From The Aspen Daily News (Catherine Lutz):
For the third time in 25 years, the upper Colorado, from its headwaters in Rocky Mountain National Park to its confluence with the Roaring Fork River in Glenwood Springs, has made American Rivers’ top 10 list of most endangered rivers, which was released earlier this month. The nonprofit cited water diversions as the main threat to the upper Colorado, the central artery of a major ecosystem and a recreational gold mine for fishing, rafting and kayaking. After more than 100 years of diversions that have collectively degraded the river’s health, two major proposed diversion projects that would take water from the Western Slope to Front Range reservoirs could make it even worse, American Rivers’ report said.
Federal authorities are currently considering the expansion of the two diversion systems. The water authority governing the Windy Gap Firming Project, which transports water from a pipeline near Granby to the Front Range, wants to build a new reservoir that would take about 28,000 additional acre-feet of water per year across the Continental Divide. And the Boulder-area reservoir that’s on the receiving end of the Moffat Tunnel Collection System, which takes water from the Winter Park area, is proposed to be enlarged and would use an extra 18,000 acre-feet…
Another reason everyone should care about the upper Colorado’s issues is that it’s an example of what could happen in other watersheds, said [Ken Neubecker of Carbondale]. The Roaring Fork River, for example, already has the third and fifth largest transmountain diversions in the state: the Fry-Ark Project, which takes water from the upper Fryingpan River, and the Independence Pass Transmountain Diversion Project, which collects water for Twin Lakes from the headwaters of the Roaring Fork River…
…water quality is another issue people need to be concerned about if the increased diversions are approved. The water taken from the Winter Park and Granby areas is closer to the headwaters of the Colorado, and thus clean and pure. Further downstream, the river has picked up sediment, salts and other pollutants. And the more salts in the water the harder it is, said Neubecker…
Both diversion projects are currently making their way through a federal environmental analysis process, and various interested parties throughout the state are in negotiations over what the final projects will look like. Some environmental groups lately have been invited to the negotiating table, and the Glenwood Springs-based Colorado River Water Conservation District (CRWCB) is involved in the talks. Movement toward a final decision could happen sometime this year…
Neubecker, who is not involved in the process, said he doesn’t believe either water authority behind the two projects is looking at the cumulative impacts of their proposals. He added that Front Range diverters need to first “recognize that there is a problem,” and then accept an adaptive management strategy that would allow the river to get the flows it needs at certain times of the year to maintain its riparian health. He also said he wants to be able to revisit whatever agreement is reached in the next decade or so, in case some of the assumptions are wrong and it’s not working…
But CRWCB spokesman Jim Pokrandt said he sees hope in that Western Slope entities are more involved in talks than they had been before.“The good news is there are negotiations with the two projects that could provide improvements for the river, and can be a win-win for everybody,” he said.
More Colorado River Basin coverage here.