| |
|
Saturday, December 6, 2008
|
|
Here's a recap of the Glen Canyon Institutes's shindig -- Adjusting to less water: Climate change and the Colorado River -- at the University of Utah this week, from Judy Fahys writing in the Salt Lake Tribune. From the article:
The institute now focuses on scientific issues surrounding the vitality of the Colorado River, and much of Thursday's program was devoted to updates about how climate change might affect the 27 million people and 3.5 million acres of farmland that rely on the 1,450-mile river.
The Institute awarded their David R. Brower Award for Conservation to California Democratic Congressman George Miller. More from the article:
"The Bureau of Reclamation has to reinvent itself," said U.S. Rep. George Miller, D-Calif. and longtime leader on natural resource policy. "It has to address the future in an innovative way and not be tied so strongly to the past." [ed. the Colorado River Compact?][...]
Miller was a driving force behind legislation in the early 1990s to complete the Central Utah Project -- the water program behind construction of the Jordanelle Dam in Wasatch County -- along with the creation of a mitigation fund to address the environmental damage caused by decades of dam-building in Utah. He also pushed for moderating flows through the Glen Canyon Dam to lessen the harm high-energy water releases were causing to Grand Canyon National Park.
The northern California lawmaker served from 1991 to 1994 as the chairman of the House committee that oversees the nation's mining programs, water, national parks and other natural resources. Miller attacked the departing Bush administration for what he described as a culture of corruption in the Interior Department. Science, he added, was "tampered with" and "pushed aside." "You don't get to change the conclusions for political reasons," he said. Instead, with a change in administration in Washington, science should be harnessed to help make smarter decisions about preserving already-taxed water supplies...
Tim Barnett, a researcher at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego, told the conference that no models of Colorado River water -- even without climate change factored in -- predict an increased flow. "You have a river that's on the brink of failure," he said.
More coverage from John Hollenhorst writing for KSL.com. From the article:
A pessimistic outlook on the long-term water supply for the desert Southwest dominated a conference in Salt Lake today. It also hinted at changes that could flow from the Democratic resurgence in the national election, possibly even involving the future of Lake Powell. The political shift is emboldening environmentalists, like many at the conference at Fort Douglas, who insist our water management policies are out of whack. With Democrats taking the White House and a firmer grip on Congress, the critics could move into the driver's seat, including a powerful congressman we spoke with today.
As Lake Powell and Lake Mead declined in the last decade, scientific studies have revealed that the dry era now is more or less normal. The previous century was abnormally wet, compared with the last thousand years. Scientists at the conference warned of long-term water shortages in the growing Southwest, which depends on the Colorado River...
It's fueling calls for reform. California Congressman George Miller will be a key player with his powerful committee assignments. "Unfortunately, over the last eight years, while we were trying to look toward the future, we had an ideological jihad going on against the scientists," he said. He suggests a strong legislative push on global warming, conservation, and water management reform. One issue being pushed here is that two big reservoirs waste too much water through evaporation...
Miller did not detail any particular agenda to us, but he questioned the value of Lake Powell and big dams in general. "We continue to make policy based on [OE]If we'll just build one more reservoir, we could solve the problems.' That hasn't worked throughout the West," he said...
[Richard Ingesbretsen of the Glen Canyon Institute] said, "The agenda we want to see is to have the water that is in Lake Powell stored in Lake Mead. There is a movement generally to move in that direction."
Dennis Strong, Utah's director of water resources, said, "I'm still optimistic that through management we'll have the need for both reservoirs and that we'll have enough water to meet our future demands."
More coverage from the Associated Press via the Vail Daily.
"cc"
9:34:56 AM 
|
|
From the Aspen Daily News (David Frey): "Conservation organizations are asking President-elect Barack Obama to reverse the Bush administration's efforts to speed oil shale development in western Colorado, eastern Utah and southern Wyoming. Twenty-one local, regional and national organizations are asking the incoming administration to withdraw the Bush administration's last-minute rules governing oil shale development and wait until after the results of a research and development program are known.
"In a Dec. 4 letter to Carol Browner, the former Environmental Protection Agency director under President Bill Clinton who heads Obama's Energy and Environmental Policy Working Group, the organizations say 'the United States should work to wean itself off fossil fuels, not invest further in expensive, dirty fuels, especially one that is unproven and untested, such as oil shale.'
"The latest letter is signed by local and regional groups including Wilderness Workshop, EcoFlight and Western Colorado Congress, as well as national groups like The Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society and National Resources Defense Council."
Meanwhile Glenwood Springs is considering filing for a Recreational In-Channel Diversion to protect their whitewater park (and a possible future expansion) in case the oil shale and oil and gas industries buy up water rights downstream from the town for development, according to Pete Fowler writing in the Glenwood Springs Post Independent. From the article:
Mayor Bruce Christensen has visions of another whitewater feature near Glenwood's new whitewater park, perhaps something like Buttermilk or Highlands is to Aspen Mountain. He sees expanding the park as a long-range possibility for the city if whitewater activities continue to grow in the U.S. and abroad. If that vision is ever to become a reality, or even if it doesn't, establishing water rights for the whitewater park could help by securing water for the park's famous gigantic waves in case other interests demand flows to the point where the park doesn't produce a good wave. The Glenwood Springs City Council decided Thursday night to hold a closed-door meeting on Monday morning to seek legal advice about possibly filing for water rights for the park before the end of the year.
Jason Carey, an engineer who designed the whitewater park and runs www.riverrestoration.org, said establishing water rights probably wouldn't be essential in the next few years, but it could be critical decades down the road. He said development of water-intensive oil shale extraction is just one example of something that could threaten the park's flows. "It's so water-intensive that it could drive the industry to up the value of water and potentially buy out orchards and that type of thing that currently pull the water through Glenwood Springs," he said. He said many communities have filed for water rights before constructing a whitewater feature. Filing before the end of the year would result in a 2008 appropriation date, and waiting till 2009 means the filing wouldn't have priority over any other 2009 applications, Carey said...
Additional construction of on-shore amenities at the whitewater park like parking, restrooms and a spectator area isn't scheduled until August. A $200,000 Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) grant application was rejected in the fall but there's another opportunity to ask for the grant again in February or March. Christensen said last year that the city decided not to apply for a GOCO grant previously because it was told it would have a better chance of getting the grant if it promised not to apply for water rights for the park. But GOCO denied that was the case, saying it refused a request from the Colorado River Water Conservation Board that it not fund projects that could involve filings for recreational water rights. Christensen said Friday the city must take GOCO at its word and discussing filing for water rights for the park now has nothing to do with the latest GOCO grant application denial.
More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.
"cc"
8:35:30 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2009 John Orr.
Last update: 3/15/09; 3:26:10 PM.
|
|
|
