Sunday, December 23, 2007

Central Colorado water news This month's article for Colorado Central Magazine is up at their website. Here are the links to the Coyote Gulch posts we used for background. Category: Colorado Water 6:34:19 PM     Fountain Creek management The Pueblo Chieftain is running a series on water in the Arkansas Valley. Here's a roundup of issues facing the Fountain Creek Watershed and the cooperation amongst interested parties that is leading to permanent solutions. From the article: While Fountain Creek water rights supply part of Colorado Springs' water supply, as well as providing groundwater to smaller communities in El Paso County, it is not part of Pueblo's water supply. More than 100 years ago, a private company sought to harness the Fountain Creek underflow in Pueblo, but customers complained the water was too hard for household use. In fact, the Fountain Creek through Pueblo always has suffered from poor water quality, and for large parts of the year did not even run. Now, there is a constant flow in Fountain Creek, as well as the potential for adverse impacts from too much flow. Channel-forming flows - the type that brings sediment downstream and deposits it in shifting sand banks - are more frequent because of development to the north. With increased water levels, high levels of E. coli bacteria nearly always are present... In 2005, community leaders became more active in seeking solutions to Fountain Creek. The Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District made it a prime issue in its negotiations with Colorado Springs. City councils has met periodically to review progress in controlling the creek. Pueblo County has asked to reopen studies of a dam. And, as officials scrambled to find funds to finish the Fountain Creek Watershed Plan, the Fountain Creek Vision Task Force began meeting in earnest in 2007. The group has talked about forming an authority to oversee projects to protect open space, create wetlands and improve management of flows. Colorado Springs also began in 2007 collecting fees for its stormwater enterprise, which will aim at reducing the impacts of development on flooding in the creek. The city this year also completed a project to catch sewage spills from its main wastewater treatment plant. Meanwhile, the Lower Ark and Colorado Springs have started a two-year program to develop a management plan for Fountain Creek... The Fountain Creek watershed is a 930-square-mile watershed shared by Colorado Springs, Pueblo and numerous other water users. For some it's a source of water, but it serves as a drainage basin for all communities. The issue: Pueblo officials developed renewed concern for Fountain Creek after damaging 1999 floods, and more acutely in 2005 after two large raw sewage releases by Colorado Springs, the latest in a series of more than 100 spills that released more than 73 million gallons into the creek in a 10-year period. What's at stake: Pueblo does not rely on Fountain Creek for drinking water, but water quality on the creek could affect downstream users. Health officials have found elevated levels of E. coli bacteria and have posted warnings for people to stay out of the creek. The bigger problem appears to be erosion and sedimentation, which could reduce the effectiveness of flood-control levees in Pueblo. Why it matters: Since meetings began a little more than a year ago, cities and counties affected by Fountain Creek have been focusing on improving flood control and incorporating more recreational opportunities. Pueblo County has suggested a multipurpose dam, or series of dams, to reduce the risk of increased base flows on Fountain Creek. Who's involved: Three major efforts, along with dozens of studies, are looking to improve Fountain Creek. The Army Corps of Engineers is completing the Fountain Creek Watershed Plan, in conjunction with 11 local partners. The Fountain Creek Vision Task Force has a 28-member steering committee that includes landowners and citizen representatives, and may lead to an authority. Colorado Springs and the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District have initiated a two-year program to develop a master plan and demonstration projects. U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., also has introduced a bill to study a dam, or dams, on Fountain Creek. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. Category: Colorado Water 8:52:04 AM     Snowpack Here's a look at Colorado's snowpack from USA Today. They write: As of Saturday, all but three of Colorado's eight river basins were above 100% of the 30-year average. One of those below 100%, however, was the South Platte, which supplies water to the populous Front Range and farmers. But it has risen from 58% on Dec. 1 to 89%. Two river basins that are major suppliers to downstream states, the Upper Colorado and Rio Grande, were at 102 and 147% respectively... [Klaus Wolter, of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] added that "this pessimistic outlook is actually more severe than the more neutral or even wet La Nina impacts that are more typical for such winters. A first glimpse at the moisture prospects for spring is surprisingly optimistic for New Mexico and southwest Colorado, but should not be taken at face value, due to lack of verifiable skill this far out, and due to typically lingering La Nina dryness." The National Weather Service, which is also part