The next coordination meeting for the operation of the Aspinall Unit is scheduled for Thursday, January 23rd 2025, at 1:00 pm #GunnisonRiver

Crystal Dam, part of the Colorado River Storage Project, Aspinall Unit. Credit Reclamation.

From email from Reclamtion (Erik Knight):

This meeting will be held at the Western Colorado Area Office in Grand Junction, CO. There will also be an option for virtual attendance via Microsoft Teams. A link to the Teams meeting is below. 

The meeting agenda will include updates on current snowpack, forecasts for spring runoff conditions and spring peak operations, the weather outlook, and planned operations for the remainder of the year. 

Handouts of the presentations will be emailed prior to the meeting.

Microsoft Teams Need help?

Join the meeting now

Meeting ID: 277 950 010 81

Passcode: nY7qX7sr

Cash flows to help update Blue Mesa power plant — The #Montrose Press #GunnisonRiver

Blue Mesa Dam. Photo credit: Reclamation

Click the link to read the article on The Montrose Press website (Katharynn Heidelberg). Here’s an excerpt:

December 7, 2024

Hydropower infrastructure at Blue Mesa Reservoir will see some urgent updates, with the help of money coming through the Interior Department’s Aging Infrastructure Account. The account received more than $3 billion through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. As part of an $849 million disbursement announced by the Interior on Dec. 3, more than $32.03 million will go to replace butterfly valves at the Blue Mesa power plant and to refurbish two ring follower gates at the dam there. This funding will pay for planning, final design and implementation.

“The infrastructure at Blue Mesa dates to the facility’s original construction, with most installations made in 1963,” a Bureau of Reclamation official said via email, in response to questions. “Given a typical service life of 50 years, much of the equipment has exceeded this threshold and requires either refurbishment or replacement. Currently, funding is allocated to priority projects that address these urgent needs.”

The government further is providing $1.3 million to pave the public access road to the power plant and $650,000 to replace the electrical “bus” that transmits power from generator to transformer at the plant…According to Bureau of Reclamation information, Blue Mesa’s power plant is composed of two 30,000-kilowatt generators, driven by 41.55-horsepower turbines; each turbine operates at a maximum head of 360 feet. The plant’s generating capacity is 86,000 kilowatts…The Department of the Interior in its announcement said the money is an investment through President Joe Biden’s Investing in America agenda, and aimed at revitalizing aging water delivery systems. The funding is gong to 77 projects overall, in several Western states, including 14 in the Colorado River Basin, totaling $118.3 million.

Hydroelectric Dam

The curious case of the cold in #Gunnison — Russ Schumacher (@ColoradoClimate Center)

Click the link to read the post on the Colorado Climate Center blog (Russ Schumacher):

December 22, 2024

Across Colorado, this December has been much warmer than average, a bookend to what will end up as one of the warmest years on record statewide. Except there’s one spot where December hasn’t been warm at all — very much the opposite.

On any climate map of Colorado for December 2024, Gunnison sticks out like a sore thumb. For example, here are the high temperatures from CoAgMET on Friday, December 20. Really warm for late December, including some record highs along the Front Range. But then there’s Gunnison with a high of just 22°F.

High temperatures from CoAgMET on Friday, December 20, 2024. See current data at https://coagmet.colostate.edu.

And here’s the departure from the average temperature for December through the 21st. Most of the state is 3-9°F warmer than average…and then there’s the bulls-eye of purple around Gunnison. For the week of December 15-21 it’s even more stark: almost the entire state in a deep red of warmth, with Gunnison again in a cold purple. Typically when we see maps like these, we get suspicious about problems with the data or a faulty thermometer, but this isn’t an error. Gunnison has truly been an anomaly in the state’s weather and climate this month.

Departure from normal temperature: December 1-21. Credit: High Plains Regional Climate Center
Departure from normal temperature December 15-21. Credit: High Plains Regional Climate Center

Here are a few more remarkable stats. From December 1-20, the climate station outside Gunnison has been 13 degrees colder than average. The highest temperature reported so far in December has been 26°F; there’s never before been a December without a high above freezing. (The average high at Gunnison this time of year is in the upper 20s.) And there were 15 straight nights with low temperatures below -10°F, including record lows of -26 on November 30 and -23 on December 1.

Daily high and low temperatures for late November and December 2024 at Gunnison, Colorado. From https://climate.colostate.edu/temp_graph.html

So why is it not warming up in Gunnison?

Two key factors are causing the remarkable cold, compared to the warmth the rest of the state has seen in December. The first is geography. Gunnison sits in a valley, surrounded by mountains on all sides. Northeast of town, the Taylor and East Rivers come together to form the Gunnison River, and the confluence with Tomichi Creek is just to the west. Cold air is known to pool in high mountain valleys like this, and the cold can be very persistent.

Elevation map of Gunnison County, from https://www.gunnisoncounty.org/332/Map-Costs-Gallery.
MODIS satellite image on December 20, 2024, showing the snow cover in the Gunnison Valley. From MODIS Today at the University of Wisconsin

If there’s a bunch of snow on the ground, these valley cold pools can become especially stubborn, and that’s exactly what’s happened this month. The storm just before Thanksgiving dropped over a foot of snow in the valley, and over 2 feet in the nearby mountains, among the highest totals from this storm. And even though the larger-scale air masses have been warm through December, the snow has remained in the valley (clearly visible in the satellite image above) and the air hasn’t warmed up. When there’s deep snow cover, it reflects sunlight and keeps the days cool, and also favors cold nights by insulating the air from the warmer land underneath. This creates a feedback loop where it stays cold, which means the snow doesn’t melt, which means it stays cold.

What’s especially unusual is that this has all happened without getting additional snowfall: Gunnison has reported only 0.5″ of snow in December. The mountain snowpack has flatlined through December, and up the hill at Crested Butte they’ve even had several days above freezing. But it’s still snowy and cold in the Gunnison Valley, and will stay that way for the foreseeable future. What looks more likely is that the rest of the state will start to cool down to something resembling winter in early January, so Gunnison won’t look like such an outlier.

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

Montrose County’s 6th Annual West Slope Water Summit — KJCT

Uncompahgre River Valley looking south

Click the link to read the article on the KJCT website (Ja’Ronn Alex). Here’s an excerpt:

November 14, 2024

Over 300 people attended Montrose County’s 6th Annual West Slope Water Summit…Water is a big part of the Western Slope’s identity. Montrose County held a water summit and invited everyone to drop by and hear speakers like Andy Mueller of the Colorado River District speak on the issues.

“We really want to make sure they understand where the situation is with the Colorado River, the things we have to do,” said Sue Hansen, Montrose County Commissioner of District 2.

Rest assured, our state representatives in Denver are looking to keep water on the Western Slope, on the Western Slope. “We are the biggest water rights holder, and we need to make sure that we can protect that as we go forward. Downstream is continuing to want more and more and more. There is no way any of us can continue to supply them with what they think they want,” commented Catlin.

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

Understanding the #GunnisonRiver — Gunnison Basin Roundtable

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

From email from the Gunnison Basin Roudtable (Savannah Nelson):

October 29, 2024

As residents of the Gunnison River Basin, we are privileged to live alongside one of Colorado’s most remarkable natural treasures. The Gunnison River is more than just a waterway—it’s a vital part of our history, our environment, and our daily lives.

The Gunnison River was named after U.S. Army officer and explorer John W. Gunnison, who surveyed the area in the mid-19th century. However, long before Gunnison’s expedition, Indigenous peoples, including the Ute tribes, called this area home. They relied on the river as a source of food, water, and transportation, establishing deep connections with the land and its resources.

The East River Valley, northwest of the historic town of Gothic, home to the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory. The mountain with the pointed peak in the distance is Mount Crested Butte. Photo credit: Mark Stone/University of Washington

Our river begins at the confluence of the East River and Taylor River near Almont and flows for about 180 miles until it merges with the Colorado River in Grand Junction. Other tributaries include the North Fork, the Uncompahgre, Cimarron, and Lake Fork. Along its course, the Gunnison carves through some of the most dramatic landscapes in the state, including the striking Black Canyon of the Gunnison—its sheer cliffs dropping over 2,000 feet.

Recreation opportunities are a major piece of local life and tourism; fishing, rafting, swimming, kayaking, and boating are part of the culture surrounding the water.

The Gunnison River is also a lifeline for our local ecosystem. Its waters support a variety of fish species, such as brown and rainbow trout, which are great for anglers, but also contribute to the rich biodiversity of our area.

Sweet corn near Olathe, CO photo via Mark Skalny, The Nature Conservancy.

In addition to the fact that all of us rely on the Gunnison river and its tributaries for drinking water, they play a crucial role in the diverse agricultural activities of the basin. The agricultural uses vary and include a range of cattle and crops, including fruit production and Olathe sweet corn.

Our river is many things: a heritage that we share and a resource we must protect for future generations. To learn more about water and ways to get involved, head to gunnisonriverbasin.org.

Aspinall Unit operations update October 30, 2024: Ramping down Gunnison Tunnel diversions for the season #GunnisonRiver

Gunnison Tunnel via the National Park Service

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

On Wednesday and Thursday, October 30 and 31, diversions to the Gunnison Tunnel will be ramped down for the season. Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be adjusted in coordination with the ramp down schedule for Gunnison Tunnel diversions in order to keep Gunnison River flows near the current level of 370 cfs. There could be fluctuations in the river throughout these days until the Gunnison Tunnel is completely shut down.

On Wednesday, October 30, releases from the Aspinall Unit and Gunnison Tunnel diversions will be reduced by 300 cfs. On Thursday, October 31, releases from the Aspinall Unit and Gunnison Tunnel diversions will be reduced by 650 cfs and Tunnel diversions will be ended until next year.

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. River flows are expected to stay above the baseflow target for the foreseeable future. 

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, is 1050 cfs for October through December.

Currently, diversions into the Gunnison Tunnel are around 980 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 370 cfs. After the shutdown of the Gunnison Tunnel, flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will still be near 370 cfs. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review.

This scheduled release change is subject to changes in river flows and weather conditions. For questions or concerns regarding these operations contact Erik Knight at (970) 248-0629 or e-mail at eknight@usbr.gov

Modeling the Future of the #ColoradoRiver in a Changing #Climate — Fresh Water News #COriver #aridification

dCrystal Lake with San Juan mountains in the background near the Uncompahgre River – one of the tributaries of the Colorado River. Photo by M. Raffae

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Raffae Muhammed):

October 11, 2024

The importance of the Colorado River cannot be overstated for the American West. The river and its tributaries serve more than 40 million people by providing drinking and municipal water. The water from the river basin irrigates more than 5 million acres of land, which produces around 15% of the nation’s crops. The dams in the basin generate 4,200 megawatts of hydro-power. Overall, the river system sustains over 16 million jobs, contributes $1.4 trillion per year to the economy, and supports terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems (USBR, 2012.)

West Drought Monitor map October 8, 2024.

However, the current drought that has lingered for decades now poses a significant threat to everything that depends on the mighty Colorado River. The river basin lies in the region which is infamous for its natural variability. Over the course of history, the region has had cycles of dry and wet periods, which may also make the present drought look like a natural phenomenon alone. However, a study conducted in 2021 showed that around 19% of the current drought conditions can be attributed to human-induced climate change. Not only that, but the conditions are worse than they have been in at least 1200 years.

Since 90% of the streamflow in the Colorado River originates in the upper part of the basin,several studies over the years have focused on watershed modeling in that region many studies have investigated historical flows, while others have included baseflow – the steady release of groundwater that seeps into a stream or river. Some have gone further to use historical streamflow and baseflow to predict future conditions in the river basin using various climate models. However, almost all studies have either used pre-development scenarios – conditions when there was little to no water infrastructure such as dams, canals, levees, etc., management, and regulations – or have used oversimplified models that ignore the complexities of groundwater movement, storage, and interactions with the surface water.

The Colorado River Basin is one of the most highly regulated and over-allocated river systems in the world. As a result, basing studies on pre-development scenarios seems to be of little practical importance in this day of rapidly changing climate. Moreover, the importance of groundwater and its interactions with surface water cannot be ignored, as more than half of the streamflow in the basin is contributed by baseflow.

Colorado transmountain diversions via the State Engineer’s office

The river basin also has trans-basin or trans-mountain diversions. These diversions bring water from the western slope of the Rocky Mountains, which are in the Colorado River Basin, to the eastern slope of the Rockies outside of the basin. These diversions have also been ignored in previous models.

Map credit: AGU

Therefore, my team, which includes my Ph.D. advisor at CSU, Associate Professor Ryan Bailey, and two scientists from the Agricultural Research Service, is working to address this knowledge gap by incorporating key hydrological processes that were overlooked in previous research studies. We are using a physically based and spatially distributed model to build and quantify historical streamflows and groundwater levels in the Upper Colorado River Basin for the post-development scenario. A physically based model simulates how water moves through the environment, using real-world processes, instead of relying on statistical patterns. A spatially distributed model, on the other hand, takes into account differences in the landscape and natural features across different areas. In our model, we have included reservoirs, canals, irrigation schedules, floodplains, trans-basin diversions, and tile drainage – an agricultural drainage system that removes excess subsurface water from irrigated fields. The model also simulates groundwater fluxes such as groundwater recharge, canal seepage, tile drainage flow, saturation excess flow, lake and reservoir seepage and evaporation, and groundwater-floodplain exchanges, which can be used to identify spatio-temporal patterns in the river basin.

Once we simulate the historical hydrology and fluxes, we plan to run what-if scenarios, hypothetical situations to help us analyze different options, for several water management, land use change, and climate change scenarios. This will allow us to come up with best management practices to address water issues and manage water resources more effectively and efficiently.

Historic photo of the Lee’s Ferry gage on the Colorado River. Photo credit: USGS

In the final phase of the study, we use what-if scenarios to assess the political and socio-economic aspects of the model. This includes, crop budgets, agricultural productivity in monetary terms, possibility and probability of Denver getting shut out from trans-mountain diversions in case of a drought, economic implications of sustainable groundwater use, the amount of water flowing at Lee’s Ferry in Arizona – the dividing point of the upper and lower basins, and so on.

The findings of this study can influence how water managers, government agencies, farmers, and other stakeholders approach water use and management for higher revenues and sustainability. Ecologists can gain insights into future streamflows and their potential impacts on aquatic ecosystems. Additionally, it will provide the scientific community with a solid foundation and valuable catalyst for future research. In the long run, these findings can help shape water policy, advancing the goal of achieving integrated regional water management.

M. Raffae

The fate of the Colorado River Basin does not only depend on the climate and its variability, but also on the policies we create that define how we store, move, use, and manage our water. To come up with policies that help us sustain the economy, environment, and society, it is imperative that we conduct a comprehensive hydrological modeling study for the post-development scenario that shows us both our best- and worst-case scenarios for the future to better prepare for it. This study is an ambitious attempt to do so.

About the author: M. Raffae is a Ph.D. student in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Colorado State University (CSU) funded by the Fulbright Foreign Student scholarship program. He is also a fellow in the NSF Research Traineeship (NRT) Program InTERFEWS at CSU.

At last, juice from Taylor Park Dam: It took awhile to make this happen but it immediately is cheaper energy for Gunnison County Electric Assocation — Allen Best (@BigPivots)

Taylor Park Dam. Photo credit: Allen Best/Big Pivots

Click the link to read the article on the Big Pivots website (Allen Best):

September 25, 2024

When work was completed on Colorado’s Taylor Park Dam in 1937, at least some thought existed that it would eventually be modified to produce electricity.

In 2024, it is finally happening. The first commercial power production has or will very soon happen in the first days of autumn.

The new 500-kilowatt hydroelectric turbine and generator installed in the dam will operate at or near full capacity 24/7/365. It is projected to produce an average 3.8 million kilowatt-hours annually. That compares to a  2.5-megawatt fixed-til solar array.

