Click on the thumbnail graphic to the right for the latest snowpack map from the Natural Resources Conservation Service.

From the Yuma Sun (Chris McDaniel):

“System wide total reservoir storage, as of April 4, was 63 percent of capacity,” said Doug Hendrix, external coordination manager for the Bureau of Reclamation’s Yuma Area Office. “This year has been a little bit drier year. The precipitation to date in the Upper Basin into the Upper Basin reservoirs has been about 79 percent of average.” Another issue that means lower water levels was the very warm weather in March that prematurely melted an already small snowpack into the river’s Upper Basin. Snow is the source of most of the river water flowing into the Lower Basin states of Arizona, Nevada and California.

Here’s the State of the Climate National Overview March 2012 from the National Climatic Data Center. Click on the thumbnail graphic to the right for a U.S. map of temperature departures from average for March.

More coverage from the Summit County Citizens Voice (Bob Berwyn):

Every state in the country broke at least one record high during March, and 25 states east of the Rockies reported their all-time warmest March readings on record. For the contiguous 48 states as a whole, March was also the warmest on record, at 8.6 degrees above the breaking the old record (1910) by .5 degrees. The National Climatic Data Center reports that it was second-largest single-month departure from average temperatures, after January 2006. And despite a lingering La Niña, which often has a cooling influence, the first quarter of 2012 is also being reported as the warmest on record.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The Natural Resources Defense Council, a nonprofit environmental agency, rated all 50 states on how they are preparing for impacts of climate change on water resources. Colorado ranked highest among all Rocky Mountain states. Essentially, Colorado earned a B, ranking behind nine other states, using the criteria chosen by the council…

“Rising temperatures and more extreme weather events are impacting our families, our health and our pocketbooks. Water is a matter of survival. It powers our lives and industries, and it keeps our natural systems healthy,” said Steve Fleischli, a water policy analyst. “This report is both a wake-up call and a road map for all communities to understand how vital it is to prepare for climate change so we can effectively safeguard our most valuable resources.”[…]

Gov. John Hickenlooper, through his water policy adviser John Stulp, has asked for a state water plan by 2016.

In Colorado, water rights are privately held and administered through court decisions. There is no central state water authority, and decisions about supply, planning, funding projects and water quality are split among several state agencies…

Individual metro water providers — including Denver, Aurora, Colorado Springs and Pueblo — are incorporating the possibility of long-term climate change into their planning efforts. The Colorado Water Conservation Board also incorporated weather pattern variance in its investigation of Colorado River supply.

More Climate Change coverage here and here.

Click here to check out their cool website with all the skinny for across the country. Here’s the link to their water readiness review for Colorado. Here’s an excerpt:

Containing the headwaters of four major U.S. river systems, Colorado seemingly has plentiful water resources. However, due to interstate compacts and agreements, the state must allow much of this water to leave its borders. As increasing temperatures challenge traditional notions of water management and availability in the West and municipal demand continues to grow as populations swell, conflicts over water resources will intensify. Consequently, the potential economic impacts to the state from climate change are significant. In 2007, winter recreation alone contributed nearly $2 billion to the Colorado economy.1 Warmer temperatures could lead to less snow and a shortening of the ski season. In fact, a 2006 study projected a loss of 43 to 82 percent in April snowpack for Colorado counties with ski resorts by the end of the 21st century.2 Dwindling water resources and higher temperatures as a result of climate change could also impair the state’s $5.5 billion agricultural industry.3 To lessen these impacts, Colorado should continue to fund research on the impacts of climate change on water resources and work to incorporate climate change considerations into all aspects of water resources planning—both statewide and locally.

More coverage from Bruce Finley writing for The Denver Post. From the article:

NRDC analysts looked at water-supply planning, as well as the extent to which states were trying to reduce greenhouse-gas pollution linked to global warming. “While Colorado has done more than many states, it should engage in more robust planning and implementation to prepare for climate change,” the NRDC report said. The primary challenges in Colorado are expected to be shifts in water supply, extreme storms, increased flooding and changes to aquatic life…

Colorado’s ranking “seems about right,” said Taryn Hutchins-Cabibi, a state drought and climate change specialist in the Department of Natural Resources. “We definitely have done more within the Interior West on the planning side, especially with regard to water.”

More coverage from Brandon Loomis writing for The Salt Lake Tribune. From the article:

The Natural Resources Defense Council released a report Thursday that groups the states in four categories for their efforts to prepare and prevent calamity. The council’s “Ready or Not” report puts Utah’s efforts in the lowest tier, partly because it found state agencies ignore the threat while legislators have passed resolutions downplaying the phenomenon.

“It seems like the [Utah] state water plan hasn’t really taken a look at what climate change will do to water supply and hydrology in the state,” NRDC water policy analyst Ben Chou said in a telephone news conference.

Numerous studies have predicted less supply for the Great Basin and Colorado River watersheds as snowfall turns to rain and temperatures increase evaporation. Timing of precipitation also may shift, requiring greater storage capacity to maintain irrigation water when it is needed.

NRDC says states facing potential shortages should incorporate them into their projections, while areas projected to get more water in fiercer storms should plan for better flood control. Some states, such as California and New York, are ahead in planning, according to the report. Utah is behind most, in the group’s reckoning, and behind all states that share the Colorado River.

