Colorado Watershed Assembly presents Water on the Land: Water Rights and Land Conservation workshop April 23

From email from the Colorado Watershed Assembly:

The Colorado Water Trust is pleased to invite you to its first ever water workshop in Basalt, Colorado on Friday, April 23 at the fantastic Basalt Library in a room overlooking the Frying Pan River.

The workshop is generously funded by Great Outdoors Colorado and the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The agenda includes a description of how the Roaring Fork Basin works, and sessions on basic principles of Colorado water law, the state’s the instream flow program, green water transactions, and water and land conservation. It concludes with a discussion of local hot topics.

This is the first in a series of twelve workshops they will be doing around the state over the course of this year. Up next: Silverthorne and Fort Collins.

For more information, visit Workshop flyer–Basalt.pdf.

More conservation easement coverage here. More instream flow coverage here.

The Mesa Land Trust signed up ranches for conservation easements left and right in 2009

From the Grand Junction Free Press (Wyatt Haupt):

The largest piece of the conservation pie was Lobe Creek Ranch, which accounted for more than 3,300 acres. Lobe Creek Ranch is owned and maintained by the Aubert family, who also agreed to conserve its Leslie Place Ranch. The combined land deals totaled about 3,700 acres in Glade Park, based on land trust data. Mary Hughes, development officer of land trust, said the family placed conservation easements, which “ensures the property will never be developed or subdivided.” She added, “They own the property. They maintain the property (and) they continue to ranch the property.”

More conservation easement coverage here and here.

HB 10-1197: Reduce Conservation Easement Cap Amount

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

“This will give us the ability to mold easements in the future,” [Jay Winner, the general manager of the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District] said Wednesday. “It should also give the landowners surety in an easement that was not there in the past.” The Lower Ark district has a big stake in making easements work as part of its mission to protect water in the Lower Ark Valley. The district has received about 50 conservation easements since it was formed by voters in five counties in 2002. Winner has been working with a state oversight commission through the Division of Real Estate to clean up a system that has been plagued by improper appraisals and tax credits which cannot be marketed because of the cloud of suspicion surrounding conservation easements statewide.

Last week, the state House passed the legislation, HB1197. It has moved to the state Senate. The legislation would cap tax credits at $135,000, rather than the $375,000 currently allowed, at 50 percent of the fair market value. It also would limit the impact to the state budget to $26 million. In 2008, $63 million in tax credits were claimed. To sort out conservation easement claims, the Division of Real Estate would be given the power to promulgate rules and issue certificates for easement claims. The Department of Revenue would make quarterly reports to the Legislature on the amount of net gain to state revenue, under the assumption that claims would have remained at 2008 levels. Tax credits would be based on a first-come, first-served basis of approved certificates.

More 2010 Colorado legislation coverage here. More conservation easement coverage here and here.

Rio Oxbow Ranch and the Rio Grande Headwaters Land Trust ink deal for conservation easement

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Matt Hildner):

Coupled with a prior easement, a 6-mile stretch of the Rio Grande and its bottom lands will now be protected along with habitat for elk, eagles and trout and the mountain views that greet drivers along Colorado 149 west of town. “We just thought it was too valuable a piece of land in its present state to ever dive off it,” Alan Lisenby said.

The family bought the ranch in 1996, and with their love of trout fishing immediately focused on shoring up the river, he said. The family has worked with the Natural Resources Conservation Service to reduce the river bank erosion that harms trout habitat and in high runoff years sends silt downstream as far as Del Norte. The Lisenby’s also adjusted their cattle operation, which includes anywhere from 400 to 900 cows in a given year, to accommodate the elk herds that wander down from the surrounding high country. “All of that stuff fits in together,” Lisenby said. “It threads the needle with what the conservation people want to do.”[…]

A $7.4 million award from Great Outdoors Colorado in 2007 helped the land trust complete the easement on the Rio Oxbow in addition to completing agreements on six other ranches along the Rio Grande. Other contributors to the easement included the Nature Conservancy, the Rio Grande Basin Roundtable and the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The land trust has protected 18,000 acres along the Rio Grande. The group is pushing to protect a 175-mile stretch of the river from the headwaters to the state line that remains largely in the hands of ranchers and farmers.

Meanwhile, a recent study commissioned by the Trust for Public Land has determined that there Colorado nets $6 of economic benefit for every $1 spent on conservation easement tax credits, according to a report from Cathy Proctor writing for the Denver Business Journal. From the article:

The study was done by Jessica Sargent-Michaud, a staff economist for the land conservation organization. It looked at the investments and returns in Colorado’s conservation easements since 1995. Over that time, the state invested an estimated $511 million in conservation easements, including $373 million through tax credits and another $138 million through the lottery-funded Great Colorado Outdoors (GOCO) grants. That’s equal to $595 million in today’s dollars, the study said…

The study separated the easement land by type of ecosystem and looked at the value such ecosystems offer on a per-acre basis. It concluded that Colorado’s land in easements gave $3.51 billion in economic benefits to the state through water-supply protection, waste treatment and flood control; farm and ranch production; and recreation, including hunting, fishing and hiking.

More conservation easement coverage here and here.