The electricity will get used by Gunnison County Electric Association. Mike McBride, the manager, says the electricity delivered will immediately save the cooperative money compared to the power delivered by Tri-State Generation and Transmission.

Under its contract with Tri-State, Gunnison County Electric can generate up to 5% of its own power. This hydroelectric facility will get it to 3%. The association is working to gain the other 2% from local solar array developments, one near Crested Butte and the other near Gunnison.

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

The Taylor River originates on the west side of Cottonwood Pass in the Sawatch Range. The road across the pass connects Buena Vista and Crested Butte and Gunnison. After being impounded by the dam that creates Taylor Park Reservoir, the river descends to meet the East River, which originates near Crested Butte. Together they become the Gunnison River.

Grand opening of the Gunnison Tunnel in Colorado 1909. Photo credit USBR.

The 206-foot-high earthen dam is owned by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation but operated by the Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association, which delivers water to the Montrose and Delta area via [the Gunnison Tunnel].

In 2020, that water association joined with the Gunnison County Electric Association to form a legal entity to finance the $3.6 million project.

George Sibley, a historian of all things water in the Gunnison Basin (and beyond), said the dam was originally intended for storing water for July through September.

In the 1970s that changed in a collaboration of the Bureau, the Uncompahgre water district, and Upper Gunnison Regional Water Conservation District. That collaboration allowed them to store water from Taylor in Blue Mesa Reservoir. This allowed water to be released continuously through the year.

“That year-round flow potential made it more possible to think of the Taylor Dam as a possible year-round power source,” he says.

But the coal-burning units at Craig were delivering plenty of cheap power. Only in the last couple of decades have the electrical cooperative started getting pressure from some members and “other cultural entities” to reduce emissions associated with their electricity, he says.

A study was commissioned in 2009 and wrapped up in March 2010. Beyond were more complications — but now success.

A new era of power: Taylor River #Hydropower Plant ready to electrify the #GunnisonRiver Valley — The #CrestedButte News

Taylor Dam. By WaterArchives.org – CO-A-0034, WaterArchives.org, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=36300145

Click the link to read the article on The Crested Butte News website (Kendra Walker). Here’s an excerpt:

September 18, 2024

Local electric cooperative Gunnison County Electric Association (GCEA) has a new way of generating energy for the Gunnison Valley with the recent completion of its Taylor River Hydropower construction project. GCEA and the Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association (UVWUA) commemorated the completion of the plant’s construction phase last week with a ribbon cutting ceremony, and plan to begin commercial power production around September 20.  The $3.6 million project located at the Taylor Park Dam is a partnership between GCEA and the UVWUA. The new 500-kilowatt (kW) hydroelectric turbine and generator at the site will operate at or near full capacity 24 hours a day, year round, to produce an average of 3.8 million kilowatt-hours (kWh) annually. That amount of generation compares to some 2,500 kW (2.5 megawatt) fixed tilt-solar arrays and, according to GCEA strategy execution specialist Matt Feier, will provide clean electricity to approximately 500 local homes and businesses in Gunnison County…Construction on the project began in May 2023, but the hydroelectric vision has been in the works far longer…

GCEA provides the electric infrastructure and UVWUA manages the water flowing through the dam. The plant connects to the existing dam penstock and GCEA’s single-phase distribution line.  Feier explained the process: “The new facility draws approximately 65 cubic feet per second of water out of the eastern penstock within the existing valve house. This water is piped to our Frances turbine within the newly constructed metal building at the base of the dam. The turbine spins, which in turn spins the generator and generates an electric current. This energy flows into GCEA’s existing distribution system and down to GCEA’s Alkali substation (located near Jack’s Cabin Cutoff) where it is distributed within GCEA’s service territory. After turning the turbine, the water flows back into the same spilling basin as the Taylor Dam’s main outflow,” he said. “This hydro generator will be a ‘run of the river’ facility and will not affect river flows within the Taylor River.” Feier said the Taylor River Hydro project is a welcome addition to GCEA’s current clean energy portfolio, and it will bump up GCEA’s local renewable energy generation. “This new hydroelectric facility will get us to approximately 3% local generation and we are working to gain the other 2%+ from local solar array developments,” he said. 

The Taylor River, jewel of the Gunnison River basin. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism

Mt. Emmons land exchange finalized — @AlamosaCitizen

Northern slope aspects below Mt. Emmons summit Credit: US Forest Service

Click the link to read the article on the Alamosa Citizen website:

September 13, 2024

The U.S. Forest Service has finalized a land exchange with Mt. Emmons Mining Company located in Gunnison and Saguache counties.

Under the agreement, finalized on Aug. 29, the Forest Service exchanged 539 acres of federal land located adjacent to the Keystone Mine for 625 acres of land owned by Mt. Emmons Mining Company located within the Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forests and Rio Grande National Forest. 

Iron Fen. Photo credit from report “A Preliminary Evaluation of Seasonal Water Levels Necessary to Sustain Mount Emmons Fen: Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forests,” David J. Cooper, Ph.D, December 2003.

The land exchange allows the Forest Service to improve wildlife habitat and recreation opportunities by reducing private inholdings and creating more contiguous public land. The parcels acquired by the Forest Service include riparian and wet meadow habitats, which are vital to various bird and aquatic species.

Additional benefits of the land exchange include an established Conservation Easement and Mineral Extinguishment Agreement, prohibiting mining and allowing for non-motorized recreation in the future. It allows Mt. Emmons Mining Company to address mining remediation efforts, including water quality and facilitated the transfer of ownership and administration of the Kebler Winter Trailhead to Gunnison County.

“We are pleased to see this momentous exchange finalized,” said Dayle Funka, Gunnison district ranger. “This project was truly a collaborative effort with local non-profits, private landowners and local and federal governments working to benefit future generations. We encountered obstacles throughout the process but found ways to move forward in the spirit of collaboration. As a result of many people’s dedication and perseverance, this land exchange will enhance public access and enable future non-motorized recreational opportunities. I commend the Mt. Emmons Mining Company for their commitment to mining remediation efforts and water quality, while honoring the values of the community.”

Read the final agreement: FINAL_Mt-Emmons_LEX-MPR_02-02-2024_Signed.NS.06.28.2024

For more information on the project, visit the Mt. Emmons Land Exchange project website https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=61798 or view the Mt. Emmons Land Exchange story map online where you can examine the parcels and read a brief, informative description of this intricate and valuable lands project.

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

Romancing the River: The Headwaters Challenge — George Sibley (SibleysRivers.com) #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Click the link to read the article on the Sibley’s Rivers website (George Sibley):

August 29, 2024

An Apology: Our service that sends these posts hs malfunctioned; this one sat in limbo for the past two weeks. I hope we have things back to where we can again get it to you every 3-4 weeks.  – George

In the last post here, with the Colorado River’s Upper and Lower Basins in stalemate over how to distribute the suffering after the 2026 expiration of the Interim Guidelines, I suggested we use the time to do what we’ve all been saying we need to do, but find it hard to do: ‘think outside the box.’ The ‘box’ in this case being the Colorado River Compact. We can go back to Monday-morning-quarterbacking the rivermeisters as they try to figure out how to drag the Compact, its misbegotten two-basin division and its Marley’s-chain Law of the River into the 21st century. But for the moment – let’s just indulge in imagining river scenarios that might actually reflect Colorado River realities in the 21st century.

​In the last post (click if you need a review) I sketched out the nature of the ‘desert river,’ which is what the Colorado River is. Rivers flowing through deserts only exist at all because of mountains or other highlands that force air moving through (as in ‘prevailing westerlies’) to rise, cool, and condense whatever water vapor it is carrying into precipitation, rain or snow, that falls on the mountains and eventually flows downhill because that’s what liquid water does, eventually coalescing into a river. In this case, it flows out into deserts which by definition are arid regions with a paucity of precipitation and a powerful propensity for turning liquid water back into vapor. Once the desert river is in its desert, it begins to disappear because it gets so little recharge from precipitation beyond its mountain origins, and gives up its water to riparian life, to evaporation, to groundwater.  We can say with some accuracy that it is the nature of a desert river to gradually disappear into its deserts – as liquid water, anyway.

​The Colorado River is a true desert river; the mountains and highland plateaus surrounding the natural basin produce 85-90 percent of the river’s total water supply, according to the Western Water Assessment study of the ‘state of the river science.’ Now it almost entirely disappears in the deserts of the Southwest – the high ‘cold deserts’ of the Colorado Plateau and Southern Rockies piedmont, and the subtropical Sonora and Mojave Deserts below the plateau canyons. This is mostly due to human uses now; we remember with nostalgia that the Colorado River flowed naturally into the Gulf of California, but that was mostly during its snowmelt flood season; by late fall and through the winter there were probably many years when it did not make it through the delta jungle to the Gulf at all.

​The Compact experience should make us all leery of dividing a river into basins. But the way a desert river works suggests a natural division into two parts – as opposed to a two-basin political division, using state boundaries that have no relevance to down-on-the-ground geography. The natural division is a water-production region, in the highlands where the majority of the precipitation falls and the river forms its tributaries; and a water-consumption region, in the deserts where that produced water gradually disappears – especially now that humans are spreading it much farther than nature ever intended.

Colorado River “Beginnings”. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism

​Today, we’ll go to the headwaters, to explore the river’s ‘water-production’ region. The major water-production region for the Colorado River lies almost entirely above the 8,000-foot elevation, mostly on the west slopes of the Southern Rockies in Colorado and Wyoming, but also water from the Wind Rivers in Wyoming, and the east slopes of the Wasatch Range in Utah, and the high plateaus and mountains of eastern Arizona and western New Mexico that give Arizona the Gila River.

​The Western Water Assessment graphic below basically shows the water-production region for the Colorado River (whose natural basin is the black line). ‘April 1 SWE’ is the ‘snow water equivalent on April 1,’ the amount of water in the snowpack that constitutes the majority of the river’s water. Late March to early April is generally presumed to be the time of the highest snowpack in the mountains and other highlands surrounding the upper reaches of the River, so a map of the ‘April 1 SWE’ is a passable map of the river’s water-production area. The blue areas (inside the black line) are less than 15 percent of the 245,000 square-mile River Basin, and as you can see, it is not a contiguous area – just the places that rise high enough to make the moving air give up to the highlands its moisture as rain or snow. Water management decisions throughout the Basin begin to be made on the basis of the April 1 SWE. (The gray lines, by the way, are watershed boundaries for different tributaries and divisions of the river, not the waterways themselves.)

​You’ll note that the adjacent averaged annual ‘Runoff’ map indicates that considerably less water flows out of the water-production region than the ‘April 1 SWE’ map shows. Scientists have found that the amount of water that actually makes it into the Colorado River is only a fraction of the water that falls in the river’s water-production region. The Western Water Assessment’s study of the ‘State of the Science’ on Colorado River climate and hydrology claims that on average around 170 million acre-feetof water falls on the Colorado River Basin annually, with the largest portion of that falling on the highlands of the water-production area – yet the river carries on average less than a tenth of that precipitation. What happens to the rest of it?

​The short answer there is, the sun is what happens to it: the sun gives, and the sun takes away. The sun distills pure water vapor from the oceans, and the winds (also created by the sun) carry that vapor over the land areas, where begins the ‘dance’ I described in the last post, as water vapor gets pushed up against mountain slopes and condensed to precipitation which falls on the mountains as rain or snow – where the sun and winds quickly go to work on trying to transform it back to vapor.

This begins even in the depths of winter, in sub-freezing weather: the sun beating down on a ‘solid’ snowpack releases enough heat energy to turn the snow crystals directly to water vapor, without going through the liquid state – a process called sublimation. Sublimation happens when a snowpack is directly exposed to the sun; it also happens when the wind blows the snow around breaking down the ice crystals; and it happens when coniferous tree branches intercept and hold the falling snow or rain, which is vaporized off the branches by the sun. On a day of brilliant sun, fairly common in the water-production region, you can actually see ‘steam’ – water vapor – rising where snow sits on an exposed darker surface – rocks or branches. And all of this in temperatures below freezing.

The East River Valley, northwest of the historic town of Gothic, home to the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory. The mountain with the pointed peak in the distance is Mount Crested Butte. Photo credit: Mark Stone/University of Washington

​A major study of the water-production area is underway in the Upper East River valley near Crested Butte, as part of a U.S. Energy Department ‘bedrock to upper atmosphere’ study of water and energy; it includes what is probably the most intensive study of sublimation ever assembled. The science team is mainly working on sun and wind sublimation in open areas; early results suggest that around 10 percent of a winter snowpack disappears through that form of sublimation. Losses from branch interception might be as large as that or larger. Guesstimates over the years suggest that as much as a third of the precipitation that falls might disappear through sublimation of ‘solid’ snow to water vapor through the course of a winter.

The snowpack is only ‘safe’ from sublimation where it gets some protection from the sun and wind. Snow that makes it down to the ground in forested areas – not intercepted by branches – is sheltered somewhat from the sun and wind. ‘Aspect’ (location on the mountain) is also important: snow on the north and east slopes of mountains may never see the direct sun all winter, although it will feel the wind.

​Eventually winter turns to not-winter, and the accumulated snowpack begins to melt as the air generally warms (with sublimation also ratcheting up with heat). One of three things will happen to the resulting ‘snow water.’ Where slopes are steep or rocky or both, a lot of the water melting out will become runoff – water running off under the affluence of gravity: trickles run together and find their way into the stream flowing out of the watershed, streams meeting other streams in ever larger watersheds until rivers flow out of the mountains into the water-consumption region where they are quickly put to work by farmers and ranchers.

​Back up to the melting edge, however – if it can, the water melting out of snow will not run off but will sink into the ground, the preferred alternative for the ‘life project’ on the planet (but not always for the human users). How much water runs off, and how much sinks in, depends on how fast the snow melts and how steep or rocky the slope.

The water that sinks in – groundwater – passes first into a soil area laced and spaced by the roots of all the plant life living on the surface, from little tundra miniatures to great trees. This is variously called the ‘vadose zone,’ the interflow, or most plainly, the unsaturated zone. The roots in the unsaturated zone will take up a lot of that water for their plants to use: some of it will go into the plant’s structure and systems, but most of it – as much as 95 percent of it – will be transpired by the plant: emitted into the atmosphere as water vapor, a kind of air-conditioning system that increases with higher temperatures.

​For big old spruces in the subalpine forest, transpiration might be around 80 gallons a day on average (more on a warmer day); for lodgepole pine, maybe 40 gallons a day. That might not sound like lot, a mere 0.0002 of an acre-foot. But next time in the mountains, look at a forested slope across a valley, and try to estimate the number of trees there to the nearest thousand….  

​In addition, any time the flowing or standing water is exposed to the sun, the sun takes a cut through straight evaporation. Evaporation also increases with temperature. One of the East River project researchers, Dr. Rosemary Carroll, claims in a research paper that, in a typically dense montane forest, the total evapotranspiration (evaporation plus transpiration) can add up to equal the precipitation that fell on the forest.

So it becomes clear that the water produced in its mountains for the Colorado River is a ‘net’ figure – precipitation minus natural depletion from a) a winter of sublimation every day the sun shines, b) evaporation of water melted from snow when exposed to the sun, and c) transpiration by the forests of the water making its way underground.

​But we have to then add back in the groundwater that makes its way down through the unsaturated zone to a saturated zone below most of the thirsty roots. The top of the saturated zone is called the water table, which rises and falls with the amount of water saoking into the ground. Water in both the unsaturated and saturated zones filters its way downslope pulled by gravity and pushed by more water coming in above.

​Eventually it will makes its way to the bottom of the watershed where the stream flows; there, if the water table is higher than the stream level, the groundwater will feed into the stream. Scientists have figured out how to tell from a sample of stream water how much of it is runoff, and how much has come through the groundwater route; over a good water year with healthy water tables, the ratio of groundwater to runoff will be about 50-50, with runoff being greater during the spring flood season and groundwater dominating the fall and winter flows.