More coverage from Michelle Mehta writing for Switchboard, the NRDC staff blog. From the post:

California has already experienced the kinds of climate change-related impacts projected only to get worse. For instance, due to “stubbornly dry conditions” the Department of Water Resources recently reduced its estimate of the amount of water the State Water Project will deliver in 2012, from 60 percent to 50 percent of the requested amount of slightly more than 4 million acre-feet. Record-setting heat in 2010 caused nearly 40,000 Los Angeles homes and residences to lose electricity and prompted adjustments to train speeds and schedules.

Fortunately, leaders across this state have recognized these risks and are acting to reduce statewide greenhouse gas pollution and prepare for the impacts of climate change. As detailed in a new NRDC report released today, California is one of just nine states in the U.S. to develop a comprehensive climate change preparedness plan, making it one of the most engaged states compared to the rest of the nation. And even among this elite group, our state stands out. Our state has established statewide greenhouse gas pollution reduction targets and is using a cap-and-trade regulation to limit greenhouse gas pollution from major sources.

More climate change coverage here and here.

From The Durango Herald (Dale Rodebaugh):

“Our snow is melting fast,” said Rege Leach, a Colorado Division of Water Resources engineer in Durango. “Stream flows are higher and earlier than average.” The area had boosted some of the healthiest snowpack in the state. But now, the San Juan Basin, which is drained by rivers from Wolf Creek Pass to the Utah state line, has seen its snowpack decline rapidly. “Our snowpack was 50 percent of average Tuesday, compared to 84 percent of average on the same date last year,” Leach said. “Still, we’re doing well when compared to 2002, when we were 29 percent of average on that date.”[…]

The entire Four Corners now is rated D0, Ryan said. The D2 zone that covered the northwest part of the state, Rio Blanco and Routt counties, has been expanded, she said. The Rio Grande and Arkansas basins have been D3 and D4 since last summer. Leach said that this week, the Gunnison Basin snowpack was 57 percent of average; the upper Colorado Basin, 45 percent; the Yampa, 46 percent; the Arkansas, 59 percent; and the South Platte, 57 percent…

The National Weather Service outlook for the next three months isn’t encouraging. “It appears that temperatures will be above normal and precipitation below normal for April, May and June,” Paul Frisbie, a National Weather Service meteorologist said. “I don’t see anything that tells me I’m wrong.” Strong wind also can cause snow to melt more rapidly, Frisbie said. Moisture is lost to evaporation rather than gathered as runoff, he said.

From the Associated Press via The Columbus Republic:

This year’s forecast of 49 percent of normal April through July flows into Lake Powell stems in part from very warm weather in March that prematurely melted an already less than spectacular snowpack in the river’s Upper Basin. That’s the source of most of the river water flowing into the Lower Basin states of Arizona, Nevada and California…

CAP officials are predicting they won’t see shortages in the canal system that runs from western Arizona through Phoenix and Tucson until 2017 or 2018 at the earliest.

From The Aspen Times (Scott Condon):

The Colorado Basin River Forecast Center’s latest forecast says peak flow of the Roaring Fork River at Glenwood Springs is likely to be 2,800 cubic feet per second — just 47 percent of the average peak. The forecast could be altered by a drastic change in the weather. In contrast, the river peaked at 8,200 cfs last year — nearly 39 percent above average. It peaked on July 2. The normal peak is between May 29 and June 23, according to the river forecast center, a division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration…

The amount of water that will flow through the Roaring Fork River from April 1 through July 31 is forecast to be 380 kilo acre feet, or 54 percent of the average of 704 kilo acre feet, according to Mage Skordahl, assistant snow survey supervisor for the Natural Resources Conservation Service. A revised streamflow forecast was issued April 1. It reflects the significant drop in the snowpack Colorado experienced during March, Skordahl said. The statewide snowpack fell to 52 percent of average as of April 1. That was down from 81 percent on March 1…

An automated snowpack measuring station 10 miles east of Aspen showed the snowpack was just 46 percent of average. In the entire Roaring Fork River basin, the snowpack is highest at the Ivanhoe site in Fryingpan Valley, at 69 percent. It is lowest at Nast Lake, also in the Fryingpan Valley, at just 10 percent of average. Nast Lake is at 8,700 feet in elevation. Ivanhoe is at 69 percent.

From the Fort Collins Coloradoan (Bobby Magill):

No significant drought is expected to impact northeast Colorado, including Larimer County, through June, according to a seasonal drought forecast issued by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on Thursday. The outlook forecasts a significant drought intensifying in southern Colorado and west of the Continental Divide, but near-normal conditions are expected throughout the northeast quadrant of the state…

The National Weather Service is forecasting good chances of below-normal precipitation for nearly all of Colorado through April and May.

“They’re basically saying we’re going to continue as-is,” said meteorologist Mark Heuer of DayWeather in Cheyenne, Wyo. “We’re not going to be seeing actual drought conditions develop, but that doesn’t mean we won’t be drier and warmer than normal. We’re probably going to be looking at increased fire danger, water restrictions and also below-average precipitation as we get into and through the spring months.”