Trust for Public Land study reveals $3.51 billion of economic benefit from conservation easements

From the Denver Business Journal (Cathy Proctor):

The study [A Return On Investment: Colorado’s Conservation Easement Tax Credit (pdf)] was done by Jessica Sargent-Michaud, a staff economist for the land conservation organization. It looked at the investments and returns in Colorado’s conservation easements since 1995. Over that time, the state invested an estimated $511 million in conservation easements, including $373 million through tax credits and another $138 million through the lottery-funded Great Colorado Outdoors (GOCO) grants. That’s equal to $595 million in today’s dollars, the study said…

The study separated the easement land by type of ecosystem and looked at the value such ecosystems offer on a per-acre basis. It concluded that Colorado’s land in easements gave $3.51 billion in economic benefits to the state through water-supply protection, waste treatment and flood control; farm and ranch production; and recreation, including hunting, fishing and hiking…

In 2009, conservation easements claimed between $50 million and $55 million in tax credits, said Greg Yankee, the policy director at the Colorado Coalition of Land Trusts.

More coverage from the Associated Press (Judith Kohler) via Business Week. From the article:

Jessica Sargent-Michaud, an economist with the national Trust for Public Land, said she used geographic data to group Colorado’s conservation easements into 16 distinct ecosystems. She then assigned the land a per-acre dollar value based on figures used in about 10 published studies and consultations with state agriculture extension agents. Examples include the premiums people pay to live next to open space, costs of cleaning up polluted water or money spent on recreation and tourism. John Swartout, executive director of the Colorado Coalition of Land Trusts, said leaders in the Glenwood Springs area have determined that protecting open space along the Colorado River for trails leading into the city has been an economic boon for tourism. “Wildlife watching is a huge industry now,” he added…

The land trust’s report is a welcome first attempt to estimate the worth of conserving Colorado’s natural heritage, something that doesn’t fit neatly in the marketplace, said Andrew Seidl, associate professor at Colorado State University’s Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics. “This study makes explicit what all Coloradans know implicitly — what is good for Colorado’s native landscapes is good for Colorado,” Seidl said.

More coverage from The Denver Post (Kate Drazner). From the article:

…every landowner I visited told me that, if it weren’t for the tax credits, they could not have afforded to keep their land. These landowners had agreed to preserve their land for eternity for a small fraction of what they could have been paid for developing it. In some cases, the money from the tax credits mostly just helped them pay off the estate taxes they owed when they inherited the land. The simplest reason to keep the conservation easement tax credit program alive is that private landowners are the best stewards of the land. They will give up the chance to receive millions of dollars to sell off their property in exchange for a few hundred thousand dollars and the promise that their land will be forever protected.

But I soon realized that the conservation easements benefit everyone, even city girls like me. Colorado farms and ranches help preserve the landscapes that make Colorado distinct, as visitors travel around the state. And they provide the locally grown produce and meat that sustains us. Perhaps most important, these farmers and ranchers, through their financial hardships and back-breaking labor, preserve the independent and hardy lifestyle that serves as Colorado’s cultural heritage.

More conservation easement coverage here and here.

Governor Ritter opposes tax amnesty for those that implemented conservation easements with inflated appraisals

From the Associated Press (Steven K. Paulson) via The Aspen Times:

Ritter’s chief counsel, Trey Rogers, said the disputed credits total $100 million — money the state needs with a $1.5 billion budget deficit. Instead, the administration wants to settle each case individually…

State tax credits under the program jumped from $2.3 million in 2001 to $98 million in 2008, fueled in part by a change in 2003 that allowed the credits to be transferred and sold. A report last year by legislative analysts put total credits from 2000 to 2007 at $274 million. The Colorado Department of Revenue has notified 295 landowners and easement credit buyers that their credits were being disallowed because the easements were overvalued by state-licensed appraisers. It ordered them to pay the credits along with penalties and interest. The Internal Revenue Service reported last year that it had audited people, including buyers of easements, who claimed credits to which they weren’t entitled.

Rep. Wes McKinley, D-Walsh, said he plans to introduce a bill to grant amnesty for landowners with disputed credits, which he estimates at $300 million, including penalties and interest. “The state made a deal. It was a bad deal, but we need to honor the deals that we make,” McKinley said…

Nearly 300 landowners who face state action say they based their credit claims on land appraisals by unscrupulous brokers who offered to develop the land, in violation of state law. Landowners who sell credits to investors are stuck with indemnity clauses that require landowners to cover any losses — including demands for back taxes…

The state contends landowners should have known their property values — which the credits are based on — were inflated. John Swartout, executive director of the Colorado Coalition of Land Trusts, says he understands the naivete of some landowners. “They were used to farm subsidy programs that sometimes are too good to be true,” Swartout said…

Conservation groups say the dispute could provide ammunition to kill the program. Ritter wants to cut $13 million from the $52 million program over the first half of this year, and another $13 million for the fiscal year that begins in July. “It’s an incredibly effective tool to preserve Colorado’s ranch lands from unnecessary development,” said Pete Maysmith, executive director of Colorado Conservation Voters, a nonprofit advocacy group.

More conservation easement coverage here and here.

2010 Leopold Conservation Award nominations to be accepted until March 17

From the Western Farmer-Stockman:

Sand County Foundation of Colorado, in partnership with the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association, Colorado Cattlemen’s Agricultural Land Trust and EnCana Oil & Gas, is seeking nominations for the 2010 Leopold Conservation Award.
The prize, which awards $10,000 and a crystal Aldo Leopold trophy to the winner, recognizes Colorado landowners who demonstrate outstanding stewardship and sustainable management of natural resources. The Leopold is named in honor of author Aldo Leopold, who called for an ethical relationship between people and the land they manage.

