Coyote Gulch's Colorado Water
The health of our waters is the principal measure of how we live on the land. -- Luna Leopold



































































Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
















































































































Subscribe to "Coyote Gulch's Colorado Water" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Saturday, December 29, 2007
 

A picture named barrlake.jpg

Say hello to Waterblogged.Info. They showed up in our referrer log after linking to us and naming Coyote Gulch in their ten top water blogs article. Thanks!

Here's their RSS feed.

Category: Colorado Water
8:19:27 AM    


A picture named derrick.jpg

Two studies on the effects of oil and gas development are due out soon, according to The Glenwood Springs Post Independent (free registration required). From the article:

Jim Rada, the [Garfield] county's environmental health manager, said a preliminary draft of a study done by St. Mary's Saccomanno Research Institute and Mesa State College and that will analyze the oil and gas industry and other area health risks, is expected to be ready for peer review in the middle of the January. The goal of the study was to have a neutral, third party analyze the risks to help open a dialogue on health concerns. It should be available for the public sometime in February, Rada said. "The Saccomanno Research Institute has gone much deeper and broader, and is looking into health risks on a community-wide basis," Rada said...

An ongoing hydrogeologic study has been looking at the relationship between drilling activities and water resources. The results of that study is expected to be released at the beginning of next year as well, according to the Garfield County Oil and Gas Department.

Category: 2008 Presidential Election
7:25:05 AM    


A picture named waterfromtap.jpg

Here's the 7th part of The Pueblo Chieftain's series on water issues in the Arkansas River Basin. It focuses on the Arkansas Valley Conduit. From the article:

In the 1950s, when legislation for the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project perpetually languished in Congress, the need for clean drinking water in the Lower Arkansas Valley was often mentioned. High salinity in the Arkansas River makes the water largely undrinkable and most communities depend on wells for their supplies...

For several years, the Southeastern district has been working toward a federal plan to complete the Arkansas Valley Conduit, with a larger federal cost share. It has been a major focus of lobbying efforts both within the state and in Washington...

In 2007, it appears progress is finally being made in obtaining funds. Congress approved a measure to grant Southeastern $600,000 for further studies on the conduit, now estimated to cost $330 million. The Water Resources and Development Act included a $79 million authorization - but no funding - for the conduit. The Colorado Water Conservation Board and state Legislature this year approved a $60.6 million loan to meet the local share if Congress passes a bill that would provide 80 percent federal funding...

A $330 million conduit from Pueblo Dam to the Lower Arkansas Valley could serve the needs of 42 communities providing water to 50,000 people.

- The issue: The conduit was part of federal legislation for the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project in 1962, but was never built because local communities couldn't afford it.

- What's at stake: Many communities are facing more restrictions as standards for pollutants in well water increase.

- Why it matters: La Junta and Las Animas already have expensive reverse-osmosis systems in place to treat water. Lamar has a plan for a non-potable irrigation system to stretch its treated drinking water supply.

- Who's involved: The Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District is the sponsor for the conduit.

Ed. note: We're looking for the link to the 6th part of series. If you have it please send email to coyotegulch [AT] mac [DOT] com.

Category: Colorado Water
7:11:22 AM    


A picture named whoopingcranes.jpg

From The Environmental News Network, "The Center for Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit in federal district court demanding that the U.S. Department of the Interior and one of its agencies, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, hand over public documents about former Interior Deputy Assistant Secretary Julie MacDonald. MacDonald abruptly resigned in April 2007 after the exposure of her unlawful interference with dozens of endangered species and habitat decisions by agency scientists, including at least one decision in which she stood to financially benefit. Ongoing legal investigations by the inspector general and General Accounting Office seek more information about MacDonald and whether the corruption goes beyond her office to higher levels."

Category: Colorado Water
6:51:11 AM    


A picture named measuringsnowpack.jpg

Here's some snowpack news from the San Luis Valley from the The Valley Courier. From the article:

Currently standing at well above average, snowpack in the Rio Grande Basin is higher than any other river basin in the state, Colorado Division of Water Resources Division III Assistant Division Engineer Craig Cotten said on Thursday. "The Rio Grande Basin is actually the highest in the state which is unusual especially since for quite a few years we have been about the lowest in the state," he said. Statewide the snowpack is 107 percent of average. In the San Luis Valley the Upper Rio Grande is sitting at 143 percent of average and the Sangre de Cristos at 128 percent of average, Cotten explained. The Sangre de Cristos are supposed to get more snow in the next storm, he added. The North Platte, Yampa and South Platte River Basins are below average, but the other basins including the Rio Grande Basin in the Valley are above average. Cotten said northern New Mexico is also doing well with snowpack. The Chama River Basin, for example, is at 152 percent of average. "That should help with the Rio Grande Compact," he said.

More snowpack news from The Craig Daily Press. From the article:

The 32 inches of fresh snowfall tallied in December and the 16 inches of snow left on the grounds at Trapper Mine can be affected by other factors, such as drifts caused by wind or snow melting before it's measured, making it hard to get a truly accurate measure. But there is a more telling number, Roberts said: precipitation of melted water. And that number already has something to say: At 4.01 inches of measured precipitation, it is the wettest December in the 29 years Trapper Mine has kept such records. The previous record for December was in 1983, at 3.35 inches of water precipitation. The 30-year average for water precipitation in December is about 1 inch, Roberts said. The wet, record-setting December comes on the heels of a dry, record-setting November. The 0.26 inches of precipitation marked the driest November in the mine's records, which is a cooperative observation site for the National Weather Service.

Category: Colorado Water
5:52:47 AM    



Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website. © Copyright 2008 John Orr.
Last update: 1/1/08; 1:35:19 PM.
December 2007
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          
Nov   Jan