The message from the NRCS is no surprise to Coyote Gulch readers. We’ve been chronicling the precipitous decline in snowpack over the past month. Click on the thumbnail graphics for the latest snowpack map and table of snowpack and storage numbers for April 1, 2012, from the Natural Resources Conservation Service, as well as the Ogive of the Berthoud Pass Snotel (Climate Prediction Center via National Geographic). Here’s the release from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (Mage Skordahl):

The reprieve due to average or above average snow accumulation in February and the resulting boost in snowpack totals across the state was short lived. March brought dry, warm and windy weather to Colorado resulting in significant declines in the snowpack. According to Phyllis Ann Philipps, State Conservationist with the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the latest snow surveys conducted on April 1, show that statewide snowpack has fallen to a paltry 52 percent of average. This is a decrease of 29 percentage points from the 81 percent of average measured on March 1. Statewide snowpack conditions have not been this low since 2002 when the snowpack on April 1 was also reported to be just 52 percent of average. Luckily Colorado’s reservoir storage is in better condition than it was in 2002; storage volumes statewide were reported at 108 percent of average at the end of March.

All major basins in the state reported significant drops in snowpack percentages over the last month, resulting from well below average snowfall and precipitation and warmer than average temperatures. The combined Yampa and White River basins and the Colorado River basin are both reporting snowpack’s that are less than 50 percent of average; 47 and 49 percent of average respectively. The South Platte River basin’s snowpack, while still above the statewide average, saw the largest decrease from conditions reported at the beginning of March. The basin’s snowpack dropped a substantial 34 percentage points from 89 percent of average on March 1 to 55 percent of average on April 1. Snowpack totals in the rest of the major basins ranged from 53 to 57 percent of average.

In an average winter the state receives around 20 percent of its seasonal snow accumulation in March. This winter however, March precipitation recorded at SNOTEL sites was well below average with monthly statewide totals at just 29 percent of average and instead of continuing to accumulate snow, data from SNOTEL sites revealed a snowpack beginning to melt. With April 12, the average date the snowpack reaches its peak, just around the corner there is very little hope for significant improvements to snowpack conditions prior to the spring-summer runoff season.

As of April 1, streamflow forecasts across Colorado have decreased by 20 to 40 percent of average from those issued last month. This closely mirrors the decline in snowpack percentages observed across the state. At this point all major basins in Colorado are expected to receive well below average runoff this spring and summer.

The bright spot in this month’s water supply report is that reservoir storage continues to track at near to above average volumes across the state. This stored water should help alleviate late-summer shortages.

More coverage from Bob Berwyn writing for the Summit County Citizens Voice. From the article:

Specifically, the snowpack declined by 29 percent between March 1 and April 1 during a month that usually delivers 20 percent of the total annual snowfall. All major river basins reported declines, with the lowest levels in the Yampa/White River Basin and the Colorado River Basin, both now well below 50 percent of average.

The South Platte River Basin, critical for water supplies in the Denver Metro area, saw the largest drop, falling 24 percent from 89 percent of average on March 1 to just 55 percent of average on April 1.

Jennifer Pitt (Environmental Defense Fund via National Geographic) is asking the question, Can Lack of Snow in Colorado River Basin Lead to a More Sustainable Path?. Here’s an excerpt:

If 2012 kicks off a series of dry years similar to those of 2000-2010, shortages will be unavoidable in the Lower Basin. Worse, the impact of another extended drought would be magnified by the fact that reservoirs in the basin are only 64 percent filled today, while they were completely full when the last drought started.

An extended drought starting in 2012 could drain so much water from Lake Mead as to threaten the ability of Las Vegas to access what amounts to 90 percent of its developed supply, just as it could threaten the ability of the Upper Basin to make downstream deliveries required under the Colorado River Compact. These would be untenable impacts, and certain to cause legal chaos and confusion unless the federal government, states, water users and other stakeholders start to work now on additional agreements that implement more conservation and allow more flexibility in times of extended drought.

Until fairly recently, water managers using Colorado River supplies would look to divert more water from the river. Because annual use of Colorado River water has reached (even perhaps exceeded) the annual average supply, today’s central challenges for water managers are to manage demands (through conservation) and to help facilitate more flexibility in the use of the basin’s water, such as voluntary markets, while avoiding economic and environmental damages. For many (but certainly not all) water managers in the basin, it’s a new – and difficult – way of doing business.

The bare mountaintops of 2012, and the possibility of more years like it, are certain to make the jobs of water managers more challenging. Scarcity will increase competition for water, and prices are sure to rise. But it’s also possible that this year’s dry conditions, coming so soon after the dry conditions of 2002, will continue to shift public awareness and opinion towards more support of these new ways.

As those of us who depend on the Colorado River increasingly come to recognize that extreme variability is ‘the new normal,’ water managers could find a public more willing to adapt. We need an honest discussion about the trade-offs we face, and the opportunities to do more with the water we already have.

From the Summit County Citizens Voice (Bob Berwyn):

This past month may not have been the driest March ever in the high country, but it was very close. At the official National Weather Service in Dillon, there was measurable precipitation on only four days (March 2,3,4 and 19), adding up to just 3 inches of snow and a paltry 0.20 inches of water, compared to the average 1.42 inches of water and 22 inches of snow.

From the Summit County Citizens Voice (Bob Berwyn):

Based on experimental forecasting, odds are close to 40 percent that La Niña will return for a third winter, according to Boulder-based NOAA climate scientist Klaus Wolter, who emphasized that’s not the official outlook from NOAA or the Climate Prediction Center.

