|
|
Friday, January 11, 2008
|
|
| |
The town of Wiggins water supply was a hot topic at a recent meeting of the town council, according to The Fort Morgan Times. From the article:
Water for the town of Wiggins was topic of discussion by the group after a report that the water table is at 139 feet to date, which is 3 feet less than last year and 4 feet less than the year before at this time, according to Rogers. He also said that the price of water has almost doubled what it was a year ago. Discussion was held as to just how serious the problem is at this time, and Rogers was asked if he had a recommendation. Rogers talked about the three different scenarios of getting water that had been discussed before such as from Fort Morgan, Northern Colorado Water District (with which augmentation would be necessary) and Morgan County Quality Water District. "I would say that even with normal moisture, we will not have enough water for lawns and such this summer," Rogers said. "It will be difficult, it will be very expensive, but we need to do something very soon."
Category: Colorado Water
6:48:22 AM 
|
|
Here's a recap of the second meeting of the Colorado Agriculture Preservation Association from CAPA. They write:
The Colorado Agriculture Preservation Association (CAPA) held its second meeting, this one in December. Attendees included a representative from Senator Salazar's office, members of the Colorado legislature, and other community leaders. The meeting focused on the compact compliance pipeline and how to advance the project.
The basin has come to realize in the past few months that a compact compliance pipeline is essential to the economic sustainability of the Republican River Basin. A good resource that illustrates the need for the pipeline is a graph that was produced by Republican River Water Conservation Districts (RRWCD) Engineer, Jim Slattery. This graph projects the effects that the draft compact rules will have on compliance. On the graph the curtailment of the groundwater within the three miles will provide less than 2,000 acre feet of credit annually. The surface water will account for approximately 3,000 acre feet per year. Draining Bonnie Reservoir would account for around 4,500 acre feet annually. This still leaves Colorado over 2,000 acre feet out of compliance each year. Additional measures must be taken to achieve compliance. The graph also illustrates that with entire basin well shut down Colorado will not be in compliance with the Compact Settlement Agreement. An option that has worked on the Pecos River to deliver New Mexico's obligation to Texas is a pipeline which is similar to the one that the RRWCD and water authority have been working on.
Not only is this pipeline essential to the continuation of irrigated agriculture in the Basin but it is also essential to sustain the economic base. It is CAPA's estimates that if all wells in the Basin are shut down due to curtailment by the Division of Water Resources or ruling by Special Master that home values will drop by approximately thirty-five percent. This means that a home currently valued at $300,000 would only be worth around $195,000. The loss of the irrigated land based taxes to the schools that collect mill levies in Yuma County is projected to be a loss that will range from $276,626.23 to $312,498.27 annually depending on the amount of acres that would be converted to dry land or rangeland, this number doesn't include any bonds the schools collect.
President of the RRWCD, Dennis Coryell, stressed the urgency of construction the Compact Compliance Pipeline stating that the RRWCD is going to try to have wet water pumping into the river by no later than June of 2009. Robin Wiley, Yuma County Commissioner, was also there to speak about the water authority's mission to protect all irrigators.
Both Coryell and Wiley stated that the cost of the pipeline depends on the location of the wells. They are planning the pipeline to make a maximum delivery of 15,000 acre feet per year. They both expressed that they are encouraged by cooperation that has taken place over recent months and that they are optimistic about the direction the Basin is headed.
Both Senator Greg Brophy and Representative Cory Gardner stated that their goal is to see that not one well is shut down involuntary. They are also working on a plan to protect all 4,000 wells in the basin. They have encouraged concerned citizens to continue to contact the Governor, State, and Local representatives by letter or by telephone. Mac McGraw, a member of Senator Salazar's staff also attended the meeting. County commissioners from Yuma and Kit Carson County also attended the meeting.
The Colorado Agriculture Preservation Associations mission is to provide local stakeholders a voice in current basin issues and sustain our rural economic community. The CAPA members and the community are encouraged to keep sharing with others the information so that all involved will be informed and had the chance to have their voices heard.
More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
Category: Colorado Water
6:39:06 AM
|
|
We know that all you water nuts are obsessed with the winter snowpack since it's the source of around 80% of Colorado's water supply. Here's a report from The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel after the storms of the past couple of weeks. They write:
To say the snow is deep in the mountains may be a bit of an understatement. Most of Colorado's river basins are flush with snow, brimming with fresh powder and pushing snowpack moisture levels to more than 50 percent above average in some places. But water managers are concerned [ed. Water managers are almost always concerned.  ] as the long-term weather forecasts show the state's pattern of a nearly every-other-day blast of snow may be about finished for the foreseeable future.
After Wednesday's snowstorm, which dropped more than 3 inches on Grand Junction and 19 inches over two days at Powderhorn, the Upper Colorado River Basin's moisture levels are at 120 percent of average, and its total precipitation is 124 percent of average. Snow water content in the Arkansas River Basin is 147 percent of normal; the Yampa and White river basins are at 98 percent of normal; and the Upper Rio Grande Basin is at 165 percent of normal. The driest basin in the state is the North Platte Basin, which is at 97 percent of normal...
"Beware of a dry spring," Colorado River District Manager Eric Kuhn said. "We've got a La Nina that's getting stronger. That tends to point to a typically drier spring." A drier pattern, at least for the short term, is already setting up despite the state's recent robust snowfall. The National Weather Service's 10-day forecast predicts less than normal precipitation for most of Colorado, especially the Western Slope...And just because river basins statewide are flush with snow doesn't mean we'll have a stellar runoff if March and April turn out to be warm as expected, Kuhn said.
More snowpack news from The Mountain Mail. From the article:
By Wednesday, statewide snowpack was 123 percent of average. Within the Arkansas River Basin, snowpack was 147 percent of average. On Fremont Pass north of Leadville, Natural Resources Conservation Service measurement equipment showed a 113 percent of average snowpack. At the Brumley station west of Twin Lakes near the summit of Independence Pass, snowpack was 132 percent of average. On Porphyry Creek near the summit of Monarch Pass it was 161 percent of average. A major three-day snowstorm boosted the state average from 110 percent on Jan. 1...
While December and early January storms benefited southern mountains, they missed most of the northern mountains. As a result, lowest snowpack percentages were measured in the Yampa and White River Basins in northwest Colorado. Other basins reporting below average accumulations in the survey were the North and South Platte River Basins. According to conservation service officials, by Jan. 1 the state typically receives 40 percent of its total seasonal maximum accumulation which is reached in early April annually.
Category: Colorado Water
6:16:05 AM
|
|
In November Pueblo District Court Chief Judge Dennis Maes ruled that Colorado Springs' proposed Southern Delivery System is subject to Pueblo County's land-use regulations and therefore is required to obtain permits from the county. The Pueblo Chieftain reports that the Springs is appealing that ruling. From the article:
Colorado Springs has appealed a November decision by Pueblo District Court Chief Judge Dennis Maes that the city's proposed Southern Delivery System is subject to Pueblo County land-use regulations. Maes ruled Colorado Springs is subject to Pueblo County regulations under two 1974 laws, HB1034 and HB1041. Colorado Springs on Nov. 23 filed a request to clarify the scope of Maes' Nov. 7 order, restricting it to the physical structures of its proposed pipeline rather than the impacts of the project - including return flows on Fountain Creek. Pueblo County filed a response on Dec. 24 to the request asking Maes not to modify his order. The county's land-use attorney, Ray Petros, argued the suggested clarification would subject the Nov. 7 order to confusion upon appeal and submitted an alternate clarifying order, which Maes accepted.
In an October trial, the county argued the pipelines, pumping stations, storage and return flows associated with SDS could have detrimental impacts on roads and property in Pueblo County. Therefore, SDS should be subject to county permitting, Petros argued. Colorado Springs attorney David Eason argued Colorado Springs should not be subject to Pueblo permit regulation because the primary route for the pipeline is in a zoned utility easement where other projects have been constructed without special hearings. Pueblo County countered that a project with the scope and size of SDS was never anticipated prior to 1974. The county adopted new land-use regulations in 2005 to encompass large water projects. Colorado Springs has not filed for a county permit, even though it acknowledged one is needed in a March 2004 intergovernmental agreement with the city of Pueblo and the Pueblo Board of Water Works. Pueblo County was not a party to the 2004 IGA, but cited it in court records.
In its appeal, Colorado Springs argues its project meets criteria for zoned land exemption under HB1041. Colorado Springs cites five sets of issues that may be raised on appeal. The first is whether Maes erred in his interpretation of the zoned land exemption under HB1041, including whether the size of the project and its subsequent operation are relevant questions. The second is whether Maes erred in deferring to Pueblo County's interpretation of the statute. Third, Colorado Springs asks whether Maes failed to determine what zoning would be applicable to SDS and whether it would meet criteria for exemption under HB1041. Fourth, Colorado Springs asks whether Maes failed to determine whether SDS met the definition of utilities under HB1041. Finally, the city asks whether Maes allowed issues outside the scope of a pre-trial stipulation to be addressed in the order. Colorado Springs disputes whether HB1034 regulations apply, claims the project originated outside Pueblo County's jurisdiction and argues the court has no authority to hold it to the March 2004 IGA with Pueblo and the Pueblo water board.
More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
Category: Colorado Water
6:07:41 AM
|
|
The Aurora long-term contract with Reclamation is in the news again. Another entity, Arkansas Native LLC, a group headed by Pueblo Chieftain Publisher Bob Rawlings has filed a motion to intervene in the lawsuit, according to The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
Arkansas Native LLC filed the motion Wednesday in U.S. District Court at Denver to intervene in the lawsuit by the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy challenging Reclamation's authority to issue the contract and the validity of an environmental assessment. Chief U.S. District Judge Edward Nottingham granted Aurora status in the federal lawsuit last week. Arkansas Native claims Aurora is moving Fryingpan-Arkansas Project water from the valley in violation of state and federal laws. Members of the group are Rawlings, former Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District President Wally Stealey, former state lawmaker Bob Shoemaker of Canon City and Wiley banker Frederick Esgar. They claim the contract will injure water rights they own within the Arkansas Valley.
The group also has challenged Reclamation's authority to enter an exchange contract with Aurora in Division 2 Water Court, in relation to a 2006 application by partners in the Pueblo flow management program under a 2004 intergovernmental agreement. The 2004 IGA between Aurora, Colorado Springs, Pueblo, the Pueblo Board of Water Works, Fountain and the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District includes a provision to maintain flows through Pueblo through "foregone diversions." The 2006 application seeks exchange rights related to the flow program.
In its state water court filing, Arkansas Native refers to Reclamation's exchange contract with Aurora as a "legal fiction," and asks the court to reject Aurora's application for exchanges on that basis. The legal fiction argument stems from a 1996 Colorado Supreme Court decision in Thornton v. Bijou that upheld a water court ruling that water from the Colorado-Big Thompson Project - water imported into the basin - could not be exchanged for water native to the South Platte Basin. Thornton's argument that the water "changed character" during the exchange was rejected by the courts. Arkansas Native argues that exchanging Fryingpan-Arkansas Project water for native rights purchased by Aurora in the Lower Arkansas Valley, as outlined in the federal contract, is a violation of state water law, and allows Aurora to make exchanges outside of limits imposed by its state decrees. The federal complaint, prepared by attorneys from the Denver law firm of White & Jankowski, echoes that argument: "The Aurora-Bureau contract would allow, through exchange, Aurora to export project water from the Arkansas River basin to the South Platte River basin. Allowing such exportation of project water would cause a material change in the Fry-Ark Project and would violate the authorizing act for the Fry-Ark Project."
More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.
Category: Colorado Water
5:55:33 AM
|
|
|
|
© Copyright
2008
John Orr.
Last update:
1/31/08; 9:13:36 AM.
|
|
|
