Monday, February 18, 2008

Dan Crabtree: I hesitate to say that the drought is over, but it is for this year Here's a look at the snowpack from The Aspen Times (free registration required). From the article: The Blue Mesa Reservoir west of Gunnison -- Colorado's largest body of water -- indicates how the state's doing in terms of water levels. It was full in 1999 and then again in 2006, but didn't make it to the brim last year. However, it will make it again this year, said Dan Crabtree, a water resources group chief for the federal Bureau of Reclamation. "If all our reservoirs are full and we are diverting all that we have a right to or that we can use, the excess goes downstream and it ends up in Lake Powell," Crabtree said. Powell acts as a storage vessel for the Upper Colorado River Basin states of Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico. In 1999, its waters reached only 3,555 feet above sea level out of a 3,700-foot capacity. Currently, Crabtree said, Powell is still more than 100 feet low, at 3,590 feet above sea level. But that could change. The Bureau of Reclamation predicts that snowpack runoff coming down the mountains and into the Colorado River will help recharge Lake Powell by nearly 5 million acre-feet of water, raising the reservoir's height by about 34 feet. Crabtree said a bureau report predicts that 13.08 million acre-feet of water will flow into Lake Powell between Oct. 1, 2007, and the end of September, while a year before, the inflow to Lake Powell during the same period was 8.08 million acre-feet. Powell must release 8.23 million acre-feet downstream during the same period. After about eight years of drought, Crabtree said, "I hesitate to say that the drought is over, but it is for this year." Looking over a list of snowpack figures, meteorologist Ken Ludington said, "Everything is way up -- it's been a good year." It's impossible to say for sure, but the consensus he and a group of meteorologists at the National Weather Service's Grand Junction office came to last week was that Colorado hasn't seen a big snowmaking winter like this since at least 1995. Category: Colorado Water 8:11:28 AM     HB 08-1330: Elect Water Conservancy Dist Board Here's an opinion piece from Ed Quillen (via The Denver Post) in support of HB 08-1330, Concerning the Election of Water Conservancy District Boards of Directors [pdf]. Read the whole thing. Here are a few excerpts: Political predictions, especially about our General Assembly, can be dangerous. Nonetheless, it is safe to prophesy that the legislature will kill House Bill 1330, which is scheduled to come up for its first committee hearing on Tuesday. HB 1330 would require our water conservancy district boards to be elected, rather than appointed by judges. WCDs collect property taxes and have eminent domain. But with rare exceptions, the public does not choose WCD boards. Pure and simple, it's taxation without representation. Further, these appointees cannot be recalled from office, and last summer, a judge ruled that term limits don't apply. This bizarre system of power without accountability might have made some sense in 1937, when Colorado established WCDs. Back then, district judges were directly elected, so there was some public accountability in the appointment process. Now judges are appointed, and subject only to retention elections. Also back then, all judges heard water cases and thus were familiar with ditches and diversions; today there are specialized water courts, and a district judge may know no more of water matters than any other informed citizen... The sensible solution is public accountability through elections. We are deemed smart enough to elect hospital and school boards, and even state legislators, senators and governors. But our legislature has for 71 years considered us too stupid to routinely vote on regional water development and administration. To the Colorado water establishment, we are just a bunch of wallets to be plucked. The water buffaloes will find a way to kill HB 1330. After all, the water that belongs to the people of Colorado ought not to be controlled by people accountable to the people of Colorado. That would be far too reasonable. Category: Colorado Water 7:58:34 AM     Colorado water law: Create flexible and cost-effective ways to trade and move water? Here's a look at the history of water in Colorado and some of the efforts that will hopefully lead to better management in the future from The Denver Post. Read the whole thing. Here are a few excerpts: As settlers flocked to Colorado during the Gold Rush, they saw that water was essential to their survival and success. They laid the foundation for a complex system of water infrastructure and laws. Today, this water-management system is under stress from growth in demand, drought and the specter of climate change. The system is bumping against its limits and needs to adapt. What do we do? Since the Gold Rush, the water system has been transformed several times. Water skirmishes led to the principle in our state constitution that use of water is a property right subject to appropriation. By 1920, Denver was filing on West Slope water rights. During the Depression, new agencies and districts were organized, and the seeds of large inter-basin projects were planted. The 1960s brought new reservoirs and laws about groundwater management, which became the basis for well shutdowns. The 1970s environmental years were followed by the Two Forks veto, which spurred a continuing hunt for water supplies for the metro area. Drought hit us hard in the new century... We already have a series of studies about what to do. The Water Conservation Board's Statewide Water Supply Initiative launched in 2003 has showed us about how much water will be needed. Other studies help us see how to manage it. For example, in 2007 the DU Strategic Issues Program recommended new partnerships and conceptual models for cooperation, along with measures to curtail water-wasting plants, conserve water and plan for drought. The studies explain that