​Carroll notes in the same paper that the journey of groundwater to the stream might be very leisurely; while some of it might make its way through the cobble found in many mountain valleys in a matter of days, water that sinks into cracks and interstices in more solid rock might not show up in the stream for a century – or never, unless someone drills into the rock and installs a pump.  

​In the final tally, about one-fifth of the precipitation that falls in the high headwaters emerges as water for the river. Another portion of it is in ‘longterm storage’ as groundwater in aquifers. But the rest, probably more than half of it, has gone back to the vaporous state of water. The sun giveth, and the sun taketh away.

​The ‘Headwaters Challenge’ ought to be obvious. We can’t do a lot about what happens up in the alpine tundra – but are there management strategies for the forests we could employ that might cut down on the amount of water we lose to the sun there, increasing the net water production even a little to compensate for what we are losing to the warming climate? That’s the romantic exploration I’m on these days, reading a lot of scientific papers I only partially understand. I may or may not be ready to say anything about this in the next post – but I wanted to get the challenge in front of those who read this, to ask if any of you have any ideas….

Meanwhile – the apparent preference of the sun for water in the vaporous state should probably make us a little nervous. Obviously, the warmer it gets, the more water gets sublimated, evaporated and transpired – and we seem to be doing all we can to make the world warmer. Not a good survival strategy for species dependent on liquid water, even though we are convinced we cannot survive without the things whose byproducts make the world warmer…. That’s a bigger challenge facing us all.

Map credit: AGU

Aspinall Unit operations update August 26, 2024: Bumping down to 400 cfs in Black Canyon

A double rainbow arches over the Painted Wall in Black Canyon at Gunnison National Park. Photo Credit: Dave Showalter

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be decreased from 1500 cfs to 1450 cfs in the afternoon of Monday, August 26th.  Releases are being decreased as flows on the lower Gunnison River are well above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs.

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. River flows are expected to remain above the baseflow target for the foreseeable future.

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, is 1050 cfs for August through December.

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 450 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will still be 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will be around 400 cfs. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review.

Aspinall Unit operations update August 21, 2024: Bumping down to 450 cfs through Black Canyon #GunnisonRiver

Gunnison River Basin. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be decreased from 1550 cfs to 1500 cfs on Wednesday, August 21st.  Releases are being decreased as flows on the lower Gunnison River are well above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. Another reduction in the release at Crystal is expected to occur next week if river levels remain above the target.

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. River flows are expected to remain above the baseflow target for the foreseeable future.

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, is 1050 cfs for August through December.

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 500 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will still be 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will be around 450 cfs. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review.

This scheduled release change is subject to changes in river flows and weather conditions. For questions or concerns regarding these operations contact:

Erik Knight at (970) 248-0629, e-mail eknight@usbr.gov

Aspinall Unit Operations update August 20, 2024: 500 cfs through Black Canyon #GunnisonRiver

Black Canyon July 2020. Photo credit: Cari Bischoff

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be decreased from 1650 cfs to 1550 cfs on Tuesday, August 20th.  Releases are being decreased as flows on the lower Gunnison River are well above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. Further reductions in the release at Crystal may occur soon if river levels remain well above the target.

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. River flows are expected to remain above the baseflow target for the foreseeable future.

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, is 1050 cfs for August through December.

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 600 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will still be 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will be around 500 cfs. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review.

This scheduled release change is subject to changes in river flows and weather conditions. For questions or concerns regarding these operations contact:

Erik Knight at (970) 248-0629, e-mail eknight@usbr.gov

Aspinall Unit Coordination Meeting August 15, 2024

Colorado River in Grand Junction. Photo credit: Allen Best

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

The next coordination meeting for the operation of the Aspinall Unit is scheduled for Thursday, August 15th 2024, at 1:00 pm. 

This meeting will be held at the Western Colorado Area Office in Grand Junction, CO. There will also be an option for virtual attendance via Microsoft Teams. A link to the Teams meeting is below. 

The meeting agenda will include a review of the spring runoff conditions and the forecasting , a summary of reservoir conditions and river flows since April including the spring peak operation, the weather outlook, and planned operations for the remainder of the year. 

Handouts of the presentations will be emailed prior to the meeting.

Aspinall Unit operations update: Streamflow in Black Canyon will be around 600 cfs, August 31, 2024 #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Sunrise Black Canyon via Bob Berwyn

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be decreased from 2100 cfs to 1650 cfs by Thursday, August 1st. Releases are being decreased as the baseflow target for the lower Gunnison River will change to 1050 cfs on August 1st.

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently above the baseflow target of 1500 cfs. River flows are expected to remain above the new baseflow target with this release reduction.

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, is 1050 cfs for August through December.

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 1050 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will still be 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will be around 600 cfs. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review.

The #ColoradoRiver: Strategies from lower and upper basin states to reduce water consumption — The Deseret News #COriver #aridification

“New plot using the nClimGrid data, which is a better source than PRISM for long-term trends. Of course, the combined reservoir contents increase from last year, but the increase is less than 2011 and looks puny compared to the ‘hole’ in the reservoirs. The blue Loess lines subtly change. Last year those lines ended pointing downwards. This year they end flat-ish. 2023 temps were still above the 20th century average, although close. Another interesting aspect is that the 20C Mean and 21C Mean lines on the individual plots really don’t change much. Finally, the 2023 Natural Flows are almost exactly equal to 2019. (17.678 maf vs 17.672 maf). For all the hoopla about how this was record-setting year, the fact is that this year was significantly less than 2011 (20.159 maf) and no different than 2019” — Brad Udall

Click the link to read the article on The Deseret News website (Emma Pitts). Here’s an excerpt:

July 9, 2024

In 2022, Lake Powell was at its lowest since it was originally filled in the 1960s. [Amy] Haas noted an ongoing concern that there is currently no mechanism to ensure the conserved water from the upper basin states is flowing down to Lake Powell and staying there.

The relationship between the upper and lower basin states is not always pleasant, but [Gene] Shawcroft noted that recently, agreements and understandings have been made between the entities…In their post-2026 operations proposal, the lower basin states said they would cut water use by 1.5 million acre-feet per year as long as Lake Powell and Lake Mead’s combined storage remains at a certain level. Shawcroft added that the question now is, at what point, do these cuts in water use begin?

“The upper division states feel very strongly that we need to improve our storage (and) that we need additional storage. And so our concept would be that we would have that one-and-a-half reduction occur at an elevation that was higher than what they would propose. Their position, or their thought process is, if there’s water in the system, we ought to put it to use,” he said.

Haas added, “The lower basin is proposing actions based on total system contents as they define it, which includes not only Lake Powell and Lake Mead but also the upstream initial units, right? So this would be Flaming Gorge, the Aspinall unit in Colorado and Navajo.”

Map credit: AGU

Aspinall Unit operations update July 12, 2024: Bumping releases to 2200 cfs

A double rainbow arches over the Painted Wall in Black Canyon at Gunnison National Park. Photo Credit: Dave Showalter

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be increased from 1900 cfs to 2200 cfs by Friday, July 12th.  Releases are being increased in response to declining river flows on the lower Gunnison River.

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently below the baseflow target of 1500 cfs. River flows are expected to remain low into next week.

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, is 1500 cfs for July and then drops to 1050 cfs in August.

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 950 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will still be 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will be nearing 1200 cfs. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review.

Aspinall Unit operations update July 10, 2024

Morrow Point Dam, on the Gunnison River, Aspinall Unit. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be increased from 1600 cfs to 1900 cfs between Wednesday, July 10th and Thursday, July 11th.  Releases are being increased in response to declining river flows on the lower Gunnison River.

Flows in the lower Gunnison River have been dropping quickly towards the baseflow target of 1500 cfs. River flows are expected to continue to decline over the next couple weeks.

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, is 1500 cfs for July and then drops to 1050 cfs in August.

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 600 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will still be 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will be near 900 cfs. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review.

The next Aspinall Unit Operations meeting is August 15, 2024

Blue Mesa Reservoir. MichaelKirsh / CC BY-SA (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

July 8, 2024

The next Aspinall Operations meeting is officially scheduled for Thursday, August 15th. We have moved from the August 22nd date due to the conflict with Water Congress. Start time will be the usual 1:00pm

The meeting will be held at the Western Colorado Area Office in Grand Junction. Due to the ongoing repairs of the US50 bridge over Blue Mesa Reservoir we have decided not to hold the meeting at the desired location of the Elk Creek Visitor Center at Blue Mesa Reservoir.

Upper #GunnisonRiver Water Conservancy District Board of Directors Annual Meeting Monday, June 24, 2024

North Fork of the Gunnison River. Photo credit: Colorado Water Trust

From email from the UGRWCD.org (Sue Uerling):

The Board of Directors of the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District (UGRWCD) will conduct its annual meeting on Monday, June 24, 2024 at 4:00 PM at the UGRWCD Offices, 210 W. Spencer Ave., Suite A, Gunnison, CO 81230 and via Zoom video/teleconferencing.

If you plan to attend the meeting via Zoom video/teleconferencing, please register in advance using the following link:https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZctcuyorz0qGtTnj7rxdZrgP7xApaG6eISi

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.

A meeting agenda will be posted at the District Office prior to the meeting.

(P.S. Following the annual meeting, the UGRWCD will host a 65th Anniversary Celebration.  We invite you to join us.)

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

Aspinall Unit Operations update June 11, 2024 #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Aspinall Unit dams

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Aspinall Unit operations forecast May 17, 2024 — Reclamation #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Aspinall Unit spring operations update

Aspinall Unit dams

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

#GunnisonRiver Basin ends winter season at about average #snowpack: Almost half the basin is dry or in moderate #drought — The #CrestedButte News

Click the link to read the article on The Crested Butte News website (Katherine Nettles). Here’s an excerpt:

April 17, 2024

As winter transitions to spring in the high country, the Upper Gunnison Basin might be heading into a warm and dry spell and holds at about average for the year on snowpack. A three-month forecast is predicting spring might be (mostly) here to stay, with warmer and drier weather to come. Spring runoff may be kicking into high gear in the next few weeks as the layers of dust within the snowpack from two recent wind events could lead to a faster melt off period as well…According to Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District (UGRWCD) senior program manager Beverly Richards, soil saturation and weather could make a difference for spring runoff season.

“The soil moisture at this time is a little dryer than this time last year so the combination may have an effect on runoff amounts and timing,” she said.

Drought conditions around the basin range from absent to moderate. As of April 2, 53% of Gunnison County was experiencing no drought conditions, and 47% of the county was experiencing abnormally dry to moderate drought conditions. In the 129-year record, this winter (January to February) was the 56th wettest year and February was the 64th driest, Richards said…

As of April 8, precipitation has ranged from 50% to 150% of normal in the county over the past 30 days, and a small portion in the southeastern corner of the county measured up to 200% of normal during the same period.

According to the National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) the Upper Gunnison Basin snow water equivalent (SWE) as of April 7 has been measured as 116% of normal overall.  Specific locations measured as follows: 125% of normal at the Upper Taylor River location; 122% of normal at the Butte location; 107% of normal at Schofield; 126% of normal at Park Cone; 127% of normal at Porphyry Creek; and 92% of normal at Slumgullion. 

Aspinall Unit dams

Blue Mesa Reservoir is projected to fill to about 85% this spring. Reservoir storage for the entire Gunnison Basin is at 63% of average, and 65% for the Upper Gunnison Basin. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) has projected that Blue Mesa will fill to 85% in 2024. The National Park Service reported that Elk Creek boat ramp at Blue Mesa opened on April 11, and the reservoir was at 7,485 feet elevation as of April 10. This is about 34 feet (10 meters) below full pool at 7,519 feet (2291 meters). The BOR has reported that among reservoirs in the Upper Colorado River Basin, the Flaming Gorge is 86% full; Fontenelle is 33% full; Morrow Point is 94% full, Blue Mesa is 66% full, Navajo is 65% full, Lake Powell is 33% full and total storage across the basin is at 63%.

Colorado River Basin Plumbing. Credit: Lester Doré/Mary Moran via Dustin Mulvaney and Twitter

Aspinall Unit Coordination Meeting April 18, 2024 #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Aspinall Unit dams

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

The next coordination meeting for the operation of the Aspinall Unit is scheduled for Thursday, April 18th 2024, at 1:00 pm. 

This meeting will be held at the Western Colorado Area Office in Grand Junction, CO. There will also be an option for virtual attendance via Microsoft Teams. A link to the Teams meeting is below.

The meeting agenda will include a review of operations and hydrology since January, current soil and snowpack conditions, a discussion of hydrologic runoff forecasts, the weather outlook, and planned operations for this water year. 

Handouts of the presentations will be emailed prior to the meeting.

Tales on the Smith Fork: A story about process-based riparian #restoration as taught by beaver — #Colorado Farm & Food Alliance @COFarmFood

Beaver dam analog on the Smith Fork of the Gunnison River. Screenshot from Tales on the Smith Fork — Colorado Farm & Food

Tales on th Smith Fork tells the story of a project to rehabilitate a riparian area along a stream at a ranch in western Colorado using low-tech process-based restoration and the installation of beaver dam analogs. Produced by the Colorado Farm & Food Alliance and filmmaker David Jacobson, this film was made possible with a grant from the LOR Foundation: “We work with people in rural places to improve quality of life.” Thank you Rancho Largo, David and the LOR Foundation for making this work possible.

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

Aspinall Unit operations update: 550 cfs through the Gunnison Tunnel

Grand opening of the Gunnison Tunnel in Colorado 1909. Photo credit USBR.

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Gunnison Tunnel diversions will be increasing by 150 cfs on Monday, March 25. This will increase the total diversion from 400 cfs to 550 cfs. For this change in diversion, releases from the Aspinall Unit will remain constant at 1150 cfs. This will result in a drop in river flows of about 150 cfs downstream of the Tunnel

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. River flows are expected to remain above the baseflow target after this increase in Tunnel diversions.

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, will be 1050 cfs for March through May.

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 400 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 670 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will be 550 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will be near 520 cfs. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review.

This scheduled release change is subject to changes in river flows and weather conditions. For questions or concerns regarding these operations contact:

Erik Knight at (970) 248-0629, e-mail eknight@usbr.gov

Coming April 5 – 6, 2024 in #Paonia, #Colorado The Rivershed: A Weekend of Awareness & Action to Promote a Resilient Watershed — Colorado Farm & Food Alliance

Click here to RSVP

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District forms collective to cover expensive snow survey flights — The Gunnison Country Times #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Gunnison River in Colorado. Source: Bureau of Reclamation via the Water Education Foundation

Click the link to read the article on the Gunnison Country Times website (Bella Biondi). Here’s an excerpt:

March 13, 2024

Although the Upper Gunnison has proven the value of ASO flights, the agency — as well as many other water districts in Colorado — cannot pay for the costly technology alone. This year, the district created an Upper Gunnison Basin ASO funding partnership, a growing collective of local agencies that will divide the cost of running flights. 

Link to the Colorado Airborne Snow Measurement Program website

“For the Western Slope, it’s incredibly important to be able to predict annual hydrology so that we can live within our means on the river,” said District General Manager Sonja Chavez. 

The annual cost of conducting snow surveys for the East and the Taylor River watersheds exceeds $300,000. These basins, which encompass roughly 570 square miles, are prioritized because they typically hold the most snow and generate the largest amount of water in the spring…After a $50,000 investment from the water district, the Gunnison County Electric Association, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the Upper Colorado River Commission and the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) helped cover the rest. Chavez said she plans to expand the partnership next winter.

A Price for the Priceless: How do we value #Colorado’s water? — Fresh Water News

A headgate on an irrigation ditch on Maroon Creek, a tributary of the Roaring Fork River. Photo credit: Aspen Journalism/Brent Gardner-Smith

Click the link to read the article on the Water Education Colorado website (Nelson Harvey):

You might call it the great economic riddle of our time: It sustains human life, lubricates the entire economy and has no known substitute, yet a month’s supply can be delivered to your home for less than the cost of cable TV or cell phone service. It belongs to the public but the right to use it is bought and sold, and changing that use requires a pricey court approval process. It supports kayakers and anglers, trout and sparrows, and all the ecosystems in between, yet those benefits are rarely reflected in its cost. It is cheap, and yet it is priceless. What is it?