“Conserving landscapes isn’t just about land conservation, but rather about people and their relationship with the land,” says Terry Fankhauser, CCA executive vice president. “The Leopold Conservation Award seeks to recognize the highest of conservation ethics whereby the rancher cares for the land and the land, in turn, cares for the rancher.” The conservation partnership established in such a relationship has long been recognized by the Sand County Foundation and is exemplified through the association’s award commitment. “The health of Colorado’s landscape is dependent on hard-working farmers and ranchers across the state who dedicate themselves to ensuring that Colorado’s natural resources are in better shape than when they found them,” says Brent Haglund, Sand County Foundation president. “Year after year, the quality of award nominations for the Leopold Conservation Award proves that Colorado’s land, water and wildlife are in great hands,” he adds. The Leopold honor ceremony is scheduled during the CCA annual convention on June 14 in Pueblo. Nominations must be made no later than March 17. For information, go to www.leopoldconservationaward.org or contact Amy Bader at amy@coloradocattle.org or (303) 431-6422.

More conservation coverage here.

Rio Grande Headwaters Land Trust completes second phase of conservation efforts for Rio Oxbow Ranch

From the Del Norte Prospector:

Six miles of the river flows through the wide curving oxbows that inspire the name of the spectacular Rio Oxbow Ranch. Across the broad valley, the Weminuche Wilderness rises on the far side and the views are indeed breath taking. The local Rio Grande Headwaters Land Trust’s conservation efforts has now insured that this view is protected in perpetuity, with completion of the second phase of the conservation easement on the Rio Oxbow Ranch at the end of 2009. With contributions from many sources, including the ranch owners, the Lisenby Family, along with financial support from Lottery-funded Great Outdoors Colorado, The Nature Conservancy, the Rio Grande Basin Round Table and Colorado Water Conservation Board, the North American Wetlands Conservation Act and the many partners that contributed matching funds, this premier conservation accomplishment was achieved…

The Rio Oxbow Ranch is one of six properties on the Rio Grande that received support from the Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) Legacy Grant for the Rio Grande Initiative. The $7.4 million grant to the Rio Grande Headwaters Land Trust was awarded in December 2007. Five of those ranches are now under easement with one left for completion in 2010, along with other river corridor properties having been protected through other GOCO and matching grant cycles as well. “As of the end of 2009, nearly 18,000 acres of river corridor ranches have been protected here in the San Luis Valley, by the collaboration between us and our various partners,” said Rio de la Vista, Co-coordinator of the Rio Grande Initiative with the land trust. “It’s a tribute to our community that people here see the value of conserving the land and water along the Rio Grande. Those ranches and all that they encompass are so important to our quality of life in the Valley.

More conservation easement coverage here and here.

Arkansas Valley: Conservation easements not the panacea for agriculture in all cases

From the La Junta Tribune Democrat (Elaine White):

On Jan. 4 the administrative board of Landowners United met with a team of consultants at the courthouse in La Junta where the topic of discussion was the ongoing threat looming over landowners who have participated in the State of Colorado’s tax credit incentive program. By donating development rights on agriculture land and/or water, farmers and ranchers were able to take advantage of state and federal tax credits, which in many cases eased a financial burden suffered after years of drought and failing commodity prices. However, many landowners are now being subjected to audits by the IRS and the state, placing them in serious danger of losing their farms or ranches. “General consensus at the meeting is that the state has changed the rules of the game and now there is a very definite economic effect to this small part of Colorado, not only from the State of Colorado, but also from the IRS,” said Ed Hiza, local landowner.

Some landowners are facing a demand from the Colorado Department of Revenue to return all tax credits, plus penalties and interest, generated from placing a conservation easement on their property. This action appears to be based on the department’s disqualification of certain professionals associated with the easement process…

J.D. Wright, LOU president and landowner said, “LOU is pursuing every option available for a resolution to this very serious problem including meetings with legislators and the governor, and requesting legislative hearings in order to determine the perceived bias against the Lower Arkansas Valley.” Many landowners speculate the Lower Arkansas Valley has been targeted because the northern part of the state needs water from the valley to continue growth and development.

More conservation easements coverage here and here.

East Fork of the San Juan River: The Southwest Land Alliance, the Conservation Fund and Great Outdoors Colorado ink deal for conservation easement

From the Pagosa Springs Sun (Jim McQuiggin):

Southwest Land Alliance Executive Director Michael Whiting announced late last week that the SLA, the Conservation Fund and Great Outdoors Colorado completed the first of three conservation easements on the East Fork Ranch. Located on the upper reaches of East Fork of the San Juan River and just 2.25 miles south of the Wolf Creek ski area, the almost 2,800-acre ranch owned by the McCarthy family has been contracted for conservation easements. What this means is that the McCarthy family has agreed to preserve the natural integrity of the ranch, and the easement will permanently protect the land from commercial or residential development. “Places like East Fork (Ranch) are special places that almost no one wants to see developed, so in the back of our minds, we worry about them. But here in southwest Colorado, we believe strongly in private property rights. So, when a landowner voluntarily steps forward to preserve their land forever, we breathe a little sigh of relief,” said Nancy Cole, SLA Board Chair.

Closing on about 1,000 acres of the ranch, the easement is the first of a three-phase contract that will, over the next two years, eventually include the entire property.

More San Juan Basin coverage here.

Conservation easement primer

Here’s a primer on the subject of conservation easements for landholders, from RegisteredRep.com. From the article:

Twelve states currently provide tax credits based on a percentage of the dollar amount of a person’s donation. Some states, such as Colorado, make their credits transferable to other people as a tax incentive. The Colorado tax credit is up to a maximum of $350,000—among the highest credits available in the nation. Iowa has just instituted a state tax credit with a maximum of $100,000 based on 50 percent of the fair market value of a conservation easement donation. Note, though, that states also impose caps and limitations—so please check carefully.

