From Fox21.com:
Stone, who fishes Aurora Reservoir with unwavering devotion, said he never set out to break any records on what he thought was just another typical morning at his favorite fishing hole. “I’ve been coming out to Aurora Reservoir pretty much every weekend, rain or shine, since 2003,” said Stone. “That morning I planned on fishing for trout and walleye but never expected to catch a catfish, much less anything of that size.”
From Clean Water Action:
Today, Clean Water Action applauds passage of the Clean Water Restoration Act in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee by a vote of 12 – 7. Clean Water Action also supports the efforts of the committee to meet the needs of agriculture, while going a long way toward restoring the historic protections of the Clean Water Act. “This vote is a strong rejection of the Bush Administration’s “No Protection Policy” that threatened the drinking water sources for at least 110 million people,” said Clean Water Action President John DeCock.
More Coyote Gulch S. 787 coverage here.
Here’s a release about an art show at Sargent Studio titled “The value of our water,” from The Cherry Creek News. From the article:
Sargent Studio presents “The Value of Our Water”, an art show that shares visions and creative descriptions of water and its value as a natural resource. The show is currently running and will continue through August 15th at 910Arts, 910 Santa Fe Drive in Denver’s Art District on Santa Fe. The public is invited to share this unique celebration of water during First Friday August 7th, 2009 and during regular gallery hours Tuesday-Friday 11-6 and Saturday 12-4.
The show was curated by environmental artist Rik Sargent who has moved into a studio in the 910Arts community to create and share the sculpting of a large monumental bronze sculpture commissioned for the City of Denver. A scale model of the sculpture entitled “One World, One Waters” is on display along with the creations fourteen invited artists of various disciplines. “Together, these artists’ experiences create a single event which celebrates water education.” says Rik, “Value comes from the use of water in the creation of artwork or from water as the inspiration. Either way, it lends to the discussion of our use and respect for the natural resource of water.” The large version of Rik’s sculpture-in-progress can also be viewed by the public in his adjacent studio.
Other highlights of the show include fun installations and found object scuptures by Tim Flynn and rich impressionist oil paintings by Lyudmila Agrich. The additional talented participants include Don Burge, Shane Duerksen, Michael Keen, Gayla Lemke, Andrea Li, Nick Baldridge, Brianna Martray, Dennis Pendleton, Jan Steinhauser and Joshua Wiener.
This show also honors the good works of Denver Water, The Nature conservancy, Project WET, Project Learning Tree, and the Colorado Association Of Environmental Education.
A Douglas County development — Sterling Ranch near Chatfield Reservoir — hopes to incorporate rainwater catchments into the design. Here’s a report from Andrew Simons writing for The Denver Post. From the article:
[Harold Smethills the major investor of Sterling Ranch] hopes Sterling Ranch will be one of 10 pilot residential developments to get statehouse approval for a rainwater collection system for use in the development. The rest of the rain that falls along the Front Range “is lost through evaporation” or is absorbed by native plants, such as field grasses, Smethills says…
Within the development, Smethills plans to install systems that will capture, store and recycle rainwater. These systems, Smethills says, will reduce the development’s consumption of municipal water by 50 percent…
For example, Sterling Ranch planners will install tanks underneath street roundabouts. Roads in the development will be constructed so rainwater will flow into the roundabouts. “This process utilizes tributary water in average or better rainfall years supplemented with storage and Denver Basin water in drought years,” according to the Sterling Ranch website. “This plan maximizes natural stream flows, traditional water storage, and by using the Denver Basin, we will dramatically reduce the water losses from evaporation while ensuring a dependable supply.”
Other water storage systems could include roof capture, where water is directed from a roof through a special gutter system and stored in a tank at the home. According to a study done by Headwaters Corp., a typical residential system where water is stored underground would run about $10,000 to $15,000…
In June, Gov. Bill Ritter signed HB 1129 into law. Getting permits won’t be easy. Prospective pilot projects must ensure water that’s captured in a neighborhood would not otherwise go into streams.
More Coyote Gulch 2009 legislative session coverage here.
From the Colorado Springs Gazette (Carlyn Ray Mitchell):
Colorado Springs was thoroughly drenched in July, when 5.39 inches of rain fell on the city — 3.43 inches above normal. On July 29, 1.45 inches fell in 24 hours.
