1. No category

Mancos Times
Western Slope to Denver: Stop watering lawns
Says solution fairer than diversion
By Jim Mimiaga
Agricultural dry-up is an ominous phrase, but it's reality on the Front Range as farmers sell off
water rights to satisfy unquenchable urban sprawl.
It won't be enough. Population predictions show Colorado doubling to 10 million in 50 years,
mostly occurring on the Front Range. Experts with the Colorado Water Conservation Board say
current water supply comes up short.
The question is how to keep farming viable while covering a Front Range domestic supply gap
expected to be between 350,000 and 500,000 acre-feet per year?
The state's eight water basins are negotiating solutions that will culminate in a Colorado Water
Plan for future management due out late next year.
Front Range metro suppliers say the solution is diverting more water from Western Slope rivers
and reservoirs via the 22 transmountain diversions already in place.
But state water districts west of the Continental Divide are calling foul, and have calculated that
if Front Range residents stop watering their thirsty Kentucky Bluegrass lawns it will be enough
to make up the supply shortage.
"Ninety percent of domestic water use - your kitchen, bathroom, showers - makes it back to the
river systems and reservoirs through return flows. It has less water-supply impact than watering
lawns, which absorb 70-80 percent of it," said Mike Preston, general manager for the Dolores
Water Conservation District.
Preston is also chairman of the Southwest Water Roundtable, tasked with forming a local
strategy for responsible water use and policy.
"The state proposes a 60-40 standard for domestic water consumption, 60 percent for in-home
and 40 percent for outdoor lawns to better conserve water for ag production and population
growth," he said "But we're getting a lot of pushback from Front Range water suppliers who are
accustomed to the 50-50 ratio now."
For domestic water obtained via transmountain diversions, the suggested ratio is 70 percent
indoor use, and 30 percent outdoor use.
Furthermore, increasing transmountain diversions have far-reaching consequences. Siphoning off
more Western Slope water to the Front Range threatens the state's water-contract obligations for
downstream states like Arizona, Nevada and California who depend on Colorado River basin
water stored in Lake Powell and Lake Mead.
"They're watching our water polices, more than we look at theirs," Preston said. "Colorado is the
headwaters for a lot of their supply."
Meanwhile Western Slope water - especially the Blue Mesa Reservoir complex, near Gunnison,
and Wyoming's Flaming Gorge Reservoir - are looked at with envious eyes by Front Range
water districts.
But the massive reservoirs are mainly designed to store water for contractual delivery to Lake
Powell and Lake Mead relied on by Lower Basin states.
Colorado is entitled to 51 percent of Colorado River basin water above Lees Ferry, Ariz. Once it
is diverted to the Front Range, it is lost to the Colorado River system, eventually draining east
toward the Mississippi River.
To make a dent in unsustainable water demand in Fort Collins, Denver, and Colorado Springs,
they should become more like Las Vegas, local water officials say.
The city's successful lawn conservation program has vastly reduced water consumption, and
includes strict drought-resistant landscaping regulations for future development.
Colorado passed legislation this summer to try and regulate lawn-watering, but it came up short,
critics say. SB17 originally required that future residential development using water from
agricultural dry-up could only have lots with 15 percent of irrigated landscaping. But the
requirement was dropped in favor of "best practices" language.
"The rewrite was to study it further," said water engineer Steve Harris. "At every meeting, we
lament ag-dry up. The original bill was saying the next five million people can't use water like
the previous five million people."
Tree-ring data shows the Colorado River at Lees Ferry suffered a 60-year drought between 1200
and 1300, causing mass migrations. Water officials report this region has suffered a 15-year dry
period, a troubling trend that needs attention.
"Front Range water district plans all include transmountain diversion as the solution," Preston
said. "We're saying it won't be considered until you get more aggressive about domestic
conservation by limiting outdoor watering."
More education is needed about the importance of responsible water management, said Bruce
Whitehead, of the Southwest Water Conservation District.
"Many people don't have a clue about the state water plan or the issues we're facing," he said.