More conservation easement coverage here.

Elkhead Valley: 617 acres put into conservation easement

From the Steamboat Pilot & Today (Brandon Gee):

The Routt County Board of Commissioners on Tuesday approved spending $250,000 to help conserve more than 600 acres in West Routt County’s Elkhead Valley. The money comes from the county’s Purchase of Develop ment Rights program. The Colorado Cattlemen’s Agricul tural Land Trust will hold the conservation easement on 617 acres of the Howe Ranch on Routt County Road 56 north of Hayden…

The Howe Ranch includes irrigated hay meadows, riparian areas along Calf Creek and sage-dominated rangelands, according to a news release, which states that the ranch also provides important habitat for species including elk, deer, pronghorn, black bear, mountain lion, bobcat, fox, sandhill cranes, greater sage grouse and Columbian sharp-tail grouse…

The PDR program is funded by a 1.5-mill property tax approved in 2006, nine years after the program first was approved for a 10-year period. The 2006 renewal is good for 20 years…

To date, the PDR program has completed 24 projects protecting 14,670 acres at a cost of more than $6 million. Six more projects totaling 3,219 acres are under negotiation.

More conservation easement coverage here and here.

Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District to test conservation easement valuation

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The value of the water used on farms can increase exponentially if its use is changed to municipal or industrial, creating a dilemma for assessors, headaches for property owners and trouble for conservation easement sponsors in the past. So the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District will present a test case to the state Division of Real Estate by claiming conservation easements on properties it owns on four ditch systems – the Bessemer Ditch, High Line Canal, Rocky Ford Ditch and Holbrook Canal. The easements are among nine the Lower Ark board voted to complete on Wednesday, bringing the total held by the district to about 60 easements. The district will present the ditch properties with easements that tie the water rights to the land, yet allow part of the water from those rights to be sold on an annual basis – or leased. The concept is central to the Super Ditch, a water leasing program supported by the district. It will also get two appraisals on each property in an attempt to determine the value of the water, and then ask the Division of Real Estate to verify the value of water, said Executive Director Jay Winner.

Because the district owns the properties, there won’t be the same liability a private landowner would face with any tax credits claimed in the transaction. The State Department of Revenue and Internal Revenue Service have raised questions about easements in Colorado in recent years, after many property owners took advantage of state tax laws meant to encourage easements. A state commission was set up and is working to certify trusts and governments that hold easements.

More conservation easement coverage here.

Colorado Water Trust

Here’s a shout out for Amy Beatie and the Colorado Water Trust, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Since state laws differ, trusts in other states operate under slightly different rules. In Colorado, a 1973 change in water law made the CWCB the only agency that could hold an in-stream water right or a right solely to maintain lake levels. Other water rights must be put to a beneficial use like municipal, industrial or agricultural rights. The state can do that by appropriating water, acquiring existing water rights or adopting policies that protect flows. New rights appropriated by the state are junior to most other rights on a stream. Flow protection usually requires court decrees to prevent injury to other rights.

Acquiring rights would yield the best results, but the problem in the past is that valuable senior water rights had to be donated to the state, without compensation, [Colorado Water Trust Director Amy Beattie] said. The trust acquires some rights, although its revenue sources are limited to grants or donations. It also works with land trusts or other conservation agencies to incorporate water rights into planning, Beattie said. “The Colorado Water Trust acts as a broker. It pays for rights to be donated,” she said Last year, the state Legislature set up two CWCB funds as a way to acquire senior rights. One is a $1 million appropriation for general water rights. Another $500,000 was set aside specially in a species conservation trust fund. “We collaborate with the CWCB,” Beattie said. “We pull from a whole menu of approaches to fix critically water-short stream reaches.”

More conservation easement coverage here.

Land Owners United conservation easements meeting October 20

From the La Junta Tribune Democrat:

Land Owners United LLC has been diligently working for resolutions, regarding the assault on conservation easement valuations and will conduct an informative meeting on current status and action plans. The meeting is Tuesday, Oct. 20 at 5 p.m. at Las Animas Elementary School in the cafeteria, 530 Poplar Avenue (Hwy 50 and Poplar Ave), Las Animas. Guest speakers will include Mack Louden, Not 1 More Acre; Mortgage Brokers Coalition, DORA Law Suit; and Mark MacDonnell, Atty (LOU), DORA Open Records Request – Status. For more information, contact J.D. Wright (719)263-5449.

More conservation easement coverage here.

Rio Grande Headwaters Land Trust scores $1 million for Rio Grande corridor conservation easements

From the South Fork Tines:

The newly awarded funds will be used over the coming year to complete two important conservation easements on the Rio Grande river corridor. The federal dollars also serve as matching funds to previous awards from the Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund (GOCO), the Colorado Division of Wildlife’s Habitat Partnership Program, The Nature Conservancy, Mineral County, the Rio Grande Water Conservation District, and other local and regional supporters. With generous donations from the participating landowners, the NAWCA award will help achieve more than $12 million in conservation value on critical river ranches. These projects are part of the overall Rio Grande Initiative, a project led by RiGHT, along with key partners The Nature Conservancy and Ducks Unlimited, to conserve the ranches, important wildlife habitat and scenic beauty of the Rio Grande. A portion of the NAWCA award will also fund improved water delivery infrastructure on the Alamosa National Wildlife Refuge, which includes an important reach of the Rio Grande and senior water rights that provide vital habitat for waterfowl and migrating birds.

