Day: October 18, 2010

Lake Mead: ‘A record-setting moment’

A picture named drylakemead.jpg

From The New York Times (Felicity Barringer):

“It is a record-setting moment,” said Colleen Dwyer, a spokeswoman for the Bureau of Reclamation. She added that slightly more water than usual had been released through Hoover Dam over the weekend because the power marketing agency that sends dam-generated electricity around the Southwest had requested some additional flow.

Lake Mead’s levels are still eight feet above the level at which a shortage is officially declared and limited rationing could go into effect for users in Nevada and Arizona, and well above the levels when the Hoover Dam’s hydroelectric output might be seriously jeopardized.

But Barry Nelson, a senior policy analyst for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said: “This strikes me as such an amazing moment. It’s three-quarters of a century since they filled it. And at the three-quarter-century mark, the world has changed.”

More coverage from the Arizona Republic (Shaun McKinnon):

Not since it was first filling in 1937 has Lake Mead held so little water. The reservoir’s level fell to the historic low shortly before noon on Sunday, eclipsing a previous record from the drought-stricken 1950s. The lake is now just 8 feet above the level that would trigger the first drought restrictions, which would reduce water supplies for Arizona and Nevada. That gap could close by next year – the reservoir fell 10 feet from October 2009 to 2010 – but there are measures in place that would likely delay rationing for one or two years or even longer if a wet winter increased runoff into the river. Most homes and businesses in Arizona likely would not feel the direct effects of the restrictions, which would divert water first from farmers.

But conservation groups say the reservoir’s low levels underscore the risk to the Colorado River. “Everyone needs to know when we turn on the tap, it drains water out of the river and it has ecological consequences,” said Gary Wockner, campaign coordinator for Save the Colorado, a non-profit education group based in Fort Collins, Colo. “We need to try to keep some water in the river and keep it alive.”[…]

The three lower-river states, along with Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming on the upper river, approved a drought plan in 2007 that uses Lake Mead water levels to trigger incremental rationing, part of an attempt to avoid widespread shortages. The first trigger is at 1,075 feet above sea level. The reservoir reached elevation 1,083.18 feet around midday Sunday and was at 1,083 feet by Monday afternoon. The previous low level was 1,083.19 feet, set in 1956…Under the 2007 plan, the first trigger would reduce water deliveries to Arizona by a little more than 11 percent, or 320,000 acre-feet, and to Nevada by about 4 percent, or 13,000 acre-feet. Additional reductions would occur if the lake continued to drop.

More coverage from the Las Vegas Review-Journal (Henry Brean):

Since drought took hold on the Colorado and its tributaries in 1999, the surface of Lake Mead has plunged almost 130 feet and caused fits for the National Park Service and its marina operators who must extend roads, utilities and other services to reach the shrinking shoreline.

The lake’s decline poses major problems for the Southern Nevada Water Authority, which draws 90 percent of the Las Vegas Valley’s drinking water from intake pipes that will start to shut down should the lake fall another 33 feet. “I’m worried,” authority General Manager Pat Mulroy said. “We’re trying everything we can to keep as much water in Mead as we can.” The prognosis looks bleak. Mulroy said federal climate forecasters are predicting abnormally dry conditions during the next two winters in the mountains that feed the Colorado…

The previous low-water mark for Mead came 54 years ago, on April 26, 1956, when the drought-stricken lake bottomed out at 1,083.19 feet above sea level. According to the Bureau of Reclamation, the lake hit elevation 1,083.18 between 11 a.m. and noon Sunday and continued to fall. By Monday afternoon, it sank below elevation 1,083 as water was released through Hoover Dam to meet orders downstream from cities and farms in California and Arizona. Projections by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation call for Lake Mead to reach a low point of 1,082.1 on Nov. 2. Then it is expected to rise by about 8 feet through the end of February before starting back down again. Water forecasters expect the lake to hit another record low by May and shrink below elevation 1,077 by September…

Even at its lowest level since it was first filled, Lake Mead remains the largest man-made reservoir in the United States. The falling water level has caused some problems with access, but it has also unveiled new coves and pristine beaches that used to be underwater, Roundtree said.

More coverage from the Voice of San Diego Environment (Rob Davis):

Millions of people — San Diegans included — rely on the reservoir’s water. So what does its drop mean here? In the short term, nothing. It doesn’t have any impact on San Diego’s supply even though we relied on the river for 61 percent of our water in 2009. But it does send a bad signal that the river supplying the Southwest’s lifeblood is continuing to face pressure — a pressure that scientists say is growing as the climate warms. If the lake continues dropping, it will first cause problems for cities in Arizona and Nevada before San Diego. Those states hold lower-priority rights to Colorado River water than California does.