"We have a lot of work to do in our basin to educate the constituency."
For more information go to www.coloradowaterplan.org.
http://www.cortezjournal.com/article/20140916/MT03/140919857
Steamboat Today
Legislators listen to local water advocates
By Tom Ross
Steamboat Springs — Jeff Devere, of Rangely, told a panel of nine state legislators gathered in
Steamboat Springs on Tuesday to talk about the challenge of meeting Colorado’s future water
needs that people in Northwest Colorado expect to be treated with dignity and respect if the
Front Range comes after their water.
Water policy discussions are typically rife with jargon, and at first Devere, a member of the
Yampa-White-Green Basin Roundtable that is contributing to a new statewide water plan,
resorted to some of the same. Devere, who is a dean at Colorado Northwestern Community
College, told members of the legislature’s Interim Water Resources Review Committee that
people who live in the Yampa, White and Green river valleys expect “equitable apportionment”
of their water. But then he decided to speak plainly.
“Equitable apportionment is a very defined legal term,” Devere said. “But in general, what we’re
talking about is the idea that local communities want to be treated with dignity and respect if
water from their basins is moved out, and they no longer have that water for their own uses.”
Members of the legislative committee in attendance included: state Reps. Edward Vigil, Don
Coram, Diane Mitsch Bush and Randy Fischer and Sens. Gail Schwartz, Mary Hodge, Matt
Jones, Ellen Roberts and Greg Brophy.
The Yampa-White-Green Roundtable is one of nine around the state representing Colorado’s
major river basins whose members spent the summer drafting water plans for their own regions.
These regional plans will be taken into consideration in a new statewide water plan intended to
help ensure Colorado has enough water to meet its needs through 2050.
Devere, who has a master’s degree from the University of Denver in environmental
management, said the Yampa-Green-White Roundtable is determined to maintain and protect
historical water uses in the basins as well as preserving enough water for future demands. The
plan calls for increasing the number of acres irrigated for agriculture in Northwest Colorado and
also anticipates developing unspecified new water projects here to give the basin flexibility to
manage for growth in the future.
But the Basin Roundtable isn’t relying simply on pleas for equitable apportionment of water to
provide for the region’s future waters needs, according to Devere. He said the meat of the Basin
Roundtable’s plan relies on mathematical models to forecast, in understandable terms, the
implications of future water policy decisions.
For example, the model is designed to be able to illustrate how the impacts of new development
of either water projects or energy development might impact the three-county area, which
includes Moffat and Rio Blanco counties and a majority of Routt County, in an era when water
might be in short supply.
“It’s a methodology for understanding tradeoffs in a dry future,” Devere said. “The idea is to
look into the future and visualize how those shortages might be dealt with using various
projects.”
The impacted areas will be more readily understood by linking the data to a color-coded map
showing where water shortages are likely to pop up from a variety of scenarios, including the
possibility of energy development in different parts of the region. For example, the Piceance
Basin (pronounced Peeyance), roughly between Meeker and Rifle, is an area that already has
many natural gas wells and relies on small creeks, some of them seasonal in dry years, for water.
Mary Brown, an agricultural representative from Steamboat Springs on the roundtable, emerged
from a breakout discussion saying her group observed there is a tendency by policymakers to
focus on the supply side of the water equation and her group was interested in flipping that
around.
“Perhaps more attention paid to the demand side rather than just looking at ‘How much water
can we provide?’” was the group’s sentiment, Brown said.
Speaking during a public comment period, Ken Brenner, of Steamboat Springs and a member of
the board of the Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District, suggested it was most important to
conserve some of the Yampa River’s water to meet obligations to lower basin states like
California.
“The best and highest use of the Yampa is as a means of helping the state of Colorado basin to
meet its obligations to the 1922 Compact,” Brenner said. “Those seven states (in the compact:
Arizona, New Mexico, California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado and Wyoming) have an alliance and
an obligation to one another. We do not want federal intervention in this situation.”
Brenner called the Yampa River the cornerstone of the economy in Northwest Colorado, but he
said it also supports the environmental integrity and quality of life in the valley.