More conservation easement coverage here.

Great Outdoors Colorado and the San Luis Valley

From the Valley Courier (Ruth Heide):

During the 15-year history of one of the recipients of lottery ticket sales, Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO), the Valley has received $28 million for a variety of projects ranging from Creede Recreation Park on one end of the Valley to Costilla County open space on the other…

Saguache County’s share of GOCO funds during that time tops the Valley list at more than $8 million followed by more than $5 million each in Alamosa and Rio Grande Counties, $1.3 million in Costilla County, more than $400,000 in Conejos County and nearly $230,000 in Mineral County.

Projects have included: Hooper Park; Zapata Falls; South Side Community Park in Alamosa; King Ranch Preservation Project; Twin Lakes Trail; Manassa Fairgrounds; Antonito Public Park; Sanford Park; Romeo Sports Complex; Will Stegar Project in Costilla County; Sierra Grande Playground Project; El Parque-A Village Park in San Luis; Fort Garland Community Park; Costilla Open Space; Creede Recreation Park; Wright Ranch Preservation Project; Creede Skate Park; Wolf Creek Pass Project; River Valley Ranch; McNeil Ranch; Del Norte Area Trails Master Plan; Natural Wonders of the San Luis Valley Play Park in Monte Vista; South Fork Rio Grande Park; Native Aquatic Species Facility; Saguache County Closed Basin Biological Inventory; Crestone Peak Trail; Irby Ranch; and Center Park.

Some projects such as the Hooper Town Park received less than $10,000 while others like the Costilla County Open Space project topped half a million.

More conservation coverage here.

Routt County: Board of Commissioners approves $400,000 for Elkhead Ranch conservation easement

From the Steamboat Pilot & Today (Brandon Gee):

The Routt County Board of Commissioners approved spending $400,000 of taxpayer funds to help place 645 acres of the 3,950-acre Elkhead Ranch under a conservation easement to be held by the Colorado Cattlemen’s Agricultural Land Trust. The easement is the third phase of an effort to protect the entire ranch. The easement lands include grazing pastures, hay fields, portions of Elkhead Creek, meadows, trees and wetlands. According to a news release, Elkhead Ranch “provides important habitat for numerous wildlife species including elk, deer, pronghorn, black bear, mountain lion, bobcat, fox, sandhill cranes, Columbian sharp-tail grouse and greater sage grouse.”[…]

[Elkhead Ranch owner Heather Stirling] is contributing about two-thirds of the easement’s value, which means she is not being reimbursed for about 66 percent of the property value lost by placing it in a conservation easement. “This is not only beautiful land and prime agricultural land,” County Commissioner Diane Mitsch Bush told Stirling, “but your contribution is over the top, in my opinion.” Some have criticized the program for spending taxpayer money on remote lands that will remain under private ownership. Roundtree rejected those criticisms and also noted that this project and others are highly visible from public roads and public lands. Visibility is one criteria the PDR board uses to evaluate a project, but not the only one, Roundtree said.

More conservation easements coverage here and here.

Pitkin County: Water rights for instream flow transfer to CWCB delayed by two valley districts

From the Aspen Daily News (Brent Gardner-Smith):

Pitkin County’s effort to place 4.3 cubic-feet-per-second of water into a trust managed by a state agency, for the benefit of the Roaring Fork River, has been challenged and delayed by the Basalt Water Conservancy District and the Starwood Metropolitan District. The two districts have asked for a formal hearing on the county’s proposal before the Colorado Water Conservation Board. “We just had concerns,” said Art Bowles, a board member of the Basalt Water Conservancy District. “We are not at all opposed to them donating water, but we want to just make sure it doesn’t affect us down river.”[…]

“This is the first time that the board has received a request to hold a hearing on a proposed water acquisition,” Linda Bassi, the head of the CWCB’s Stream and Lake Protection section, wrote in a March 9 memo to the CWCB board of trustees. On the other hand, the county’s innovative proposal to place water into a trust agreement administered by CWCB is also the first one the CWCB has received. The proposal was made possible by legislation passed in 2008 which strengthened the state agency’s ability to hold water rights for environmental purposes…

If the trust agreement is approved by the CWCB board, it would set up an arrangement where Pitkin County would be able to easily put under the trust an additional 34 cfs of water rights it owns — primarily from its open space purchases — to the benefit of the river. However, in February, attorneys for the Basalt Water Conservancy District and the Starwood Metropolitan District, sent a letter requesting a formal hearing to review the potential water acquisition. “The Basalt Water Conservancy District supports the minimum stream flow program and it supports instream flows that have designated historical use and are appropriate for that purpose,” said Christopher Geiger, an attorney Balcomb & Green, P.C. in Glenwood Springs…

But [Christopher Geiger, an attorney Balcomb & Green, P.C. in Glenwood Springs], who also represents the Starwood metro district, was critical of the CWCB process to date. “They haven’t provided anyone with the explanation with how the water right is going to be measured or administered in the river for instream flow purposes,” Geiger said. “They haven’t shown that it is going to have any appreciable benefit to the natural environment. At the same time, based on how the CWCB chooses to operate the water right, it might prevent the district from exercising its water rights.”[…]

One of the results of the Basalt and Starwood request for a hearing is an additional physical analysis of the stretch of the Roaring Fork River that the county’s water right would flow through. The analysis is to provide better information about the actual minimum amount of water needed in late summer to “protect the environment to a reasonable degree.” That analysis is best accomplished by looking at the river in late August. Pitkin County has agreed to an extension of the normal CWCB timelines so the data can be gathered and analyzed…

“Administrative agencies are entitled to a significant amount of deference in their decision making process,” said Amy Beatie, the executive director of the Colorado Water Trust, which has worked in support of Pitkin County’s decision. “They are asking for water court-type preparedness in order for a preliminary decision to be made.” Beatie said many of the concerns raised by Basalt and Starwood are typically covered in water court, which is a required next step after a CWCB review and approval.

