Category: Green Mountain Reservoir

Denver Water’s proposed rate increases attract the focus of councillor Jeanne Faatz

From The Denver Daily News (Peter Marcus):

The Board of Water Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, as well as again next Wednesday, before voting on the proposal. The plan calls for an average increase for next year of $41 per year for Denver customers, or an increase of about $3.40 per month. The increase would be more than 10 percent for next year and comes as Denver Water officials warn that consumers may see an increase of 31 percent over the next three years. If approved, the increased water rates would take effect in March 2011.

Suburban residential customers would see an average increase of about $2.66 per month, or about $32 per year.

The proposal has already made a splash with Denver City Council members – but not the kind of splash that Denver Water would have liked. In addition to raising concerns over the impact a rate increase could have on constituents, Councilwoman Jeanne Faatz took the opportunity last month to raise questions over the organization of the Denver Water board itself.

Currently, the Board of Water Commissioners is a five-member board that is appointed by the mayor of Denver. Faatz questioned whether it wouldn’t be a better idea to switch to a board that is elected by the people, to perhaps better represent the interests of voters.

“Our same people are paying these rates and they have definitely let us know that they are not interested in increased taxes and we have tried to listen to that and be responsive, and they’re not interested in higher fees, and yet you all just pretty much as an enterprise get to set what you set and charge them,” Faatz told Denver Water officials at a City Council briefing last month.

More Denver Water coverage here.

Green Mountain Reservoir operations update

A picture named greenmountainreservoir.jpg

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

This week, we have begun to cut back our releases from Green Mountain Dam to the Lower Blue River. Earlier this week, we began scaling down from the 730 cfs range. This morning, we cut back another 100 cfs from 500 to 400 cfs.

Denver Water, the Colorado River District and others are making progress over the Shoshone water right and Blue River Decree

A picture named shoshoneglenwoodcanyon.jpg

From The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Gary Harmon):

Attorneys for Denver Water and other water organizations won a weeklong stay Wednesday in the beginning of a trial on a case in federal court in which Denver Water’s handling of its Blue River decree is at issue. That litigation could be set aside next week once an affidavit attesting to the progress of the parties is filed under seal in the court, River District spokesman Chris Treese said…

Denver Water also wants to get about the business of expanding Gross Reservoir near Boulder, [Denver Water General Manager Jim Lochhead] said. The agency, which serves 1.3 million people and is the state’s oldest and largest water utility, needs the flexibility to move water around its system. It’s looking to the settlement to offer Denver Water the kind of flexibility it needs to manage its system, Lochhead said. In addition to completing the Blue River decree, which refers to the stream that fills Dillon Reservoir, one of Denver’s largest water supplies, the agreement would limit the size of the Denver Water service area. It also would offer the Western Slope assurance that Denver Water would take no action to obtain more water without cooperation from the Western Slope. Once it’s complete, “This will be one of the most comprehensive agreements that’s ever been negotiated in the state of Colorado,” Lochhead said. “I’m looking at this agreement to forge an entirely new paradigm” in relations between the Front Range and Western Slope.

The agreement will give the Western Slope, primarily the River District, a greater voice in the operations of the Shoshone Power Plant. The Shoshone plant generates 14 megawatts of electricity from turbines spun by the Colorado River, and its 1902 water right ensures water will flow from the headwaters of the river to Glenwood Canyon and below. If Shoshone was unable to call water downriver, the Grand Valley’s domestic, agricultural and industrial needs, as well as those of four endangered fish species, would have to be met by other sources, notably the Roaring Fork and Fryingpan rivers. They join above Glenwood Springs, and those waters flow into the Colorado River in Glenwood Springs, below the Shoshone plant. Plateau Creek in De Beque Canyon also could be called down to meet the Grand Valley requirements, leaving some of those junior water rights to go unfilled.

More Colorado River Basin coverage here.

CWCB: New transmountain pipeline concepts update

A picture named dnrpipelineconcepts309

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The Colorado Water Conservation Board is looking at three new transmountain possibilities and two pumpback plans in the Arkansas and South Platte river basins in an analysis of supply options that could provide between 100,000 and 250,000 acre-feet per year of new water to the Front Range.

Only one of the projects, a 540-mile pipeline from Flaming Gorge Reservoir in Wyoming to Colorado’s Front Range, is actively being pursued. Entrepreneur Aaron Million and the South Metro Water Supply Authority both looking are at it. The “Big Straw” plan, or Colorado River Reconnaissance Project, was not evaluated in the latest study because of its high initial cost to build. It would bring water from the Colorado River near Grand Junction to the Front Range. Other projects studied were from Blue Mesa Reservoir and the Yampa River. The Green Mountain pumpback plan also was included in the study, although it would provide about 68,000 acre-feet annually — less than the other 100,000 or 250,000 acre-feet plans.