Soren Jespersen, of the nonprofit advocacy group Friends of the Yampa, said the many economic
considerations surrounding future demands on the rivers of Northwest Colorado are important,
but a preoccupation with economic issues tends to obscure the natural qualities that define the
rivers of the region.
“There is more to a wild river than just the economic benefits it can provide,” Jespersen told the
legislative committee. “The Yampa is one of the last major untamed waterways in the entire
Colorado River system. If we were to start diverting its waters to the Front Range, we wouldn’t
just be diminishing its flows, we’d be killing the very thing that makes the Yampa River unique.”
http://www.steamboattoday.com/news/2014/sep/16/legislators-listen-local-water-advocates/
Colorado Independent
Climate paradox: More snow, less water?
By Bob Berwyn
FRISCO — Juggling Colorado’s already stretched water resources is going to get even tougher
in the decades ahead.
Rising temperatures will cut river flows and increase demand from thirsty plants and towns, a
new state report concludes, projecting that average temperatures across Colorado will climb by at
least 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit in the next 35 years, and by much more than that if there are no cuts
in greenhouse gas emissions.
The report, released last month by the Colorado Water Conservation Board, outlines clearly how
global warming has already affected water resources in Colorado:
– Warmer temperatures and other changes (dust on snow) mean that snowpack is melting
earlier, on average, by one to four weeks compared with 30 years ago. This creates a
strain for farmers and other users who draw water directly from rivers.
– Colorado has seen no long-term increase or decrease in total precipitation or heavy
rainfall events. Climate models are split about Colorado’s future precipitation, showing a
range of possible outcomes from a 5 percent decrease in precipitation to an 8 percent
increase by midcentury.
– Climate models tend to show a shift toward higher midwinter precipitation across the
state.
– Hydrology models show a wide range of outcomes for annual streamflow in Colorado’s
river basins, but an overall tendency towards lower streamflow by 2050, especially in the
southwestern part of the state.
The part about more midwinter snow is not a typo. The best available information now suggests
a slight boost in precipitation from December through February, but whether that comes as snow
or rain depends very much on elevation, and how fast the overall climate warms, said the
Western Water Assessment’s Jeff Lukas, the main author of the report.
If some high country ski resorts see a bump in snowfall, you can still blame it on global
warming. Warmer air holds more water vapor, and even in warmer climate, those clouds will
give up some of that moisture as they’re forced up over the high peaks of Colorado.
The models don’t suggest any other big changes in other parts of the climate system (for example
the lifting mechanism that forces air to rise and condense moisture), said Colorado State
Climatologist Nolan Doesken.
“Unlike other parts of the country where temperature is the primary limiting factor for snow, we
will still be plenty cold enough throughout the midwinter season,” Doesken said.
Climate Nuance
Teasing out a global warming signal in mountain ecosystems isn’t easy. There’s huge year-toyear variability, even without any changes forced by heat-trapping pollutants like carbon dioxide
and methane. Tree ring records spanning thousands of years show longer and drier droughts than
anything we’ve seen, but scientists are convinced they’re starting to see a pattern.
“There are so many nuances about this, but we’ve got a signal emerging from noise,” said Lukas.
“The precipitation record is still noisy, but we can’t discount that we’re seeing a trend caused by
anthropogenic global warming … The global models just don’t get it right for Colorado. It’s
pretty difficult to jump from that broad scale to saying there will be more snow in Colorado,” he
said.
Regardless, even if there is a bump in winter snow and rain, the warmer temperatures will suck
up the moisture and then some. The end result could be a parched Colorado, unless water
managers seriously pursue the path of adaptation and mitigation.
http://www.coloradoindependent.com/149326/climate-paradox-more-snow-less-water
Colorado Springs Independent
The EPA is coming to get us ... or not
Proposed changes to the Clean Water Act have the county crying foul. Is that
justified?
By J. Adrian Stanley
Just before the El Paso County commissioners passed a resolution opposing a proposed change
to the federal Clean Water Act last week, Commissioner Sallie Clark had something to say.
