|
|
Sunday, March 9, 2008
|
|
| |
From The Summit Daily News: "Anticipating U.S. Forest Service approval of a proposal to enlarge Old Dillon Reservoir, the Board of County Commissioners discussed paying for the multi-million dollar project. The county is partnering with Dillon and Silverthorne to create a valuable new water supply at a cost now estimated to be about $30,000 per acre foot. At that price, the enlargement would cost about $7.5 million, according to county manager Gary Martinez."
Category: Colorado Water
7:25:25 PM 
|
|
Here's some snowpack news from The Mountain Mail. From the article:
Average snowpack in the basin is at 161 percent, the second highest in the state. Feb. 4 snowpack in the basin was 165 percent of average. Compared to last year, this year's snowpack in the basin is more than 46 percent better. By Wednesday, statewide snowpack was 131 percent of the 30 year average, also a slight decrease from early February. Within the northern section of the Arkansas basin, snowpack was 157 percent of average near Monarch Pass, 132 percent of average at Fremont Pass and 156 percent of average near Independence Pass. At a measuring site near Saint Elmo in western Chaffee County, nearly 46 inches of snow is on the ground at 10,540 feet elevation. Nearly 70 inches is at Fremont Pass and 66 inches near Monarch Pass. Measurements in the southern part of the basin are higher. Snowpack was 224 percent of average at the Apishapa site west of La Veta and 181 percent of average west of Westcliffe...
Mountains of southern Colorado continue to report the highest snowpack percentages. Snowpack readings in the Rio Grande basin of southern Colorado continue to track at a near record pace at most locations. Wednesday the average snowpack was 162 percent of average. Although February snowfall was above average statewide, the greatest increases in terms of percentages over last month were across northern Colorado during the month. The Yampa, White, and North and South Platte basins received their best snowfall of the season, boosting the basins above average. For nearly the entire state, snowpack percentages increased each month since Jan. 1. The Colorado statewide snowpack shows a slight increase from the 129 percent of average measured Feb 1.
Category: Colorado Water
7:22:09 PM
|
|
Here's an update on Cañon City's proposed whitewater park from The Pueblo Chieftain. They write:
Nick-named for a fun 1970s sitcom and envisioned as an economic and aesthetic boost to the community, the proposed Whitewater Kayak & Recreation Park has moved $25,000 closer to becoming a reality. Canon City doesn't have a kayak course in the Arkansas River, although it has a healthy population of kayakers and is part of the Arkansas Valley's multimillion dollar whitewater tourism industry. But that is changing, aided most recently by a $25,000 grant from the Colorado Water Conservation Board. The Canon City Council accepted the grant this past week.
Last year, local boaters teamed up with the Canon City Chamber of Commerce to start the process of fundraising for the park, affectionately nicknamed "WKRP-Canon City." It is planned for the section of the Arkansas River that runs along Centennial Park, also known as Duck Park. Large boulders will be added to the river and the waterway will be shaped to create holes and chutes for kayakers, similar to the whitewater course in Pueblo.
Category: Colorado Water
7:00:16 PM
|
|
Here's a recap of last week's meeting of the Interbasin Compact Committee, from The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
How to clear legal obstacles, combine interests and pay for solutions for future water needs in a statewide plan were topics batted around in a lively discussion among the state's water leaders Friday. Conclusions were hard to come by.
The Interbasin Compact Committee, which represents the state's water basins and specific interests, responded to a challenge by Harris Sherman, director of the Department of Natural Resources, to give a vision for using the state's water resources over the next 50 years. "We can't separate water from everything else. Water is not in isolation with other things," Sherman said. "I don't recall state's top water leaders sitting around the table talking about this in this type of setting."
Generally, the group agreed the state is running low on new water supplies, there will have to be more sharing within or between basins to provide for growth, some protection is needed for nonconsumptive uses and changes are needed in how water business is done. After that it got complicated.
One possible way to pay for future water development was suggested. Aurora Water Director Peter Binney suggested a statewide 1 percent sales tax to pay for future water projects, since the state is demanding inclusion of more public needs in water development...
Not everyone agreed the sales tax would be a good idea. "It seems unfair to tax everyone for growth on the Front Range; if there was a benefit to everyone it would be different," said Steve Vandiver, manager of the Rio Grande Conservation District. "I hope we get away from the idea that 7.5 million people on the Front Range is a good idea."[...]
Chips Barry, Denver Water manager, was among those who said the solution to state water needs could lie outside the "first in time, first in right" doctrine of prior appropriation. While protecting senior water rights, the doctrine has led to "use it or lose it" practices in agriculture that discourages conservation. Meanwhile, cities have turned to conservation as a way to stretch water supplies. "The prior appropriation doctrine, which I have always defended, has its wretched excess," Barry said. "Conservation has not been applied evenly. What we need is a uniform requirement that does not differentiate between agriculture and domestic use."[...]
[Melinda Kassen] said energy consumption and water are linked and also said the unused portion of water under the Colorado River Compact is important for nonconsumptive uses " fish, wildlife and recreation " as well as municipal uses. "Recreation is an industry, just like mining or agriculture. It's an industry that needs water," Kassen said. "Prior appropriation is not designed for sharing." She suggested that pooling water rights may be needed, even though some senior water rights holders might have to make concessions.