More Colorado River basin coverage here.

CWCB: Next board meeting November 15-17 in Berthoud

A picture named telluridevalleyfloororg.jpg

From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (Brent Newman):

Notice is hereby given that the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) will host a joint meeting with the Front Range Water Council on Monday, November 15, 2010, commencing at 10:00 a.m. This meeting will be held at Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Office, 220 Water Avenue, Berthoud, Colorado 80513.

Notice is hereby given that a CWCB Public Rulemaking Hearing for proposed floodplain regulations will be held on Monday, November 15, 2010, beginning at 1:00 p.m. This Hearing will also take place at Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Office, 220 Water Avenue, Berthoud, Colorado 80513.

Notice is hereby given that a meeting of the CWCB will be held on Tuesday, November 16, 2010, commencing at 8:00 a.m. and continuing through Wednesday, November 17, 2010. This meeting will be held at Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Office, 220 Water Avenue, Berthoud, Colorado 80513.

More CWCB coverage here.

Windy Gap Firming Project update

A picture named chimneyhollowreservoir.jpg

From the Loveland Reporter-Herald (Pamela Dickman):

“This [the Colorado River] is not a healthy river,” [the director of the Colorado Division of Wildlife] Tom Remington said at a meeting in Loveland last week. “The question is how do we fix the river?”[…]

Northern Water, the water conservancy district that wants to build the reservoir [Chimney Hollow — part of the Windy Gap Firming Project], is required to work with the Colorado Division of Wildlife to mitigate any additional impacts to wildlife and the river. To accomplish this, the Division of Wildlife plans to bring planners together with biologists, government officials, conservation groups and others with a stake in the river. Maybe together, they can go one step beyond maintaining the river as it is to fixing problems from past water projects, Remington said.

The Division of Wildlife cannot prevent the district from taking the water, but it can try to mitigate the impact on wildlife, said wildlife commissioner Bob Streeter of Fort Collins. “We’re looking at this as an opportunity to fix a problem,” added Remington. “It leads to a better river down the road instead of just maintaining the current condition, which is all Northern Water is required to do.”

More coverage from the Summit County Citizen’s Voice. From the article:

…the [Wildlife] Commissioners were briefed on the potential impacts of the Windy Gap Firming Project on aquatic resources and heard input from landowners and fishing advocates about their concerns.

The Windy Gap Firming Project would allow the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District to capture more of the water rights its owns on the West Slope for storage in a new reservoir west of Carter Lake in Loveland to provide additional reliability to its system.

The project has been undergoing review under the National Environmental Policy Act since 2003. West of the Divide, impacts could include a decrease of water level in Lake Granby, a reduction in trout habitat in the Colorado River due to lower stream flows and increases in water temperature. There would also likely be a reduction in river flows preferred by rafters and kayakers, with a potential impact on anglers who fish from personal floatation equipment. Fisheries east of the Continental Divide would benefit from potential development of a new flat-water fishery in the proposed Chimney Hollow Reservoir.

Later this fall, the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District will present a plan to mitigate impacts from the project to the Wildlife Commission, which will need to approve or deny the plan within 60 days unless Northern consents to an extension.

The wildlife commission will take more public input on the Windy Gap project at an Oct. 21 meeting in Granby. “This is obviously a very, very important issue and our commissioners are anxious to learn more about how the impacts of this project can be mitigated,” Glenn said.

More Windy Gap coverage here and here.

Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy board meeting recap

A picture named upperarkansasvalley.jpg

From The Mountain Mail (Joe Stone):

The act would designate 850,000 additional wilderness acres in Colorado at 34 sites, including six in the Upper Arkansas River Basin and three along streams of “particular importance to the Upper Arkansas region,” district manager Terry Scanga said.

He identified the three tributaries as Beaver, Badger and Grape creeks and presented a letter from attorney John Hill describing negative impacts of the wilderness designation on water rights in those areas. All are downstream from developed areas. Hill wrote that wilderness designation would require the Secretary of Interior to claim all unappropriated water in these areas for in-stream flow, which “would preclude any future appropriations upstream of the wilderness area.”

In the case of Grape Creek, Hill wrote, “The proposed wilderness area … would significantly impact the operating regimen of DeWeese Reservoir.”[…]

Tim Canterbury, district board member and immediate past president of the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association, said he recently spent four days in Washington on behalf of cattlemen urging DeGette to “go back and rewrite the implementation” that directly affects cattle grazers, water districts and other water users. “She said, ‘Absolutely not,'” Canterbury reported. “We (the association) are not opposed to wilderness, but to the effects on cattle grazing … . Since she’s not willing to talk about it, we have to oppose this.” Canterbury added, “The agencies have no choice on implementation, and that’s the problem because it eliminates all activity.”

More Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District coverage here.

2010 Colorado elections: Battle for the U.S. Senate seat

A picture named orchardmesa1911

From The Colorado Statesman:

Q: Would you support expanded use of nuclear energy?
Buck: “Yes.”
Bennet: “Yes.”

Q: Are you in favor of the Northern Integrated Supply Project (a water project on the northern Front Range)?
Bennet: “I don’t believe that’s a decision for me to make.”
Buck: “Yes. … That’s a decision for me to make, so, yes.” (Bennet interjected, “That’s going to come as news to the people of the region.”)

Q: About “fracking,” Congresswoman DeGette has a bill to require the industry to disclose the chemicals it uses to extract natural gas. Are you in favor of that legislation?
Buck: “No.”
Bennet: “I believe there should be public disclosure of fracking fluids.” (Pressed by Buck, who said, “That wasn’t an answer. Are you in favor of the bill?” Bennet responded, “I haven’t endorsed that bill, but I believe there should be public disclosure of fracking fluids.”)

More 2010 Colorado elections coverage here.

Interbasin Compact Committee: Meeting the water supply gap

A picture named ibccroundtable.jpg

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“This is a four-legged stool,” said Alex Davis, chairwoman of the IBCC, at the group’s meeting last week. “These are all processes to meet the gap.” The “legs” are:

– Identified projects and processes already under way.
– New supplies of water, most likely new diversions from the Western Slope.
– Municipal water conservation.
– Drying up, or alternatively sharing, agricultural water supplies.

In any case, the state municipal water demand is expected to increase to nearly 2 million acre-feet from current demand of about 1.2 million acre-feet by 2050, when the state’s population is expected to double to 10 million people…

Not all of the identified projects — things like the Southern Delivery System or Arkansas Valley Conduit — are expected to be successful. And, they may not come at the right time or place to meet future needs. “We’re making the assumption that the identified projects and processes will be available to those who need them. It’s an oversimplification,” said Eric Kuhn, general manager of the Colorado River Conservation District. “Not all those who need water have access” to the identified projects and processes, he said. “The timing and how water can be available needs to be answered.”

Drying up agriculture is seen as the default option because that is what has happened in the past. Municipal water suppliers thirsty for new supplies have found willing sellers of agricultural water and have not fully developed all of the water they’ve purchased. The 2004 Statewide Water Supply Initiative developed by the Colorado Water Conservation Board, found that thousands of more acres would be dried up even if most current water projects were successful.

No one is sure how conservation would be applied toward new supplies of water or simply as a hedge against drought…

A proposal by the IBCC to create water banking, compensatory storage on the West Slope and a risk-management plan for needs on both sides of the Continental Divide was batted around last week. The Front Range has the greatest needs, and currently brings over nearly half of its surface water supply from the Colorado River basin. In Kuhn’s words, it is a way to “share the pain.” Water banking would try to guard water rights claimed since the 1922 Colorado River Compact against a call by downstream states by storing water to release in the driest years. “The water would be stored in wet years to protect diversions in dry years,” Davis said…

“This is the discussion we’ve needed to have since we formed,” said Peter Nichols, a water attorney appointed by the governor to the IBCC. “How do we as a state develop more water out the Colorado River basin?”

“This is a different way of doing things that would protect more interests and make for less of a battle in water court,” said Melinda Kassen, Trout Unlimited’s Western Water Project legal director. “At the end of the day, this might be too much of a give, and people are free to take their risk and go their own way.”

Jeris Danielson, a former state engineer who represents the Arkansas Basin Roundtable on the IBCC, suggested municipal interests need to back off their hard-line positions. “We’re just starting a conversation that never took place for 130 years,” Danielson said. “The issues are just beginning to develop.”[…]

Davis asked the group to strongly consider moving the storage proposal ahead, allowing those with objections to help shape it into a more acceptable form. “Without a new supply, ag is the first thing we throw under the bus, and conservation becomes harder if there’s no light at the end of the tunnel,” Davis said. “The fears and concerns of the West Slope and environmental groups would be the first to halt a new supply project. We have to find conditions that make it palatable to everyone.”

More IBCC — basin roundtables coverage here.