Wednesday, September 6, 2006

Reservoir levels Summit Daily News: "Steady High Country precipitation during the summer has left the area's reservoirs in good shape, with plenty of storage. Healthy water levels in Dillon and Green Mountain Reservoirs recently led Colorado River managers to declare a water 'surplus.' Even with demand from the senior Shoshone water right, there's enough water in the system to enable releases benefiting endangered Colorado River fish, said Scott Hummer, the Blue River Basin water commissioner for the State Engineer's Office. That means healthy water levels in the Blue River below Green Mountain Reservoir, flowing at 923 cubic feet per second as compared to mean early September flows of 565 cfs. Below Dillon Reservoir, the Blue River was flowing at 201 cfs Tuesday (177 mean flow for the date), and other local streams are also near historic averages, Hummer said. Denver Water is currently diverting about 33 cfs through the Roberts Tunnel. The average for this date is about 100 cfs, he said. "According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service, reservoir storage across the Western Slope was right around 100 percent of average at the end of July, but well below normal east of the Continental Divide. The Upper Rio Grande Basin is the worst off, with reservoir storage at 39 percent of average and only 55 percent of last year's storage for this date. The South Platte and the Arkansas were at 76 and 61 percent of average storage respectively at the end of July." Category: Colorado Water 6:42:53 AM     Local government to regulate watersheds? Grand Junction Daily Sentinel: "The Grand Junction City Council will decide tonight whether to adopt an ordinance aimed at protecting the city's watershed or refer the measure to the November ballot. Council members will hold a public hearing and then choose to either approve the ordinance as written or place it on the Nov. 7 ballot and let city voters decide. The meeting begins at 7 p.m. at City Hall, 250 N. Fifth St. Organizers with the Concerned Citizens Alliance, a local chapter of the Western Colorado Congress, led a charge in July to put the issue to voters. The alliance collected 4,270 signatures for a petition demanding the ordinance - nearly three times the 1,580 necessary to place a question on the ballot - and turned them over to City Hall. In the end, 2,635 were confirmed as those of city voters. The environmental group is pushing for the ordinance as oil and gas companies eye drilling on Grand Mesa, where Grand Junction and Palisade's municipal watersheds are located. Last month, the Bureau of Land Management issued leases for land in both municipalities' watersheds to Genesis Oil and Gas of Kansas City, Mo., but suspended the leases for a year to give the company time to work with Grand Junction and Palisade on its plans. A majority of council members suggested three weeks ago they would likely adopt the ordinance, saving the estimated $40,000 cost of a ballot issue and making it easier to amend the ordinance. An ordinance adopted by the voters could only be changed by the voters. Council adoption of the ordinance is fine with Bill Grant, as long as any changes don't overhaul the measure, he said." Category: Colorado Water 6:33:09 AM     Beauprez for governor? Grand Junction Daily Sentinel: "As the weekend's Club 20 debates approach, visitors and politicos arriving in Grand Junction will notice two prominently located billboards and a radio advertisement released Tuesday deriding Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez's support of Referendum A. Carrie Doyle, executive director of the Colorado Conservation Voters Campaign Fund, a group aimed at educating voters on statewide candidates' views on conservation issues, said she hoped the advertisements would make voters more aware of U.S. Rep. Beauprez's stance on the vital issue of water... "Doyle said the ads place a special focus on Beauprez's support of Referendum A, which would have allowed the state to go $2 billion into debt to finance unspecified water projects. 'When he comes to the West Slope he talks about protecting our water, but he supported Referendum A,' the radio ad says. Western Slope lawmakers, including former Rep. Matt Smith, R-Grand Junction, attacked the referendum as a license for the Front Range to steal water from the other half of the state. The referendum, which Ritter opposed, died by a two-to-one margin statewide... "Rep. Mark Larson, R-Cortez, who has endorsed Beauprez's opponent, Democrat Bill Ritter, told The Daily Sentinel that despite Beauprez's assertions that he is, in fact, conservation-minded, his votes in Congress show that Beauprez supports causes alien to the Western Slope. 'We believe in being tough stewards, but we also believe that water is a precious resource,' Larson said. 'We want a balance with oil and gas, and we have not seen that in the congressman's record.' Larson emphasized Beauprez's support for a bill that would have given manufacturers of MTBE (methyl tertiary-butyl ether), a gasoline additive, protection from liability if the chemical leaked into groundwater supplies. (The language dealing with MTBE never made it into the final version of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005.)[...] "Marshall said he questioned Larson's comments based on the fact the representative endorsed Beauprez earlier this year. Larson, however, told The Daily Sentinel on Tuesday that he never endorsed Beauprez. He said Marshall was distorting a discussion earlier this year they had during the spat between Beauprez and then-Republican-gubernatorial-candidate Marc Holtzman. He said he told Marshall that Holtzman's aggressive politicking, including Holtzman's coining of the phrase 'Both Ways Bob,' disgusted him." Category: Denver November 2006 Election 6:26:31 AM     Fountain Creek management Colorado Springs has a new plan to deal with sewage spills into Fountain Creek, according to the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article, "A new plan by Colorado Springs Utilities would capture sewage spills into Fountain Creek by diverting the entire flow of the creek through a former irrigation ditch into holding ponds. The water then would be pumped back about one mile through a pipeline to the city's main treatment plant before being released back into Fountain Creek, according to a plan still being formulated. Cost is estimated to be just under $10 million, which is less than the $13.2 million price tag utilities put on an inflatable dam plan abandoned last month. The size of the holding ponds - an estimated 18 million gallons - is based on past non-storm sewage spills, said Bruce McCormick, utilities chief water services officer... "...spills of more than 300,000 gallons from broken lines on Sand Creek in June 2005 caused by a large storm would not have been captured by the diversion, but a spill of 44,000 gallons in January during an operation to repair sewer lines would have been contained. The diversion also would not be effective against a spill not discovered for several hours, such as the release of 26,400 gallons after vandals used rocks to plug a manhole in May 2005. It also would not prevent bacteria levels from spiking during storms... "Most of the cost associated with the Stubbs-Miller Ditch project is not from the diversion structure itself, McCormick said. Other major cost items will include expanding one pond and constructing another to hold an estimated 18 million gallons, a milelong pipeline to return water to the Las Vegas Treatment Plant and electrical improvements at the site to power pumps and the diversion gate, McCormick said. Colorado Springs Utilities chief Jerry Forte first told Pueblo City Council about the inflatable dam concept in February, but provided few details. In August, the utilities backed away from the inflatable dam, citing the relative expense and the reliability of the system during a power outage. The new diversion plan should be complete by mid-2007." Category: Colorado Water 6:12:29 AM

© Copyright 2006 John Orr. Last update: 12/29/06; 12:09:34 PM.