If you’re reading [Headwaters] magazine, you already know that the answer is water, and you already know that water is invaluable. What you may not know is that water’s price, according to many economists, comes nowhere near to reflecting its true value, and that blunt economic fact has consequences for the long-term sustainability of both our water resources and our water systems.

Aligning water’s price with its value is much harder than it seems. That’s because water is traded and regulated in ways that reflect its unique and irreplaceable role in our economy. Depending on who you ask, water is a private commodity or a public good, an economic input or a human right.

These varying roles affect the accuracy of water prices, and the freedom—or lack thereof—of water markets. Some examples: In Colorado, many water utilities are prevented by their charters from charging more than they need to cover their costs. This keeps water rates affordable but also prevents providers from charging customers for the current market value of their water, also called the “scarcity value,” to encourage conservation. Legal restrictions on water transfers—in place to protect other water users—make those transfers complicated and expensive, slowing the flow of water from farms to cities and helping to preserve the gap between agricultural and municipal water prices. At the same time, many non-market costs of water transfers or appropriations—“externalities” like the open space, wildlife habitat and fishing grounds lost when farmers sell their water rights to a city or a new water right is appropriated, further depleting a stream—are not typically paid for by the buyer or the seller.

Ignoring the full cost of water—and the non-market values that water provides—saves money in the short term by keeping water rates low. In the long run, however, it could prove both financially and culturally expensive. Over time, wasteful use may hasten the need for costly new water projects, and public benefits like wildlife habitat and open space are less likely to be preserved if they aren’t factored into the price of water transfers. Given the stakes, how can we value water more accurately, while preserving the legal framework that protects water users and the environment?

Supply and demand, within limits

When utilities, ditch companies and irrigation districts buy water rights to serve their populations, the price of those rights is determined in part by the basic interplay of supply—what the water costs to deliver—and demand—what it’s worth to buyers. Brett Bovee, intermountain regional director for the consulting firm WestWater Research of Fort Collins, helps clients value water rights for purchase or sale. He considers factors like a water right’s source, location, current use, historical buyers and sellers, ease of storage, and seniority, since older rights are more dependably fulfilled than those appropriated more recently.

Bovee might compare a water right to a handful of others with similar characteristics to arrive at a reasonable price, or, if the water is agricultural, he might use a technique called the income approach, calculating the yields that a farmer could get irrigating with the water compared to dryland farming yields. (A slight variation is comparing the sale price of dry farm ground to that of irrigated land nearby, then using the difference to infer a water right’s value). A final technique, the replacement cost approach, involves calculating the cost of the next-most expensive water supply option and then advising clients to pay just less than that.

“Usually the replacement cost sets the ceiling, the income approach sets the floor, and the market price is somewhere between those two,” Bovee says. “The willing seller must make more off a water transaction than he would in farming, and the willing buyer is only going to buy water if it is cheaper than alternative sources.”

Brett Bovee. Photo credit: Westwater Research

Yet the economic playing field is not completely level where water is concerned, as evidenced by the vast and enduring price differences between agricultural and municipal water. As University of Arizona law professor Robert Glennon and his co-authors point out in the 2014 paper “Shopping for Water: How the Market Can Mitigate Water Shortages in the American West,” agricultural users in many parts of the West may pay just a few cents for a thousand gallons of water, while urban users pay $1 to $3 for the same amount. That’s partly because, in a strictly financial sense, urban users can earn more money with the water they consume: If you ignore the vital non-market values of agriculture like open space, wildlife habitat and food security, urban activities like manufacturing frequently generate more money per acre-foot of water than farming does. Used to grow lettuce in Yuma, Arizona, Glennon writes, an acre-foot of water might generate $6,000. Used to make microchips in California’s Silicon Valley, it would generate $13 million.

The price disparity between agricultural and municipal water is further explained by higher treatment and conveyance costs for urban water, from the chemicals that disinfect drinking water to the pumps that keep it pressurized and ready to flow from the tap. “If farmers needed really clean, pressurized water at their farm headgate on demand, the price between agricultural and municipal water may not be all that different,” Bovee says.

Grand River Ditch July 2016. Photo credit Greg Hobbs.

Agricultural water users who inherit their land also benefit from the investments their ancestors made in ditch and reservoir systems originally constructed to put the water to beneficial use. Today, they pay only the water assessments necessary to maintain or improve these systems or to make the occasional legal filings. When they sell their shares in their infrastructure or water rights, they earn the appreciated value of both, which can be substantial in areas like Colorado’s Front Range where a booming residential real estate market has kept water demand high.

First water through the Adams Tunnel. Photo credit Northern Water.

Finally, federally funded irrigation projects provided a subsidy to early agricultural water users: Many of the West’s large water diversions were paid for with federal dollars between the 1930s and the 1970s. Although those federal outlays were partly recouped through a combination of cost sharing from local governments and revenues from projects’ hydroelectric features, the federal government never required full reimbursement from water users. Examples include the Colorado-Big Thompson Project, authorized by Congress during the Great Depression to provide a supplementary source of water to farmers and cities in northern Colorado, as well as earlier Western Slope projects like the Uncompahgre Project and the Grand Valley Project. “Recipients of irrigation water from federal projects will have repaid, on average, about U.S. $0.10 on each dollar of construction cost,” writes University of California, Berkeley economist W.M. Hanemann In his 2005 paper “The Economic Conception of Water.” Today, federal funds are largely unavailable to help finance water supply infrastructure.

Although they remain much higher than agricultural water prices, municipal water rates are hardly exempt from market manipulation, and for good reasons. Because water is widely considered a basic necessity for human life and economic activity, many Colorado utilities are public entities whose rates are regulated by local governments or appointed boards, and even the rates of private, investor-owned utilities are limited by the Colorado Public Utility Commission.  Many municipal utilities set their rates through “cost-of-service” pricing, which doesn’t account for the value of water itself but factors in only what it costs to run the utility—energy, water treatment chemicals, office staff—plus maintain financial reserves, make debt service payments, and repair aging pipes, tanks, reservoirs and other infrastructure. A growing number of utilities also employ “increasing block rate” pricing to keep everyday water use affordable while penalizing higher water users to encourage conservation. Yet their rates include little or no charge for water’s replacement cost or “scarcity value:” what it would cost to obtain their water on the open market today, or what they could earn by selling their water and using the proceeds to pay off debt or meet other obligations.

“For a farmer to keep a tractor, they have to be earning more by keeping it than they could make by selling it,” says Chris Goemans, an associate professor of economics at Colorado State University (CSU) who specializes in water issues. “For water rights portfolios, there is no charge to households to reflect the fact that the water could go somewhere else and earn more money for the utility.”

Failing to account for this opportunity cost encourages customers to use their water for purposes worth less to them than the cost of bringing that water to the tap, whether that’s watering the lawn or filling the swimming pool. That’s highly inefficient from an economist’s point of view. “You don’t want people using water that costs $10 per gallon to produce on applications for which they place a value of a dollar or two,” says Chuck Howe, a professor emeritus of economics at the University of Colorado, Boulder. “If the price to the consumer doesn’t cover all the costs of production, then individual customers will apply water to uses that are, at the margin, worth less than the costs imposed on society.”

Boulder’s Avery Brewing Company is one among 230-plus Colorado craft and micro breweries that have combined water with barley, hops and other specialty ingredients to establish a nationally recognized market for beer enthusiasts. Photo courtesy of Avery Brewing Company

Artificially cheap water saves customers money today, but in the long run will prove expensive as utilities are forced to meet growing demands by acquiring expensive new water rights or building new infrastructure. In a 2013 analysis, city staff in Westminster, Colorado, calculated that water rates would be 135 percent higher and water tap fees 99 percent higher if per-capita water demand in the city had not fallen by 21 percent since 1980. That declining consumption—driven by a combination of utility-sponsored conservation programs, conservation-oriented increasing block rate water pricing and stricter national plumbing codes—saved the city over $5.9 million on water and wastewater treatment, new water rights, and loan interest payments, which would have been passed along to residents in the form of higher rates and tap fees. Even though water rates have risen in Westminster since 1980, in part to compensate for declines in per-capita consumption, they have risen much less than they would have if per-capita consumption had stayed flat as the population grew.

Howe believes that charging customers for the scarcity value of their water could have a similarly virtuous effect on consumption—and thus on water rates—over the long haul. In an unpublished paper co-written with water attorney Peter Nichols of the Boulder firm Berg Hill Greenleaf Ruscitti LLP, Howe argues that utilities could encourage conservation by charging customers more for each 1,000 gallons of water they use, then refunding any resulting profits by reducing the fixed monthly service charges that appear on monthly water bills. By increasing the price of each 1,000 gallons of water by just $1.50, Howe and Nichols surmise, the City of Boulder could earn $20 million per year, a sum equivalent to 5 percent of its $400 million water rights portfolio. This would encourage conservation without harming ratepayers’ overall bottom lines, since higher volumetric usage fees would be offset by reductions in fixed service charges.

Love thy neighbor: Legal restrictions on water transfers

Despite the limits on what municipal utilities can charge, the gap between urban and agricultural water prices persists. That’s partly because significant legal barriers discourage those who get their water cheaply—farmers—from selling it to the cities who will pay dearly for it. Those barriers serve noble goals: Because water, unlike other commodities like land or electricity, is often used several times in succession within the same river basin, many users depend on the reliable timing and amount of return flows from their neighbors upstream. To protect those flows, legal restrictions, such as the “no harm to juniors” rule, prevent anyone who moves their water or changes its use from impacting other water users. Colorado water courts employ several other principles in regulating water trades: The beneficial use requirement is intended to discourage waste and requires water to be put to beneficial uses approved by the legislature or the courts or else abandoned, and the anti-speculation doctrine mandates that anyone changing their water use show precisely its new use, location and amount, to prevent speculators from buying water and simply holding it, unused, until prices rise.

Water courts also limit the salable portion of a water right to its “historical consumptive use,” the average amount actually absorbed by crops, retained by people and lawns, or used up by industrial processes over the water right’s history. This prevents farmers from harming other water users by selling water they no longer have to divert as a result of improving their irrigation efficiency, provided they leave irrigated acreage and consumptive use unchanged. Before the efficiency improvements, the unused portion of the water diverted and applied had served other users in the form of return flows, so Colorado law protects those historical return flows for appropriation by other users after efficiency improvements are made.

On July 7, 2020, we closed our headgate that takes water from the Little Cimarron for irrigation. The water in the above photo will now bypass our headgate and return to the river. Photo via the Colorado Water Trust.

Taken together, these restrictions discourage water from simply flowing to the highest bidder. They make the process of transferring water rights time consuming and expensive, since detailed engineering studies and costly legal filings are necessary to prevent other water users from being injured without compensation. And yet, examples abound of Colorado water law flexing to accommodate changing state priorities. The nonprofit Colorado Water Trust and the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB)—the only entity in the state that can hold an instream flow water right—are now seeking water court approval for the state’s first permanent “split-season” water right on the Little Cimarron River in Gunnison County. The right, acquired by the Colorado Water Trust, will permit the same water to be used for agricultural irrigation in the early summer and then for instream flows that benefit fish in the fall. Another example: Under a state law passed in 2013, farmers and municipal water providers can now enter into so-called “interruptible supply agreements” three out of every 10 years without the approval of a water court. In this arrangement, farmers fallow some of their land or reduce irrigation and then, with the blessing of the State Engineer, convey the freed-up water to cities in exchange for short-term lease payments. One such arrangement, the Arkansas Valley Super Ditch, is partway through a three-year pilot project that began in spring 2015 when irrigators on the Catlin Canal east of Pueblo leased 500 acre-feet of water to the cities of Fowler, Fountain and Security.

“It went so smoothly the first year that I don’t think we want to mess it up by changing anything,” says John Schweizer, president of the Lower Arkansas Valley Super Ditch Company and the Catlin Canal Company. Because agricultural commodity prices were low in 2015, Schweizer says, the farmers who participated earned at least twice as much fallowing land and leasing water as they would have growing corn, wheat or alfalfa on the same acreage. And they still kept at least 70 percent of their water rights in agricultural production, as required by law. Even though there are two years left in the pilot project, Schweizer says, “The City of Fountain is already talking about coming back and negotiating a longer term lease, which could mean bringing more farmers into the program.”

Ideally, these alternative transfer methods (ATMs) could give cities reliable sources of water in dry years without requiring the “buy and dry” of agricultural lands. Yet short-term leases are a relatively new concept, and because urban water providers must plan for a reliable, long-term supply they often prefer to purchase agricultural water outright. Some urban utilities then lease the water back to farmers until they need it, giving them flexibility in deciding when to begin the sometimes long and arduous process of filing for a change of use in water court.

“If you are a water [utility] manager, when you provide a water tap to a developer you are promising them water. Short-term leases are just not reliable enough right now to fulfill that promise,” says Goemans, at least not for a city’s entire water supply.

Still, reducing regulatory barriers to water leasing is likely to make it more common over time. In the South Platte River Basin, where the Colorado-Big Thompson (C-BT) Project diverts water from the upper Colorado River, owners of contracts for C-BT water are only required to obtain the blessing of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District board, rather than a water court, before selling or leasing their water interests, and a robust leasing market has materialized there.

According to a 2016 WestWater Research report, leases have accounted for about 80 percent of all water trades in the South Platte Basin in recent years, and most transactions have involved farmers leasing their water to cities. The value of this streamlined process is also reflected in the sale price of C-BT units—unlike a lease, a sale gives a buyer rights to the unit in perpetuity. In 2015, C-BT units changed hands 67 times and fetched an average sale price of $36,300 per acre-foot—by the second quarter of 2016 the price was above $40,000. Meanwhile area ditch shares, whose transfer requires water court approval, were traded just 23 times for an average price of $13,800 per acre-foot.

From “The Stages of Cannabis Growth“. Photo credit: Clean Leaf Air Filtration Systems
Pricing the priceless: The non-market value of water

The market for C-BT units is a compelling example of what freer water trading might look like, yet several factors make it unlikely that such a market could be replicated across Colorado. Under a 1938 contract between Northern Water and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, all contracts for C-BT water must be exercised within the boundaries of Northern Water’s service area. Units of C-BT water can only be used once before being allowed to flow down the lower South Platte River between Greeley and the Nebraska border, for the benefit of irrigators there. And yet, irrigators on the lower river have no legal right to claim injury if the lease or sale of C-BT units affects the return flows they rely on, since the prior appropriation doctrine—including the no-harm-to-juniors rule—applies only to native flows within a river basin, not to transbasin diversion water. This minimizes objections when C-BT units are leased or sold.

Colorado-Big Thompson Project Map via Northern Water

Leaving aside these complicated machinations, there is a simpler reason why most of Colorado’s water sales and leases are still regulated by water courts: Legal safeguards like the no-harm-to-juniors rule play an important role in limiting harm to third parties or the environment when water is moved. They also highlight water’s role as both a private good and a public resource with important environmental and cultural values.

Economists have devised a suite of techniques to translate those “non-market” values into financial terms so that they can be factored into cost-benefit analyses of water projects. Perhaps the most prominent technique is “contingent valuation,” where economists survey water users to gauge their financial willingness to pay for environmental benefits or willingness to accept environmental harms.

Big Wood Falls photo via American Whitewater (2011)

People value water’s role in the environment for a wide variety of reasons: “Use value” reflects the benefit of using a waterway for kayaking, rafting or swimming; “existence value” measures the well-being gained from simply knowing that a river exists; and “bequest value” shows the worth of knowing that an environmental good will be preserved and passed down to future generations. There is also “intrinsic value”—the notion that other water-dependent species should be allowed to exist regardless of their value to humans.