"Imagine if every little drainage way was considered a navigable waterway as it relates to
requiring permitting," Clark, who brought the resolution, said from the dais. "It's just one more
example of the [Environmental Protection Agency's] overreach on everything from the
Endangered Species Act to everything that they do."
The Endangered Species Act is not administered by the EPA. But that didn't stop Commissioner
Amy Lathen from chiming in.
"Our fundamental responsibility is the protection of private property rights," she said, "and what
the feds do [has] a chilling, chilling impact on land. They sterilize land, they erode private
property rights."
The resolution was approved unanimously, with Commissioner Dennis Hisey absent.
The commissioners aren't the only ones crying foul about the proposed change, which would
define the "waters of the U.S." and therefore the bodies subject to the Clean Water Act, enacted
in 1972 to prevent pollution. However, a representative of the EPA, which is proposing the
change along with the Army Corps of Engineers, says concerns like those of the commissioners
are unfounded, and rooted in a misunderstanding of how the act works.
Lots of concern
Hours after the commissioners took their Sept. 9 vote, Republican U.S. Congressmen Scott
Tipton and Cory Gardner, both of Colorado, sent out press releases noting that a bill they
cosponsored, the Water Rights Protection Act, had passed the House and moved to the Senate.
H.R. 3189 aims to prevent the EPA and the Corps from making the proposed changes to the
Clean Water Act, which Tipton calls "a gross federal overreach" that would expand the act to
cover virtually every form of surface water. Gardner says the proposal would even regulate a
"puddle." (Gardner's "puddle" claim is one of many addressed at the EPA's Ditch the Myth site,
tiny.cc/ditch-myth-cs.)
U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., is usually a proponent of the environment. Asked whether he
supported the change, his office issued a statement saying simply that he encouraged constituents
to give feedback to the EPA, which has extended a comment period to Oct. 20.
County public services executive director Jim Reid says the changes would mean that every time
the county tries to approve a water project, it would need to pay for two permits relating to water
quality, which could take as long as a year and cost thousands of dollars. The change would
mean that instead of just protecting "navigable waters," there would suddenly be federal
protection for any waterway, he says, even a dry streambed. That could affect the ability to
control stormwater and floods.
"There could be more infrastructure damage while we're waiting for those permits to get
through," he says.
A different explanation
But is that really true?
No, says Karen Hamilton, chief of the EPA's aquatic resource protection and accountability unit.
Many are confused about what the Clean Water Act already regulates, she says. The EPA has
jurisdiction over most surface water, not just "navigable waters," and this proposed change
wouldn't add any new waters.
The point of the change, she says, is to make permitting for water projects easier. It was
proposed after over 100 parties complained to the EPA that new rule-making was needed to
clarify the act — everyone from Susan Gordon of Venetucci Farm to the American Petroleum
Institute. Projects sometimes required lengthy jurisdictional reviews to determine if a permit was
needed.
Hamilton says the EPA considered over 1,000 scientific articles when it assembled ways of
determining which waters are covered. (The regulation also includes a list of types of waters that
are not covered.) It should mean that fewer projects require jurisdictional review.
Two entities in Colorado issue permits related to the Clean Water Act: the state and the Corps.
Allan Steinle, regulatory division chief for the Albuquerque District of the Corps, which includes
our area, says of the change, "I don't think it's going to be very significant ... It will actually make
things easier for us and for the public."
Martha Rudolph, director of environmental programs for the state, agrees that permitting
requirements for projects should not increase, as Reid and others fear. But she understands where
those fears come from, saying the proposed regulation sometimes sounds like an expansion of
powers. So the state has asked the EPA to change that language so that it doesn't look like a
power grab.
"I would agree that there needs to be some clarification in the regulatory language," she says, "to
make that abundantly clear."
http://www.csindy.com/coloradosprings/proposed-changes-to-the-clean-water-act-have-thecounty-crying-foul-is-that-justified/Content?oid=2940726
Mountain Mail
Council OKs water treatment plant improvements
By Brian McCabe
Salida City Council voted 4-1 Tuesday to increase the water treatment plant improvements Phase
2 project from the original project scope of 2 million gallons to 4 million gallons.
