Snowpack news: Beneficial moisture has dried up a bit, south and southwest

From The Durango Herald (Dale Rodebaugh):

The snowpack on Jan. 1 in Southwest Colorado – in the Animas, Dolores, San Juan and San Miguel drainages – was right on the money.

It was 100 percent of average for the date. Compared with last year it was well above, registering at 146 percent of the Jan. 1, 2013, level.

In fact, the snowpack in the state’s other six basins clustered around the 100 percent mark, ranging from 99 percent to 111 percent of average.

The overall state snowpack on Jan. 1 was 103 percent of average. It was almost half again the amount of snow on the ground on Jan. 1, 2013.

Although the numbers are encouraging, state and federal water officials say, they won’t hold up without more moisture, which has been in short supply for the last month. The extended outlook for more snow isn’t encouraging.

There is a chance of snow today at higher elevations and again Saturday night, Ellen Heffernan, a National Weather Service meteorologist in Grand Junction, said Wednesday…

The Yampa, White and North Platte basin was at 111 percent of average as of Jan. 1. The Rio Grande and South Platte basins registered 99 percent…

Reservoir storage in the seven drainages is much better than last year. Overall, reservoir storage stands at 87 percent of average, compared with 67 percent on Jan. 1, 2013.

Reservoir storage in the Animas, Dolores, San Juan and San Miguel drainages on Jan. 1 was 69 percent, compared with 66 percent on the same date last year. Statewide, storage this year ranged from 64 to 118 percent of average, the highest being in the Yampa, White and North Platte basins.

Public Trust Doctrine effort spurs the Colorado Water Congress to respond

Justian I first codifier of riparian rights
Justian I first codifier of riparian rights

From the Northern Colorado Business Report (Steve Lynn):

One of Colorado’s oldest, most powerful water groups is raising a war chest to battle an initiative that would place the public’s interest in the state’s hallmark rivers and streams ahead of the interests of private water-right owners, changing the state Constitution.
The notion that the public has an inherent interest in free-flowing water is well-established in other states, which embrace what’s known as the “public trust doctrine.”

California, Wisconsin, Montana and New Jersey, for instance, have such a doctrine, according to a 2009 report from the Center for Progressive Reform, a nonprofit policy research organization based in Washington, D.C. In Wisconsin, for example, the public interest in a water source is paramount and a water permit only can be granted if its use does not obstruct navigation, reduce flood-flow capacity or harm the public interest.

This would mark a radical shift from Colorado’s prior appropriation system, which favors individual water rights owners, especially those with older water rights. During drought periods, water is provided to those with senior water rights while those who have junior, or newer, water rights don’t get water.

But the Colorado Water Congress, which represents private water-right owners, contends the Public Trust Doctrine runs counter to state law and 150 years of case law. The legal principle would make rivers and streams public property, superseding water rights of property owners in some cases.

Richard Hamilton, a retired aquatic microbiologist from Fairplay, is behind recent efforts to introduce a ballot initiative to ask voters to enact the public trust doctrine in Colorado. Hamilton and Phillip Doe have tried several times since 1988 to enact a public trust doctrine.

“The state does not now act as a steward of the people’s property,” Hamilton said.

“It goes ahead and decides what is the best interest of everybody and the government makes up its mind as to which of those interests shall supersede the public’s ownership.”

Hamilton said his measure failed last year because the state did not give him enough time to gather signatures for a ballot initiative. He said he does not know whether he will pursue a ballot initiative this year.

The Colorado Water Congress, nonetheless, is spending $325,000 on a campaign to oppose any effort to launch a public trust doctrine initiative. Founded in 1958, the not-for-profit lobbying organization represents water-right owners. The Colorado Water Congress claims an 85 percent “success rate” on state water legislation it endorses, and Colorado governors rarely have signed bills it has opposed.

More Public Trust Doctrine coverage here.

What the New York Times Misses About the #ColoradoRiver — National Geographic

Colorado River Basin including out of basin demands -- Graphic/USBR
Colorado River Basin including out of basin demands — Graphic/USBR

From the National Geographic (Jennifer Pitt):

The good news, as reported by the Times, is that many water managers understand the dire circumstance of reduced snowfall, as well as the options available to avoid water rationing. Water conservation – already widely employed across the region – is an imperative moving forward, whether or not the drought persists. The Great Recession temporarily slowed the region’s meteoric rise in population, but its cities are growing again. In some cities where people bathe, drink, water lawns, and wash cars with Colorado River water, historic tightening of supplies has successfully and dramatically reduced per capita use, extending supplies. Many cities use less water now than they did a decade ago, despite population growth.

Still, even the most water-thrifty cities in the basin have a long way to go before they achieve conservation levels seen in other cities across the globe, such as those in Australia and Israel.