institutional change is needed to go with engineering solutions... The good news is that remarkable things are happening. Information technology enables us to track water better than in the past. At Colorado State University, for example, scientists have created excellent models for basin simulation and planning. State agencies have also developed models to explain how the state's plumbing works. Businesses help water users promote water conservation and exchanges, even as they work within the water court system. A dialogue has been created through the Interbasin Compact Process. Front Range and West Slope interests have also cooperated on some water-rights issues. State officials have detected signs of local cooperation where water users seem tired of conflict. In all cases, any cooperation won't be due to mandates or wishful thinking but to mutual self-interest. A third piece is needed to go with efficiency and cooperation: mechanisms to facilitate rather than impede access to water. These require ways to move water from places where it is available to places where it is needed so we can have a more workable water market. Unlike electric power, water is heavy and difficult to move, but we can have a market for water by moving it through paper exchanges, such as when an upstream user diverts a downstream user's water rights or when water is run through another user's lakes, pipes or canals. The biggest need is institutional support. Colorado's court-based system of water exchanges is not as flexible as a system where water can be moved flexibly within zones by administrative approvals. Fortunately, some water shares can be moved without court approval because they are based on new water from trans-mountain diversions. However, older rights based on historic use within a basin require court approval before they can be moved, even temporarily... Because our water-rights system is here to stay, we need to promote, approve and fund water planning and new technology to promote efficiency in water use and management. But saying that is like preaching to the choir. More important, and more difficult, is to create flexible and cost-effective ways to trade and move water. Category: Colorado Water 7:48:59 AM     Energy policy: Wind Here's an article about the effects of wind turbines on wildlife from RedOrbit. From the article: Supporters see wind power as the first clean, renewable, domestic power source to reach maturity. Many in the industry believe wind power will supply 20 percent of electric needs by 2020. And for the first time, wind energy is competitive in cost with electricity from conventional sources because of advances in turbine design during the last 30 years. The American Wind Energy Association said that wind electricity sells for half the price of nuclear power and about the same as electricity form coal, oil and natural gas... But the advantages don't mean that everyone appreciates -- or supports -- energy generated by wind farms. Some groups claim the wind farms are unsightly and some environmental groups are raising concerns about small birds, large raptors and bats -- as well as hoofed animals like antelope and elk. "We just don't know what the long-term effects will be -- and we don't know what the difference will be on wildlife if there are a thousand turbines instead of just one," said Ken Wilson, wildlife biologist and professor at Colorado State University. Wilson isn't fully opposed to wind farms, however. "It really is an unknown right now -- and some wind farms can be quite large," he said. "As a wildlife biologist, I know you can change the habitat easily. But it's a trade-off. There are many places to put wind farms without any damage. And you have to consider if it's worth it to put the turbines in place -- just in terms of clean energy." While wind energy seems benign, Wilson points out that water energy was once considered the cleanest energy of all -- and then the effects on fish and other wildlife dependent on free-flowing rivers was recognized. "And then, of course, you have the aesthetics," he said. "Some people don't want to look at a wind farm, just like many want to see white water in a canyon instead of a huge hydroelectric dam." Wilson said any change to the ecology and habitat can be a danger to wildlife. "There is no simple little equation that says this energy is clean and harmless," he said. "We just need more study done before we put these wind farms in places that could harm the wildlife." The hard part, he said, is slowing down the industry long enough to conduct the study. "When you look at the amount of money going into alternative energy development, the cost to study the problem is a very small amount," Wilson said. "But it will take a few years -- and most people want the wind farms operable within a few years. That certainly seems to be the case in Colorado, where three projects were completed last year. Phil von Hake, spokesman for the Colorado Renewable Energy Society, said 2007 was the best year for wind power because of action taken by the governor and the legislature. "Wind energy is getting cheaper -- and the eastern plains are an excellent wind resource," he said... Concerns about migratory bird patterns and bat flyways are overblown, von Hake said. Fears of dropping property values also are unjustified. "The new turbines aren't as much of an attraction for the birds," he said. "They know now not to put them in the middle of migration routes. And the turbines themselves don't have grids or girders for the birds to sit on. I think those arguments are finished." But Wilson disagrees, saying that no one is really keeping track of the number of small birds that could fall prey to the sharp blades of a wind turbine. "We just don't know -- and no one's tracking it," he said. "Small birds make easy food packets for animals and insects, so there's no way of telling how many die each year." More Coyote Gulch coverage here. Category: 2008 Presidential Election 7:30:13 AM

© Copyright 2008 John Orr. Last update: 3/1/08; 10:30:27 AM.