Councilman Hal Brown voted no, and Councilman Mike Bowers was absent.
The upgrade will cost the city an additional $20,000 from the capital fund reserves, plus $6,000
to replace the windows.
Brown said he could not vote for the increase because it will use reserve funds.
Council also discussed a Colorado Department of Transportation memorandum of understanding
concerning the restriping of U.S. 50 through Salida.
U.S. 50 was recently remeasured and was found to be 66 feet wide, not the 68 feet it was
believed to be, which meant that the measurements for the new restriping would have to be
modified.
The new measurements include a 5-foot-wide bike lane on the outside, a 1½-foot buffer area,
two 10½-foot driving lanes and an 11-foot center turn area.
The cost of the restriping will be approximately $9,000 a mile, of which Salida will be
responsible for half, while CDOT will pay the other half.
Bowers, who was unable to attend the meeting, requested that the council vote to continue the
discussion on the subject until council’s next meeting, so that he could give his input as well.
Council also heard a request from 350 Colorado for $200 to be used to print materials to
advertise the group’s upcoming forum, entitled “Climate – Energy – Creating a Resilient
Community.”
Katherine Clark and Dr. Corrine Knapp, from Western State Colorado University, will speak
about “establishing a plan to mitigate the economic effects of changing climate,” according to
the group’s presentation.
Council voted 4-1 to deny the money, with Council member Eileen Rogers casting the dissenting
vote.
Brown said he felt that, because it was a controversial issue, he was not comfortable supporting
only one side, to which Council members Melodee Hallett and Tom Yerkey agreed.
Salida resident Monica Griesenbeck offered to provide the money to 350 Colorado.
In other business, council unanimously approved:
•
•
•
•
An amendment of the emergency telephone charges, with no public comment.
The Chaffee County memorandum of agreement concerning vital records.
The budget amendment to an agreement for professional services with Workshop Design
for way-finding signage, for $63,547, well within the already approved budget for
$100,000 in 2014.
The $50,000 bid by Churchich Recreation LLC for new playground equipment for
Chisholm Park, making it Americans with Disabilities Act compliant.
Council adjourned to executive session to discuss the Mira Monte Annexation agreement and the
Crestone Mesa real estate transfer assessment.
Council returned and directed staff to list those items on the agenda for the next meeting.
City council will meet again for its regularly scheduled meeting Oct. 7.
http://www.themountainmail.com/news/article_e69270fc-3e27-11e4-882f-001a4bcf6878.html
Grand Junction Daily Sentinel
Boating closure begins Oct. 1 on Highline Lake
By Dave Buchanan
You can tell it’s almost fall.
The days are noticeably shorter, the mornings are cooler and HighLine Lake turns from water
sports to waterfowl.
As is traditional, Highline Lake State Park on Oct. 1 will close to all water-based activities,
including boating, water skiing, paddle boarding and swimming.
Instead, the focus turns to providing a stopping place for migrating waterfowl, which offers
birders and hunters the opportunity to pursue their activities.
“The park provides many different ways to enjoy the outdoors and wildlife throughout the year,”
Park Manager Alan Martinez said. “As we head into fall, camping is still available; however,
fishing, hunting and wildlife viewing will now be the main attractions.”
The park’s bicycle and hiking trails are open year-round and are excellent ways to enjoy the
parks during the offseason.
Waterfowl season on the Western Slope begins Saturday except for Highline Lake, where
regulations allow hunting Monday through Friday only.
This means the Sept. 29 season opener comes two days prior to the winter boating closure, and
boaters and hunters will have to share the lake.
During the overlap, hunters must use the blinds at the north end of Highline Lake and boaters are
asked to stay south of the no-wake buoy line on the north end of the lake.
Blinds can be reserved by calling 255-6161.
http://www.gjsentinel.com/outdoors/articles/boating-closure-begins-oct-1-on-highline-lake