More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain:
Harris Sherman, executive director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources challenged the Interbasin Compact Committee to predict what the state will look like in 50 years under the current approach to water development, if that is the direction the state wants to head and what could be done differently. It was a deceptively easy homework assignment, with the option to take the open-book written test or give an oral presentation in class. By recess after nearly four hours, many in the room were longing for a simpler multiple choice or true-false test. Several members of the IBCC realized it most likely will not be their own future they are planning and that few in the room had a hand in planning for 2008 back in 1958. Most agreed that water, a critical focus of the state since the drought of 2002, was not historically the driving factor for the state's growth, and probably won't fill that role in the future.
Eric Kuhn, general manager of the Colorado River District, said few imagined ubiquitous Internet and cell phone technology back in 1958, just as few realize the potential of new sciences like molecular biology today. In addition, the weather could change dramatically in the next 50 years, rewriting the assumptions of historic water use, Kuhn said. "We can't fight tomorrow's wars with yesterday's tools," Kuhn said.
Category: Colorado Water
6:49:05 PM
|
|
Here's a article about the release of water from Glen Canyon dam last week, from The Environment News Service. They write:
More than 300,000 gallons of water per second is now gushing through the Grand Canyon, released from Lake Powell near the Arizona-Utah border in an effort to restore sandbars needed by native plants and fish. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne Wednesday pulled a lever at Glen Canyon Dam to release the water for a 60-hour "high flow test." The flood of water is expected to push sand built up at the bottom of the river's channel into a series of sandbars and camping beaches along the river, replenishing the sediment that has been held back behind the dam...
The experiment is an inter-agency research effort conducted by three Department of the Interior bureaus - the U.S. Geological Survey, USGS; the Bureau of Reclamation, which operates Glen Canyon Dam on the Colorado River; and the National Park Service, which manages Grand Canyon National Park. High flows also create areas of low-velocity flow, or backwaters, used by young native fishes, particularly endangered humpback chub, one of four remaining native fish in the Grand Canyon. USGS scientists will be monitoring how the high-flow releases affect the survival of a population of young humpback chub. Researchers will collect data on the changes in sandbars before, during, and after the high flow. This data will be used to improve the predictive capabilities of the existing sediment model and determine the optimal peak flows of future high-flow experiments.
But a conflict over future high-flow experiments has caused a rift within the Department of the Interior. The fight pits the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which is pushing a plan supported by water and power interests, against the National Park Service which says the plan will harm wildlife and habitat in Grand Canyon National Park, according to a national organization of government employees in natural resource agencies. Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, PEER, released documents last week that illuminate the intra-agency conflict. The Bureau of Reclamation released its plan's Environmental Assessment, EA, in early February, allowing only 15 days of public comment, and concluded that its experiment would have "no significant environmental impact," eliminating the need for further review. The National Park Service, which was excluded from the plan's development, is objecting because the plan does not permit any further high flows during the five-year experimental period so that power generation can be maximized. Instead, the plan calls for a two-month regime of steady flows during September and October over a five-year period. In a February 19, 2008 comment letter to the Bureau of Reclamation's Regional Environmental Manager Randall Peterson, Grand Canyon National Park Superintendent Steve Martin pointed to the lack of scientific basis for the "steady flow periods" and for conducting only one high-flow event in a five-year span. "It is not apparent where the 80 million dollars in research, conducted over the last 10 years has been used in this decision-making process," wrote Martin. "Our analysis shows that this document is not consistent with current best information." Martin wrote, "Based on current scientific information, lack of inclusion of additional high flows could lead to impairment of the resources of Grand Canyon National Park." Martin says high flows should be staged every year or two, whenever enough sediment builds up behind the dam.
Further, the Grand Canyon Trust, a nonprofit group based in Flagstaff, Arizona is suing the Interior Department to get it to honor commitments made in 1996 to seasonally adjust flows and stage more high-flow events. "The water released during the test will not change the amount of water to be released over the course of the 2008 water year," said Larry Walkoviak, Regional Director of Reclamation's Upper Colorado Region. "The current plan of operations calls for releasing 8.23 million acre-feet of water from Glen Canyon Dam. That water flows downriver to Lake Mead for use by the Lower Colorado River Basin States and Mexico," he said. "The experimental flows are included within this annual volume. Monthly releases later in the year will be adjusted downward to account for the water released during the experiment."
Category: Colorado Water
5:54:22 PM
|
|
After having attended the Wallace Stegner symposium on Friday and Saturday global warming is on our mind of course. We ran across this video yesterday The Most Terrifying Video You'll Ever See. The videographer makes a great argument for action, "When faced with uncertainty about our future," choose to act to prevent further climate change, "because the risk of inaction far outweighs the risk of taking action."
During yesterday's session we heard from Randy Udall that the world economy may tank, due to us running out of cheap hydrocarbon energy, long before runaway heating plunges us into economic and survival chaos. He takes issue with the contention that we'll be able to continue pumping oil and mining coal for decade after decade as is shown in most climate models. He's arguing for a sensible energy policy of course, one that moves the world economy away from fossil fuels, coincidentally one that will curtail warming.
Category: 2008 Presidential Election
8:13:06 AM
|
|
|
|
© Copyright
2008
John Orr.
Last update:
4/1/08; 8:09:02 AM.
|
|
|