More Coyote Gulch instream flow coverage here and here.

Fountain Creek watershed: Conservation easements key to protecting the riparian environment

Here’s a recap of an event last week sponsored by conservation groups on Fountain Creek, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Unfortunately, development in Colorado is heaviest along the sides of those streams, called riparian areas, and is putting pressure on the most productive wild environments in the state. “Whatever you’ve been doing here is great,” Rondeau told Ann Hanna, who like her late husband, Kirk, has continued to put the environment first in running the ranch on Fountain Creek. “It is a lot different than the river looks in Colorado Springs.” Despite a few invasive salt cedars, there are both large and small cottonwoods and a thick mix of undergrowth near the creek on the Hanna Ranch. On the ground were signs of all sorts of wildlife moving through the area. Bugs were everywhere. Those are all good signs, since species diversity in Colorado is highest among riparian corridors…

“These riparian zones face the greatest pressure,” Rondeau said. That is amply illustrated on the Hanna Ranch, located halfway between Colorado Springs and Pueblo in El Paso County. Once it was a sprawling spread that stretched from the foothills of Pikes Peak to the short-grass prairie and Tepee Buttes – volcanic vents that were part of the ocean floor in the ancient past. In the 1960s, the ranch was split by Interstate 25. Much of it was sold to Colorado Springs, which uses some of the land for the Ray Nixon Power Plant. The Clear Springs Ranch, on the west side of Fountain Creek, was a wildlife viewing area badly damaged by the 1999 flood and Colorado Springs Utilities plans to rejuvenate it as part of the corridor master plan with a fish diversion, trail, wetlands. camping areas and ponds. Hanna has kept the ranch going and continues to train hunter and jumper horses. She is working on a conservation easement that will set aside about 460 acres along Fountain Creek with Great Outdoors Colorado purchasing the development rights. “It was a struggle just to keep the ranch,” Hanna said. Her relatives, Jay Frost and Ferris Frost, own an adjacent ranch, which already has a 900-acre conservation easement.

Meanwhile, development edges ever closer. Pikes Peak International Raceway is due west. Trains barrel through several times a day. Power corridors, toll roads, extensions of city streets, more power plants, gravel pits and wastewater treatment plants have all been proposed for the area in recent years. The Southern Delivery System pipeline will cut through the ranch at some point, although no one’s quite sure where yet, and that’s the least of worries for Hanna. “At least it will be underground when it’s done,” she said…

“The Hannas and the Frosts, like a lot of families, have worked with conservation trusts very fiercely trying to protect their ranches,” said Dan Pike, executive director of Colorado Open Lands, which has obtained a $4.7 million legacy grant from GOCo for its Peak to Prairie program. Its partners include the Nature Conservancy, the Conservation Fund, Colorado Conservation Trust, the Trust for Public Land and Conserving Land for People, which collectively have formed Keep it Colorado. Pike said the public funds available for protecting ranches pale when compared to the money available for development…

Overall, about 114,000 acres in a 2.2 million-acre area have been preserved at a cost of $32.69 million, about two-thirds funded by public funds. The goal of the project is not to stop or even curtail development, but to preserve enough land to maintain wildlife corridors and encourage strategic planning, Pike said. The short-grass prairie, like most riparian environments, is not greatly respected by the public, Rondeau said. “It’s under-known, under-conserved and under-appreciated. No other ecosystem is as converted to other uses as our grassland,” Rondeau said. “Ninety percent is privately owned. You can’t buy it all; that would be ridiculous. We want to work with the people who own it to preserve it.”

More coverage from R. Scott Rappold writing for The Colorado Springs Gazette:

…the Peak to Prairie program, which uses lottery funds and private donations to buy easements, has preserved 114,773 acres of prairie in the Pikes Peak region. That now includes 460 acres of the Hanna Ranch, which county property records show covers more than 4,200 acres.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Wet Mountain Valley: Vickerman family ranch to be preserved

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Tracy Harmon):

Thanks to a recently awarded $484,200 Great Outdoors Colorado grant, the San Isabel Land Protection Trust will be able to preserve the 720-acre ranch. It will stay as it always has been, a working cattle and hay ranch that also is home to wildlife on the valley floor. “We grow native hay that requires just one cutting usually in mid July to the end of July. Since my husband passed, we’ve taken in cattle for pasture,” Mrs. Vickerman said. “We have a lot of deer and antelope. They like the alfalfa and when we are haying we see where they’ve made beds to stay in the meadow then they move on when it is cut low and not as protective.”

