|
|
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
|
|
| |
American Water Works Association: "Conserve to Enhance offers an innovative municipal water conservation mechanism designed to motivate consumers to conserve water and set aside funds to purchase water for environmental needs. The concept and program elements were developed with the collaboration of utility representatives, elected officials, interested citizens, as well as more than 40 experts in water and environmental concerns."
Thanks to The Water Information Program for the link.
Category: Colorado Water
5:56:57 PM 
|
|
From The Pueblo Chieftain, "The Colorado Water Protective and Development Association owns a little more than 87 shares of Bessemer Ditch water, which it primarily uses to augment the wells of about 20 commercial operations which drilled the wells after 1985. The water has been used year-by-year under an augmentation plan approved by the Colorado Division of Water Resources. Last month, CWPDA made an application to make the use of the water permanent through a change of use decree, as required by state law."
More from the article:
The association serves about 20 domestic water providers, along with agricultural and commercial users. It has about 500 members overall. The group augments wells under a 1996 state regulation that requires well owners to augment flows in the Arkansas River to offset depletions from groundwater pumping. Wells are divided into two general categories: those in operation before 1985, when Kansas filed a lawsuit in U.S. Supreme Court alleging violations by Colorado of the Arkansas River Compact, and wells put in after 1985. Kansas prevailed on the issue of groundwater depletion in a 1995 decision, leading to new well rules. The Bessemer rights are used first to satisfy the post-1985 pumping requirements, and the overall needs of CWPDA, if water is sufficient...
The amount of water from the Bessemer shares is a small part of CWPDAs portfolio, which is a mix of owners' surface rights, purchased rights and leases, which are one-time sales of water that don't change water rights ownership. It is also only part of the supply for post-1985 users. Members of the group include Fountain Creek users like Fountain, Widefield and Security, cities in the Lower Arkansas Valley and many farmers. The group this year is applying for 8,000 acre-feet of excess-capacity storage in Lake Pueblo to help manage the timing of flows into the Arkansas River. The 87 shares are also a small part of the Bessemer Ditch, which has about 20,000 shares overall. Shares in the ditch now are overwhelmingly designated for agricultural use, although the St. Charles Mesa Water District has filed for a change of use to domestic supply on about 10 percent of the shares, which it uses to provide water to homeowners. The Pueblo Board of Water Works and Pueblo West are trying to buy a controlling interest in the Bessemer Ditch as well in order to meet future water needs, although active purchase of the shares has not yet begun. In recent years, other well owner groups have taken similar steps to cement their water rights with decrees, rather than relying on year-to-year state administrative approval. The Lower Arkansas Water Management Association and Arkansas Groundwater Users Association received decrees to add augmentation to water rights they purchased on various ditches to satisfy state requirements related to the Kansas v. Colorado suit.
Category: Colorado Water
6:36:15 AM
|
|
From Reuters, "Antarctica lost billions of tonnes of ice over the last decade, contributing to the rising seas around the world, a climate researcher said on Monday. The ice melted from two particular parts of the southern continent, according to Eric Rignot and colleagues, who wrote about the phenomenon in the journal Nature Geoscience. Using satellites to monitor most of Antarctica's coastline, the scientists estimate that West Antarctica lost 132 billion tonnes of ice in 2006, compared to about 83 billion tonnes in 1996. The Antarctic Peninsula, which stretches toward South America, lost about 60 billion tonnes in 2006. To put this in perspective, 4 billion tonnes of ice would be enough to provide drinking water to the more than 60 million people of the United Kingdom for a year, fellow author Jonathan Bamber of the University of Bristol said in a statement. This ice loss is not from the so-called ice sheets that cover the water around the continent. This melting occurred in the glaciers that cover much of the Antarctic land mass, and when that melts, it contributes to sea level rise in a way that sea ice does not."
Category: 2008 Presidential Election
6:22:59 AM
|
|
Here's an opinion piece from The High Country News in favor of the proposed H.R. 2262, the Hardrock Mining Act of 2007. From the article:
Though congressional reform never seems to go the distance, last November marked a milestone: The Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2007 passed the House of Representatives 244-166, and was a huge victory for hunters and anglers. The bill was strongly supported by a coalition called Sportsmen United for Sensible Mining, made up of organizations and individual grassroots partners and spearheaded by the National Wildlife Federation, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, and Trout Unlimited.
Now, it's the Senate's turn, and as the issue gains momentum, sportsmen in the West want to make sure the bill retains four principles that will make all the difference in the world to fish and other wildlife:
*Allow reclamation incentives and common-sense liability relief to those "good Samaritans" who buy or own land damaged by mining. Companies and nonprofit organizations that didn't create the problems created by abandoned mines or their waste need to be encouraged to return the land to other uses while being protected against unreasonable liabilities.
*Prohibit the patenting or sale of public lands under this law. Since 1872, public lands have been practically given away to mining companies for as little as $2.50 to $5 per acre. Our wildlife needs public land to survive, and reform should prohibit the sale of that land.
*Create a royalty from any minerals taken from public lands to fund fish and wildlife conservation programs and reclamation of mined land. Sportsmen for over a century have been paying to play on public land; it's time mining companies paid their share.
*Strengthen protections for fish, wildlife and water resources from the impacts of mining. This can be done by entrusting federal land managers with the authority to ensure reclamation of mining sites and to approve or deny mining permits based on environmental impacts.
More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.
Category: 2008 Presidential Election
6:17:16 AM
|
|
The Great Lakes Basin Compact is an state election issue in Michigan. They're hoping to prevent any large scale movement of water to the Southwest. From The Sturgis Journal, "People and business moved out of Michigan to warmer and drier climates and now they want Great Lakes water, one member said. Where do the candidates stand on the water issue? Rob Sisson, a member of Republicans for Environmental Protection since 1999, was passionate. "I really believe water is our future," he said. In the next 20 years, Sisson believes industry will be moving to the water, and Michigan has water. One of the most water-intensive manufacturing process is the creation of computer chips, Sisson said, and all the companies are in California. He is frustrated with Republicans in Lansing dragging their feet, hesitant to sign the Great Lakes Basin Compact which prevents the shipping of water from the basin out of the area. The Colorado River is going dry and that's not an acceptable option for the Great Lakes, he said. Bordner, a farmer, also an advocate for keeping Great Lakes water "local," said while he agrees with the compact, farmers have run into issues concerning the use of water because of wording in similar compacts."
Category: 2008 Presidential Election
6:03:13 AM
|
|
On Monday Aurora asked U.S. District Judge Edward Nottingham to dismiss the Lower Arkansas Water Conservancy District's lawsuit over the long-term contract between Reclamation and Aurora, according to The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
The district's lawsuit, filed in October in U.S. District Court, is against Aurora and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. They contracted in September for the lease of unused storage capacity in Lake Pueblo, part of Reclamation's Fryingpan-Arkansas water project. Aurora, in 24 pages of court filings Monday, argued the lawsuit should be dismissed, contending the district does not have the legal right, known as standing, to bring the lawsuit. The city argued that the district does not have standing because it has not shown in the lawsuit that the district itself has suffered actual or threatened injury as a result of the contract. To have standing, a plaintiff must show "concrete and certain harm" to itself, resulting from a defendant's action, Aurora argued. In the filings, the city said Reclamation is also asking for the lawsuit to be thrown out...
Aurora said the lawsuit lists these ways the district alleges the 40-year contract harms the district: By Reclamation's performance of its obligations under the contract. By Reclamation's alleged violations under the National Environmental Policy Act and actions that were an abuse of Reclamation's discretion. By Reclamation's alleged failure to comply with federal environmental justice mandates. The alleged failure purportedly has harmed minority and low-income water users, constituents, inhabitants and taxpayers of the district...
"Without an adequate showing of harm, the (lawsuit) must be dismissed," Aurora argued. It contended the district "has failed to allege a sufficient injury to its own interests" to be entitled to bring the lawsuit. The city also contended the district, created in 2002, has used Fryingpan-Arkansas project water only since 2004, "sixteen years after (Reclamation and Aurora) first came to terms regarding the use of excess storage capacity" in the project. "Apparently, (the district) contends that the Aurora contract is a potential impediment to the eventual delivery of water called for in its letter of intent to Pikes Peak Regional Water Authority," the city said. The lawsuit "does not allege, however, that the water to be delivered (by the district) would be Fry-Ark Project water," Aurora contended...
The lawsuit said the district has signed a letter of intent to lease water from the Lower Arkansas Valley to the Pikes Peak authority. The authority is an organization of water providers serving northern El Paso County. The lawsuit said the district "is engaged in similar discussions with other water users," which, like the Pikes Peak authority, are outside the boundaries of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Aurora said the potential injury to the Lower Valley district's arrangement with the Pikes Peak authority "appears to be limited to the loss of available surplus storage space in Fry-Ark to facilitate the transfer of Arkansas River water to areas of the Arkansas Basin outside of" the Southeastern Colorado district. Aurora contended terms of the contract "preclude any injury to other Fry-Ark water users." Any water received by the district "is protected because the Aurora contract is an 'if and when' contract for water exchange of available water in the Fry-Ark system," the city said. Aurora argued that the contract does not involve any Fry-Ark water "except through transfer," thus, the lawsuit purportedly does not explain how the contract could impair the district's water rights...
The city argued the district's concern about not being able to deliver water to the Pikes Pike authority is "speculative" because the district and the authority do not yet have a contract. Aurora also argued it is dubious the district is legally entitled to claim to represent the interests of "water users, constituents, inhabitants and taxpayers."
More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
Category: Colorado Water
5:57:51 AM
|
|
|
|
© Copyright
2008
John Orr.
Last update:
1/31/08; 9:16:31 AM.
|
|
|