of NOAA, only forecasts for two weeks at a time. The service's latest Colorado forecast calls for above average temperature and below average precipitin for Dec. 30 through Jan. 5. Category: Colorado Water 8:35:12 AM     Southern Utes influenced state's treatment of Bayfield The town of Bayfield is on track to come into compliance with state wastewater discharge rules. Here's a look at the influence of the Southern Ute Indian Tribe over the town's relationship with the state, from The Durango Herald. From the article: Many Bayfield leaders believe the tribe pushed state officials to take a hard line on the town's sewage violations. "It's caused the state to react differently than they might in other situations," said Town Manager Justin Clifton. Ed Morlan, chairman of the Bayfield Sanitation District, agreed... Neither Frost nor tribal Vice Chairman Matthew Box returned messages seeking comment. But Sam W. Maynes, a Durango attorney who represents the tribe, said the tribe wanted to move on from the sewage controversy. "At this point, the tribe doesn't have an interest in revisiting the past, but is more interested in congratulating Bayfield on moving forward with plans to build a wastewater treatment plant that will ensure the protection of water quality in the Pine River," Maynes said. More coverage of Bayfield's problems due to moratoriums on sewer taps from The Durango Herald. They write: When Bayfield imposed a sewer-tap moratorium to ease pressure on the town's overworked sanitation system, it sent ripples through the local economy. A state regulatory agency, prompted by the politically influential Southern Ute Indian Tribe, which lies downstream on the Pine River, issued a moratorium on building permits in Bayfield in April 2006. The town followed with its own moratorium on sewer taps from February to May 2007. Builders complained. Restaurateurs complained. Recriminations flew. Heavy users of the Bayfield sewer system, such as Steamworks Brewery and the school district, were forced to reduce their impact. It was an embarrassing and frustrating crisis for Bayfield. So what went wrong? "It was a lack of planning," said Town Manager Justin Clifton, a former Fort Lewis College student body president who began working for Bayfield not long before the first moratorium. "That lack of planning was part of a mindset," Clifton added, speaking at an economic forum in Durango on Nov. 14. "It was, 'let's keep fees as low as possible because fees are bad for business.'" The Bayfield Sanitation District, led by a five-member board, drew much of the blame for allowing growth to overload antiquated sewage lagoons. The town of Bayfield wrested control of its residents' sanitation needs from the district in April 2006, and voters followed up by abolishing the district in a lopsided vote this November. It is planned to be formally dissolved Dec. 31... A plan to build a Steamworks Brewing Co. in Bayfield almost fell through after the sanitation district wanted to assess a $60,000 sewer fee. It was later dropped to $38,500 and the brewery opened in 2004. The brewery was later identified as one of five heavy users of the Bayfield sewer system. It has since taken steps, such as trucking waste off-site, that have dramatically reduced its usage. Morlan said more funding and planning could have forestalled the need for moratoriums. "If we'd have gotten $5 million and spent it five years earlier, it could have been avoided." Bayfield's crisis was unusual, said Dave Akers, clean water facilities program manager at the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment. "There's been growth in Colorado, certainly, but a lot of the growth has occurred in large municipalities, and those municipalities do a good job of keeping on top of their loadings," Akers said. In Bayfield's case, Akers said, "They continued to grow and accept more residential and commercial sources of wastewater. And ultimately, those added up to where they were exceeding the capacity of the plant."[...] The economic impact of the moratoriums was devastating, Clifton said. The initial ban on building permits in April 2006 prohibited even porches from being built. "Building is Bayfield's economic driver," Clifton said. "We don't have industry, we don't have tourism." When the building moratorium was issued "it had a ripple effect into all those other sectors," he said. Mountain Valley Market, a natural foods grocery store, closed. One restaurant, Mom's, never opened because the town would not allow it to connect with sewer service. The second moratorium, on sewer taps, lasted much of the next spring. Ted Caffarel, formerly of Delta Road Developers, was building Mesa Meadows, a 138-unit single-family subdivision near Bayfield Elementary School, when the second moratorium was issued. "The second one hurt us bad," he said. Caffarel estimated he lost "several hundred thousand dollars" because of the moratorium. "The market moved away from Bayfield," Caffarel said. "People knew about the moratorium, and it became very difficult to get people to consider moving to Bayfield." More from the article: By all accounts, Bayfield is well on its way to expanding limited sewage capacity. Measures taken to reduce sewage loads, combined with interim technical fixes, are expected to hold until a new sewage-treatment facility is completed. The current sewage lagoon system "is running certainly better than it's ever run," said Bradley Elder, a current board member of the Bayfield Sanitation District. Dave Akers, clean water facilities program manager at the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment, confirmed that Bayfield was in compliance with pollution limits. Bayfield plans to break ground on the new plant by the end of April. Construction is expected to be completed in late 2008 or early 2009. The plant will cost about $6.2 million, said Town Manager Justin Clifton. A loan will pay for most of it, with grants covering much of the rest...The new plant will be rated to handle 600,000 gallons a day, "essentially double" the current capacity, Clifton said. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. Category: Colorado Water 8:15:13 AM     Jim Eddy: The time to build is now Aaron Million's proposed pipeline and a pumpback project being pushed by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District are both in the planning stages. Either project could use all of the water left to Colorado in the Colorado River system under the 1922 and subsequent compacts. Here's a look with a southwestern Colorado perspective from The Durango Herald. From the article: The Yampa River west of Craig is one of the last rivers in Colorado with no major dams or diversions. But now, a water district from the northern Front Range wants to throw a leash on the river. It has proposed a 250-mile pipeline to claim some of the Yampa's flow for the Front Range. Meanwhile, a Fort Collins man named Aaron Million is pressing for a 400-mile pipeline from Flaming Gorge Reservoir in Southwest Wyoming to the Front Range. Either pipeline would affect the Four Corners and the rest of the state, because Colorado doesn't have much water left under the Colorado River Compact of 1922. "A project like this could well take all the rest of the water that's remaining in the system," said state Sen. Jim Isgar, D-Hesperus. The two pipeline plans were devised after the failure of the Big Straw, a pipeline that would have taken Colorado River water from the Utah state line to Denver. The compact's limits mean that if either proposed pipeline is built, it would be the last straw... Northern's board wanted to look for ways to cope with Front Range population growth without drying up farms, said General Manager Eric Wilkinson. "If you look around the state, long story short, there are few places where there's available water," he said. One of those places is the Yampa. So Northern wrote a study on pumping Yampa River water east, tunneling through the mountains to the Front Range. The highlights: A 250-mile pipeline. About $4 billion to build it. Up and running by 2023. Northern's study envisions piping 300,000 acre-feet of water per year and building a 500,000 acre-foot reservoir north of Maybell. That's four times the size of Animas-La Plata south of Durango. Wilkinson is quick to say the numbers are for discussion only. Northern leaders studied a 300,000 acre-foot diversion because that's how much water they estimate is left under the Colorado River Compact. The project would be too big for Northern alone. Wilkinson hopes for help from other utilities or maybe the state... Aaron Million, though, has a much quicker plan in mind. When he was a graduate student at Colorado State University, he looked at a map in the library and contemplated the short section of the Green River that runs into Northwest Colorado. He remembered working as a cowboy on the Green. Soon, he hatched the idea to build a pipeline to use Colorado's share of the Green, which blends with the Colorado River in Utah. His pipeline would start upstream at Wyoming's Flaming Gorge Reservoir and follow Interstate 80 through southern Wyoming before dipping south to the Front Range. Million says he can start running water through his pipeline within five years. He's been working on it for three years. "No one has found any fatal flaws," he said. However, the project would require a federal environmental impact statement, which Million would have to pay for, and so far, no agency has volunteered to coordinate the analysis. He plans to take 165,000 to 250,000 acre-feet a year from Flaming Gorge Reservoir. Windmills and solar power could run the pumps, he said. Plus, there's a net elevation loss from Flaming Gorge to the Front Range, so the pipeline could generate hydroelectricity. Million is talking to potential customers, but he knows there's enough demand for the water on the Front Range. He thinks the water could be recycled many times and be used for cities, farms and the environment... Eric Kuhn, head of the Colorado River Water Conservation District, thinks the pipelines are maybe too risky. If global warming sucks water out of the rivers, a big new pipeline could make Colorado violate the compact, and the whole state would suffer. Meanwhile, new residents will depend on the pipelines for their household water. "That's the issue with the Aaron Million project. They say, 'Well, we'll accept a 2007 right.' Well, baloney," Kuhn said. But someone has to provide water for the 3 million people expected to move here by 2035. The time to plan and build is now, said Jim Eddy, Million's business partner. "The (CRWCD) wants to wait, but waiting is what caused all the problems today," Eddy said. More Coyote Gulch coverage here, here, and here. Category: Colorado Water 7:49:25 AM

© Copyright 2008 John Orr. Last update: 1/1/08; 1:28:28 PM.