The Arkansas Valley plans would move water from either La Junta or Avondale to Rueter-Hess Reservoir near Parker. From either place, the cost would be nearly $100,000 per acre-foot over the 50-year life of the project and supply 100,000 or 250,000 acre-feet, according to a report by CDM engineering. All of the other options come in around $80,000 per acre-foot or less over 50 years. One of the South Platte options would cost around $70,000, while the Green Mountain option is about $40,000 over the life of the project. The reason for the discrepancy would be the need for reverse-osmosis, coupled with unproven methods of zero liquid discharge, to bring Arkansas Valley water up to drinking quality…

The new report, now in draft form, will be part of a Colorado Water Conservation Board’s water needs assessment expected to be complete in January.

More CWCB coverage here.

Green Mountain Reservoir operations update

A picture named greenmountainreservoir.jpg

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

At 4 p.m. [September 1], we will curtail our releases from Green Mountain Reservoir to the Lower Blue River. We have seen inflows to the reservoir drop off over the last few days. By this evening, the Lower Blue will be running at about 650 cfs.

More Colorado-Big Thompson Project coverage here.

Green Mountain Reservoir update

A picture named greenmountainreservoir.jpg

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

If you’ve been watching the gage, you most likely noticed that yesterday we bumped releases from Green Mountain to the Lower Blue up by 150 cfs, bringing it to 550 cfs. This morning, Thursday, we bumped releases up again by another 150 cfs. Currently, we are releasing 700 cfs to the Lower Blue. This release is anticipated to remain through the weekend and into next week.

More Colorado-Big Thompson Project coverage here.

Green Mountain Reservoir update

A picture named greenmountainreservoir

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

As inflows to Green Mountain Reservoir slow down, we have been curtailing our releases to the Lower Blue. Yesterday, we reduced releases by 50 cfs to 450 cfs. This morning, August 11, we reduced releases by 50 cfs to 400 cfs.

More Colorado-Big Thompson coverage here.

CWCB: It’s been a good water year for storage so far

A picture named cheesmandam

From email from the Colorado Water Conservation Board (Ben Wade):

The August Water Availability Task Force (WATF) meeting has been canceled due to favorable precipitation and storage conditions throughout most of the State. The next WATF meeting will be held September 27th at 9:30am at the Division of Wildlife.

Should you like an update on current conditions throughout the Colorado River Basin we encourage you to join an online webinar hosted by the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) on August 31st at 10am. Additional information on this webinar, including log in details, can be obtained by contacting Wendy Ryan at wendy.ryan@colostate.edu.

Thank you for your continued participation in the WATF—see you in September.

More CWCB coverage here.

Colorado-Big Thompson Project update

A picture named coloradobigthompsonin2007.jpg

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

Now that it is spring, we will be increasing our releases from Olympus Dam to the Big Thompson River to meet the seasonal minimum stream flow. At 8 p.m. on Saturday, May 1, we will increase our releases to 100 cfs.

More Colorado-Big Thompson Project coverage here and here.

Mesa County Water Association to offer ‘The Water Course’ January 19, 27 and February 2

A picture named orchardmesa1911

From the Grand Junction Free Press (Sharon Sullivan):

What: “The Water Course” covering water law, water quality and balancing competing demands, sponsored by the Mesa County Water Association
When: Jan. 19 and 27, Feb. 2, 6-9 p.m. Registration due Monday, Jan. 11.
Where: GG City Hall Auditorium, 250 N. Fifth St.
Cost for entire series: $35 MCWA members; $45 nonmembers; Single session: $15 MCWA members; $20 nonmembers. Some scholarships..
Info: hannah@mesacountywater.org, or 683-1133, or http://www.mesacountywater.org

More from the article:

Studies estimate a 600,000 million-acre-feet shortage [ed. in the Grand Valley] by 2050, said Grand Junction Utility and Street System Director Greg Trainor, and a board member of the Mesa County Water Association.

The MCWA was first formed 25 years ago by the late Ruth Hutchins, a Fruita farmer concerned about a proposal that would pump water from the Western Slope to the Front Range. Citizens, irrigators and government leaders held “Water 101” courses on controversial water topics for many years. After several years of inactivity, the MCWA was resurrected a year ago by Trainor and Hannah Holm to resume educating people on water issues affecting the Western Slope. The association is governed by a seven-member board of directors. “Current water laws serve the valley well, but it really behooves people to appreciate the resource and protect it as the water situation gets tighter,” said Holm, MCWA coordinator. “We can’t stay in our bubble forever.”[…]

A three-part water course series starts Tuesday, Jan. 19, at Grand Junction City Hall Auditorium. The first course will address water law; how the valley’s water rights relate to the water rights of California and Denver; and who is responsible for irrigation water once it leaves a canal…

The Jan. 27 course will cover laws and programs that seek to protect and clean up Colorado waterways, the condition of Grand Valley rivers and streams, and how drinking water is protected and treated. The February course will explore threats to irrigated agriculture as cities grow; environment and recreation water needs; and how the Grand Valley could change with drought and increasing competition for water.