From the Cañon City Daily Record (Charlotte Burrous):
A long-term weather pattern has brought 3.1 inches of precipitation this month, compared to .82 in July 2008. “Last year was below average while this year is above average,” said National Weather Service meterologist Joe Ceru. “The average is 1.82” for Fremont County. Because of the breakdown in the La Nina system, there was a much drier air mass last year, he said. “We have a different climate” this year, Ceru said.
Here’s the link to the Dolores River Dialogue’s Lower Dolores Plan Working Group set of issue fact sheets. Here’s a report from the Cortez Journal. From the article:
The goal is to gather information, identify values worthy of protection in the planning area, formulate ideas for protection of the values, and make recommendations to the Dolores Public Lands Office – the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Once the Lower Dolores Management Plan Working Group makes its recommendations, the public lands office will initiate a formal environmental assessment process, conduct public involvement, and issue a decision notice.
More Coyote Gulch Dolores River coverage here.
From The Denver Post (Charlie Meyers):
…area biologist John Alves said…DOW is committed to a strategy of balance: a highly productive kokanee fishery, a good rainbow trout fishery and a viable trophy lake trout fishery. To explain its rationale, and perhaps sprinkle some cold water on the argument, DOW has scheduled a series of public meetings in the region. The first is Aug. 25 at the Grand Junction Doubletree Hotel. Others are Aug. 26 at the Montrose Holiday Inn Express, Aug. 27 at the Gunnison Aspinall-Wilson Center at Western State College and Sept. 2 at the DOW regional office in Colorado Springs. All begin at 7 p.m. DOW will explain how stable water levels in recent years promoted highly successful lake trout reproduction in Big Blue. At the same time, kokanee egg take has tumbled — 5.8 million in 2008 against 8.2 million in 2007. Biologists project the current kokanee population at 200,000. A decade ago, the estimation was 10 million or more.
From The Durango Herald (Dale Rodebaugh):
Board members of the La Plata West Water Authority last week took possession of an intake structure at what will be Lake Nighthorse when a reservoir in Ridges Basin just west of Bodo Industrial Park is full. The lake is part of the Animas-La Plata Project, commonly known as A-LP, a Bureau of Reclamation project to provide drinking water for three Native American tribes and nontribal partners in Colorado and New Mexico.
While the authority is confident it has most of the $6 million cost of the intake lined up, it must start looking for $1.5 million to $2 million to buy the 700 acre-feet of water it wants from the water project. The water is owned by the Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority, which also holds 1,900 acre-feet of A-LP water earmarked for the city of Durango…
The intake consists of a vertical shaft and two pipelines perpendicular to it on what will be the northwest shore of Lake Nighthorse. The shaft is 120 feet deep and 17 feet in diameter. At right angles to it are two pipelines, each 3 feet in diameter, one 870 feet long that will draw water from 100 feet beneath the surface and one 152 feet long that will take water from 50 feet. The intake had to be finished before the level of water in Lake Nighthorse covered the location. The lake, which has a capacity of 120,000 acre-feet of water, is being filled by pumping water from the Animas River near Santa Rita Park.
When complete – at an estimated cost of $95 million – the system will bring water to as many as 3,600 dwellings in the unincorporated communities of Breen, Kline, Marvel and Redmesa, a 250-square-mile area straddling County Road 140. Area residents currently fill containers at a spring in Marvel or truck in water. The remainder of the project consists of a water-treatment plant, pump stations, storage tanks and about 40 miles of trunk lines that would carry water to County Road 140, then south to the New Mexico line, said Gene Bradley, a La Plata West board member. The number of miles of branch lines hasn’t yet been determined, he said. Two locations are being considered for the treatment plant – two miles north of the intake along realigned County Road 211 or at Blue Hill just south of the Shenandoah subdivision, Bradley said. Either way, water would be pumped to Blue Hill from where distribution would rely on gravity. The Southern Ute Indian Tribe will contribute $3 million and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe will contribute $1.5 million toward the cost of the $6 million intake. The tribes, which received $20 million each when the irrigation component of the A-LP was removed, must spend 75 percent of their “resource funds” on nontribal projects. Other than the Ute tribes, there is no sure funding for the distribution system, which is expected to be built piecemeal over a number of years, Bradley said. The authority board is looking for local, state and federal money, including stimulus funds, to complete the project, he said.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