The $1.3 million Vickerman Ranch project consists of a $400,000 contribution from the Vickerman family through the donation of development rights to the property, $450,000 in matching funds being sought through the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranch Protection Program and the GOCo funds.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Ouray County: Regional water boards seek county cooperation to keep water on the land

From OurayNews.com (Christopher Pike):

In early May, representatives from several regional water boards in and around Ouray County met with the Board of County Commissioners to begin a water summit with a mission to develop a plan to meet the county’s future water needs. The meeting is expected to continue in September with work sessions that will consider how to preserve and keep water rights in Ouray County and the surrounding region. “We would like to find ways to provide incentives to land owners to tie their water rights to their property,” said Commission Chair Heidi Albritton recently. “I think that’s what we’d all like to work to.”

The commissioners wish to evaluate all of the challenges which now crowd a sizable game board, in an input process that will comprise the members of the BOCC, the Ouray County Planning Commis-sion, the Tri-County Water Conservancy District, the Colorado River District, the Gunnison Basin Roundtable, the Shavano Conser-vation District, the Uncompahgre Watershed Partnership and likely San Miguel and Montrose County elected officials and their staffs.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

San Juan Skyway land and water projects

From The Durango Herald (Dale Rodebaugh):

The 16 projects started in 2005 with a $5.7 million challenge grant from Great Outdoors Colorado. More than 30 partners, including cities, counties, private foundations, individuals and landowners who contributed part of the value of their conservation easements found $11.8 million to supplement the GOCO grant. “We’re very pleased we exceeded our own expectations,” said Ken Francis of the Fort Lewis College Office of Community Services, who coordinated efforts. “We raised more money, got more work done and preserved more land than anticipated.”[…]

Nina Williams, executive director of the Montezuma Land Conservancy, which acquired conservation easements on 3,100 acres of 10 working ranches along the Mancos and Dolores rivers, spoke of the relationship between people and the landscape in Southwest Colorado. “The San Juan Skyway and Southwest Colorado is defined by the relationship that people – ranchers, farmers, sightseers and hunters and fishermen – have with the land,” Williams said. “The vision of the Skyway coalition has been to preserve the intrinsic quality of the region so people can continue to maintain that relationship and their way of life.” The San Juan Skyway is a 236-mile highway loop that takes the traveler from Durango and back via Silverton, Ouray, Ridgway, Telluride, Rico, Dolores, Cortez and Mancos.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Gunnison County: Conservation easement win for rancher

Gunnison County rancher Nick Hughes sued the IRS over their devaluation of his conservation easement and has won, mostly. He still will have to pay an additional $437,153 since the value of his land was determined to be less than the $3 million originally determined. Here’s a report from Seth Mensing writing for the Crested Butte News. From the article:

The IRS had audited Hughes after he filed his 2000 taxes with a $3.1 million charitable contribution for 2,413 acres he had donated to Black Canyon Land Trust Inc. The land was placed in a conservation easement to protect it from future development.
The IRS countered that the donated land was worth between $0 and $238,135, and not more than $3 million as claimed by Hughes, according to expert testimony from the IRS included in the ruling. But Judge Wherry disagreed and overruled the IRS, placing a value of $2 million on the land. Hughes will now have to pay taxes on the remaining $1.1 million. Hughes’ attorney Joseph Thibodeau told the Denver Post, “It was a given that the contribution was allowable. The only issue was the amount [the land was worth].”[…]

Lucy Goehl, executive director of Gunnison Ranchland Conservation Legacy, said there have been several audits of conservation easements conducted by the IRS in Gunnison County, “but they’re all over the state and Gunnison County is not exempt from that.”
The ruling pointed out that the IRS engineers evaluating conservation easements are not certified appraisers, who are the only professionals able to place a value on property donated as a conservation easement. “I think the fact that the court gave very little weight to the matrix the IRS was using in valuing the land makes this an encouraging decision,” said Goehl. In response to that part of the ruling, the IRS asked the Colorado Division of Real Estate to grant their engineers certified appraiser status.

Ann Johnston, executive director of Crested Butte Land Trust, thinks the ruling will have an indirect affect on the trust’s efforts to preserve open space by giving legitimacy to the idea that land held in a conservation easement still has value. “What I’m hoping will happen here is that when these programs in Colorado go through cases like this, it’s showing that the programs are valuable and it could encourage people to donate land,” she said.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Bessemer Ditch: Bylaws changes

Here’s a look at one Bessemer Ditch shareholder’s view on the proposed bylaw changes coming up for a vote soon along with the Pueblo Board of Water Works plans to buy shares, from Chris Woodka writing for the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:

Mike Bartolo is proposing a different path that would keep water rights in the hands of irrigators while guaranteeing Pueblo the ability to use some of the water when it was needed. His idea – which he admits is sketchy – is for the Pueblo Board of Works to buy the development rights shares in the Bessemer Ditch rather than purchasing shares outright. That would ensure that the water would stay in the ditch, while a portion of it would be available to Pueblo as it is needed. “The city would have to dish out less, maybe about $4,000-$5,000 an acre, rather than $10,000 to purchase rights,” Bartolo said. “The grower would retain the rights and the city could lease up to 30 percent when they need it.”[…]

Bartolo is also aware of Pueblo’s track record on past sales of the Booth-Orchard and Twin Lakes that left behind wastelands in Pueblo and Crowley counties and doesn’t trust the Pueblo water board’s promises that the same thing wouldn’t happen on the Bessemer Ditch. “I think the Board of Water Works has failed miserably to understand that they are not buying a chunk of a ditch, but are destroying the autonomy of it,” Bartolo said. “They are destroying the value of the Bessemer Ditch.”[…]

Bartolo is not opposing the right of anyone along the Bessemer Ditch to sell, and said he understands the reasons some of his friends and neighbors want to sell at this time. He believes more time investigating the potential impacts of the sale and the alternatives is needed, however. The Bessemer Ditch has been a target for urban water sales since the 1980s, when other ditches in the valley sold. Because there is not one large block of shares immediately available, as there were on the Rocky Ford Ditch and Colorado Canal, no sales ever materialized. The current sale was born from a failed effort in 2007-08 that happened in a very public way. The second time around, the water board lined up sellers through a broker at a higher price that lured more takers. While some shareholders met in the 1980s to prevent sales at that time, there has been little public discussion in the past 20 years about whether water rights should be sold or what other options are available.

