Saturday, February 24, 2007

Colorado to move presidential caucus? Colorado Legislators are considering moving the presidential caucus from March to February, according to 9News.com. From the article, "State lawmakers are discussing a plan to move Colorado's presidential caucus from the middle of March to the first week in February in an effort to attract candidates to discuss issues important to their constituents. Capitol leaders from both political parties have been consulted and no decision has been reached. 'We're in talks to see if this is a good idea for the state as a whole,' said House Majority Leader Alice Madden (D-Boulder). 'It's not a party issue. It's about western issues...Presidential candidates should know about water. They should know what the Bureau of Land Management is.' Denver's selection as the host of the 2008 Democratic National Convention elevated the region into the political spotlight. The Democrats also decided to move the Nevada presidential caucus into the month of January, splitting up the traditionally first two states of Iowa and New Hampshire, to further highlight the Rocky Mountain region. However, more than thirty states will select their presidential candidate before Colorado does on March 18, 2008, leading many to believe Colorado will have no say in who the respective party nominees will be." Category: 2008 Presidential Election 8:13:12 AM     Lincoln Park Superfund site groundwater monitoring Here's a report about groundwater around the Lincoln Park Superfund site from the Cañon City Daily Record. From the article, "A Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment geologist told Community Advisory Group members Thursday no evidence currently exists for a 'massive leakage' from Cotter Mill's primary impoundment facility. However, he did say one particular monitoring well remains an area of concern. Edgar Ethington of CDPHE's Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division, who is a regular presenter at the advisory group meetings said continued monitoring of data needs to be done in order to make a determination of leakage. Ethington said 2006 third- quarter impoundment data of ground water monitoring results were 'very similar to the second quarter,' but the final quarter of 2006 data has yet to be analyzed and 2007 first- quarter data has yet to be taken by Cotter Corp. 'Once that is done, we[base ']ll determine if there is physical evidence that the impoundment is leaking,' Ethington said. Ethington did say an area well near the impoundment had a 'potential' for problems as he was reporting findings that indicate water added to the area beyond the natural flow water. He said this will continued to be monitored." Category: Colorado Water 8:08:39 AM     Energy policy: Renewable energy Peter Blake reports that HB 07-1281 [pdf] will not promote research and investment in hydroelectric power, in his column in today's Rocky Mountain News. From the article, "Because rivers flow even when the wind doesn't blow or the sun doesn't shine, there's no renewable energy more reliable - or cleaner - than hydroelectric power. But don't be looking for more of it in Colorado even as the legislature rushes through House Bill 1281, which mandates that power companies and cooperatives in Colorado generate 20 percent of their electricity from various renewable sources over the next 13 years. What they mostly have in mind is wind, sun and some plant and animal waste. Hydroelectricity is acknowledged, but barely. The bill limits new hydroelectric sources to 10 megawatts or less, and existing hydro plants to 30 megawatts. Generate more than that, no matter how efficiently, and it won't count against the 20 percent renewable that Xcel Energy and the state's various rural electrics must produce by 2020. During floor debate Friday, Rep. Frank McNulty, R-Highlands Ranch, offered an amendment that would have, as he put it, 'popped the top' on how much renewable energy the companies could produce with water." Category: 2008 Presidential Election 7:30:25 AM     HB 1036 HB 07-1036 [pdf]: Concerning Restrictions on the Ability of Governmental Bodies to Acquire Specified Water Rights through the Exercise of the Power of Eminent Domain passed narrowly in the state House of Representatives yesterday, according to the Pueblo Chieftain. From the article, "A bill to strip governments' ability to take water rights through eminent domain squeaked through the House on a preliminary vote Friday. Freshman Rep. Jerry Sonnenberg, R-Sterling, said that while the use of eminent domain of water rights isn't used often, it's important to outlaw it because water is a different kind of property right and shouldn't be lumped into land that governments may condemn for public need... "The House gave its nod to the measure on a 33-30 vote, but it still requires a final House vote, which could come as early as Monday. Opponents to the bill said removing the right not only will cause local governments to have to pay more for the water they buy, but that the right is needed to help protect local water interests from well-financed buyers looking to move water to other parts of the state. Rep. Anne McGihon, D-Denver, said the right for governments to condemn water is a constitutional right because water, more than real estate, is a public commodity and should go where the public needs it to go... "Supporters, however, argued the measure is needed just in case. 'I think a problem is looming, and it is time for us to be proactive as opposed to reactive,' said Rep. Al White, R-Winter Park. 'I'll tell you where the problem will come. It will come from these long-term fallowing agreements and long-term water leasing agreements. 'Imagine if you can, that the city of Colorado Springs acquires a long-term lease right to water,' he said. 'Twenty years from now when that lease expires and the farmer wants his or her water back, is Colorado Springs going to say, 'You know what, we've got plenty of water for our people. We haven't grown in the last 20 years.' You know what folks, it's not going to happen that way. What's going to happen, Colorado Springs will go to the farmer and say, 'I'm going to condemn your water.' That's why we need this bill.'" More Coyote Gulch coverage here. Category: Colorado Water 7:16:50 AM     Fountain Creek management Here's a report about yesterday's meeting of the Fountain Creek Vision Task Force, from the Pueblo Chieftain. They write, "With two water quality studies just beginning and two others showing seasonal swings in data without complete explanation, the committee learned it could be years before any meaningful data is generated. The committee also began talks on how the data would be used and what type of studies might be needed in the future. 'We've finally got all these people together and left the boxing gloves outside the room,' said Jay Winner, general manager of the Lower Arkansas Water Conservancy District. 'Now we have to get a level of trust in the room, not just among the group doing the studies.' While there may be some redundancy in the types of studies and the areas where water samples are being collected, the coordinated effort also will provide the opportunity for the different groups to cross-check or share data, most acknowledged... "Mostly, however, the group found common ground in four studies: "The U.S. Geological Survey is studying upper Fountain Creek to determine the source of E. coli. The study, called 'library independent,' will identify whether certain marker bacteria are human or livestock related, said Don Stoeckel of the USGS. The three-year study will look first at upper Monument Creek and is funded by the Colorado Department of Health, Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments and Colorado Springs Utilities. "Colorado State University-Pueblo is doing a three-year study at more than 30 points along Fountain Creek using a state-of-the-art machine to measure metals as well as bacteria. It could determine the loading of bacteria as streams collect water from urban areas, flow through agricultural areas and then re-enter urban areas, said Brian VandenHeuvel of the CSU-Pueblo biology department. Seed money for the study was provided by the Lower Ark district and other partners are being sought. "Pueblo has made weekly measurements of bacteria on four points on Fountain Creek since public concern over raw sewage spills in June 2005, said Scott Cowan of the Pueblo City-County Health Department. Preliminary results show warm water at higher flow rates or storms are responsible for higher E. coli counts. Cowan said the health department is primarily concerned with high counts, because ingesting water can cause illness and contact with water can cause skin irritation. Nationwide, far more outbreaks are caused by bacteria in sources like hot tubs, swimming pools or public fountains than in lakes or streams, he added. "Colorado Springs has measured E. coli at seven points on Fountain Creek monthly since the summer of 2005. The study shows similar results to Pueblo figures, with the highest counts during the warmest months with the heaviest flows, said Keith Riley of Colorado Springs Utilities." Category: Colorado Water 7:00:01 AM

© Copyright 2007 John Orr. Last update: 3/1/07; 6:57:05 AM.