Colorado Springs Utilities and the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District want to extend an agreement to develop a Fountain Creek Corridor Master Plan and have invited the new district to join. Colorado Springs and the Lower Ark would each provide $150,000 for the next two years, for a total of $300,000. Of that, they would make $100,000 available to the Fountain Creek district to hire a manager and pay office costs. The other $200,000 would continue to fund consultants working on the corridor master plan. “We’d like to not have the district on the sidelines and see it become a partner,” Jay Winner, general manager of the Lower Ark district, told the Fountain Creek board Friday…
Carol Baker, Fountain Creek coordinator for Colorado Springs, said the city is moving ahead on demonstration projects at Clear Springs Ranch, part of its commitment to Pueblo County commissioners for the 1041 permit for Southern Delivery System. Colorado Springs has committed to paying $50 million to the district under the conditions, but the district won’t see most of that money for a long time. The first $300,000 of the payments will come in the next three years, but can’t be used for administrative costs, only for study of flood-control measures, including a dam on Fountain Creek, said Pueblo County Attorney Dan Kogovsek. The remaining payments will come in sums of $9.7 million the first year and $10 million each year for four years after SDS is completed. Last month, Colorado Springs City Council moved the completion date of SDS to 2016, rather than the 2012 date used when the conditions were being written…
By entering the agreement, the board would allow Colorado Springs to pay forward a portion of the funds it would eventually receive, but keep efforts to improve the creek moving forward, Baker said. The Fountain Creek district also would have a staff member working with Colorado Springs and the Lower Ark to create the master plan. The Fountain Creek board was generally favorable to the proposal, but Kogovsek and El Paso County Assistant Attorney Cole Emmons wanted to make minor changes in the agreement before it’s voted on. The agreement also would need approval of the Lower Ark board and Colorado Springs City Council. Pueblo County commissioners would also have to approve using funds to administration of the district as a credit against the future payments under the $50 million in the 1041 conditions.
“Our ultimate stream of money is a mill levy, but to get voters to approve it you need a demonstration project,” said Pueblo County Commissioner Jeff Chostner. He said the only other ways to gain money now would be to apply for grants through Pueblo and El Paso counties or to “pass the hat” as the Vision Task Force did for two years.
Colorado water law includes an anti-speculation doctrine. Here’s a short explanation from a Coyote Gulch reader:
The doctrine basically says water may not be held for future sale. The Colorado Constitution says no water right will be denied, if the water is put to beneficial use. The one exception to this is referred to as the Great and Growing Cities Doctrine (c. 1916) that says cities can appropriate (or purchase water rights in a change case) water for future needs.
An individual or corporation cannot claim or buy water without an immediate or historic beneficial use.
So that is the conundrum that Aaron Million is in: He hasn’t named any customers for the water that he plans to deliver from the Green River so many are pointing the speculator finger at him and his proposed project. He has frightened off some potential customers by also being secretive about the eventual cost of the water.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is in the process of completing an environmental impact statement for the project but needs to know where the water will be put to beneficial use in order to evaluate the impacts. Million has said that he will provide the names of users in Wyoming and Colorado, “…but is not in a position to provide them yet,” according to this report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. More from the article:
“I think the Corps is trying to shore up its information and narrow down the focus of the project so it can develop alternatives,” Million said. “Obviously, we’re going to do everything we can to cooperate. The project’s on a positive path.” Rena Brand, regulatory specialist for the Corps, had a similar comment.
“In order to define the need, the Corps must understand who the water users are and verify their specific needs for water,” Brand said. “Water users could be cities, irrigation districts or industries.”[…]
The Colorado Water Conservation Board estimates the state has 440,000-1.4 million acre-feet of water to develop under the [Colorado River Compact and Upper Colorado River Compact], but is investigating things like the location and timing of flows. Million’s project would minimize elevation changes as it bypasses the Colorado Rockies and moves water along existing utility corridors.
There is strong opposition to the project in Wyoming. “I’m not sure they have adequate definition of the need for the project to even do the analysis,” Gov. Dave Freudenthal said last week. “I think this is just a rich guy who just wants to move water.”
Million countered that Freudenthal’s opposition was not expected, and said he is ignoring possible benefits to the state.
There is also interest by others in the state in the concept. The CWCB has included it in a study of possible water supply alternatives, and the South Metro Water Supply Authority has been looking at a similar alternative [Colorado-Wyoming Coalition] in its long-range planning.