Bartolo recently joined Super Ditch – a land fallowing, water management program – in an effort to share in the research into the value of ditch rights by the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District. He doesn’t know if the idea of selling water while while keeping the water rights through long-term lease contracts is practical, but said the idea needs to be investigated. Bartolo’s own idea is taken from practices used in some conservation easements, where the future development rights are purchased to maintain a property’s character. The price is the difference between the current worth and the value of developing the property – in this case, water rights. “It preserves the rights of guys who have worked hard and want to cash in their chips,” Bartolo said. While he’s pitched the idea to shareholders through a handout at this year’s annual meeting, to the Lower Ark board, to The Pueblo Chieftain editorial board and at an informal meeting with some members of the water board, Bartolo has found few takers so far…

The water board’s proposal amounts to a “pig in a dress,” that would buy and dry farmland, Bartolo said. “They would lease it back for 20 years, but that’s pathetic,” he said. “When it comes time, the water board will make a business decision with the goal of providing cheap water for Pueblo. The water they are leasing to Aurora could generate five to six times the revenue in agriculture. They haven’t been a good partner to the valley.” Not all of the consequences of what could happen to the Bessemer Ditch’s water rights have been explained, Bartolo added.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Conservation easements

Here’s an update on the state’s efforts to plug the leaky conservation easement program, from the Associated Press (Steven K. Paulson) via the Aurora Sentinel. From the article:

Erin Toll, director of Colorado’s Division of Real Estate, told lawmakers Wednesday the program is the target of a grand jury investigation that involves millions of dollars in questionable tax breaks. State lawmakers want to suspend the program and use the money to restore a property tax break for seniors, but Toll warned that could jeopardize hundreds of landowners who have taken advantage of tax credits who were told the easements would continue forever. She said tax benefits continue for up to 20 years, and some property owners have already sold those tax credits. “There’s a rollover for people who took that credit,” she told legislators. Toll said a grand jury is looking into $24 million that may have been fraudulently claimed with the help of unscrupulous appraisers who overvalued the land. Toll said three appraisers have been suspended and two of them are believed to be in Mexico. “We discovered millions of dollars in suspect credits,” Toll told legislators…

Toll said state regulators were hamstrung because of state laws that kept tax records private. She said new laws passed over the past two years will help investigators unravel what happened. Lawmakers were outraged when they were told they may not be able to cancel the program because of contracts that have already been signed to sell the easements.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Prowers County: Conservation easement valuation still hot topic

Local residents crowded a recent meeting of the Prowers County Commissioners where conservation easements were being discussed. Here’s a report from Aaron Burnett writing for the Lamar Ledger. From the article:

[Roxy Huber, executive director of the Colorado Department of Revenue], who was accompanied by Commissioner of Agriculture John Stulp was on hand to address issues surrounding conservation easements. Easements across the state have come under scrutiny in recent years as tax values assigned to many easements have been called into question by the Internal Revenue Service and the state’s department of revenue…

There are several types of easements including ones that restrict gravel or other mineral mining as well as easements that restrict construction or development on property. The current audits being performed on existing easements call into question the amount of tax credit that should be awarded for each individual easement. As the audit process has progressed, some appraisals have been deemed fraudulent even though they were performed by state licensed appraisers. Locally, some land owners have been dealing with easements under audit for close to five years. Some landowners have been told by tax officials that their easements have no value.

“Part of the reason we’re here today is rumor control,” said Commissioner Gene Millbrand about the meeting. He noted that several county landowners have been affected by the issue and have raised concerns to all three members of the board…

Huber told the commissioners that even though there appears to be a disproportionate number of easements in the area being examined, the state is more interested in broad trends than individual regions. “We’re not targeting any particular part of the state. We are targeting systems of corruption,” Huber said. “We understand people feel like they’ve been defrauded,” Huber said. She added that actions of several appraisers have been called into question, but that ultimately the responsibility for an easement’s accuracy in its valuation falls to the individual landowner who places the easement. “While they’re licensed through the state, we can’t stop them from doing shenanigans,” Huber said concerning the auditors whose work has been called into question…

Huber said the state is attempting to resolve issues surrounding easements, but until recently hadn’t all the necessary tools at its disposal. She added that with the passage in 2008 of House Bill 1353 the department of revenue was finally able to discuss easement issues with other state agencies, a practice which has allowed the department of revenue to draw on the expertise of other state departments for such things as valuation of property. Huber noted that prior to the bill’s passage, her department was not able to discuss the easement issue with individuals not directly employed by the department.

Huber said the best option for landowners to take if they have received notification from the state concerning an audit of their easement is to file an objection within the alloted time period. She said this is an important step because it ensures due process for the landowner concerning any issues in question.

The revenue department head said the common timeline for easement reviews begins at the federal level, then is reviewed at the state level following the completion of the federal audit. She added that the state is currently suspending any audits that are currently under federal review pending that outcome. “If you’ve protested, you’re just sitting in the queue,” Huber said.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: