Grand County, the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (Eagle County), the Upper Eagle Water Authority (Eagle County), Breckenridge, Silverthorne, Frisco, Parachute, the Ute Water Conservancy District (Mesa County), the West Divide Water Conservancy District (Garfield and Pitkin Counties), the Basalt Water Conservancy District (Pitkin, Eagle and Garfield Counties), the Grand Valley Water Users Association (Mesa County), the Orchard Mesa Irrigation District (Mesa County), the Grand Valley Irrigation Company (Mesa County) and the Colorado River District.

The partners are helping to fund an environmental assessment of a program to preserve a 10,825 acre-foot pool of water dedicated to the Recovery Program. An acre-foot of water is equal to 325,851 gallons of water.

This water obligation is currently split 50-50 by West Slope water users of the main stem Colorado River and Front Range entities that divert water from the Colorado River through transmountain diversions.

Under an expiring deal, the Colorado River District has been releasing half the water from Wolford Mountain Reservoir on behalf of the West Slope and Denver Water has been releasing its half from Williams Fork Reservoir on behalf of the Front Range. A new arrangement would provide half the water from Ruedi Reservoir and half from Granby Reservoir. The Colorado River District will continue to supply a separate pool of environmental water for endangered fish – 6,000 acre-feet – from Wolford Mountain.

The environmental analysis will cost an estimated $550,000, to be split 50-50 between the Front Range and the West Slope. Dan Birch, Deputy General Manager of the Colorado River District, is coordinating the effort to achieve the new deal and to gain financial support from West Slope water users. Negotiations continue to bolster the West Slope’s half of the commitment.

“We are pleased that 13 water providers have committed thus far and we look forward to help from other water users in the basin,” Birch said. He commended Ute, the Eagle County districts and Grand County for being leaders on this environmental issue.

If water users cannot win approval of the 10,825 plan, the blanket protection afforded water users by the Recovery Program would be jeopardized, forcing entities who need to improve their water supplies from the Colorado River and its tributaries to undergo expensive, individual consultations with federal authorities.

The water in question, as well as other sources of environmental water for the endangered fish, helps bolster flows in the 15-Mile Reach between Palisade and Grand Junction. The endangered fish are the Colorado pikeminnow, the humpback chub, the razorback sucker and the bonytail chub.

Pending the environmental assessment, water users are still liable for payment for the new arrangement. The Front Range option at Granby Reservoir is estimated to cost about $17 million. The West Slope option at Ruedi Reservoir could cost about $8 million. The Colorado River District is working on Congressional legislation to make the cost of the Ruedi water non-reimbursable because the federal water would be used to meet a federal environmental program. Ruedi is part of the Bureau of Reclamation’s Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, a transmountain diversion that supplies West Slope water to water users in the Arkansas River basin.

For more information about the 10,825 effort, contact Jim Pokrandt of the Colorado River District at (970) 945-8522 x 236 or jpokrandt@crwcd.org. For more information on the Recovery Program, go to http://www.coloradoriverrecovery.org.

More Coyote Gulch endangered species coverage here.

Summit County: Ground-breaking ceremony for new Upper Blue Sanitation District North Plant expansion

From the Summit Daily News:

In a special ground-breaking ceremony for the $34 million dollar Upper Blue Sanitation District North Plant expansion recently, district manager Andrew Carlberg detailed the numerous benefits of the expansion to residents of the county and the Upper Blue Basin. Not only will this new facility provide economical sewer service to build out of the Upper Blue Basin, but it will provide economic stimulus as well…It is estimated that at least 75 percent of the work force will be local labor, which equates to 30 new jobs in Summit County. There are also up to 10 local sub- contractors that will be used throughout the duration of the project, ranging from excavators to concrete supply and landscaping. In addition to the infusion of several million dollars into the community, Carlberg also outlined the inter-governmental cooperation that has also benefitted the district and the community. In separate agreements, the district, the Town of Breckenridge and Summit County exchanged sewer tap fees for waiving of development fees and water tap fees. This has saved the residents of the Upper Blue approximately $600,000. The tap fees the town and county have acquired are planned for use in public projects such as affordable housing.

More Coyote Gulch wastewater coverage here.

USGS: Piceance Basin water quality map now online

Here’s a release from the United States Geological Survey:

The U.S. Geological Survey today launched a website that provides water quality data for the Piceance Basin area of Western Colorado.

The site, created and administered by the USGS, was developed to better address concerns about water quality in the Basin. It consists of a common data repository with the most comprehensive collection of water-quality sampling information available in a single location (visit the Piceance Watershed Water-Quality Data Repository site).

“The purpose of the website is to provide all stakeholders with equal access to this important information,” said USGS hydrologist Judith Thomas. “A database such as this is an important tool in understanding changes in water quality over time.”

The need for the repository was identified by energy producers and local governments to address concerns regarding potential changes to surface and ground-water resources as large-scale energy development occurs in the area.

“There is a tremendous amount of water sampling data out there—from government entities, water districts and energy companies, said Sam Potter, president of the West Divide Water Conservancy District. “Until now, however, it hasn’t been aggregated and presented in a format that is easily accessible to the public. This repository is a boon for anyone with an interest in understanding water quality in this region—landowners, energy companies, regulators, and public officials.”

The website is the result of a collaborative data-sharing and water resource assessment process that included local citizens, industry, government agencies, and conservancy districts. A baseline water-quality assessment will be published by the USGS as a result of the compilation of this database.

The database will also identify data gaps and redundancies in water quality information. This information can be used to understand current conditions and inform future monitoring in the Piceance Basin area.

The $1.3 million dollar project is funded through contributions from federal, state and local governments, water conservancy districts, and energy companies, and is matched by grants from the Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA).

Project collaborators included: the USGS, the Bureau of Land Management, West Divide Water Conservancy District, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, the Colorado River Water Conservation District, Garfield, Delta, and Rio Blanco counties, the cities of Rifle and Grand Junction, the towns of De Beque, Palisade, Parachute, Carbondale, Silt, and Rangely; EnCana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc., Natural Soda, Oxy (Occidental Petroleum Corporation), Chevron, Petroleum Development Corporation (PDC), Shell Oil Company, Williams Production, and Marathon Oil.

More Coyote Gulch groundwater coverage here.

Cortez: Verde Fest

From The Durango Herald:

The public is invited to “Verde Fest – the Four Corners Sustainability Fair” from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Aug. 15 in the Cortez City Park. The fair will feature booths on green building, eco-products, renewable energy, natural health and more. There also will be children’s activities, films, speakers, demonstrations, live music and local foods. No admission will be charged.

More Coyote Gulch Montezuma County coverage here.

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: