Friday, January 4, 2008

Morgan County water in 2007 Here's a look at water in 2007 in Morgan County from The Fort Morgan Times. From the article: With more wells shut down or offered minimal pumping rights early in the year, many growers found themselves with no water to nourish crops. This led many to worry that irrigated land would be redesignated as dryland, with land prices to fall, or for producers to default on land and operating loans. Fortunately, local banks reported they had not yet seen such defaults, although they noted those supplying farmers with equipment, seed and fertilizers were hurting. Speakers came to town both to warn that the well shutdowns could destroy the economy and to say that it would not hurt as badly as some feared. Farmers crowded a Board of Morgan County Commissioners meeting in early February as they heard the board might consider making Front Range cities pay to replace the county taxes lost when water rights within the county were sold off under its 1041 powers. They feared that this might inflate the price of their water and reduce their chances of selling what some claimed was their only resource. When Gov. Bill Ritter showed up for a summit on groundwater use at the Wiggins Event Center March 22, 700 farmers, business people and northern Colorado leaders crowded the stands to warn Ritter about the consequences of water policy on the rural economy. This prompted Ritter to create the South Platte Task Force, which included Steve Bruntz of Wiggins, Arnie Good of Fort Morgan and Harold Griffith of Fort Morgan as well as local legislators. However, no short-term solutions were proposed. Meanwhile, a report by James Pritchett and Jenny Thorvaldson said senior surface water rights holders saw the value of their land rise and their irrigation season become longer. Category: Colorado Water 6:48:25 AM     New treatment plant for Bayfield Here's an update on Bayfield's new wastewater treatment plant from The Pine River Times. From the article: Bayfield is now jumping through all the assorted hoops needed to be able to build a new sewage treatment plant in 2008. Construction is supposed to start in late spring. As 2007 ended, Town Manager Justin Clifton was savoring the approval of a congressional "earmark" for $400,000 to help pay for the $6 million plant. The earmark was included in a $555 billion spending bill approved by congress in December and signed by the president on Dec. 26. It was sponsored by Congressman John Salazar and Senators Ken Salazar and Wayne Allard. In addition to that, the town has $600,000 to $700,000 transferred from the now dissolved Bayfield Sanitation District; $1.4 million from state Energy Impact grants; $300,000 Community Development Block Grant; and $5 million loan from the Colorado Water and Power Authority... One ordinance deals, among other things, with how sewer taps are issued and line extensions handled. It gives the town authority to determine the number of equivalent residential taps (ERTs) a new customer must pay for, and to re-assess the number of ERTs an existing commercial customer has. For now, the schedule for determining ERTs will stay the same as what the district had, town attorney Dirk Nelson said. As for line extensions, Nelson said that for out of town areas that have been part of the district (i.e. the Gem Village area), extensions and hook-ups won't be used as a tool to force annexation into Bayfield. But other areas that want service will be expected to annex. Another ordinance makes the sewer system a self-supporting government enterprise not subject to state TABOR limits on revenue and spending. One resolution sets tap fees and monthly rates the same as what the district was charging, but subject to change. Tap fees are now $6,000 in town and $3,500 for Gem Village. The Gem Village fee is likely to be the same as in town, once their sewage starts being piped to the new Bayfield plant... He said it's likely to take state officials 60 to 90 days to approve the new plant application. Clifton clarified to the Times that the application already has been submitted to the state, but they are likely to have questions, want more details, or want something changed. It will probably take around 30 days to compile the rest of the information for the application, before the state asks for it, he said. Once the town knows any changes to the designs and specs will be minor and low cost, he thinks the project can go out for bid before the plant application is approved. The project also needs an environmental assessment that Woodward said should be done in March or April, and a county class 2 land use permit... Woodward said construction is expected to take 10 months, plus one month for start-up, to get the biological processes going in the new plant. He estimates it will start operation in February 2009. Clifton hopes that with the grants, there will be enough money to also build a transmission line and lift station to get sewage from Gem Village and the Homestead subdivision to the new plant instead of expanding or replacing the small Gem Village treatment plant. That line and lift station are likely to cost around $1 million. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. Category: Colorado Water 6:37:14 AM     Twilight for Bonny Reservoir? Water levels in Bonny Reservoir are on the decline and the reservoir may be drained permanently in an attempt to help satisfy Colorado's obligations under the Republican River Compact, according to The Rocky Mountain News. From the article: There is another reason for Bonny fans to visit the once-brimming lake and still-great wildlife area. This could be goodbye. Colorado owes Nebraska and Kansas a backlog of 50,000 acre-feet of water from Bonny's only source, the South Fork of the Republican River. To make matters worse, drought and irrigation wells have lowered the aquifer and reduced the South Fork to a drip. "We do have to come back into contract compliance," said Grady McNeill, water rights specialist with the Colorado Division of Wildlife. "Some wells might have to be shut down." Also, it is possible that every last drop of Bonny, one of Colorado's finest warm-water fisheries, could dribble away. There is hope, though, in talk that Kansas is more interested in seeking compliance from Nebraska than grabbing the few drops that ooze from Colorado's headwaters. McNeill said Bonny might get by without releasing water this year, but evaporation estimated at 4,000 to 5,000 acre-feet per year remains its main problem. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. Category: Colorado Water 6:26:44 AM     Snowpack According to The Aspen Daily News (free registration required) the snowpack is officially above average a couple of months into the new water year. From the article: It's official - local and statewide snowpack are both above average for this time of year. A recently released report from the Natural Resources Conservation Service snow survey office in Lakewood has confirmed what we all suspected after one of the snowiest Decembers in history: On Jan. 1, the statewide snowpack was 110 percent of average and 113 percent of last year's readings on the same date. Snowpack in the Colorado River basin, which includes measuring sites in the Roaring Fork Valley, is 105 percent of average and 103 percent of last year's snowpack. The Roaring Fork basin in general has benefited from deeper snowpack than the Colorado River basin: Snowpack is 117 percent of average and 115 percent higher than last year. The closest measuring site to Aspen, on Independence Pass, is at 37 inches, which is 113 percent of average and 119 percent of last year's total for the same date. The Schofield Pass site above Marble is measuring at 117 percent of average, and another site up the Frying Pan, at Nast Lake, is reported as having a snowpack 181 percent of average and 152 percent over last year... The storms largely missed northern Colorado, and the lowest snowpack percentages were measured in the Yampa and White River basins, which had 85 percent of their average snowpack on Jan. 1 (but 107 percent of last year's). The news is also good for water supplies: Colorado typically receives only 40 percent of its total seasonal snow accumulation by Jan. 1, but this winter it appears that many parts of the state are on track for an above-average runoff season. Statewide, reservoir storage is 98 percent of average and 105 percent of last year's storage volumes. More snowpack news from The Greeley Tribune (free registration required). They write: According to records kept at the University of Northern Colorado, December 2006 had 26.5 inches of snow, concentrated in two storms late in the month. December 2007 had a little more than 18 inches of snow, but it was spread throughout the month... Meanwhile, the mountain snowpack has seen some improvement since early December, but the snow in the northern mountains remains below the long-term average. Officials with the U.S. Department of Agriculture will begin taking monthly snowpack measurements at the end of the month after relying on automated sites during early winter months. More coverage from The Summit Daily News (free registration required). They write: [Rick] Bly, who records snow and rain amounts for the National Weather Service, said it was the seventh-snowiest December on record, with 43 inches of powder, compared to the average 21.9 inches... "We did a lot of catching up," Bly said. For the weather year beginning Oct. 1, snowfall is 39 percent above average, based on records going back more than 100 years. Average January snowfall is just about the same as December, at 22.2 inches. The highest-ever snowfall total came in January 1899, the record-setting winter that left Summit County buried and cut off from the surrounding area... In Dillon, where Denver Water officials also keep track of daily snow and temperature readings, 29 inches of snow fell in December, with the biggest single-day total coming back on Dec. 6, with 9 inches. The snow melted down to 2.4 inches of water, about double the historic average based on records going back to 1909. Last year, only 12 inches fell at the Dillon site in December, despite the pair of big holiday blizzards that bopped the Front Range and shut down Denver International Airport. Despite the beefy December snowfall, there are still indications that La Niña conditions, with colder-than-normal sea surface temperatures in the eastern Pacific, could lead to dry skies for the next few months... And Summit County wasn't the only area blessed with generous December snow. Vail reported the snowiest December since 2000, with 97 inches of snow at the ski area, and Aspen also flirted with an the all-time December snowfall record of 72 inches, set in 1983. The December dumps helped build up the mountain snowpack to decent levels by the end of the month. The Upper Colorado Basin snowpack was at 103 percent of average as of Jan. 3, compared to 101 percent on the same day one year ago. Snowpack in the Blue River Basin is at 110 percent of average, said Scott Hummer, water commissioner for the State Engineer's office. Hummer also said local streamflows have stayed near historic means for most of the winter. Flows have also stayed strong downstream of the big snowmaking operations in Keystone and Breckenridge, in the Snake and Blue rivers respectively. Those readings have steadily stayed above state-set minimum instream flows established to protect aquatic life, Hummer said. Category: Colorado Water 6:09:45 AM     Dead ducks at Front Range wastewater facilities Ducks are dying near wastewater treatment plants along the Front Range again this winter. Officials have received some dough from the USGS to continue studying the problem, according to The Denver Post. From the article: Ducks are dying again in the warm ponds of Front Range wastewater treatment plants, frustrating wildlife officials who are still struggling to understand what killed 850 ducks in wastewater ponds last year. "We have about 35 total at three sites -- not nearly as many as last year," said Jennifer Churchill, spokeswoman for the Colorado Division of Wildlife. Last year, the ducks -- mostly northern shovelers -- died in wastewater ponds in Denver, Boulder, Northglenn and Englewood, and also in south Denver's Sunfish Lake. The recent deaths have also been mostly shovelers, Churchill said. A few have turned up in Denver and Westminster, but most in the Littleton/Englewood wastewater treatment plant. All of the birds died after losing the waterproofing of their feathers, she said. Oily feathers repel water, and ducks that lose those oils get soaked to the skin and can die of hypothermia. Dozens of disease and chemical tests conducted by multiple agencies during the past year have ruled out infectious diseases, many chemicals and other toxins, John Wegrzyn of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said late last year. "Now, we're dealing with stuff that's a little more off the wall," Wegrzyn said. "It's just very frustrating to have it run out this long and still have people scratching their head."[...] Some have suggested that cold temperatures could be freezing the birds' natural habitat -- lakes and streams -- leaving only treatment ponds for shelter and food. Wastewater treatment ponds do not support enough duck food -- tiny animals called zooplankton -- to keep the animals healthy, said Steve Frank, spokesman for Denver's Metro Wastewater. And starving birds might not be able to maintain oily feathers Frank was skeptical about the cold-starvation theory. One duck died at the Denver plant Christmas Eve, when temperatures were relatively warm -- the low temperature was about 24 degrees, Frank said. At least six ducks have died at the Denver site, he said. Moreover, only some of the birds that died last year were emaciated, Churchill said. Many appeared to have been well-fed... The U.S. Geological Survey gave the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Colorado Division of Wildlife $20,000 to begin a controlled study of how the water in wastewater ponds affects living ducks, said Barb Perkins, Fish and Wildlife spokeswoman. The birds will be exposed to the water in controlled conditions and their feathers analyzed in detail, she said. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. Category: Colorado Water 6:03:46 AM     Water to generate electricity Here's a look at the water requirements from coal fired generation plants in the Arkansas River Basin. The article is the 13th in The Pueblo Chieftain's series "Water Logs." They write: Power plants - the coal-burning kind that provide most of the state's electricity - use a tremendous amount of water. When all three Comanche units operated by Xcel south of Pueblo are on line after the year 2009, the company will lease 14,700 acre-feet annually from the Pueblo Board of Water Works. The company will make hefty payments for the power, which will largely be used outside the Arkansas Valley. Xcel also bought the Las Animas Consolidated Ditch in 1984. Last year, the Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association completed its campaign to gain enough water rights to supply two large power plants near Holly by purchasing more than half of the Amity Canal. Water is also used in power plants that supply users in the valley. The largest is at Colorado Springs, which reuses nonpotable water in its power plants. All told, in the next 50 years, power plants in the Arkansas Valley potentially could double their current use - to a total of more than 50,000 acre-feet, or almost twice as much water as Pueblo now uses in its municipal water system... Coal-fired power plants require large amounts of water for steam turbine generators and cooling. - The issue: Using water for power reduces supply of water available in the Arkansas Valley. - What's at stake: While there are some economic benefits from taxes, fees and water leases, water is no longer available for other uses. - Why it matters: Just as people are dependent on a consistent supply of water, their need for electricity will not diminish over time. - Who's involved: Xcel Energy operates the Comanche power station near Pueblo; Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association has bought more than half of the Amity Canal for proposed plants near Holly; Colorado Springs Utilities uses some of its nonpotable water supply for its power plants. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. Category: Colorado Water 5:53:41 AM     Smart growth on agenda for legislature? Here's a report about conservationists and the upcoming legislative session from The Denver Post. From the article: A coalition of Colorado environmental groups said Thursday that it will concentrate in the upcoming legislative session on passing bills designed to promote healthy rivers, solar energy and smart growth. Elsie Jones, executive director of the Colorado Environmental Coalition, which represents more than 100 organizations, said the group wants to ensure "smart growth" by making sure state transportation dollars are used more effectively to reduce traffic and to assure there are sustainable water supplies. David Nickum, executive director of Colorado Trout Unlimited, said the effort to promote healthy rivers and streams will be done by "providing more freedom for water-right holders to be able to put water back into rivers." Nickum said healthy rivers are among the state's most valuable assets, preserving water quality for a variety of uses, providing a healthy habitat for fish and wildlife and helping the economy by promoting recreation and tourism. "There are rivers that, because of the growing demand associated with Colorado's rapid growth over recent years, are de-watered and some that are completely dried up at certain times," he said. Nickum said a fair way to help get water back into the streams and rivers and to keep them flowing is to work with "willing water-right holders to help them put water back in the streams and compensate them for that." Under current law, he said, water-right holders don't have incentive to do that and "actually face potential penalties for doing so." Category: Colorado Water 5:45:34 AM

© Copyright 2008 John Orr. Last update: 1/31/08; 9:10:44 AM.