Where water has been plentiful, by dint of geography or law, investments in water conservation are less common. John Fleck makes this point nicely in a recent Albuquerque Journal post: “When there is more water, people use more water. When there is less, they use less. The trick is making the transition from one to the other. New data from state water managers suggest New Mexicans are doing better at this task than I expected.”[…]

Water conservation in agriculture will be more of a challenge. While the Times cites laser-leveling of fields as a practice to reduce farm run-off, this practice may not actually save water. Much of the water that leaves farms is already going back into our water supply where it is used over and over again. Limited but promising options for conserving water in agriculture are technologies that reduce evaporation, such as drip irrigation of high-value crops. These technologies can also add resilience to farming operations. But to make such technologies effective at saving water, farmers will need financial incentives to reduce water use and changes to law and regulation that allow them to profit from the savings.

Historically in the West, water has been permanently taken out of agriculture to feed the thirst of our growing cities, and the acreage of irrigated fields has declined. That’s something to consider as Western communities make choices about water supply: do we want lawns if it means we have to buy-up and dry-up our irrigated open spaces and our culture of farming and ranching?

Another important point is one Wines failed to capture in his story: what all of this – the problem of extended drought and the solutions we employ – mean for the Colorado River itself. The mighty Colorado is not simply infrastructure for water delivery. It is the lifeline of the American West. It is a river of legends, with awe-inspiring canyons that have for centuries seduced people to explore their depths. Citizens of the West and the rest of the globe alike love the Colorado River for the thrill of its rapids, the shade of its riverside forests that make for epic fishing, and the serene calm of a morning view from a houseboat on one of its large reservoirs. Colorado River recreation adds some $26 billion to the economy every year.

Those with the power to affect Colorado River water management – our elected leaders and the officials they appoint – have the power to preserve the natural wonders of the American West. Persistent drought presents these leaders with a significant challenge, and how they respond will have an enduring impact, not only on the economic viability of our cities and rural counties, but also on the health of the Colorado River.

More Colorado River Basin coverage here and here.

Colorado Water Plan the focus of three-evening course — Glenwood Springs Post Independent

Colorado Water Plan website screen shot November 1, 2013
Colorado Water Plan website screen shot November 1, 2013

From the Glenwood Springs Post Independent (Hannah Holm):

…the Water Center at Colorado Mesa University is focusing its annual three-evening water course on what citizens need to know to understand what’s at stake and how to make their voices heard as the Colorado Water Plan is developed.

This course is open to the public. It will be held on Colorado Mesa University’s campus in the University Center Ballroom from 6-9 p.m. on three consecutive Mondays: Feb. 3, Feb. 10 and Feb. 17. The cost is $45 for the whole series, or $20 per session, with scholarships available for those who can’t afford the cost.

Feb. 3 – Physical Realities of Colorado Water Supply and Demand

On Feb. 3, Dr. Gigi Richard will provide an overview of how Coloradans currently meet their needs for irrigation, drinking water and recreation, and what factors are necessary for healthy streams. She will also touch on the climate factors that affect our water supplies. Speakers from the Colorado and Gunnison Basin Roundtables will then discuss the water needs that have been identified for these two river basins, which meet in Grand Junction. The basin roundtables are groups of stakeholders responsible for assessing water needs and recommending projects in their river basins. Plans developed by basin roundtables across the state are to be building blocks for the statewide water plan.

Feb. 10 – Laws, Compacts and Agreements for Meeting Future Water Needs

On Feb. 10, attorney Aaron Clay will provide an overview of Colorado water law, focusing on how it relates to strategies for meeting future water needs. Then John McClow, Colorado’s representative to the Upper Colorado River Basin Commission, will discuss the importance of the Colorado River Compact, the 1922 agreement on how to allocate the Colorado River’s water between states. Peter Fleming, attorney for the Colorado River District, will then discuss recent and still-developing agreements designed to help address growing water needs on the Front Range while addressing the West Slope impacts of piping water over the Continental Divide.

Feb. 17 – The Colorado Water Plan: Process and Perspectives

On Feb. 17, Mike King, executive director of Colorado’s Department of Natural Resources, will discuss the need for a Colorado Water Plan and how the plan will be developed. Mr. King’s presentation will be followed by a panel that provides perspectives on how the Colorado Water Plan could affect the East Slope, the West Slope, agriculture and the environment. The public will also have the opportunity to provide input regarding what they would like to see in the plan.

More education coverage here.

A roundup of new bills. In haiku — Joe Hanel #COleg

Here’s an excerpt:

The King Cup Cactus.

So sharp. Such bright red flowers.

Your new state cactus.

King Cup Cactus via American Southwest
King Cup Cactus via American Southwest

More 2014 Colorado legislation coverage here.

@fortcollinsgov loses 1985 storage right for Halligan Reservoir, no diligence filing

Reservoirs NW of Fort Collins
Reservoirs NW of Fort Collins

Here’s the story from Kevin Duggan writing for the Fort Collins Coloradon. Here’s an excerpt:

Failure to file required paperwork has cost Fort Collins a water right on the Poudre River it has held for 28 years.

The right was intended to help fill Halligan Reservoir, which sits on the North Fork of the Poudre River, if a project to enlarge the reservoir is ever approved and built.

The city has been working on the enlargement proposal for many years. It secured a conditional right to receive up to 33,462 acre-feet of water in 1985 in hopes of storing part of it in Halligan to meet future water needs and protect the city’s water supply during times of drought.

More Halligan Seaman expansion coverage here and here.