A triple La Niña could spell trouble for an already dry Colorado, as three-year La Niña events are statistically linked with some the driest conditions on record in Colorado, including a historic mid-1950s drought, the mid-1970s drought that prompted ski resorts to start making snow, as well as the drought in the early 2000s that culminated with the ultra-dry year of 2002, when Dillon Reservoir nearly disappeared in a cloud of dust.

The best hope for a moisture turn-around would be a sudden switch to El Niño, which some climate models are predicting, but Wolter calculates that there’s only a 20 percent chance of that happening.

Click on the thumbnail graphic to the right for the 3-day precipitation map for the Denver area from the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. The two stations nearest Gulch Manor reported .28 and .47 inches of beautiful moisture.

I’ve also posted a thumbnail of the current snowpack map from the Natural Resources Conservation Service.

Finally, I’ve posted the Ogive for the South Platte River basin high/low snowpack summary. Note the red lines showing the daily minimums and the 2002 drought year. April 2002 was a disaster for the snowpack with much of a low snowpack sublimating into the atmosphere. Snow/cold weather dances are still in order.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Pete Roper):

Falling trees pushed over by wind gusts reaching 64 mph tore down power lines in the Pueblo area, while nearly 2 feet of snow fell in the nearby foothills. Beulah and Rye both reported deep wet snow, while farther south an estimated 3 feet of snowfall was reported in Cuchara…

Walsenburg saw about 4 inches of snowfall, according to Ron Mercier, emergency dispatch communications director. Cuchara received about 3 feet of snow at the most, Mercier added…

Monarch Mountain ski resort reported 4 inches of new snow, which promoted a chain-law for commercial vehicles traveling over Monarch Pass…In Salida, a weather spotter reported 3 inches of snow…Canon City residents reported 4 inches of snow, which combined with overnight rain for 0.48 of an inch of moisture. In Custer County, Road and Bridge Department Foreman Dave Trujillo reported between 13 and 16 inches of snow in the hardest hit parts of the county, while lower totals ranged from 7 to 12 inches.

From KUNC (Kirk Siegler):

“Despite what we’re seeing outside my window [Tuesday] of a little snowfall which is most welcome, rest assured we’re very concerned about the conditions, and we are in a drought,” said Lochhead, CEO of Denver Water. As head of the largest water utility in the state, it’s Lochhead’s job to ensure that water from melting snow keeps making its way to the taps of 1.3 million customers – even in a drought – and even when the average snowpack levels statewide are about half where they should be…

Lochhead said his agency and its regional counterparts that make up the Front Range Water Council have yet to implement restrictions on water use. But that could change in the coming weeks. The main reason they haven’t already is because the last two years were wet and snowy.

“Our storages reservoirs are our savings account in Colorado,” said Brian Werner, spokesman for Northern Water in Berthoud, the second largest water utility in the state and a member of the Council. Werner said Northern’s reservoirs are still about 25% above average, though like Lochhead, he’s worried about the long-term forecast. “We are in relatively good shape going into 2012, especially in comparison to 2002-2003 when we had the same kinds of numbers in terms of snowpack, but we didn’t have the same amounts of storage,” Werner said…

But even if it is approved, it wouldn’t happen for another decade. So for now, Jim Lochhead said he can only feel fortunate that, like Northern, Denver Water’s reservoirs are mostly full. “But we’re also reluctant to roll the dice on what might happen in 2013, so we really don’t want to spend our savings account and waste it,” Lochhead said.

From the Associated Press via TheDenverChannel.com (Wayne Harrison):

Aurora Water spokesman Greg Baker says destructive wildfires and an arid March have reduced expectations for this year’s water supply. The most severe drought in the state is in the Arkansas Basin where drought areas are reporting extreme conditions as a result of last summer’s Texas drought which also affected Colorado. In Fort Collins, March was the warmest in 124 years of record keeping. Warnings are also out for the Yampa/White Basin in northwestern Colorado due to lack of sufficient snowpack, and most of the northeastern plains are abnormally dry. The statewide snowpack was at 49 percent of average Tuesday.

State climatologist Nolan Doesken said even though reservoir levels are still strong and northeast Colorado soil moisture is still good, it’s early in the season for the state to be this warm and dry. “This is very concerning,” he said.

From KUSA (Blair Shiff):

“A lot of people have been comparing this year to 2002 and the difference is that we didn’t have the reservoir storage in 2002,” Mage Skordahl, with the Colorado Snow Survey Program, said. “2002 came off of multiple years of below-average snowpack and very little storage in the reservoirs and that is when you really start to get in trouble when you have multiple years of below-average [snowpack].” Skordahl also says if Colorado sees heavy spring rains, it will help make up for a drier winter.

From the Aspen Daily News (Curtis Wackerle):

March, typically a snow-heavy month in the Colorado Rockies, averages between 25 and 26 inches of snow, according to Cory Gates of AspenWeather.Net. In 2012, it snowed 7 inches on March 1, a trace on March 2 and 1.25 inches on March 18, bringing the grand total to 8.25 inches, according to Gates’ records. Since local records have been kept, going back to 1934, the driest March on record was 1966, which saw 7.2 inches of snow, Gates said. So this March, with about an inch less of snow, would have been the driest on record.

It also was exceptionally warm for most of the month, which saw high temperature records fall on four days. March 31 hit 69 degrees in town, about a degree shy of the all-time highest recorded temperature for March. A total of 10 days in March saw temperatures break 60 degrees, “which is unprecedented and will never happen again in our lifetime,” Gates wrote in an email.