Because some of these values have an emotional component, it can be tough to give them the same weight as purely financial considerations, and many cost-benefit analyses reflect this problem. In 2011, for instance, the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment was considering additional limits on releases of phosphorous and nitrogen from wastewater treatment plants to comply with enforcement of the federal Clean Water Act by the Environmental Protection Agency. A state-commissioned study by the consulting firm CDM Smith weighed the costs of those new regulations—new equipment and more intensive wastewater treatment and monitoring—against benefits like reduced spending on drinking water treatment, better-tasting and better-looking drinking water, improved ecological function in rivers and streams, and increased recreation. The study found that the regulations would yield just $0.79 worth of benefits for every $1.00 spent to implement them. Yet it relied on rough estimates—derived from previous economic studies—of the financial value that people place on environmental benefits. And it did not weigh qualitative benefits like existence and bequest value, despite the fact that these values often account for half of people’s willingness to pay for environmental benefits, according to CSU environmental economics professor John Loomis.

Colorado transmountain diversions via the State Engineer’s office

Those same omissions have characterized, and potentially marred, other studies. A 2009 study by the Front Range Water Council, a group of Front Range water providers that has advocated for new transbasin diversions from Colorado’s Western Slope, found that the Front Range withdraws 19.4 percent of the state’s water but generates 80 to 86 percent of the state’s economic activity, while western Colorado withdraws 41 percent of the state’s water but comprises just 10 percent of the state’s economy. By that logic, the Front Range produces about $132,268 in economic output per acre-foot of water used, compared to just $7,200 per acre-foot on the Western Slope. Yet those figures fail to account for the economic costs that diverting water to the Front Range imposes on the Western Slope, along with the financial benefits of things like tourism and recreation, which rely on keeping western Colorado water in the stream. The Northwest Colorado Council of Governments (NWCCOG), a coalition of Western Slope municipal governments whose members generally oppose new transbasin diversions, attempted to address these omissions with its own 2012 study: Water and its Relationship to the Economies of the Headwaters Counties.

“We have struggled to convey how important having water in the river is to the economy in the headwaters region, especially in the summer,” says Torie Jarvis, co-director of the Water Quality and Quantity Committee at NWCCOG. “That study was meant to point out that there were values that studies like the Front Range Water Council’s were not accounting for.”

Fraser River at gage below Winter Park ski area. Photo credit: Colorado Water Trust

Some of these values, and the economic implications of protecting them, are relatively easy to quantify: The town of Winter Park, for instance, is forced to treat its wastewater to a higher standard because 65 percent of the Fraser River that once flowed through town is diverted to the Front Range, making wastewater more difficult to dilute. “We have seen an impact on the cost of wastewater treatment year-round due to the lack of dilution flows,” says Bruce Hutchins, manager of the Grand County Water and Sanitation District 1. Faced with ongoing transbasin diversions, Winter Park town leaders have also opted to curtail the town’s development to keep at least 10 cubic feet per second of water in the Fraser River at all times. That has clear economic consequences: At buildout, the town could accommodate about 9,300 single-family housing units if officials were willing to dry up the river to provide them with water. Instead, the town has capped the number of water taps it will dispense to allow for just 8,300 single-family units in order to maintain river flows.

Colorado fly fishing, whitewater and other water-related recreational pursuits contribute significantly to Colorado’s $34.5 billion recreational economy. Photo courtesy of the Winter Park Convention and Visitors Bureau

“It’s a bit backwards from the way that other communities have done it,” says Winter Park community development director James Shockey. “We’ve put the river first, and then looked at how much we can develop from there.”

Other values compromised by transbasin diversions, like the potential effect of changes in water use on tourism, require non-market valuation in order to be expressed financially. In a March 2003 study, CSU economists Adam Orens and Andrew Seidl surveyed winter tourists in the towns of Gunnison and Crested Butte to see how changes in the area’s open space ranch landscape would affect their decision to vacation there. More than half of those surveyed said they would reconsider vacationing in the area if just 25 percent of the existing ranchland were converted to second homes or other uses. If all of the ranchland were converted, the researchers concluded that tourism in the area could drop by as much as 40 percent.

Contingent valuation surveys have also shed light on the value of water left in rivers for recreation, wildlife habitat and scenic views, which sometimes exceeds the economic benefit of diverting that same water to farms or cities. In a 2008 study, CSU Economist John Loomis surveyed a random sampling of Fort Collins residents and found that they were willing to pay an average of $352 per year to keep peak spring and summer flows in the Cache La Poudre River rather than letting agricultural and municipal users deplete them. “It appears the value of these instream flows to Fort Collins residents is of the same magnitude as the market value of the water in alternative uses,” like irrigation and municipal use, Loomis concluded. In Colorado today, there are two legal  mechanisms that Fort Collins residents could use to keep that water in the stream, and both involve the prior appropriation system. In theory, they could convince local or state government to acquire a water right on the Poudre from a willing farmer or utility, then convert it to an instream flow right (held by the CWCB) or a recreational in-channel diversion right (held by a local government) to keep its recreational and wildlife benefits intact. Such benefits are protected in some states by the public trust doctrine, a legal concept which holds that certain resources should be held in trust by the government for public benefit. Yet that concept holds no legal sway in Colorado.

“We are not a public trust doctrine state,” says retired Colorado Supreme Court Justice Greg Hobbs. “We are a prior appropriation state with a market. The Constitution provides that the water is owned by the public and is dedicated to the use of the people of the state subject to appropriation. Therefore, the public values protected by the constitution consist of the beneficial uses made by water rights owners.”

The graphic shows the existing dam and water level and how high the new dam will rise above the current water level. Image credit: Denver Water.
Wading through no man’s land: Accounting for social costs

There are some good examples of water users paying for the public and private costs of their diversions. Under a 2012 pact called the Colorado River Cooperative Agreement between Denver Water and 17 Western Slope entities, the Front Range utility won support for its efforts to enlarge Gross Reservoir north of Boulder in exchange for helping to fund dozens of river improvements on the Western Slope. Among them: channel maintenance and habitat improvements on the Fraser River, a catchment basin that reduces sediment in the Fraser and cuts water treatment costs for Winter Park, and a whitewater park in the Colorado River at the mouth of Gore Canyon near Kremmling.

Yet some observers argue that there should be a more formalized way to charge for the public costs of diverting water. Aside from mitigation requirements imposed on water projects by state and federal environmental laws, the existing legal mechanisms for protecting public values—instream flow rights and recreational in-channel diversion (RICD) rights—were introduced into Colorado water law relatively recently. (The legislature authorized the first instream flows in 1973 and RICDs in 2001.) That means that many instream flow rights have junior priorities and cannot be exercised when more senior rights are diverting, which can render them ineffective during dry parts of the year. As an added way to safeguard water-related public goods, the CSU economist Chris Goemans floats the idea of a public fund—perhaps financed by a tax on the buy and dry of agricultural lands—dedicated to preserving water-related public goods like open space and wildlife habitat.

“There are social values of water use that are not factored into the transaction when a farmer sells their water to a city,” says Bovee. “A farmer cannot charge a developer twice as much simply because his water is irrigating nice open land that will dry up once the water is gone. The developer will not pay extra to compensate for the loss of that public good.”

In extreme cases, in the absence of state intervention, the social costs of water diversions can undercut the economy of an entire region. A well-known example of this is southeastern Colorado’s Crowley County, where droves of farmers sold their water rights to the growing cities of Aurora, Colorado Springs and Pueblo between the 1960s and the 1980s, then took the profits, packed up and moved away. Because few of the proceeds from those water sales were reinvested in the community and the region lacked an alternative economy to fall back on, widespread unemployment ensued that persists to this day.

Photo of Crowley County by Jennifer Goodland

“If you looked at this transaction from a statewide perspective, it was a net benefit,” Bovee points out. “The revenue from moving that water to the Denver Metro area was greater than the lost income from farming in the county. But there was a spatial problem—Crowley County did not have a second and third economy to rely upon, so it was economically devastating, and there was huge poverty and social fallout. Open markets see nothing wrong with that transaction. But the state has to look out for the health of its rural populations and mitigate the downside in some way.”

Atmospheric rivers boosting #snowpack (February 7, 2024) — The #GrandJunction Daily Sentinel

Click the link to read the article on The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel website (Dennis Webb). Here’s an excerpt:

February 7, 2024

A second atmospheric river of moisture in a matter of days is further bolstering Colorado snowpack levels that have continued to lag a bit behind normal…An initial atmospheric river storm system that wound down over the weekend dumped as much as three feet of snow in parts of the mountains, with the Colorado Avalanche Information Center saying the Ruby and Ragged ranges west of Crested Butte and south of Marble were particularly hard-hit. The Mesa Lakes area on Grand Mesa got about 15 inches of snow in that storm and Park Reservoir saw about a foot of snow fall, while another measuring site on Grand Mesa got only about 4 inches, said Dennis Phillips, a meteorologist for the National Weather Service in Grand Junction. The second atmospheric river that arrived this week is expected to be a stronger system, he said…

The federal Natural Resources Conservation Service on Tuesday said that statewide snowpack in Colorado stood at 93% of normal for Feb. 6. It has seen little growth since the middle of last month or so, after increasingly sharply from below 70% of normal at the start of January.

Snowpack in the Colorado headwaters basin on Tuesday stood at 96% of normal for Feb. 6. The Yampa-White-Little Snake basins were at 95% of normal, as was the Gunnison River Basin, and the Arkansas River Basin was at 91%.

Southwest Colorado is drier, with the combined San Miguel-Dolores-Animas-San Juan basins at 84% of normal and Upper Rio Grande River Basin at 80%. On Grand Mesa, snowpack levels at NRCS sites Tuesday ranged from 93% at Mesa Lakes to 74% at Overland Reservoir. Mountain snowpack is relied upon to bolster streamflows, reservoirs and agricultural and municipal supplies when that snow melts and runs off.

Colorado Drought Monitor map February 6, 2024.

Most of Southwest Colorado is in varying levels of drought, with moderate drought stretching into western and southern Mesa County, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor.

Aspinall Unit Forecast for Operations January 30, 2024 #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Click the link to view the forecast graphics.

Conservation of the North Rim area — Pete Kolbenschlag (Colorado Farm and Food Alliance) #GunnisonRiver #DoloresRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Stateline run of Dolores River around the turn of the last century. Photo credit: Pete Kolbenschlag

From email from Pete Kolbenschlag (Colorado Farm & Food Alliance):

The North Rim of the Black Canyon, in the National Park, which is accessed from Fruitland Mesa near Crawford – a remote region of ranches at the base of the West Elk Mountains – showcases an especially dramatic feature. Even among many spectacular places in western Colorado it impresses, marking where the Southern Rockies transition into the mesas, deserts and canyons of the Colorado Plateau. This cherished national treasure is also a local North Fork favorite, found on the way to Blue Mesa and the city of Gunnison.

The Colorado Farm & Food Alliance is supportive of public lands conservation, for protecting the stunning landscapes near our home-base. Set into this amazing landscape are small towns like Crawford, Paonia and Hotchkiss, and scattered between and on the mesas all around are the farms, ranches, wineries and businesses that work hard to make it here. 

As we consider how we can adapt rural communities to be resilient and prosperous in a changing climate and dynamic future, we think that land conservation and watershed health are two of the most important, and effective, strategies we can pursue. That is one reason, as we look even further west, across the Uncompahgre Plateau, into the heart of Colorado’s red rock canyon country along the Dolores River, we see opportunity. 

Far less visited than Moab and Monticello, Utah which lie just on the other side of the La Sal Mountains and Paradox Basin, the looming Wingate cliffs along this tributary to the Colorado River, which it joins at Dewey Bridge just over the stateline, contain an unique, fascinating, often hardscrabble history.

Back in the North Fork Valley, the Black Canyon National Park is not the only nearby designated national park service or conservation area. Just downstream is the Gunnison Gorge National Conservation Area. And above it is the Curecanti National Recreation Area which includes not only Blue Mesa reservoir, Colorado’s largest water body, but seldom visited upper reaches of the Black Canyon itself, with sweeping vistas of the San Juan Mountains and the Uncompahgre Plateau. Protected public lands are critical components of the economy in this region.  

So lately as talk has percolated up from people who love the red rock Dolores River country, about securing protections to conserve what is unique and important about it, we pay attention. Sen. Bennet has long championed a bill to establish a national conservation area for part of the Dolores Canyon region. And more recently, a growing coalition of businesses, conservation groups and local elected officials are calling on President Biden to designate a national monument for a part of the region as well. 

We think this could be a great opportunity to ensure what is unique there remains intact and that local businesses benefit from growing visitation to the region. Given the rich history in the West End of Montrose County, like the Hanging Flume and the town of Uravan – a critical player in the Atomic Age – it’s no wonder community leaders are wanting to protect the area. 

Towns like Naturita and Nucla, with their markets and cafes, can serve as hubs that support local farms and residents, as they always have, and play host to visitors and activities, provide guides and services, and be the jumping off and provisioning point for the more adventuresome. 

For places as rooted in tradition as are the rural communities of western Colorado, public land conservation and protecting the health of our lands and watersheds is a solid strategy to preserve what we care about most. And to welcome new opportunities. This is the strongest connection we see with our friends on the West End: protected public lands protect a rural way of life – and can help us better prepare for and better prosper in the future. 

As 2024 opens to new possibilities, we cannot think of a better conversation than how to secure a locally-rooted, sustainable, and prosperous future for the Dolores Canyon Country and the rural, western communities of our local and nearby watersheds. As President Biden looks for legacy projects to leave with future generations, now is the time for Colorado’s leaders like Senators Hickenlooper and Bennet, and Governor Polis to speak up and urge the president to act. 

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550
Dolores River watershed

The next coordination meeting for the operation of the Aspinall Unit is scheduled for Thursday, January 18th 2024, at 1:00 pm — Reclamation #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Black Canyon July 2020. Photo credit: Cari Bischoff

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

The next coordination meeting for the operation of the Aspinall Unit is scheduled for Thursday, January 18th 2024, at 1:00 pm.

This meeting will be held at the Holiday Inn Express in Montrose, CO. There will also be an option for virtual attendance via Microsoft Teams. A link to the Teams meeting will be emailed next week along with the meeting handouts.

The meeting agenda will include a review of operations and hydrology since August, current soil and snowpack conditions, a discussion of hydrologic forecasts, the weather outlook, and planned operations for this water year. There will also be a presentation by American Whitewater on the development of the Environmental & Recreational Flow Tool.

Aspinall Unit dams

Aspinall Unit operations update December 20, 2023 #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Colorado Drought Monitor map December 12, 2023.

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be decreased from 650 cfs to 575 cfs on Wednesday, December 20th.  Releases are being decreased in response to drier than average conditions in the Gunnison Basin. 

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. River flows are expected to remain above the baseflow target for the foreseeable future. 

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, will be 1050 cfs for December. 

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 0 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 620 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will still be 0 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will be near 550 cfs. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review.

#ColoradoRiver District funds helped in tapping federal money for water projects — The #GrandJunction Daily Sentinel #COriver #aridification

Click the link to read the article on the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel website (Dennis Webb). Here’s an excerpt:

Four recently announced federal Bipartisan Infrastructure Law grants for water projects in the region all included one notable common denominator — they all got help in their application process through a special Colorado River District program made possible by a voter-approved tax measure in 2020…According to a news release from the Colorado River District, based in Glenwood Springs, four of the projects are in the district’s boundaries, and all four made use of the district’s Accelerator Grant program, which was established last year to help West Slope water users in navigating the time-consuming and often-expensive requirements for applying for the considerable funding available under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The assistance includes helping pay for feasibility analysis, design, preliminary environmental review and engineering costs. Altogether, through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Bureau of Reclamation is investing a total of $8.3 billion over five years for water infrastructure projects…

Photo courtesy Wright Water Engineers via the Middle Colorado Watershed Council

■ $746,423 to the Middle Colorado Watershed Council, which in partnership with Garfield County plans to install a fish barrier to prevent non-native fish migration, and upgrade a diversion structure, on Roan Creek outside De Beque.