More Coyote Gulch Flaming Gorge pipeline coverage here and here.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
The project at Colorado Springs’ Clear Spring Ranch, located near Pikes Peak International Raceway, will benefit the Arkansas darter and flathead chub, which are listed as threatened or of concern under the Endangered Species Act. The fish passages are strategically placed rocks that provide the fish shelter as they make their way upstream, said Carol Baker, Fountain Creek watershed planning manager for Colorado Springs Utilities.
“The project will identify for the first time fish performance curves for the Arkansas darter and flathead chub and will establish fish passage design criteria for plains fish species,” Baker said. The fish passages will also demonstrate how similar projects should be constructed on Fountain Creek and elsewhere in the state, Baker said. “Little is known about the biology of these fishes, including their swimming and jumping performance,” said Gregory Gerlich, aquatic section manager for the state Division of Wildlife. “This information is critical to the design of a fish passage.”
Pat Edelmann of the Pueblo office of the U.S. Geological Survey agreed, saying the timing of flows and size of barriers have to be considered in evaluating fish habitat. “To reduce the level of uncertainty, individual species have to be evaluated for swimming performance and jumping ability,” Edelmann said…
The project also ties in with ongoing studies of 16 species of fish in Fountain Creek by Colorado State University-Fort Collins, said professor Christopher Myrick, who is leading the project. “In my view, the construction of a fish passage at Clear Springs Ranch diversion dam on Fountain Creek had the highest potential benefit to a state listed species of any future project we identified within the Fountain Creek watershed,” said Champe Green, senior ecologist with the Army Corps of Engineers.
The project also is part of the list of conditions Colorado Springs agreed to for a 1041 land-use permit with Pueblo County for the Southern Delivery System.
From the Pine River Times (Carole McWilliams):
Bayfield’s new $7.6 million sewage treatment plant is almost finished, but groundwater infiltration into sewer lines could take up a lot of its 600,000 gallon per day capacity. The town made a major effort to eliminate sewer line infiltration in 2006 and 2007 after it took over operation of the sewer system from the separate and now dissolved Bayfield Sanitation District. But Town Manager Justin Clifton reported to the town board on July 21 that the system has been running around 430,000 gpd, versus the 250,000 gpd that it should be running based on winter volume. “This problem needs to be addressed as soon as possible, as it is using up a large portion of the new plant’s capacity,” he said in a written memo to trustees. “You can almost see it the day the (irrigation) ditches come on,” he said of the increased flow volume.
“We are getting very close to start-up of the new sewer plant,” he reported. “The equipment providers will be on site during the first couple weeks of August to make sure everything is working properly. We still have some work to do getting a testing lab set up and a few other loose ends, but for the most part we are in the wrap-up stage of construction.” He wants a public ribbon cutting as “an end to a very controversial time in Bayfield’s history”
More Coyote Gulch infrastructure coverage here.
Here’s a look at the Orchard City water system, from Hank Lohmeyer writing for the Delta County Independent. From the article:
The long-standing policy of the town to keep water rates as low as possible has hurt Orchard City’s ability to get other government grants for system upgrades. Granting agencies want to see the town carry more of a burden in paying for the water system costs by charging higher user fees.
Meanwhile, the Orchard City Town Board approved a 5 percent increase in rates last week. Here’s a report from Hank Lohmeyer writing for the Delta County Independent. From the article:
The rate increase, which applies only to water used and not to the base rate, is in addition to the capital construction fee proposal that would be tacked on to every Orchard City Water bill (see related story). The capital construction fee will be considered at the trustees’ Aug. 12 meeting…
The five-percent use rate increase will apply to every rate class in the town system. For example, the use rate for a single-family home inside-of-town will rise from 94¢ per 1,000 gallons for the first 30,000 gallons to 99¢ (an actual 5.3 percent increase). Before last year’s 10 percent hike, that household was paying 85 cents per 1,000 gallons for the first 30,000. That water customer using 10,000 gallons per month will see their new bill for water use increase by 50 cents per month. That same water user located outside of town will pay $1.16 per 1,000 gallons for the first 10,000 gallons under the new rate. The rate increase was discussed by trustees at a water workshop where they looked at various options, including another 10 percent hike and also raising the base rate. But, the board finally decided on the 5 percent increase primarily because trustees also plan to impose the capital construction surcharge on water billings at their Aug. 12 meeting. That surcharge is likely to be as high as $5 per month for every Orchard City water tap.
The Orchard City Town Board is also considering adding a monthly capital surcharge to existing customers in an effort to raise needed funding. Here’s a report from Hank Lohmeyer writing for the Delta County Independent. From the article:
on July 8, the trustees at their regular monthly meeting heard first reading of an ordinance that would impose a capital surcharge on town all town water bills. The ordinance will receive second reading and likely be voted on at the trustees’ Aug. 12 regular meeting. The amount of the surcharge has not been determined. At their July water workshop session board members discussed amounts of $2.50 or $5 per month. The $5 per month surcharge would raise an estimated $107,000 per year.
More Coyote Gulch infrastructure coverage here.
From the Longmont Times Call:
Beetles that eat trees are the good guys in the fight to save water and native plants in western Colorado. With the help of volunteers, Mesa County has released 2,500 beetles on an island in the Colorado River in Grand Junction. Their job is to eat the leaves of the tamarisk, a nonnative tree that can consume 200 gallons of water a day.
More coverage from the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Le Roy Standish):
“This is the first ever” release of beetles by the county’s division of pest management, Sirota said early Wednesday. She and several volunteers from the Tamarisk Coalition took the beetles, 2,500 of them supplied by the Palisade Insectary, and released them on South Watson Island, at the end of Seventh Street in the Colorado River. “You just kind of shake them out on the tamarisk,” she said.
More Coyote Gulch invasive species coverage here.
Here’s a release from Reclamation via TargetedNewsService.com:
he U.S. Interior Department’s Bureau of Reclamation, Upper Colorado Region, has announced it intends to award a non-competitive cooperative agreement to Brigham Young University to address water quality problems in the Colorado River Basin. The estimated total program funding available was cited as $215,000, although no specific amount for this award was indicated by the agency.
A funding opportunity notice from the Bureau of Reclamation states: “There are four general work areas for this research. These are: characterization of phosphorus distributions in the sediment; quantifying sediment loading processes to the reservoir; developing tools to collect, store, and analyze the resulting data; and develop water quality models that include these processes to provide tools to support analysis of management decisions to minimize adverse impacts from these processes.”
The funding opportunity number is 09SS402923 (CFDA 15.517).
Full Announcement: http://www.grants.gov
More Coyote Gulch Colorado River Basin coverage here.
Here’s a look at S.B. 09-080 which allows collection of precipitation for properties that have an exempt well, from Bob Berwyn writing for the Summit Daily News. From the article:
Some of the early news stories on the change were unclear about the change in the law, creating an expectation that this “new” source of water would be widely available. But the new rule is very limited in scope. It doesn’t enable everyone to start catching and using rain water willy-nilly. In fact, the only people eligible are those who have a well permit from the state. “We’re starting to get some calls on this,” said local water commissioner Scott Hummer. “You can only use rain water for the same domestic indoor uses authorized by a well permit.”
In other words, people who get their water from a utility are not allowed to capture and use rainwater. The fundamental premise of state water law is still that every drop of rain needs to flow back into a river or into the groundwater, where it becomes part of a downstream water right owned by someone else who previously claimed it.
The tiny new exception is only for people who use a well for domestic water. And it only allows them to use the water for the same purposes specified by the well permit. In most cases, that means only indoor domestic use. It’s not legal to capture the rainwater and use it on outside plants, and it’s not legal to fill a hot tub with it, Hummer explained.
More Coyote Gulch 2009 Colorado Legislation coverage here.
From the Aspen Daily News (Brent Gardner-Smith):
Pitkin County’s effort to place 4.3 cubic-feet-per-second of water into a trust managed by a state agency, for the benefit of the Roaring Fork River, has been challenged and delayed by the Basalt Water Conservancy District and the Starwood Metropolitan District. The two districts have asked for a formal hearing on the county’s proposal before the Colorado Water Conservation Board. “We just had concerns,” said Art Bowles, a board member of the Basalt Water Conservancy District. “We are not at all opposed to them donating water, but we want to just make sure it doesn’t affect us down river.”[…]
“This is the first time that the board has received a request to hold a hearing on a proposed water acquisition,” Linda Bassi, the head of the CWCB’s Stream and Lake Protection section, wrote in a March 9 memo to the CWCB board of trustees. On the other hand, the county’s innovative proposal to place water into a trust agreement administered by CWCB is also the first one the CWCB has received. The proposal was made possible by legislation passed in 2008 which strengthened the state agency’s ability to hold water rights for environmental purposes…
If the trust agreement is approved by the CWCB board, it would set up an arrangement where Pitkin County would be able to easily put under the trust an additional 34 cfs of water rights it owns — primarily from its open space purchases — to the benefit of the river. However, in February, attorneys for the Basalt Water Conservancy District and the Starwood Metropolitan District, sent a letter requesting a formal hearing to review the potential water acquisition. “The Basalt Water Conservancy District supports the minimum stream flow program and it supports instream flows that have designated historical use and are appropriate for that purpose,” said Christopher Geiger, an attorney Balcomb & Green, P.C. in Glenwood Springs…
But [Christopher Geiger, an attorney Balcomb & Green, P.C. in Glenwood Springs], who also represents the Starwood metro district, was critical of the CWCB process to date. “They haven’t provided anyone with the explanation with how the water right is going to be measured or administered in the river for instream flow purposes,” Geiger said. “They haven’t shown that it is going to have any appreciable benefit to the natural environment. At the same time, based on how the CWCB chooses to operate the water right, it might prevent the district from exercising its water rights.”[…]
One of the results of the Basalt and Starwood request for a hearing is an additional physical analysis of the stretch of the Roaring Fork River that the county’s water right would flow through. The analysis is to provide better information about the actual minimum amount of water needed in late summer to “protect the environment to a reasonable degree.” That analysis is best accomplished by looking at the river in late August. Pitkin County has agreed to an extension of the normal CWCB timelines so the data can be gathered and analyzed…
“Administrative agencies are entitled to a significant amount of deference in their decision making process,” said Amy Beatie, the executive director of the Colorado Water Trust, which has worked in support of Pitkin County’s decision. “They are asking for water court-type preparedness in order for a preliminary decision to be made.” Beatie said many of the concerns raised by Basalt and Starwood are typically covered in water court, which is a required next step after a CWCB review and approval.
From the Highlands Ranch Herald (Robyn Lydick):
A new pilot rebate program for replacing older, 3.5 gallon per flush toilets with current standards of a maximum of 1.6 gallons per flush. The rebate is $75 per toilet with up to three per home covered. Homeowners and landlords with toilets installed prior to 1994 can use either low flow or high efficiency toilets as replacements. A full list (pdf) of qualifying models is on Centennial Water’s Web site…
Centennial Water will provide rebates for 250 toilets in the first year and analyze any changes to the program. Jon Klassen, water conservation specialist with Centennial Water, said that the program could save as much as 1.9 million gallons of water annually through the community. Participants in the rebate will be monitored for three years to assess the cost effectiveness of the program.
More Coyote Gulch conservation coverage here.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
The Pueblo water board approved the sale Friday, extending a schedule of one-time leases of water it approved in February. A lease is a one-time sale of water that does not change water rights…
The Fort Lyon Canal had asked for up to 10,000 acre-feet, but Ward said he is not comfortable with drawing down Pueblo’s supply that much at this time. Fort Lyon is the largest ditch system on the Arkansas River, but is often water-short. It irrigates up to 90,000 acres of farms in Otero, Bent and Prowers counties along its 113-mile length.
More Coyote Gulch Pueblo Board of Water Works coverage here.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
Aurora will pay the Pueblo water board $30.48 million for the ditch, located on Fremont Pass 13 miles north of Leadville. The water board will use the money from the sale as part of a $60 million package to buy 5,200 Bessemer Ditch shares, about one-fourth of the total. “This action is critical,” said Tom Autobee, a member of the water board. “It allows us to buy a water right in our backyard in exchange for a transmountain right that’s not reliable.” Without the sale of the ditch, Pueblo water rates would have to increase 25 percent in two years beyond the rate increases currently being considered, said Executive Director Alan Hamel.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
The committee was created this month by the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District to sort out the technical merits of proposals in flood plain controlled by the district. The district also makes recommendations throughout the watershed. “We need direction from the district board about what type of regulatory guidelines we have,” said Kim Headley, Pueblo County planning director. “I don’t think they want us to be looking at every land-use application throughout the watershed.”[…]
Many members of the committee have been looking at Fountain Creek issues for years as part of an Army Corps of Engineers study, but they have not previously evaluated specific projects and how they could impact the creek. After working through its first application, the 62-unit Confluence Vista development at Fountain, members of the committee were doubtful about their task. It was the third public hearing for the proposal in a month, and the final outcome was a recommendation endorsing the concept, with provisions to look at details as they emerge. The committee said bank stabilization, invasive species management, coordination with future trail plans and minimizing visual impact should be considered, but did not say how.
More Coyote Gulch Fountain Creek Watershed coverage here and here.