The Pacific Ocean is to blame for the lack of snow, Gates said. The pattern coming off the sea meant the Aspen area had a “ridge aloft” bringing lots of sunshine since March 18.

From The Denver Post (Jason Blevins):

Confirming what everyone in the high country already suspected, Monday’s preliminary data from the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Colorado Snow Survey office reveals the state’s snowpack at 50 percent of average. That’s the lowest beginning of April measurement since the survey began in 1968. It’s even lower than in 2002, when early April snowpack measured 52 percent of average, marking the apex of a lingering drought that parched Colorado. “I can tell you from being at the ski areas that it’s going backward fast,” said Jim Pokrandt, spokesman for the Colorado River District.

Outside his Glenwood Springs office window, Pokrandt eyed the Colorado River, fed by a basin with snowpack measuring a meager 40 percent of last year and 50 percent of average. And the river was rushing — higher than normal for early April. “The runoff is starting early,” he said.

With wildfires in March and ski areas scraping to reach mid-April closing dates, the spring so far does not bode well for paddlers, fishermen and river lovers. Unless the snow hammer falls in late April and May — the next two weeks look warm and dry, according to the National Weather Service’s Climate Prediction Center — Colorado’s rivers will be trickling with extra-low flows by early summer…

“The reservoirs this year won’t be hit too hard,” said Pokrandt, adding that “lessons we learned” from 2002 will help water managers this summer. “Water providers might want to be quicker on the draw to implement water conservation measures. They waited too long in 2002, and the reservoirs got hit and we went into the following year in a big predicament.”

Rain and snow, I almost forgot what they look like with the dry March weather. Click on the thumbnail graphic to the right for the 3-Day precipitation map from Urban Drainage.

Meanwhile, CoCoRaHS is recruiting new observers in southeastern Colorado, according to Bruce Fickenscher writing for the La Junta Tribune. From the article:

Goals stated in the CoCoRaHS mission statement include: provide accurate high-quality precipitation data for our many end users on a timely basis, increase the density of precipitation data available throughout the country by encouraging volunteer weather observing, encouraging citizens to have fun participating in meteorological science and heightening their awareness about weather, and providing enrichment activities in water and weather resources for teachers, educators and the community at large. Volunteers make an important contribution in helping others. By providing your daily observation, you help fill in a piece of the weather puzzle that affects many across your area in one way or another.

In southeast Colorado, CoCoRaHS data has been utilized in reporting to USDA offices, documenting extreme weather conditions affecting crops and livestock, BUT we need more volunteers. There are many areas in the seven counties of the Southeast Area that we do not receive any weather information from. CoCoRaHS data is not only used to document when an area gets precipitation, but when it does not.

One advantage of the CoCoRaHS system is that individual volunteers may enter their own data on the website, but for some that is not an option they wish to use. Therefore, in the Southeast Area, we are making another option available. If you wish to participate in the program but do not, or cannot, use the Internet, you may call your local CSU Extension office and give a verbal report to the staff, they will then enter your data into the system. I know all of you producers check your rain gauges and the majority of you have cellphones – easy reporting with a phone call!

If you wish to learn more about the CoCoRaHS network or to sign up as a volunteer, you may contact Storm Casper for Baca County at the Baca County NRCS office at (719) 523-4522 ext. 3, Kevin Lindahl for Crowley, Otero or Bent counties at (719) 469-1894, Bruce Fickenscher for Cheyenne, Kiowa, or Prowers Counties at (719) 438-5321, or your local CSU Extension office in any of those counties. New volunteers will receive an information packet explaining how to properly install and read their rain gauges and reporting procedures as well as a complimentary, high quality rain gauge to get started. The more reports, the more accurate the information!

Here’s the release from the Front Range Water Council via Denver Water

Front Range Water Council members are keeping a close eye on snowpack levels, and some might implement additional water restrictions if their supplies continue to look below average.

Even those water providers whose storage appears to be in good shape for this year are carefully watching the numbers because if warm dry weather continues through this summer, they may need to stock up for what could be a dry year in 2013.

“During the drought 10 years ago, water providers learned it’s difficult for reservoir storage to survive multiple-year droughts,” said Jim Lochhead, Front Range Water Council chair and CEO/manager of Denver Water. “As a result, municipalities pushed more comprehensive conservation efforts, and we’re seeing those positive results today. But conservation alone is not enough. We need strategies that also include reuse and new supplies.”

The Front Range Water Council is a collaboration between Aurora Water, Denver Water, Colorado Springs, Northern Water, Pueblo Board of Water Works, Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District and the Twin Lakes Reservoir and Canal Company. The members, all of whom pull various amounts of water from the Colorado River, are looking at options should the snowpack levels remain low.

In Colorado, the year round water supply is dependent on the winter snows and the ability to store the snowmelt runoff for later use. Because each provider also pulls water from additional sources — some of which are in better shape than others — individual providers will likely need to address their supplies in different ways:

Aurora Water — Aurora Water’s supplies are in relatively good shape, in part because of the Prairie Waters project, which recaptures river water from the South Platte, as well as higher than normal reservoir levels. However, staff is keeping a close eye on reservoir levels to determine if Aurora needs to keep extra supply in the event dry weather continues into 2013. Aurora has permanent conservation measures in place which prohibits residents from watering more than three days a week or between the hours of 10 a.m. and 6 p.m., but no additional restrictions are planned.

Colorado Springs Utilities — Colorado Springs Utilities is well positioned to manage its water situation this spring and summer thanks to adequate storage levels and customer conservation. Staff continues to carefully monitor the dry weather conditions and below average snowpack.

Even though Colorado Springs Utilities is not looking at mandatory restrictions this year, it reminds its customers that the City remains in voluntary water restrictions. Customers should be even more diligent in managing their water use this irrigation season by following conservation tips, attending free xeriscape classes and taking advantage of rebate programs at http://www.csu.org.

Denver Water — Denver Water gets about half of its supply from the Colorado River and half from the South Platte River, snowpack levels in both basins are very low. Officials have not yet implemented additional restrictions, but could if its system reservoir levels drop. In the meantime, Denver Water asks residents to conserve as much as possible.

Denver Water is proposing several projects to meet its future need. It is building out its recycled water treatment system and has an aggressive conservation program. In addition, the utility is pursuing new supply. Following the 2002 drought, Denver Water nearly ran out of water in the north end of its system, which is more susceptible to water supply problems during a dry year. The utility currently is in the permitting process to enlarge Gross Reservoir near Boulder to help avoid running out of water any given year and put water where it is needed.

Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District – Northern Water and its Municipal Subdistrict provide water to Northeastern Colorado through the Colorado-Big Thompson and Windy Gap projects. The C-BT Project has above average water in its storage reservoirs due to recent high snowpack years and will be able to fulfill this year’s deliveries despite lackluster snowpack. In addition, two proposals – the Windy Gap Firming and Northern Integrated Supply projects – would add even more reliable annual supply to this growing region.

Pueblo Board of Water Works – The Board has worked diligently to maintain an ample reserve supply in storage at Clear Creek, Twin Lakes, Turquoise and Pueblo Reservoirs so that it can continue providing a reliable water supply to all of its customers, even during severe droughts. The Board currently has over 3 times as much water stored in these reservoirs than it did going into the irrigation season in 2002. For this reason the Board does not anticipate any watering restrictions or curtailment of extraterritorial water leases for this coming summer.

Wise water use by Puebloans has saved millions of gallons of water since 2003. The Board acknowledges our customers’ help in preserving this vital resource, and encourages them to continue doing so.

Twin Lakes Reservoir and Canal Company – Twin Lakes provides water to municipal and agricultural users in the Arkansas River and South Platte basins including several Front Range Water Council members. Twin Lakes is closely monitoring the snowpack and runoff forecasts and is preparing for a below average year.

Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District – A majority of the water supply to the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project comes from the Colorado River, where snowpack levels are very low. By May 1st the Bureau of Reclamation will notify the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservation District as to the amount of project water available to the District’s domestic, municipal, and irrigation entities that have applied for project water. Since the supply of project water is to supplement the supplies available to the users from privately-owned water rights, the use of project water increases during years in which there are lesser supplies of privately-owned water within the basin. The Allocation Committee then meets to review the applications, and prepare recommendations concerning the applications received as related to the amount of water available. Recommendations from the Allocation Committee are considered at the next meeting of the board of directors of the District, and appropriate allocations are made.

Front Range Water Utility Council member media contacts:

Aurora Water – Greg Baker 303-739-7081

Colorado Springs Utilities – Steve Berry 719-668-3803 or Mark Murphy 719-668-3831.

Denver Water – Stacy Chesney 303-628-6584

Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District – Brian Werner 970-622-2229

Pueblo Board of Water Works – Paul Fanning 719-584-0212

Twin Lakes Reservoir and Canal Company – Steve Berry, 719-668-3803 or Mark Murphy 719-668-3831

Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District – Lee Miller 719-948-2400

Meanwhile, here’s a release from Colorado State University (Emily Narvaes Wilmsen) that explains current conditions:

Despite the cooler weather coming in, Colorado State University climatologists have officially confirmed for the U.S. Drought Monitor what many people in Colorado already know: About 98 percent of the state is experiencing varying levels of drought.

The most severe drought in the state is in the Arkansas Basin where drought ranges from D1, or “moderate” drought to D3, or “extreme” conditions as a result of last summer’s Texas drought which also affected Colorado. A newer area of D2 or “severe” drought has recently been added to the Yampa/White Basin in northwestern Colorado due to lack of sufficient snowpack this season.

Most of the Northeastern Plains are designated as “abnormally dry.” In October, 60 percent of the state didn’t have any drought categories. That has shrunk to 2 percent, said Nolan Doesken, the state climatologist who is based at Colorado State University.

“Even though reservoir levels are still strong and northeast Colorado soil moisture is still pretty good, we just don’t usually start out quite this warm and dry at this time – so this is very concerning.”

Some comparison is being made to 2002, which was the last major drought in Colorado.

“In 2002, things didn’t seem that bad at the end of March as March had been quite cool with some snow,” Doesken said. “April 2002 was a lot like March 2012 in that there was scarcely any precip statewide and the snowpack just disappeared without producing much runoff. I don’t recall much fire issues until mid April 2002, but then things started going crazy.

“There is plenty of time yet for at least some parts of Colorado to improve,” Doesken said. “Our spring ‘cool wet season’ continues into mid-May in southern Colorado and into the first or second week of June in northern Colorado. We typically need – and often receive – about three major widespread cold and soaking storms during this coming 10- to 11-week period along with increasing amounts of scattered thunderstorms, especially from late April onward.”