Uncompahgre River Valley looking south

■ Nearly $1.2 million to American Rivers, which, working with partners, plans to upgrade irrigation infrastructure and enhance aquatic and riparian habitats along a mile of the Uncompahgre River;

August, in the Elk Creek valley. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism

■ About $3 million to Trout Unlimited and the Middle Colorado River Agriculture Collaborative to upgrade, relocate or combine six diversion structures in order to remove instream barriers to fish passage along five miles of Elk Creek in the New Castle area.

Photo credit: Jonathan Thompson

■ Nearly $1.6 million to the Western Slope Conservation Center, which, in partnership with the North Fork Farmer’s Ditch Association, will modernize the Farmers Ditch diversion and headgate structures downstream of Paonia Reservoir to improve upstream fish passage, increase diversion efficiency and improve safety for boaters.

Biden-Harris Administration Announces $51 Million from Investing in America Agenda for Water Resources and Ecosystem Health — Department of Interior

Click the link to read the release on the Department of Interior website:

President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law investing in environmental projects to increase water availability

11/15/2023 WASHINGTON — The Department of the Interior today announced $51 million from President Biden’s Investing in America agenda for 30 new Environmental Water Resource Projects in 11 states through the Bureau of Reclamation. The collaborative projects focus on water conservation, water management and restoration efforts that will result in significant benefits to ecosystem or watershed health.

“Adequate, resilient and safe water supplies are fundamental to the health, economy and security of every community in our nation,” said Secretary Deb Haaland. “The Interior Department is focused on ensuring that funding through President Biden’s Investing in America agenda is going to collaborative projects throughout the West that will benefit the American people.”

As part of the Biden-Harris administration’s commemoration of the two-year anniversary of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water and Science Michael Brain announced the selections during a visit to Grand Junction, Colorado, where eight of the selected projects are located.

“These locally led initiatives utilize the investments from President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to demonstrate quantifiable and sustained water savings, all while providing a direct benefit to the surrounding ecosystems,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Michael Brain. “These types of projects and robust cooperation with stakeholders are helping to improve watershed health and increase water reliability and access for families, farmers, and Tribes.”

President Biden’s Investing in America agenda represents the largest investment in climate resilience in the nation’s history and is providing much-needed resources to enhance Western communities’ resilience to drought and climate change. Through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Reclamation is investing a total of $8.3 billion over five years for water infrastructure projects, including rural water, water storage, conservation and conveyance, nature-based solutions, dam safety, water purification and reuse, and desalination. Over the first two years of its implementation, Reclamation selected 372 projects to receive almost $2.8 billion.

The WaterSMART program also advances the Justice40 Initiative, part of the Biden-Harris administration’s historic commitment to environmental justice, which aims to ensure 40 percent of the overall benefits of certain climate, clean energy and other federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities that have been marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution.

Arizona

Altar Valley Conservation Alliance, Surface Water Conservation for Drought and Climate Resilience in the Altar Valley Watershed

Reclamation Funding: $1,213,809         

The Altar Valley Conservation Alliance, in partnership with the Pima County Regional Flood Control District, will use a series of nature-based features in the Altar Wash watershed, southwest of Tucson, Arizona, to slow flows, improve groundwater infiltration, and create surface water habitat for wildlife. The Alliance will install low-tech natural infrastructure in dryland streams facilities across 8,985 acres of the wash, which will slow the runoff, reducing erosion and retaining water in the wash for longer periods. The project will enhance drought and climate change resilience, reduce downstream flood impacts and increase the sustainability of agricultural operations.

California

San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, Hidden Valley Creek Aquatic and Riparian Habitat Restoration Project

Reclamation Funding: $3,000,000

San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District will implement the Hidden Valley Creek Aquatic and Riparian Habitat Restoration Project within the Upper Santa Ana River Watershed, a tributary of the Santa Ana River, in southern California. The project will restore and improve the condition of 21.7 acres of degraded aquatic and riparian habitat, including habitat for the threatened Santa Ana Sucker. The district will construct new and restored stream channel, establish a buffer of native riparian vegetation on each side of the stream, and enhance a 1.2 acre floodplain bench. The project will include non-native plant removal and site revegetation efforts. This restoration will improve water quality, increase habitat connectivity, and provide crucial support for recovering endangered and sensitive species.

Uncompahgre River

Colorado

American Rivers, Inc, Uncompahgre River Multi-Benefit Project

Reclamation Funding: $ 1,198,376        

American Rivers, in partnership with the Ward Water Group and local landowners, will upgrade irrigation infrastructure and enhance aquatic and riparian habitats along one mile of the Uncompahgre River in western, Colorado. The current push-up diversion dam structure has caused channel widening, reduction of aquatic habitat diversity, and a decrease in floodplain connectivity. American Rivers will improve the Ward Irrigation Ditch infrastructure by constructing 2 cross-vane weirs, installing a new concrete stoplog bypass at the headgate, and piping 5,600 linear feet of open irrigation ditches. The project will improve aquatic and riparian habitat within the channel by constructing cross-vane weirs, J-hook vanes, rock vanes, and boulder clusters; revegetating the banks and meanders using willow pole clusters and riparian plant species plugs; and removing invasive vegetation.

Rio Grande through the eastern edge of Alamosa July 5, 2022. Photo credit: Chris Lopez/Alamosa Citizen

Colorado Rio Grande Restoration Foundation, Farmers Union Multi-Benefit Diversion Infrastructure Improvement Project

Reclamation Funding: $1,274,625

The Colorado Rio Grande Restoration Foundation, in partnership with the San Luis Valley Irrigation District, will upgrade the diversion infrastructure for the Farmers Union Canal and Rio Grande #1 Ditch, in southwestern Colorado, to meet agricultural, ecological, recreational, and community needs. The current diversion infrastructure creates a barrier to fish passage, is hazardous for boaters, and requires frequent maintenance. The partners will construct a new diversion structure, incorporating fish passage that will allow fish to access an additional 1.42 river miles of habitat. The project also includes restoration of streambank through the installation of rock and root wad structures and streambed and aquatic habitat through improved sediment transport at the diversion structure. The diversion upgrade will provide safe boat passage and more efficiently deliver water to the Farmers Union Canal and Rio Grande #1 Ditch.

Mancos River in Montezuma County

Mancos Conservation District, Riparian Restoration and Infrastructure Improvements to Better the Ecological Processes of the Mancos Watershed

Reclamation Funding: $2,482,686    

The Mancos Conservation District, in partnership with the Town of Mancos, will implement a multi-benefit project consisting of a suite of infrastructure improvements and nature-based solutions along the Mancos River, a tributary of the San Juan River, in southwestern, Colorado. The partners will upgrade three agricultural diversion structures, install remote metering and telemetry equipment on 10 agricultural pipeline headgates, complete fire mitigation work on 650 upland acres and replace invasive riparian plants with native species adjacent to the Mancos River. The project is downstream of Reclamation’s Jackson Gulch Reservoir and will mitigate wildfire risk to the reservoir and water supplies in the Mancos River Watershed. 

Roan Cliffs Aerial via Rocky Mountain Wild

Middle Colorado Watershed Council, Roan Creek Fish Barrier and Diversion Infrastructure Upgrade

Reclamation Funding: $746,423

The Middle Colorado Watershed Council, working in partnership with Garfield County, will install a fish barrier to prevent non-native fish migration, and upgrade a diversion structure on Roan Creek, in western Colorado. The upper portion of Roan Creek, a tributary of the Colorado River, contains a unique native fish assemblage comprised of Colorado River cutthroat trout, bluehead sucker, Paiute sculpin, and speckled dace. Non-native fish in the Roan Creek watershed harm the river system’s ecology by predating on or hybridizing with the unique native species. Construction of a fish barrier will effectively eliminate the upstream movement of non-native fish to improve Roan Creek’s aquatic and riparian habitat and protect the native fish.

Purgatoire Watershed Partnership, Purgatoire River Fish Passage

Reclamation Funding: $2,403,748

The Purgatoire Watershed Partnership will improve fish passage at the Baca-Picketwire diversion dam on the Purgatoire River in downtown Trinidad, Colorado. The Purgatoire River supports a robust assemblage of fish species and is of local and regional interest for conservation. Currently, ecological function is impaired because the existing concrete diversion dam is not passable to fish. This project will restore fish habitat connectivity and enhance recreation opportunities by adding a low-gradient engineered riffle feature that mimics a natural channel. The upgrade will allow fish access to 3.3 miles of main river, wetlands, 20 miles of Raton Creek, and many stream miles within ephemeral drainages, including approximately 4 miles of Moore’s Canyon and 9 miles of Colorado Canyon. The project is also expected to have flood mitigation, sediment transport, and bank stabilization co-benefits.

Los Pinos River

Southern Ute Tribe, Nannice Canal Diversion and Fish Passage Project

Reclamation Funding: $651,920

The Southern Ute Tribe, in partnership with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and The Nature Conservancy, will implement the Nannice Canal Diversion and Fish Passage project on the Southern Ute Indian Reservation in southwestern, Colorado. Part of the BIA-owned and operated Pine River Indian Irrigation project that receives water from Reclamation’s Vallecito Dam, the Nannice Canal Diversion is a low-head dam that sweeps across the Los Pinos River and creates a significant fish barrier. Fish get entrained in the Nannice Canal during low flows and during irrigation season. The Southern Ute Water Resources Division will upgrade the diversion structure and install a fish screen and fish ladder. The project will restore river connectivity, improve fish passage, and eliminate fish entrainment during low flows, while continuing to allow the diversion of Nannice Canal’s decreed water.

August, in the Elk Creek valley. Photo: Brent Gardner-Smith/Aspen Journalism

Trout Unlimited, Inc, Middle Colorado River Agriculture Collaborative: 4 Fish Passage/ Irrigation Diversion Upgrade Projects on Elk Creek-a tributary to the Colorado River

Reclamation Funding: $2,999,595

Trout Unlimited and the Middle Colorado Agriculture Collaborative will upgrade, relocate, or combine six diversion structures to remove instream barriers to fish passage in the Elk Creek west of Glenwood Springs, Colorado. These upgrades will open approximately five miles of aquatic habitat in Elk Creek to fish passage. The project is anticipated to improve stream morphology, increase instream flows, and benefit irrigators by increasing the operational capabilities of the diversions and reducing transmission losses of vital irrigation water.

Agriculture in the U.S. Southwest is at high risk from the impacts of climate change. EcoFlight photo of the North Fork Valley by the Western Slope Conservation Center.

Western Slope Conservation Center, Farmer’s Ditch Improvement Project

Reclamation Funding: $ 1,594,799

The Western Slope Conservation Center, in partnership with North Fork Farmer’s Ditch Association, located in west-central Colorado, will modernize the Farmers ditch diversion and headgate structures to improve upstream fish passage, increase diversion efficiency, and improve safety for boaters. The project will upgrade the existing concrete headgate structure with a long-lasting alternative headgate that is equipped with remote automation technology, enabling more efficient water deliveries to irrigators while maximizing water that remains in the river. In addition, the Center will install graded riffle and small pools and drops to mimic the natural morphology of the river for approximately 200 feet below the diversion to promote upstream fish passage and allow for safe recreational boating.

Hawaii

Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, Protecting Forests for Water Supply Sustainability in Molokai, Hawai’i

Reclamation Funding: $936,892

The state of Hawai’i Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife, will expand protection of native landscapes in the north-eastern portion of Molokai, one of the five Hawaiian Islands. Invasive hooved animals, including feral pigs, deer, and goats, are the main threat to Hawai’i’s original forests, negatively impacting water supply, increasing flood risk and land erosion, and threatening several listed species. The project will reduce populations and associated damage to the forest due to these invasive animals through animal control and installation of fencing to exclude them from 3,340 acres within the Pelekunu Valley. The project will also remove hooved animals from an additional 12,000 acres along the north shore of Molokai in an area with steep terrain that is not possible to fence. The island of Molokai relies on ground water for all fresh water needs and is designated as a groundwater management area by Hawai’i’s Commission of Water Resources Management. The forest provides increased water infiltration into the aquifer and reduces soil erosion and associated water quality issues.

Idaho

City of Pocatello, Rainey Park Stream Restoration and Wetland Creation

Reclamation Funding: $1,635,276

The city of Pocatello, Idaho, will implement a river restoration project on the Portneuf River in downtown Pocatello. The health of the Portneuf River has been severely compromised by flood protection levees and the construction of a concrete channel, which removed hundreds of acres of wetlands when installed. Restoration will be accomplished by moving the river’s existing riprapped levee to an area of city-owned property. A wetland and side channel will be installed adjacent to the levee, along with accessible river access for anglers and floaters. Additionally, a stormwater pond will be installed to capture the first flush of sediment-laden waters from city streets. This project builds on the concepts developed in the 2016 Portneuf River Vision Study and addresses a wide range of environmental goals, including improving hydrologic functions by increasing floodplain, wetland, and riparian habitat areas, and improving water quality.

The Nature Conservancy, Loving Creek Tributaries Restoration and Water Conservation Project

Reclamation Funding: $1,900,217

The Nature Conservancy, in partnership with Idaho Department of Fish and Game and landowners, will complete a suite of nature-based features on four reaches of Loving Creek, located in Blaine County in south central Idaho. The four project locations span the full extent of Loving Creek from its headwaters to the outlet at Silver Creek. Through a combination of in-stream restoration work, sediment removal, and riparian habitat creation, the project will restore 2.75 miles of active stream channel, regenerate riparian and wetland habitat, and remove one fish passage barrier to holistically restore connectivity to 5.72 miles of upstream habitat. The project also will revive upland and agricultural buffer habitat and pipe 1,200 linear feet of open water delivery canal to conserve 9 acre-feet of water, which will remain in Loving Creek as instream flow. Despite improvements in agricultural management and land use practices over the past several decades, water quality and habitat conditions in Silver Creek and its tributaries remain degraded. This project will restore more natural channel morphology, increase habitat complexity, and improve water quality in Loving Creek.

Nez Perce Soil and Water Conservation District, White Road Passage Project

Reclamation Funding: $367,091

The Nez Perce Soil and Water Conservation District will improve anadromous fish habitat for Federally listed Steelhead Trout in the Tom Beall Creek watershed, a tributary to Lapwai Creek, located in northern Idaho. The project will improve watershed health within the boundaries of the Reclamation’s Lewiston Orchard Project. The district will replace an existing culvert with a fish passable structure to support the migration of the Steelhead Trout and additional species including Coho and Chinook Salmon. When completed, the project will provide access to approximately two miles of habitat and reduce area flood risk. The project also will improve water quality to downstream recreational and agricultural water users. The project is supported by the Lapwai Creek Ecological Restoration Strategy developed collaboratively with the Nez Perce Tribe, National Marine Fisheries Service, Idaho Department of Transportation, Nez Perce County, city of Lapwai, city of Culdesac, Lewiston Orchards Irrigation District, a landowner advisory group, and several Idaho state government divisions.

Nez Perce Soil and Water Conservation District, Lower Clearwater Snake Rivers Phase I

Reclamation Funding: $451,889

The Nez Perce Soil and Water Conservation District will undertake the Lower Clearwater Snake Rivers Phase I Project in Culdesac, Nez Perce, and Lewis Counties, in northwest Idaho. The project will improve watershed health within the boundaries of the Reclamation’s Lewiston Orchard Project. The district will enhance anadromous fish habitat for Federally listed Steelhead Trout and improve overall water quality in the Lower Clearwater River Basin. The district will upgrade a culvert for aquatic organism passage, thin approximately 129 acres of forest to mitigate wildfire risk and install over 100 instream wood structures to enhance over 10,000 feet of stream for juvenile steelhead habitat. The project will yield ecological benefits including improved habitat function, optimized flow timing, increased groundwater recharge, and reduced sedimentation.

