From today's Rocky Mountain News, "Snowpack in the central and northern mountains, where most Front Range residents play, measures as high as 132 percent of average, said Mike Gillespie, snow survey supervisor with the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Statewide, the snowpack measures 91 percent of average, due to a deficit in southern Colorado."
Here's an report from today's Rocky about the potential water fee increase in Castle Rock [December 3, 2005, "Castle Rock water bills rising"]. From the article, "Homeowners will see water bills rise on average $12 per month next year, and water fees to build homes will likely double as this fast-growing Douglas County town races to develop a new water supply system.
The increases, the first in a series, are part of a far-ranging proposal designed to help the community wean itself from dwindling underground water supplies, replacing them with a combination of recycled water and surface supplies from rivers...Key to Castle Rock's plan is to claim water storage in Parker's Reuter-Hess Reservoir. The town also plans to create water budgets that specify how much water each household can use annually, imposing sharp penalties on those who exceed them. Castle Rock isn't alone in its water quest. Booming communities up and down the Front Range are searching for new supplies. A recent state study shows the region's thirst will soar 53 percent in the next 25 years as more than 2 million people arrive. Castle Rock's population is expected to nearly triple to 100,000 by 2030, up from 35,000 today. If the water proposal is approved by the town council - it will be formally presented Tuesday evening - the town will more than double its water supplies, bringing the total to 15,400 acre-feet, up from 7,000 acre-feet today, according to Ron Redd, utilities director...But the plan relies on more than simply building water systems. The town also hopes to slash per capita water use to 135 gallons per capita per day, down from a current rate of 165 gallons...If Castle Rock's plans succeed, three-quarters of its water will come from renewable surface sources, while another large piece will come from a sophisticated recycled water system."
Cedar City, Utah is certainly not in Colorado but this article from TheSpectrum.com details plans to run a $500 million pipeline from Lake Powell to Washington County, Iron County and Kane County. Just another claim on an over allocated resource (the Colorado River).
From the article, "The Department of Water Resources began exploring the possibility of the Lake Powell Pipeline in 1995. Rep. Mike Noel, District 73, said state officials knew there would be a water shortage in Southern Utah because of growth in the area. But nobody expected the unprecedented growth of the past few years...The pipeline would begin at the Lone Rock Pump Station near the Glen Canyon Dam at the southern tip of Lake Powell. The 66-inch pipe would then stretch 120 miles to Sand Hollow Reservoir near St. George. From there, a 30-inch pipe would follow Interstate 15 for 38 miles north to Cedar City. The pipeline would provide 70,000 acre-feet of water to Washington County, 20,000 acre-feet to Iron County and 10,000 acre-feet to Kane County."
Meanwhile discussions and plans are proceeding to try and improve water quaility in the Colorado River Delta. You did know that the Colorado used to flow to the Pacific ocean? From the article, "What grows the agriculture is the water from the river that gives the border town its name, the bi-national Colorado River.
While Yuma and the agriculture in California's Imperial Valley have been growing, however, the river has been shrinking and, with it, the economic development possibilities of everybody living from San Luis south all the way to the mouth of the channel. Some agribusiness interests think the irrigation is the only valid use for the river water. They look at a river flowing and see a waste of the precious liquid. But watering crops with Colorado flows for years has created salty chemical runoffs that pollute it beyond recognition, and many folks would like to conserve the water for other ends. In fairness, of course, agribusiness is not entirely to blame for the paucity and degradation of Colorado River water. Hydroelectric dams all along its course, as well as industrial and municipal demands of the arid U.S. Pacific Southwest, take their toll. The point is that fishing, hunting, birding, boating, tourism and other longtime socioeconomic activities in Baja California have gotten the short end of the stick when it comes to measuring their share of the Colorado's wealth. More often than not, the only water they still receive is what's left in the drainage from grain and vegetable fields...So, many residents of the Colorado River Delta, at the northern end of the Gulf of California, are staking their lives on securing greater allocations of fresh water from the river for their use in downstream habitat restoration. Their efforts have congealed in the multi-sector Colorado River Delta Project, undertaken by water users, researchers and non-governmental organizations several years ago. Now they are garnering the attention of key civil servants who can incorporate their ideas into institutional planning."
Efforts to remove non-native fish species from the Colorado River are working according to AZCentral.com. They write, "Efforts to remove non-native fish from parts of the Colorado River appear to be working, with more native fish being reported by fish-removal crews. A years-long effort to remove trout from the river by stunning the fish with electrical shocks and netting them is now in its final year. Biologists say the number of trout is dropping while the number of natives species the program is designed to help, such as speckled dace, bluehead and flannelmouth suckers and chub, is increasing. Crews have stunned, captured and killed more than 17,000 non-native fish this year. Their remains are ground up for use as fertilizer on a downstream Indian reservation. While teams used to catch native fish only about 5 percent of the time, there are now stretches of the Colorado River where they are dominant, according to Clay Nelson, the Arizona Game and Fish Department biologist contracted to run the fish-removal efforts for the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program."
Here's another article about the snowpack from the Durango Herald. From the article, "Colorado snowpack figures as of Thursday (amounts are percentages of the 30-year average): Gunnison Basin - 73 percent; Upper Rio Grande Basin - 23 percent; San Miguel-Dolores-Animas-San Juan Basin -28 percent; Arkansas Basin - 83 percent; Upper Colorado Basin - 123 percent; Laramie-North Platte Basin - 107 percent; South Platte Basin - 118 percent; Yampa-White River Basin - 103 percent; Statewide: 84 percent."
Meanwhile ranchers east of Durango are suing to require oil and gas companies to protect groundwater according to the Durango Herald. From the article, "A lawsuit by two ranching families in the heart of coal-bed methane gas country east of Durango could require gas-extracting companies statewide to protect the water rights of others. The plaintiffs - Jim and Terry Fitzgerald in La Plata County and Bill and Beth Vance in Archuleta County - allege that the extraction of water from coal-bed seams should be subject to the same regulations as agricultural or sand/gravel operations. Methane gas producers, they say, should have well permits and a plan for replacing water taken in the course of their work. Otherwise, the extraction of water during gas drilling could dry up wells, contaminate ground water or result in flammable tap water, according to the lawsuit, filed Nov. 21 in District Court in Durango. Methane-gas producers dispose of water extracted from coal seams in deep wells or evaporation ponds. Water is extracted to free methane gas from the coal-bed. No one from the state Attorney General's Office answered requests for comment. The lawsuit may be the first challenge to coal-bed methane producers regarding water quantity under Colorado law, according to the plaintiffs' lawyer, Amy Beatie of the Denver law firm of White & Jankowski. Coal-bed methane extraction is different from other oil and gas development because it can suck dry the water in areas where drilling occurs, Beatie said...U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management environmental studies conclude that water in methane gas-producing formations in the northern San Juan Basin is connected to the aquifer and surface-water system and that disturbances affect the water rights of all water users, Fitzgerald said. According to Fitzgerald, the water used by gas companies to free methane gas qualifies as a beneficial use, one of the requirements for oversight by the state engineer. The benefit is the production of gas."
Category: Colorado Water
6:48:57 AM 
|
|