Statewide, the northeast plains have received less than 5 percent of normal for the March – that’s the worst for the state, said Wendy Ryan, research associate who works with Doesken in CSU’s Colorado Climate Center.

“The temperature has been 6 to 9 degrees above normal,” Ryan said. “The mountains have already started melting out after some improvement in February. I recently helped with the snow course at Cameron Pass and it’s only 50 percent of normal at the end of March. The two lower courses, Big South and Chambers were single digit percents of normal with barely any snow cover at all.”

The U.S. Drought Monitor officially tracks drought conditions across the United States; the office of the State Climatologist at Colorado State University is responsible for reporting Colorado’s conditions to the monitor. The drought monitor, through the National Drought Mitigation Center based at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, is a synthesis of multiple indices and impacts that represent a consensus of some 200 federal and academic scientists.

In Fort Collins, March was the warmest in 124 years of record keeping, Ryan said.

“In Fort Collins, we had the hottest and driest March on record,” Ryan said. “This is the first time we’ve ever had only a trace of precipitation for March. No years have had zero.”

Ryan said the Front Range urban corridor has been one inch or more below average for March. The entire state is below 50 percent with the exception of the far Eastern Plains, which have received some moisture.

The statewide snowpack has declined in recent weeks and is currently only 60 percent of normal, she said.

“March is one of our bigger precipitation months on the Front Range so to not have anything is a big deal,” Ryan said. “This is pretty much polar opposite to last year with record snowpack continued to accumulate in the mountains all spring.”

From the Summit County Citizens Voice (Bob Berwyn):

Statewide, the snowpack is only 50 percent of the historic average; the Colorado River Basin snowpack is the lowest in the state, at 47 percent. NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center is showing above average chances for dry weather to continue the next three months, with above average temperatures, which could further debilitate the spring snowpack.

Even those water providers whose storage appears to be in good shape for this year are carefully watching the numbers because if warm dry weather continues through this summer, they may need to stock up for what could be a dry year in 2013, according to the Front Range Water Council.

“During the drought 10 years ago, water providers learned it’s difficult for reservoir storage to survive multiple-year droughts,” said Jim Lochhead, Front Range Water Council chair and CEO/manager of Denver Water.

From the Denver Business Journal (Cathy Proctor):

Council members all pull water from the Colorado River, and are looking at options if snowpack levels remain low, the council said.

From The Denver Post (Monte Whaley):

About 98 percent of the state is experiencing varying levels of drought, according to CSU, with the most severe in the Arkansas Basin, where drought ranges from D1, or “moderate” drought to D3, or “extreme.” Last summer’s Texas drought is also still affecting Colorado, CSU said.

A newer area of D2 or “severe” drought has recently been added to the Yampa/White Basin in northwestern Colorado due to lack of sufficient snowpack this season.

Most of the northeastern plains are designated as “abnormally dry.” Conditions changed drastically since October, when 60 percent of the state didn’t have any drought categories.

That has shrunk to 2 percent, said Nolan Doesken, the state climatologist who is based at CSU.

“Even though the reservoir levels are still strong and northeast Colorado soil moisture is still pretty good, we just don’t usually start out quite this warm and dry at this time — so this is very concerning,” Doesken said.

Some are comparing this year to 2002, which was the last major drought in Colorado. “In 2002, things didn’t seem that bad at the end of March as March has been quite cool with some snow,” Doesken said.

April 2002 was a lot like March 2012, he added, saying there was scarcely any precipitation statewide and the snowpack disappeared without producing much runoff…

“We typically need — and often receive — about three major widespread cold and soaking storms during this coming 10-to-11 week period along with increasing amounts of scattered thunderstorms, especially from late April onward,” Doesken said.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“As we all know, water is one of our most precious resources,” said Alan Hamel, executive director of the Pueblo Board of Water Works. “And, even though we don’t anticipate any restrictions on irrigation this year, we encourage all of our customers to use water very wisely and not waste it.”[…]

Most of Colorado’s snowpack occurs in March and April, and statewide snowpack was listed at 58 percent of normal Monday by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Pueblo received only 0.11 inches in March, and has received 0.74 inches for the year, less than half of normal. Record-breaking temperatures were recorded over the weekend before colder weather and high winds returned Monday…

Between its accounts in Lake Pueblo, Clear Creek, Turquoise and Twin Lakes, the water board has more than 43,000 acre-feet of water in storage, more than a year’s worth of potable water supply.

From CBS4Denver.com:

Denver Water said because March was so dry they’re now anticipating a weak year for the rivers and creeks that fill the lake. “We need to maintain or hold some more water in Dillon Reservoir in anticipation of low run off and snowpack,” [Phil Hofer, Frisco Bay marina manager] said.

By law Denver Water has to release 50 cubic feet per second. They said they’re just above that at 53. On the same day last year they were releasing 97 cubic feet per second. And by the end of April 2011 they were releasing 255 cubic feet per second.

From the Colorado Springs Independent (Pam Zubeck):

Despite the flushing and a dam project that has reduced the city’s transmountain storage capability, Utilities has ample water for a normal growing season, Berry says, promising there won’t be a repeat of 2002 when drought conditions triggered water restrictions during what turned out to be the third driest year in more than a century, with only 7.84 inches of rain. Only two Dust Bowl years, 1939 and 1934, were drier.