Trout Unlimited, Inc, Completion of the Alta Harris Creek Boise River Side Channel and Fish Passage Project Along the Boise River

Reclamation Funding: $734,103

Trout Unlimited, together with the city of Boise, Idaho, will improve aquatic ecology in the Boise River by restoring spawning and rearing habitat for salmonid fishes, and providing fish passage connection between the lower Boise River and Barber Pool, downstream of Reclamation’s Arrowrock Dam. The project will enhance 3,800 feet of existing side channel and include construction of 1,600 feet of new side channel, complete riparian revegetation with native plants, and construct of a fish passage facility at Barber Dam. The fishway design will better accommodate fluctuating river flows and variable water surface elevation. Completion of this project will reconnect 2.5 miles of the main-channel Boise River with 5 acres of adjacent riparian habitat and over a mile of side channel for spawning and rearing of juvenile fish. The project also will allow fish to bypass a half mile of the Boise River with a risk for fish entrainment in water delivery canals.

Wood River Land Trust, Warm Springs Preserve Stream Restoration and Irrigation Improvement Project

Reclamation Funding: $1,733,154

Wood River Land Trust, in partnership with the city of Ketchum, Idaho, will enhance and improve the ecological function of the 65 acre Warm Spring Preserve along the Warms Springs Creek in Blaine County, in central Idaho. Warm Springs Creek in the project area has been artificially confined, concentrating flow, and creating incision and floodplain abandonment. There is virtually no floodplain connectivity within the northern half of the project reach. The project will restore 1.3 miles of Warm Springs Creek through instream earthwork to create pools, point bars, and constructed riffles, and installation of woody debris structures to promote in-channel complexity. The project will also create nine acres of adjacent floodplain habitat by lowering the floodplain. The floodplain restoration will be complemented by revegetation with low-water native plant species along the riparian zones and throughout the preserve, which will collectively aid in improvement of water quality and temperature of Warm Springs Creek.

New Mexico

Chama Peak Land Alliance, Increasing Resiliency in the San Juan-Chama Project Headwaters

Reclamation Funding: $3,000,000

The Chama Peak Land Alliance will conduct ecological forest thinning on approximately 2,150 acres to protect source watersheds for Reclamation’s San Juan-Chama Project, the Rio Chama headwaters, and the Rio Brazos headwaters from the impacts of future wildfires. Forests in these headwaters are unnaturally dense and homogenous, putting them at risk of severe wildfires and deterioration of watershed function. These watersheds supply crucial drinking water to the cities of Albuquerque and Santa Fe, and numerous tribes, Pueblos, and rural communities throughout New Mexico. In addition to threatening water supply infrastructure, a severe wildfire could cause water quality impairments, flooding erosion and significant degradation of habitat for fish and wildlife.

Pueblo of Isleta, Restoring Watershed Function and Protecting Sacred Ancestral Sites on the lower Rio Puerco, a tributary of the Rio Grande

Reclamation Funding: $2,487,942

The Pueblo of Isleta will build resilience in the lower Rio Puerco watershed by implementing nature-based watershed restoration techniques to restore natural watershed function on an approximately 30,000 acre parcel of the Comanche Ranch and neighboring lands, in central New Mexico. Forming a part of the Pueblo of Isleta lands, the Comanche Ranch comprises over 90,000 acres of public and private lands and is home to upwards of one hundred sacred ancestral sites, including an important cultural site, the Pottery Mound. The ranch forms an integral part of the Rio Puerco lower watershed, the primary source of sediment to the middle Rio Grande and Reclamation’s Elephant Butte Reservoir. The Pueblo and stakeholders have identified that loss of vegetation and increasingly higher energy monsoonal storms that have resulted in erosion and soil loss throughout the uplands in this region and threaten the cultural sites downstream. The Pueblo will utilize a series of watershed restoration practices that spread and slow runoff flows, increase groundwater infiltration, and reduce erosion, including contour plowing with native seed imprinting, contour stone line and brush weir installation to protect plantings and slow runoff, and riparian restoration and revegetation on a section of the Rio Puerco adjacent to Pottery Mound, including the planting of wild medicinal and traditionally gathered edible plants.

Nevada

Southern Nevada Water Authority, Muddy River Riparian Corridor Improvements at Warm Springs Natural Area

Reclamation Funding: $743,329

The Southern Nevada Water Authority will protect the Warm Springs Natural Area, a 1,250 acre property located in southern Nevada, and downstream habitat from drought impacts. The property is regionally significant as it contains more than 20 perennial springs that form the headwaters of the Muddy River and numerous habitat types. These resources provide habitat for several protected and sensitive species, including the endangered Moapa dace, endangered southwestern willow flycatcher, and threatened yellow-billed cuckoo. The project will widen the riparian corridors along 0.3 miles of the mainstem of the Muddy River and establish mesquite bosques along the corridor, resulting in the creation of 12 acres of new habitat. These actions will increase habitat for listed species, improve hydrologic conditions, lessen wildfire risk, and reduce erosion and sedimentation during flood events. Non-native vegetation will be removed and replaced with native vegetation to restore the area to the natural habitat that existed before the area was converted for agricultural purposes.

Oregon

Crooked River Watershed Council, Lower Crooked River Riparian, Floodplain, and Habitat Restoration Project

Reclamation Funding: $1,400,000         

The Crooked River Watershed Council, working in partnership with the Ochoco Irrigation District, will restore habitat and enhance ecological features on two project sites just downstream from Prineville, Oregon. Hydrology in the Crooked River watershed is impacted by upstream Dams, including Reclamation’s Bowman Dam, leading to loss of floodplain continuity, degraded channel structures, and water quality impairments, impacting native Spring Chinook Salmon and Columbia River Steelhead populations that inhabit the watershed. To address these impairments, the Council will strategically place approximately 130 large wood structures to promote habitat complexity, stabilize eroding streambanks on 3,285 linear feet of stream channel, restore approximately 19 acres of floodplain and upland habitat, improve 0.22 acres of alcove habitat, and create 0.42 acres of wetland.

Deschutes Land Trust, Ochoco Preserve Restoration – Phases 2 and 3

Reclamation Funding: $3,000,000         

The Deschutes Land Trust, with support from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, will restore aquatic, floodplain, and upland habitat across 124 acres on the Ochoco Preserve, located in Crook County, Oregon, adjacent to the city of Prineville. The Crooked River and Ochoco Creek support reintroduced spring Chinook salmon and summer steelhead, as well as a host of other native aquatic species. The waterways frequently experience low flows, elevated summer stream temperatures, and poor water quality. These issues are compounded by a lack of suitable habitats for both fish and terrestrial wildlife, and the impacts to river ecology of Reclamation’s Crooked River Project, including Bowman and Ochoco Dams. The Deschutes Land Trust will lead efforts to create over 2 miles of new main baseflow stream channels, 1.5 miles of side channels, over 11 acres of wetland, and restore 37 acres of floodplain and 75 acres of upland habitat, significantly increasing available habitat for native species.

Texas

Menard County Water Control and Improvement District #1, Pipe a 2.5 mile section of the Menard Canal and dedicate 1,100 acre-feet instream

Reclamation Funding: $1,891,500         

Menard County Control and Improvements District #1, in central Texas, will upgrade the Menard Canal irrigation water conveyance system to reduce losses so that more water is kept in the San Saba River for fish and wildlife benefit. A water loss study conducted by U.S. Geological Survey in the summer of 2014 showed that the 6-mile long canal experiences an approximately 50% loss over the first 2.5 miles. The project involves replacing the first 4,000 feet of the unlined Menard Canal with pipe, and re-sloping, reshaping and partially filling the next mile of unlined canal to create a narrower channel profile. Following that narrowed span of canal, the district will pipe an additional 2,000 feet of the canal and install gates to control flow. The district has committed to leaving the majority of the conserved water, 1,100 acre-feet per year instream for a 30 year term. The additional instream flows will contribute significantly to baseflow of the San Saba River and create a more reliable supply of water for downstream aquatic habitat. Sections of the San Saba River downstream from the project that will benefit from the increased flows include critical habitat for the Texas fatmucket and Texas pimpleback mussel species.

Washington

The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Lower Yakima River: Anadromous Fish Survival

Reclamation Funding: $2,248,677

The Yakama Nation, in partnership with the Benton County Conservation District, will improve conditions for anadromous fish species in the Prosser, Snively, and Confluence reaches of the lower Yakima River, in central Washington. The project will address two key elements of the Yakima Basin Integrated Plan: fish passage and habitat protection and enhancement. The Yakima Nation will complete instream restoration work to expand a cold-water refuge within the Yakima River mainstem at the confluence of Amon Creek, including construction of 1,400 linear feet of cool water channel habitat and restoration of 20 acres of riparian zone through invasive vegetation removal and revegetation with native species. The Yakima Nation will also complete electrofishing and install a fish trap on the Wanawish Dam to remove and prevent reintroduction of invasive predatory fish species that impede the migration of endangered fish species. These improvements will benefit the federally threatened Middle Columbia River steelhead; spring and fall/summer run Chinook, Coho, and Sockeye salmon; and the Yakima population of Pacific lamprey. The project area is downstream of Reclamation’s Yakima Project, which impacts river flows, temperatures, and habitat conditions in this area.

The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Yakima River Mile 89.5 Side Channel and Floodplain Restoration

Reclamation Funding: $600,000

The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation will reconnect approximately 9 miles of side channel along the Yakima River within the Yakama Reservation, in south central Washington. Upstream flow regulations tied to Reclamation’s Yakima Project have constricted historical floodplain processes and cut-off side channel access for native fish species, leading to degradation of riparian and wetland habitat areas. The Yakama Nation will excavate five historic side channel sections connecting to the mainstem of the Yakima River, install two constructed logjam inlet structures to ensure fish access to the mainstem of the river, and install three stream ford crossings to access the project site. The excavation of side channels will increase winter and spring off-channel habitat utilized by Middle Columbia River Steelhead and restore hydrologic connectivity to a total of 135 acres of floodplain and wetland habitat. The project is supported by the Yakima Basin Integrated 10-Year Action Plan developed by water and land management stakeholders.

The County of Chelan, Camas Meadows Streamflow and Ecosystem Restoration Project

Reclamation Funding: $468,903

The Chelan County Natural Resource Department, in coordination with the Washington Department of Natural Resources, will restore wet meadow hydrology in Camas Meadows, a unique meadow ecosystem within the steep canyon drainages of north-central Cascade Mountains in Washington. The 1,300 acre meadow flows into Camas Creek, a tributary of Peshastin Creek, in the Wenatchee Watershed. Due to widespread floodplain disconnection and irrigation withdrawals, the Peshastin sub-basin is among the top three flow-limited sub- basins in the Wenatchee Watershed, with chronic low flows and high stream temperatures limiting recovery of ESA-listed steelhead and spring Chinook that reside throughout Peshastin Creek and in the lower reaches of Camas creek. Historic land use practices have resulted in Camas Meadows being confined into ditch-like channels with incision ranging from 4 feet to 8 feet, causing rapid and early drying of the meadow. This projectwill restore the natural hydrology of the meadow by replacing the meadow outlet culvert, re-grading the channel and meadow elevations, installing channel-spanning habitat log structures, and re-planting with native shrubs and plants. The project will restore floodplain connectivity and wet meadow hydrology for a modeled additional water storage of 180 acre-feet and an anticipated year-round baseflow contribution of 0.2 cfs.

Kittitas Conservation Trust, Gold Creek Restoration Phase 2 RM 2-3 Implementation

Reclamation Funding: $2,475,000

Kittitas Conservation Trust will implement an in-stream restoration project on river mile 2-3 of Gold Creek, in Kittitas County, Washington. Located just east of Snoqualmie Pass in Kittitas County, Washington, Gold Creek is the headwaters of the upper Yakima River and flows for approximately 8 miles from the Alpine Lakes Wilderness into Keechelus Reservoir in the Central Cascade Mountains. Upstream fish passage is blocked at Reclamation’s Keechelus Dam on the downstream end of the reservoir. Prolonged dewatering conditions and a century’s worth of anthropogenic channel widening have dramatically impacted the habitat and health of the creek’s Federally threatened Bull Trout. The Trust will install a total of 28 large woody debris structures along the river mile. The instream wood replenishment will create habitat complexity, including deeper pools with shaded cover, provide relief from high velocity flood flows, and ensure optimal habitat for both the successful rearing of juvenile Bull Trout and migration of mature fish. The project also will provide floodplain reconnection, which will improve groundwater recharge from flood flows, and reduce the likelihood of future flood events further harming the channel morphology.

Kittitas Reclamation District, Kittitas Reclamation District – South Branch Piping

Reclamation Funding: $3,000,000         

The Kittitas Reclamation District, located in central Washington, will restore in-stream flows and provide benefits to fish and wildlife in Mantash Creek, an over-appropriated tributary of the Yakima River. The project will involve the piping of a 2,656 linear feet section of the currently unlined South Branch Canal, which is part of Reclamation’s Yakima Project. Once piped, the district anticipates conserving approximately 385 acre-feet per year currently lost to seepage. The district will designate this otherwise lost water through an allocation, management, and protection agreement, that involves careful monitoring of stream flow on Mantash Creek to maintain optimal conditions for Yakima Basin fish species, including Coho and Chinook Salmon, Mid-Columbia Steelhead, and Bull Trout. The Washington State Department of Ecology is responsible for water protection and enforcement and will ensure that conserved water stays instream.

Wyoming

City of Casper, North Platte River Restoration — Izaak Walton Reach

Reclamation Funding: $3,000,000

The city of Casper, in collaboration with members of the Platte River Revival Committee, will complete a river and riparian restoration project on the Izaak Walton reach of the North Platte River in Natrona County, Wyoming. The North Platte River is a Blue Ribbon trout fishery, but this reach suffers from significant bank erosion, tight riverbend geometry, a lack of riffle-pool complex development, poor bedform complexity, meager floodplain connectivity, and is characterized by a low quality riparian vegetation community. These conditions have resulted in degraded habitat for trout as well as native aquatic and terrestrial species. These characteristics have also contributed to reduced ecological function, adversely affected the regional municipal water supply, degraded aesthetic values, and impaired river recreation. The city of Casper will restore over 5,150 linear feet of the North Platte River that will involve regrading of the riverbed, banks, and floodplain to create appropriate geometry and bedform complexity, reduce riverbank degradation, and improve instream and riparian habitats.

Trout Unlimited, Inc, Sage Creek Watershed Restoration for Drought Resilience and Sediment Control

Reclamation Funding: $1,513,538

Trout Unlimited, working in partnership with Wyoming Game and Fish, will complete a multi-part restoration project, including nature-based features, in the Sage Creek Watershed, located in southwestern Wyoming. The project will involve the installation of 50 beaver dam analogs, 160 aggradation structures, and an aquatic invasive species barrier along a 5.6 mile stretch of Sage Creek. These installations will be complemented by a robust invasive plant removal and native riparian reseeding along 7.6 miles of both the Sage and Trout Creeks. Together, these actions are estimated to restore 453 acres of valley floor habitat and protect 79.5 linear miles of aquatic habitat from invasive trout that inhabit Reclamation’s Flaming Gorge Reservoir just downstream of the project site. The project is additionally expected to reduce channel incision and erosion to reduce sediment and nutrient delivery to Flaming Gorge Reservoir, protect native trout from hybridization, and increase groundwater recharge and surface water availability.

Aspinall Unit operations update: Gunnison Tunnel diversions end for this season #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Official opening of the Gunnison Tunnel by President Taft at the west portal

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be decreased from 850 cfs to 350 cfs on Tuesday, November 14th.  Releases are being decreased in response to the end of irrigation diversions to the Gunnison Tunnel.  The Gunnison Tunnel will be shut down on November 14th. 

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. River flows are expected to remain above the baseflow target for the foreseeable future. 

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, will be 1050 cfs for November and December. 

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 500 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 320 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will be 0 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will still be near 320 cfs. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review. 

