Wednesday, March 5, 2008

Iraq Andrew Sullivan: "McCain On The War: His strategy is now clear. He will refuse to debate the question of whether we should have fought in the first pace. And that's understandable. He cannot win on those grounds. And his commitment to end the war as swiftly as possible without inflaming sectarian hatred is as good as we'll get. But here's what I fear: that he will not be honest and candid about the true implications on his strategy: an occupation with no fewer than a hundred thousand troops for his entire first term, and at least 75,000 troops for decades." "2008 pres" 7:19:19 PM

? for President? Political Wire: "Sen. Hillary Clinton has moved ahead of Sen. Barack Obama in national Democratic nomination preferences, 48% to 44%, according to a new Gallup tracking poll." Political Wire: "A new Public Policy Polling survey in North Carolina finds Sen. Barack Obama edging Sen. Hillary Clinton 47% to 44%." Left in the West: "I've long been a skeptic of the idea that Montana matters. There's really only one scenario in which we do -- a primary fight headed for the convention. That's never struck me as that likely. But thanks to primary voters in Ohio and Texas, it is way more likely than it was two days ago. Why? Well, it's still damn near impossible for Hillary Clinton to win a majority of delegates before the convention. But if she pulls an inside straight, gets Michigan and Florida seated, holds her superdelegates, and rises in the polls v. John McCain, it's definitely possible that she becomes the nominee. In other words, hold on to your hats -- I think the Presidential race may be headed our way. And simply because of the scale of resources involved in this Democratic race (and the lack of restrictions on who may participate), this contest is likely to be unlike any primary Montana's ever witnessed." Andrew Sullivan: "From Kos's counting, the night barely changes anything in the delegate math. Clinton wins Ohio 73 - 68 and Rhode Island 12 to 8. Obama wins Vermont 9 to 6 and wins Texas by 99 to 94 (because his narrow loss in the primaries is offset by a lop-sided win in the caucuses). These numbers may change a little as full caucus results come in, but not by much. Once all the dust has cleared, Obama's delegate lead remains. RCP has it at 1542 for Obama and 1447 for Clinton." "2008 pres" 6:46:28 PM

Trapper Creek Cutthroat get big grant The cutthroat trout in Trapper Creek have attracted a donation from an mysterious source according to The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel. From the article: A small population of Colorado River cutthroat on the Roan Plateau will receive some much-needed attention this summer, but it's still a mystery where some of the money for the project is coming from. According to a press release from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, a group called the Western Native Trout Initiative recently was given official recognition as a "National Fish Partnership" by the National Fish Habitat Board, an arm of the Fish and Wildlife Service. That means the Initiative qualifies for some federal matching funds for 22 trout projects across the West, including one on Trapper Creek on the Roan Plateau. How much money? According to a press release from the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Initiative will receive $600,000 for the projects, which include rebuilding a mile-long exclosure around a section of Trapper Creek to keep cattle away from the stream. Robin Knox, formerly the sportfish manager for the Colorado Division of Wildlife, is the Initiative coordinator and said the project is funded by an Initiative grant of $7,750 matched to another $24,000 coming from the Bureau of Land Management ($18,000) Colorado Trout Unlimited ($3,000) and Colorado Big Country ($3,000). The latter's full name is Colorado Big Country Research Conservation and Development Council, a nonprofit group working in 10 northwest Colorado counties to "improve land conservation, land management, water management and community development," according to its Web site. Research Conservation and Development Councils were established in 1962 and work under the National Resources Conservation Service. The Colorado Big Country RC&D, one of eight in Colorado, was designated in 1972. After learning Colorado Trout Unlimited had no knowledge of the Initiative grant or the $3,000 supposedly promised by CTU, I talked to John Trammell, a member of the Grand Valley Anglers Chapter of TU and one of the many volunteers who have worked on Trapper Creek over the past 20 years or so. Trammell has been working on the latest Trapper Creek project and was surprised to hear of the Colorado Big Country money because he thought the request deadline had been missed. Trammell said CTU wasn't giving money, it was the local TU chapter but he thought it was only $1,500, not $3,000. "The GVA committed $1,500 as matching funds for a TU Embrace-A-Stream grant, but we didn't get the grant so I asked the chapter to chip in a little more," Trammell said. No decision has been made on adding to the local grant, Trammell said. "colorado water" 7:17:03 AM

John Singletary: Their statements offend the hell out of me, because the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project was intended to benefit the lower valley Officials from the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District have had their interest piqued for a different route for the Southern Delivery System than the preferred alternative named by Reclamation, according to The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article: The possibility that a water supply pipeline to Colorado Springs downstream of the confluence of Fountain Creek and the Arkansas River could be more cost-effective than one from Pueblo Dam should make the city take pause and re-examine the option, the chairman of the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District said Tuesday. "I'm not telling them how to run their water system, but they need to run it so it stops hurting us in the lower valley," said John Singletary, Lower Ark chairman. "In order to use Fountain Creek in a meaningful manner, we need to address the issue of flows together." Singletary said a project like Prairie Waters, which Aurora is building to physically recycle its return flows, makes sense for Fountain Creek, in light of the fact that cost estimates in the Bureau of Reclamation's draft environmental impact statement show the firm yield from a downstream intake would be 60 percent greater than the dam route for the proposed Southern Delivery System. The alternative would add $700 million to the $1.7 billion cost of SDS over a 40-year period, but would produce a higher firm yield of water because most return flows could be directly recaptured. The cost over the life of the program would be about 12 percent less. In the dam route, flows are exchanged into Lake Pueblo, and opportunities for exchange would be limited by decrees, river conditions and flow management programs... The Fountain Creek route costs more to build initially, $1.27 billion versus $1.07 billion, because it includes an additional pump station. It costs more to operate over the 40-year life of the project because reverse osmosis treatment and disposal would be needed. Colorado Springs is allowed to reuse return flows from transmountain water deliveries and some fully consumable native rights. Singletary suggests using a series of reservoirs along the pump-back route to help clean the water returning to Colorado Springs. Economically, it could make sense because of the higher yield of the downstream alternative and the potential to attract partners like Colorado State Parks and the Division of Wildlife by improving Fountain Creek, Singletary said. "At first blush, and all I know is what I've read in the paper, it looks like Colorado Springs Utilities would be doing the right thing for its ratepayers by taking out below the confluence," Singletary said. "My goal in negotiations is to match water quality for water quality (from the dam and from Fountain Creek). I see this as a potential boon for Colorado Springs."[...] Under the proposal to build a pipeline from the dam, Colorado Springs proposes to send its unused return flows down Fountain Creek, which would double its releases over a 40-year period. Singletary said the additional water in itself is not necessarily detrimental, if it is of the same quality as the Arkansas River at the confluence and if the flows are adequately managed. "If a dam is feasible, we need to look at that too," Singletary said. Singletary also bristled at Fredell's suggestion Monday that Colorado Springs is entitled to use the dam route because it has paid more than 70 percent of ad valorem taxes for the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project. The statement is often made by Colorado Springs officials in public presentations. "I take great umbrage at that statement," Singletary said, pointing out that only $150 million of a $585 million federal project is being repaid through the ad valorem taxes, and has not yet been fully repaid. "Colorado Springs has benefitted manifestly in the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project because of Lake Pueblo, the Fountain Valley Pipeline, Twin Lakes and Turquoise Lakes. They would never have grown the way they did without it, and they've recovered their investment tenfold...Their statements offend the hell out of me, because the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project was intended to benefit the lower valley." More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here. "colorado water" 7:06:25 AM

Arkansas Valley Conduit Here's an update on the push to build the Arkansas Valley Conduit from The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article: Officials from the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District will travel to Washington next week to testify before a U.S. House committee on the need for the Arkansas Valley Conduit. They also will talk about a concept by Executive Director Jim Broderick to finance the conduit and other underfunded parts of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project using revenues from excess-capacity leases. "This might be the only way to pay for it," Southeastern President Bill Long said Tuesday. "I think I may have been naive - we all may have been naive - when we were talking about an 80-20 match."[...] Last year, U.S. Reps. John Salazar, D-Colo., and Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo., introduced legislation to authorize the project. The legislation was similar to bills by U.S. Sens. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., and Ken Salazar, D-Colo., and proposed 80 percent federal funding for the conduit. The bills have languished since early 2007, although a $79 million authorization through the Water Resources Development Act passed later in the year. On March 13, the water and power subcommittee of the House Natural Resources Committee will have a hearing on the conduit, and Long will testify. The committee is chaired by U.S. Rep. Grace Napolitano, D-Calif., who came to Pueblo last year to hear concerns about the Fry-Ark Project. During that hearing, she heard Long testify about the importance of the conduit and agreed a hearing on the project is needed... Broderick has proposed using lease revenues for excess-capacity contracts with the Bureau of Reclamation as a way to reimburse the federal treasury for the cost of building the conduit. Contracts for storage, exchange and carriage of water have increased in recent years, especially in Lake Pueblo, which has been on average 58 percent full since it began storing water in 1975. While the primary storage mission for the lake is holding Fryingpan-Arkansas Project flows, Reclamation began issuing excess-capacity contracts in 1986. To date, those revenues have helped pay off the debt obligation of the Southeastern district, and operation and maintenance. After the obligation is paid off, the excess-capacity revenues would go into the treasury. Broderick has asked federal agencies to evaluate a plan that would redirect those future revenues to pay off project costs which otherwise would not be reimbursed. In addition to funding the conduit, the plan lowers the estimated federal match for the conduit to 65 percent, and pays off Ruedi Reservoir (compensatory storage on the Western Slope) and part of the municipal outlet at Lake Pueblo. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. "colorado water" 6:56:52 AM

New pipeline from Bellvue to Greeley? Here's an update on Greeley's new pipeline running from Bellvue to the city, from The Greeley Tribune "reg". From the article: Greeley may sell $35 million worth of bonds to pay for the next portion of its controversial water pipe project that would bring water to the city from its plant in Bellvue. The Greeley City Council introduced an ordinance Tuesday night that would approve the competitive sale of the bonds in late March. If approved at the March 18 council meeting, Greeley water users and new businesses would pay for the $35 million loan plus an estimated $18 million interest it will cost Greeley to continue its expansion of a 5-foot water pipeline from a water treatment plant in Bellvue to the city. About half the pipeline -- a segment from Windsor to Interstate 25 is complete, said Jon Monson, Greeley director of water and sewer. Greeley Finance Director Tim Nash said Greeley also will probably have to bond $22 million more for the project in another two years to finish the project. Officials say the 30-mile pipeline, which will allow only gravity to bring water to Greeley, will cost the city $2 million per mile. After bonding, the total cost including interest could be much more. Also as part of the bond, Greeley will get permits to expand its Milton Seaman Reservoir northwest of Bellvue. Officials hope a future, separate $90 million water purchase will help the city store water in the reservoir. Greeley residents will pay for the bonds in the form of increased water rates during the next 10 years. Officials estimate a 9 percent raise in rates during the next two years. Water rates increased 7 percent this year compared to 2007. The average household in Greeley paid $38 per month in 2007 for water. The pipeline project itself is not without controversy. Residents in Laporte, near Bellvue, say the proposed water line will run through their backyards and will disturb a historic, abandoned railroad. Rose Brinks, whose house in Laporte is close to where Greeley officials propose to put the water line, said the Colorado Historic Preservation Review Board has recommended to the federal government that the railroad and a nearby bridge be designated on the National Register of Historic Places. It will take at least 60 days for the National Park Service to rule on the railroad's historic designation. A historic designation would mean Greeley and federal agencies may have to look at other routes around the railroad in Laporte, even if the water line ends up staying where its proposed. "We're just hoping they'll leave us and go around Laporte," Brinks said. More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here. "colorado water" 6:50:47 AM

Snowpack news Here's a look at potential runoff from The Aspen Times "reg". They write: The runoff volume in the Roaring Fork River from April through July is expected to be 40 percent above average, Mike Gillespie, snow survey supervisor for the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), said Tuesday. The NRCS currently is projecting that the runoff volume flowing into Ruedi Reservoir will be 30 percent above average... The Roaring Fork River Basin's snowpack level was 53 percent above average Tuesday. That was one of the highest levels among the basins throughout the state, according to NRCS data. Only a few areas in the southern mountains had levels that were a higher percentage of average. Statewide the snowpack is 35 percent above average, according to a report released Tuesday by the NRCS. "colorado water" 6:44:11 AM

? for President? Colorado Confidential: "John McCain clinched the deal for the GOP presidential nomination Tuesday. As for the Democrats, the New York Times has an easy-to-read, detailed list of the 712 Democratic superdelegates as of March 4 - including 254 who support Hillary Clinton, 202 supporting Barack Obama and 256 whose preference is currently unknown. Click here for the complete breakdown." "2008 pres" 6:33:05 AM

March 4th primaries and caucuses Political Wire: "Sen. Hillary Clinton defeated Sen. Barack Obama in the Ohio and Texas primaries on Tuesday, 'ending a string of defeats and allowing her to soldier on in a Democratic presidential nomination race that now seems unlikely to end any time soon,' the New York Times reports. 'Mrs. Clinton also won Rhode Island, while Mr. Obama won in Vermont. But the results mean that Mrs. Clinton won the two states she most needed to keep her candidacy alive.' "The Washington Post: 'But as she vowed to keep campaigning, the tight vote in Texas signaled she may yet face a tough decision in coming weeks. The slim margin in the Texas popular vote and an additional caucus process in which she trailed made clear that she would not win enough delegates to put a major dent in Sen. Barack Obama's lead. And regardless of the results, she emerged from the crucible of Ohio and Texas with a campaign mired in debt and riven by dissension.'" Obama '08 Community Blogs: "Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton: 'Tonight was the Clinton campaign's last best chance to make a significant dent in our lead in pledged delegates and they have failed. In our latest projections, we will win the Texas caucus with a double-digit margin and any pledged delegate shift will be absolutely minimal. In fact, Clinton's chances of regaining the delegate lead actually decreased tonight, as the number of delegates remaining dwindles.'" John McCain: "Thank you. Thank you, Texas, Ohio, Vermont and Rhode Island. I am very grateful for the broad support you have given our campaign. And I am very pleased to note that tonight, my friends, we have won enough delegates to claim with confidence, humility and a sense of great responsibility that I will be the Republican nominee for President of the United States. "I want to thank all of you here and all the Republicans, Independents, and independent thinking Democrats, in all parts of this great country, who supported our campaign for the nomination, and have brought us across the finish line first, an accomplishment that once seemed to more than a few doubters unlikely." Wash Park Prophet: "Low Republican turnout in [Tuesday's] primaries and caucuses is to be expected. Their race was effectively over before it began. But, given the Republican tendency to rally around a clear winner, McCain's showings among those hardy few Republicans that did vote is remarkably low. In Texas, McCain garnered only about 52% of the vote. In Ohio, McCain won 60% of the vote. Rhode Island Republicans gave McCain 65% of their vote. Liberal leaning Vermont Republicans gave him 72% of their vote, but aren't typical of the Republican party at large. McCain is a GOP nominee with plurality support, but not a mandate from the mix of Republican and independent voters who have a say in the decision. I haven't crunched the exit poll numbers, but it isn't clear to me that McCain was even a plurality candidate among Republican voters prior to Romney's departure from the race." Josh Marshall: "MSNBC and Fox call Texas for Clinton. Remember, that's the popular vote in the primary. That accounts for 126 of the Texas delegates; 67 more are up for grabs in the caucus. The Texas primary has no bonus for getting an overall win. So with the margin this close, that's probably a tie in delegates -- even conceivable that Obama picks up more because of the way the apportionment works. But assume that's basically a wash. Then there's the caucus. People assume, though that's only based on earlier caucuses, that Obama will win there. So keep in mind the very distinct possibility, even a probability, that Obama will take more delegates out of Texas than Clinton, even assuming he narrowly loses the primary part of the contest." "2008 pres" 6:22:43 AM

© Copyright 2009 John Orr. Last update: 3/14/09; 10:09:52 PM.