It seems like a no-brainer to expect rationing, considering Colorado Springs has received .37 of an inch precipitation since January 1, or 22 percent of the normal 1.69 inches, the National Weather Service reports.

Adding to the problem are high temperatures. Along with dozens of cities in 25 states, Colorado Springs experienced higher-than-normal temperatures in March. The average high was nearly 64 degrees, compared to an average of 52 in a normal year. The average minimum was 32 in March, compared to 26 degrees in a normal year, according to the Weather Service…

But Pueblo won’t impose restrictions, and neither will Springs Utilities, despite a project to improve Homestake Reservoir, part of the city’s transmountain system, which delivers water from the Colorado River basin to Colorado Springs. The reservoir, in the Holy Cross Wilderness area near Leadville, will be drained and the work will begin this summer. (Berry says the lake is already low enough that two snowmobiles have been found at the bottom, “but no Jimmy Hoffa.”)

Utilities officials decided to move ahead on the $30 million project this year (Aurora is a partner in the project) after 2011 turned out to be a “pretty wet season,” Berry says, with 16.24 inches of precipiation for the year, not far off the normal mark of 17.4 inches.

To compensate for the empty Homestake Reservoir, Utilities purchased additional storage space in Pueblo Reservoir. That water will be delivered to the Springs through the Fountain Valley Authority water line, Berry says.

While snowfall has been below normal in most of Colorado, except for the Sangre de Cristo range, Berry says local snowpack on Pikes Peak is a little above average. That means the North and South Catamount Reservoirs, lowered last year due to repairs on Montgomery Dam near Breckenridge, will likely return to normal levels this year.

Local storage is at 73 percent of capacity, Berry says, slightly more than the historic capacity of 70 percent, while the city’s systemwide storage stands at 69 percent of capacity, compared to the historic level of 62 percent.

From The Colorado Springs Gazette (Andre Wineke):

“We’ve looked at it and, while it’s certainly dry, we feel good about our storage this year,” said Utilities spokesman Steve Berry. “For 2012, we don’t expect any restrictions.”

Having said that, Berry added, it wouldn’t hurt everyone in Colorado Springs to keep an eye on their water usage.

“I think if the weather conditions don’t improve going into next year and if we have a bad snowpack next year like we have this year, then it could be a problem,” he said. “It’s still key that our customers conserve. Customer water usage is going to be really important this spring and summer. If our customers help us, that will certainly help us going into next year.”

Berry said Colorado Springs Utilities’ storage reservoirs are at about 69 percent of capacity. That’s above the 62 percent average for this time of year from 1970-2004, albeit down from the 77 percent of capacity in 2011…

The warm March did pump up local water use: Colorado Springs residents used an average of 53.6 million gallons of water a day during the month, up 15.2 percent from March, 2011, according to Colorado Springs Utilities. On the plus side, however, Utilities customers used 358 million gallons less than they did back in March, 2001 — about a 27 percent decrease after adjusting for the city’s growth.

From the Fort Collins Coloradoan (Bobby Magill):

Normally, Fort Collins gets more than a foot of snow every March. But not last month.

Only a trace of precipitation was recorded in Fort Collins last month, the first time in history that March did not have any measurable precipitation at all. The next driest March on record was 1966, when 0.01 inches of rain fell.

The average overall temperature for March was 50 degrees, or 8.6 degrees above normal. The average high temperature for March was 67.2 degrees – five degrees higher than the average high temperature for April.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Anthony A. Mestas):

The weather service reported the average monthly temperature in Pueblo in March was 48.7 degrees. That figure is 6.4 degrees above normal and makes last month the fourth-warmest on record in Pueblo. That is well behind the average temperature of 51.3 degrees recorded in March of 1910…

The weather service reported that Pueblo received 0.11 inches of precipitation in March, which is 0.82 inches below normal and makes this March the seventh driest March on record in Pueblo.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

In January, the organic farm advocate traveled to New York to lend his support — and testimony, if needed — to a federal court case brought by the Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association against Monsanto. Hobbs was not called on to testify during the oral arguments, but joined about 200 others from food safety groups and Occupy Wall Street in a rally near the courthouse after the courtroom action wrapped up. The farmers lost their challenge to Monsanto’s patents on genetically engineered seed on Feb. 24. Monsanto admitted to filing 144 lawsuits between 1997-2010 and settled another 700 cases out of court for undisclosed amounts with gag orders on the farmers, which the association says amounts to harassment of farmers. “Our goal is to protect farmers from patent infringement charges by Monsanto when their organic crops are contaminated by Monsanto’s genetically altered seed,” Hobbs said.

Last week, a federal appeals court agreed to hear an appeal of the New York decision…

“We believe the precautionary principle should be followed,” Hobbs said. “The first genetic crops appeared in the 1990s, and they pushed them without any review. Now, 94 percent of soy is genetically modified, and that wipes out the genetic diversity.”

For Hobbs, 43, who has farmed on 30 acres at Avondale since 2000, there is no direct threat to the types of food he grows, both as cash crops and for seed: garlic, squash, beans and vegetables. In all, he and partner Jamie Dunston raise seed for eight varieties of garlic and a couple dozen other vegetables.

Hobbs relocated to Pueblo after learning about organic farming and training others in Northern New Mexico in the late 1990s. He was lured here by the climate — cool nights, hot days during growing season — and plentiful water on the Bessemer Ditch.