Aspinall Unit operations update: Bumping releases down to 800 cfs November 2, 2023 #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Grand opening of the Gunnison Tunnel in Colorado 1909. Photo credit USBR.

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be decreased from 1100 cfs to 800 cfs on Thursday, November 2nd.  Releases are being decreased in response to a decrease in diversions at the Gunnison Tunnel.  Tunnel diversions will be reduced by 300 cfs on November 1st, so there will be a short period of higher flow in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon before the release change at Crystal Dam. 

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. River flows are expected to remain above the baseflow target for the foreseeable future. 

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, will be 1050 cfs for November through December. 

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 800 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 320 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will be 500 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will still be near 320 cfs.  Gunnison Tunnel diversions are expected to stay near 500 cfs for the first 2 weeks of November for late season irrigation of the winter wheat crop. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review. 

Grand Junction looking at #GunnisonRiver to supplement water supply — The #GrandJunction Daily Sentinel

The confluence of the Colorado River and the Gunnison River in Grand Junction. Credit: Screenshot Google Maps

Click the link to read the article on The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel website (Sam Klomhaus). Here’s an excerpt:

The City of Grand Junction is considering taking water from the Gunnison River to augment its current supply from the Kannah Creek watershed, which is estimated to need bolstering in about 15 years.

“The city’s primary water source is the Kannah Creek watershed,” Utilities Director Randi Kim said at an Oct. 16 City Council workshop. “And we are projecting that that watershed will not yield sufficient supply to carry us into the longer term future.”

Kim said the city could need to supplement the Kannah Creek watershed with additional sources around 2039.

“We’re looking at our water rights on the Gunnison River,” Kim said. “To do that, we’re conducting a feasibility study this year to evaluate the conversion of two gravel pits along the Gunnison River to water storage reservoirs, and the associated piping and pumping to bring that water to our water treatment plant to supplement those supplies.”

[…]

The city is proposing $600,000 in its draft 2024 budget for engineering and design work on converting the gravel pits. Kim said city staffers are looking at grants to help fund the project.

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

#Paonia applies for WaterSMART Planning Grant — The Delta County Independent

Paonia. Photo credit: Allen Best

Click the link to read the article on The Delta County Independent website (Frank Witowski). Here’s an excerpt:

“We learned about the WaterSMART grant pretty late,” Bachran said. “It will supplement the cost to finish the hydrogeology study and move into actionable items. That’s what this grant’s going for…

The hydrogeological study is allegedly the driving force and conduit to discovering all that needs to be done with the town’s water system. So far, $25,000 has been allegedly secured through the Water Supply Reserve Fund and the Colorado River District, while the Colorado Water Conservation Board provides $122,983 in funding. According to Bachran, if the town qualifies for the Water SMART strategic planning grant, staff can secure additional funds for the “full comprehensive plan of our water system” from start to finish, financing the hydrogeology study and completing much more needed work. The planning grant process costs $500,113, but the town has matching funds from the above agencies to cover that cost.

Bachran said the planning grant process would help both in-town and out-of-town water companies, ditch companies, farmers and ranchers, and it’s the first step to applying for other federal grants. Bachran asked for letters of support for as many water companies as possible, and she said they would contact them all in the end. An audience participant said she was glad the study would include all the water companies.

Aspinall Unit operations update: Bumping down to 1100 cfs #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Sunrise Black Canyon via Bob Berwyn

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be decreased from 1150 cfs to 1100 cfs on Wednesday, October 18th.  Releases are being decreased in response to declining inflow forecasts for the Aspinall Unit.   

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. River flows are expected to remain above the baseflow target for the foreseeable future. 

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, will be 1050 cfs for October through December. 

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 825 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 400 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will still be 825 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will be near 350 cfs. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review.

Aspinall Unit operations update October 4, 2023 #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

A double rainbow arches over the Painted Wall in Black Canyon at Gunnison National Park. Photo Credit: Dave Showalter

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be decreased from 1400 cfs to 1050 cfs on Wednesday, October 4th.  Releases are being decreased in response to declining inflow forecasts for the Aspinall Unit.   

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. River flows are expected to remain above the baseflow target for the foreseeable future. 

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, will be 1050 cfs for October through December. 

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 700 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 700 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will still be 700 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will be near 350 cfs.  River flows will increase next week as part of a flow request for the trout fishery survey in the Gunnison Gorge. Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review. 

Aspinall unit operations update: Bumping down to 1400 cfs October 2, 2023 #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Grand opening of the Gunnison Tunnel in Colorado 1909. Photo credit USBR.

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be decreased from 1750 cfs to 1400 cfs on Monday, October 2nd.  Releases are being decreased in response to a reduction in diversions at the Gunnison Tunnel.   

Flows in the lower Gunnison River are currently above the baseflow target of 1050 cfs. River flows are expected to remain above the baseflow target for the foreseeable future. 

Pursuant to the Aspinall Unit Operations Record of Decision (ROD), the baseflow target in the lower Gunnison River, as measured at the Whitewater gage, will be 1050 cfs for October through December. 

Currently, Gunnison Tunnel diversions are 1050 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon are around 700 cfs. After this release change Gunnison Tunnel diversions will be 700 cfs and flows in the Gunnison River through the Black Canyon will still be near 700 cfs.  Current flow information is obtained from provisional data that may undergo revision subsequent to review. 

2020 #COleg: #Gunnison ranch to loan #water for the environment — @AspenJournalism #Tomichi #GunnisonRiver

Kathleen Curry, owner of Peterson Ranch in Gunnison County, stands by a fence on her ranch on a breezy summer day. Peterson Ranch has an agreement to temporarily loan its agricultural water to the state’s instream flow program for the benefit of Tomichi Creek. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Click the link to read the article on the Aspen Journalism website (Heather Sackett):

A Gunnison County family ranch plans to use a relatively new tool to help keep water flowing in a chronically dry section of creek while still irrigating their hay crop.

In dry years, the Peterson Ranch will temporarily loan some of the water it diverts from Tomichi Creek to the state’s instream flow program, which is aimed at keeping water in rivers for the benefit of the environment. The agreement was approved by the Colorado Water Conservation Board this year under legislation passed in 2020 designed to make the water loans more attractive to water-rights owners and effective as a conservation tool.

“We don’t like to see the fish suffer, so we thought this was one way to allow us to continue with our operation and do something for the creek,” said ranch owner, former legislator and Colorado River Water Conservation District board member Kathleen Curry. “For us, it was a way to make a contribution.” 

Historically, Curry and her husband, Greg Peterson, have flood irrigated their 220 acres of river bottom ranchland, about 15 miles east of Gunnison, beginning in the spring until the end of July. The end of spring runoff, combined with irrigation season, can cause river flows to plummet during the hottest time of year, which is bad news for fish.

“Historically, Tomichi Creek dries up in several locations,” said Tony LaGreca, a project manager for the Colorado Water Trust. “A dry-up is the complete worst thing to happen for an aquatic ecosystem because everything that needs water to live does not live.”

In late July, Curry and Peterson normally stop irrigating to allow their fields to dry out for a few weeks so that they can get their one annual hay cutting in August, during which time — with the help of monsoon rains — creek flows tend to rebound. They resume irrigating in the fall to regrow some pasture grass and to replenish the groundwater for the next season, which leads to another dip in river flows.

But with the lease agreement enacted, Curry and Peterson would turn off their four ditch headgates at the end of June and keep them off for 37 days — usually the hottest, driest time of year and when Tomichi Creek could most use a boost. By turning water off a month early, they expect to lose about 20% to 25% of their yield, for which they will be compensated nearly $25,000 by the nonprofit Colorado Water Trust. 

A second part of the agreement would let them irrigate in August and leave the water in the creek in September, when streamflows are lower. Peterson Ranch could get $2,500 if it enacts the lease in the second operational window. If they do both windows, they could get $30,000.

Over seven miles of Tomichi Creek would benefit from the loan of water. Depending on the location in the stream and time of year, the project could add between 2 and 18 cubic feet per second back to the stream for a total of 116 acre-feet of water conserved.

“It’s a win-win,” Curry said. “We can go with a little bit less yield and they are compensating us very fairly.”

Tomichi Creek, a tributary of the Gunnison River, runs through the Peterson Ranch property. The Colorado Water Conservation Board holds an instream flow water right for 18 cfs on the creek in this stretch. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Legal pathway 

The statute that allows irrigators to temporarily loan their water to the state’s instream flow program was originally crafted in 2005 with the help of Curry when she was a state representative. (Curry this week told Colorado Politics that she intends to run in 2024 to represent House District 58.)

The instream flow program allows the Colorado Water Conservation Board to appropriate water rights to “preserve the natural environment to a reasonable degree.” Since it was created in 1973, the CWCB has appropriated water rights on nearly 1,700 stream segments, covering more than 9,700 miles of streams, according to its website. But because these rights are so junior compared with most other water users, their effectiveness as a tool for keeping water in rivers is limited. 

Under the prior appropriation system — the cornerstone of Colorado water law — the holders of the oldest water rights, which usually belong to agriculture, get first use of the river. That means in many locations across the state, the much younger instream flow water rights — 18 cfs in the case of Tomichi Creek, with an adjudication date of 1980 — are not met. Temporary leasing of agricultural water to the instream flow is one way to remedy the problem. 

Still, the tool is not widely used, despite tweaks to the legislation in 2020 with House Bill 1157 that allowed projects to expand to being used five of every 10 years from three of every 10 years. The Peterson Ranch lease is one of just three projects using the five-in-10 lease program, according to CWCB staff. There are six other similar projects across the state that came about under the previous three-in-10 legislation.

“It doesn’t appear at the rate it’s being utilized, it’s going to solve environmental problems all across the state just like that,” said Kate Ryan, executive director of the Colorado Water Trust. “But on the streams and rivers where it’s used, it’s transformative. It makes a huge difference.”

The graph shows how, even in a wet year, a “July hole” sends Tomichi Creek flows below the targeted instream flow of 18 cfs. Credit: Colorado Water Trust

State Sen. Dylan Roberts, D-Avon, who represents District 8, was one of the sponsors of HB 1157. The bill also made it possible to renew loans for two additional 10-year periods, meaning that holders of agricultural water rights can theoretically loan their water for the benefit of the environment for 15 of every 30 years. Roberts said he has heard positive feedback about the expanded loan program.

“We’ve cut down some of the barriers and made it easier to participate but the whole time we’ve kept it voluntary,” Roberts said. “I think the tool is only going to become more important as we head further into drought and dry summers.”

Curry said she got involved with the original bill that created a legal pathway to loan water to ensure that it was workable for livestock producers. 

“The state is changing, and we have to face that there are other values for water,” she said. “We just need to make sure if we go down this path, these types of projects need conditions: They wouldn’t hurt ag, they wouldn’t hurt your neighbor, it’s voluntary — things like that.”

State engineers at the Division of Water Resources still need to give their final sign-off for the Peterson Ranch project to move forward. In the spring, Peterson Ranch will decide whether to enact the lease for 2024’s irrigation season. Ideal conditions for the agreement would be a below-average runoff year but not in the bottom 10%. 

Despite the lease program’s limited use so far, Ryan said she has seen more interest lately in partnerships among water-user groups. 

“We don’t have to choose between ag and the environment,” she said. “I think water users are seeing there is a natural partnership between ag and the environment. But it’s still complicated and takes a lot of work.”

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

Gunnison County falls back into #drought: Dry conditions ideal for new wildfire starts — Gunnison Country Times #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

Colorado Drought Monitor map August 8, 2023.

Click the link to read the article on the Gunnison Country Times website (Abby Harrison). Here’s an excerpt:

Despite a season of abundant spring rainfall and runoff in the Gunnison Valley, the late arrival of monsoon season has set the stage for fire, robbing the basin of the moisture it relies on each year to reduce the chance of starts. After nearly a month of little-to-no precipitation, the valley started registering drought conditions in mid-July. Lack of monsoon rains and high temperatures have exacerbated and prolonged the drying pattern, bringing drought back to the county and setting the stage for multiple fire starts around the Western Slope. Although a few storms have graced the valley recently, more significant precipitation is not expected for at least a week…

These lingering high pressure systems have ushered in record-breaking temperatures for both Gunnison and Crested Butte. Cities all over the Western Slope set temperature records this year, Sanders said. Thunderstorms that follow prolonged periods of drying tend not to bring “deep moisture,” he said. Dry air at ground level prevents moisture in the atmosphere from reaching the ground, causing dry thunderstorms. Fire officials have stated that the Lowline Fire burning north of Gunnison was likely started by a lightning strike, and most fires burning around the state have also been started this way. The high pressure system finally moved out in late July, bringing some moisture. Even then, rain fell in a few isolated incidents while darker storm clouds hung along the edges of the valley and didn’t quite make it into town. 

Gunnison River Basin. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550

Aspinall Unit operations update July 13, 2023 #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver #aridification

The Powderhorn Wilderness Area in the southern Rocky Mountains is home to part of the Gunnison River watershed. Photo: Bob Wick, BLM

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

Aspinall Unit operations update June 30, 2023 #GunnisonRiver #ColoradoRiver #COriver

From email from Reclamation (Erik Knight):

The June 15th forecast for the April – July unregulated inflow volume to Blue Mesa Reservoir is 845,000 acre-feet. This is 133% of the 30 year average.  Blue Mesa Reservoir current content is 760,000 acre-feet which is 92% of full. Current elevation is 7512 ft. Maximum content at Blue Mesa Reservoir is 828,00 acre-feet at an elevation of 7519.4 ft.

The ramp down from the peak release this week has begun. Releases from the Aspinall Unit will be decreasing over the weekend and next week until returning to full powerplant capacity at Crystal Dam. The full schedule of releases from Crystal Dam with estimated Gunnison River flows is shown in the table below, with the gray areas already complete and the yellow areas future projections. River flow projections are estimated daily averages and actual flows during the day may be slightly different on either side of these projections.

Watershed Warriors: Meet the local groups working to protect the #UncompahgreRiver — The #Montrose Daily Press #GunnisonRiver

Uncompahgre River Valley looking south

Click the link to read the article on the Montrose Daily Press website (Kylea Henseler). Here’s an excerpt:

Agricultural users, who grow our very food, depend on the health of the river, soil and habitat around it, while recreational users take advantage of opportunities for activities like fishing and surfing. In this sense, the river boosts the economy and literally helps put food on the table…Multiple local and nearby groups have organized around this river and other Western Slope water resources, and yesterday, June 15, 2023, four met up at the Montrose Library to introduce themselves and explain their mission and current efforts. Most have educational opportunities available and are seeking volunteers, and all are focused on protecting watershed health for all kinds of users for years to come…

Friends of the River Uncompahgre

The mission of this Montrose-based group is “restoring, enhancing and protecting the Uncompahgre River through stewardship efficacy, partnerships and education,” according to Board President ​​Melanie Rees. Its biggest immediate focus is on restoration, as the group is working with Grand Junction-based RiversEdge West on a project to remove invasive species from areas of the river in the city of Montrose and revegetate them with native plants…

Shavano Conservation District

This special government district covers parts of Montrose, Delta, Gunnison, Ouray and San Miguel counties and has been around since the Dust Bowl era focusing on providing conservation resources for agricultural producers. ..

Uncompahgre Watershed Partnership

The Ouray County-based Uncompahgre Watershed Partnership focuses on protecting the upper Uncompahgre River Watershed, but since the water flows toward Montrose, their work impacts us all. According to Executive Director Tanya Ishikawa, the group was founded in 2007, when local residents were concerned that state officials couldn’t monitor the water quality within the watershed closely enough…

Gunnison Gorge Anglers

A chapter of the national organization Trout Unlimited, Gunnison Gorge Anglers serves parts of Montrose, Delta, Hotchkiss, Paonia, and Telluride.  While “Anglers” is right in the name, President Joel Evans said: “We’re talking about a lot more than fishing. We’re talking about the river and how to take care of things.”

Map of the Gunnison River drainage basin in Colorado, USA. Made using public domain USGS data. By Shannon1 – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=69257550