More Colorado River Basin coverage here.

Green Mountain releases

A picture named greenmountainreservoir.jpg

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

A Grand County contractor, working on the county’s Streamflow Management Plan, will be collecting data along the Blue River below Green Mountain Reservoir under multiple flow regimes. In order to accommodate this data collection it will be necessary to maintain the reservoir release at 200 cfs on Wednesday and Thursday and then 400 cfs on Friday and Saturday. The release rate will be ramped down to 200 cfs by Sunday evening.

More Blue River watershed coverage here.

Green Mountain Reservoir update

A picture named greenmountainreservoir.jpg

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

We are still releasing about 700 cfs from the dam to the river. We are anticipating this will continue through next week. If there is a change, I will let you know.

More Green Mountain Reservoir coverage here.

Green Mountain Reservoir update

A picture named greenmountainreservoir.jpg

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

Due to continuing demand for Green Mountain water, we are still releasing around 740 cfs from the reservoir to the Lower Blue. I am anticipating that this demand will stay on through the weekend and probably well into next week. The reservoir is at an elevation of 7920 and dropping about 2/3 of a foot a day.

More Green Mountain Reservoir coverage here.

Green Mountain update

A picture named greenmountainreservoir.jpg

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

…we dropped releases from Green Mountain Reservoir to the Lower Blue by 100 cfs earlier today. The Lower Blue is now flowing at about 850 cfs.

More Blue River watershed coverage here

Green Mountain update

A picture named greenmountainreservoir.jpg

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

Today we saw inflows to Green Mountain Reservoir start to taper off. We have responded in kind, reducing our releases from Green Mountain Dam to the Lower Blue River in 100 cfs increments. By this evening, there should be a flow of about 2250 cfs in the Lower Blue.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Twin Lakes, Lake Pueblo, Green Mountain, Ruedi and Colorado-Big Thompson update

A picture named ruedidam.jpg

From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):

[Ruedi] Now that spring has arrived, we are getting ready for spring run-off in the Fryingpan River Basin. We are looking at a slightly above average snow pack this year. As a result, beginning [April 10], we will start moving some water out of Ruedi Reservoir to make room for melting snow. At 6:00 p.m. this evening, we will increase our releases from Ruedi Reservoir to the Fryingpan River by 40 cfs. Rocky Fork Creek is currently running at about 5 cfs. Our release, plus the Rocky Fork, will put about 153 cfs total in the ‘Pan.

[Green Mountain] Just a quick head’s up about spring and Green Mountain Reservoir. As most of you have probably already noticed, we are only at an elevation of 7894 in the reservoir [April 10]. We are also releasing about 100 cfs from Green Mountain to the Lower Blue. We are anticipating run-off and getting ready for the on-coming season.

[Twin Lakes/Lake Pueblo] Today [April 10], we are releasing about 27 cfs from Twin Lakes Reservoir to Lake Creek (which flows into the Arkansas). The Wellsville gage on the Arkansas River is showing 273 cfs. We have 380 cfs flowing into Pueblo Reservoir. And the reservoir is currently sitting at an elevation of 4879.

[Colorado-Big Thompson] Today [April 10] on the C-BT, we are releasing about 63 cfs from Olympus Dam in Estes Park to the Big Thompson River. Pinewood Reservoir is looking pretty full at an elevation of 6575. And, we are still pumping to Carter Lake. Carter is also getting close to full with an elevation of 5753.

There is some regular maintenance work being conducted on the portion of the Charles Hansen Feeder Canal which runs water to Horsetooth. For this reason, water into Horsetooth has dropped off over the past couple of weeks. It has been sitting fairly consistently at an elevation of 5404–about ten feet below our average spring high of 5414. Once the work on the canal is complete, we will stop pumping to Carter and begin running water to Horsetooth, again.

If you’ve been following the snowpack information, you no doubt will have heard by now that Colorado is just slightly below average in most of its river basins. The South Platte basin is one that is sitting just below average. It has been somewhat dry this winter on Colorado’s eastern plains. The spring snow storms helped a little, but that early heat wave we had in March did melt some of the snowpack away.