|
|
Saturday, October 20, 2007
|
|
| |
Mike Preston is the new lead administrator for the Dolores Water Conservancy District, according to The Cortez Journal. From the article:
Montezuma County resident Mike Preston took over the lead administrator position Monday, and he is happy to be there. "This is a really great organization. The people have excellent talent," Preston said Tuesday, his second day on the job. For the past 28 years, Preston has worked for Fort Lewis College as an advisor. Most recently, he worked with Montezuma County as an advisor on public lands issues. Preston has also served as the facilitator of the Dolores River Dialogue.
Preston, 61, said being the manager of the DWCD is like coming full circle in his career because toward the beginning, in the early '80s, he worked on water issues and getting the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe a water rights settlement. In addition, Preston was the project development director for the 7,634-acre Ute Mountain Farm and Ranch Enterprise.
Category: Colorado Water
9:42:48 AM 
|
|
The State Engineer has approved the official plan for the San Luis Valley's first water management sub-district, according to The Valley Courier. From the article:
District Judge O. John Kuenhold approved the organization of the Groundwater Management Sub-District #1, a sub-district of the Rio Grande Water Conservation District. The next step was the selection of a board of managers comprised of water users within the sub-district boundaries in the closed basin region of the Valley. That board of manager developed a management plan for the sub-district that outlined the details of how the sub-district would operate. The managers held public hearings and accepted public input on the plan. They then forwarded the plan to the state engineer's office and the Rio Grande Water Conservation District Board for approval. Acting State Engineer Ken Knox approved the plan at the state level the end of September. That set in motion a 60-day comment period for anyone with objections to Knox's decision. Those objecting to Knox's decision must file their objections with the water court in Alamosa by the end of November.
On a parallel course, the Rio Grande Water Conservation District Board will hold its final public hearing on the plan at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, Oct. 24, at the Inn of the Rio Grande in Alamosa. The board can adopt the sub-district management plan, recommend changes to it or reject the plan and send the board of managers back to the drawing board. If the board approves the plan, those disagreeing with the board's decision will have 10 days following the water board's approval to file objections with the district court in Alamosa. The district court judge will then schedule a hearing. "We are going to push hard to have a hearing before the court as soon as we can," said Rio Grande Water Conservation District Board Attorney David Robbins.
During the board's quarterly meeting on Tuesday Robbins clarified the process of public response and objections. "We are going into a two-path process," Robbins said. He explained that while the clock is already running for the period to file objections to the state's decisions, the clock would start ticking after October 24 for objections to the local water board's decision. He explained that the local objections would have to be filed in the district court of the 12th Judicial District, not the water court "because this is not a water matter. This is a matter of setting up a governmental body and adopting a plan of management for that body." Robbins said that while objections to the state's decision would be filed in water court and objections to the local water district's decision would be filed in the district court, the same judge would be the one hearing both sets of objections so he could decide to hear both sets of objections at the same time if there were any...
Robbins said those filing objections would have the burden to prove why the plan should not be approved. He said he understood there were some people in the Valley very upset with the sub-districts who planned to mount an attack on the water management plan for sub-district #1. He said if they do, there is nothing the board can do to stop them because they have the right to object to the plan...
There are at least three other sub-districts besides the closed basin sub-district that are in the works. Robbins said that Knox has taken the position that "you have to give people a little time after you tell them what you are going to do to them to respond and take appropriate actions, but at some point in time the state has to adopt rules and has to begin dealing with wells that are not taking responsibility for impacts to surface streams and water users."
Category: Colorado Water
9:04:03 AM
|
|
The San Luis Valley enjoyed a 110% water year, according to The Valley Courier. From the article:
A water year that looked like it would be less than average has turned into a 110-percent year, Colorado Division of Water Resources Division Engineer for Division III Mike Sullivan told members of the Rio Grande Water Conservation District Board on Tuesday...
Andrew Valdez who presented the Great Sand Dunes National Park's report to the water district board on Tuesday said 10 of the past 14 months at the dunes have been above average in precipitation. This past year the dunes recorded 17 inches of precipitation, he said. The average is 11 inches. "This is the third wettest year on record," Valdez added. Sullivan said in April the snowpack resembled 2004, and the snowpack was expected to melt out early. However, cooler weather in May kept the snow on the mountains longer and it melted out more gradually than expected. The snowpack did not melt out until July. "That's 140,000-150,000 acre feet of water we did not expect to get from that snowpack," Sullivan said. Late fall, 2006, and spring, 2007, rains also boosted the water numbers, Sullivan said. He said he tried to direct the return flows back into the ditches as much as possible to benefit Valley water users. He added that 667,100 acre feet have already run through the gauges, so the remainder of the projected flow for this year is expected in November and December.
Sullivan said of the 715,000 acre feet projected annual index, the Rio Grande will owe 211,500 acre feet to downstream states through its Rio Grande Compact obligations. The state has already delivered 165,700 acre feet of that obligation, Sullivan said. To meet the remainder of its obligation to downstream states, the Rio Grande will have to get 3,700 acre feet through the system the rest of this month, "something we are doing fairly easily at this point in time," Sullivan said. He estimated the Rio Grande would send about 30,000 acre feet downriver in November and December. The state also has some carryover credit and Closed Basin Project contribution to the Rio Grande Compact to make up its obligation for the year. Sullivan said the estimated 3,700 acre feet required in the next two weeks means he will have to impose a curtailment of 20 percent on the ditches but that is the lowest curtailment of the irrigation season and is reduced from the 24 percent curtailment imposed in the last month.
On the Conejos River Sullivan has reduced the curtailment to 7 percent, substantially less than it was earlier this fall. Curtailments on the Conejos were as high as 25 percent in August and most recently were 11 percent until October 17. The projected annual index on the Conejos River is 280,000 acre feet, and the obligation through the compact is 95,400 acre feet.
Sullivan said he experimented this year with storing water in the Rio Grande Reservoir. He said he plans on using the 6,600 acre feet that is currently in storage as "seed water" for next year. He explained that if he released that water now, the Rio Grande would owe 50 percent of it as part of the compact because the annual projected index supply has exceeded 700,000 acre feet and the more water the Rio Grande runs, the higher percentage of that water must be sent downstream because of the way the Rio Grande Compact is set up. If the Valley has a drier year next year, Sullivan said, that storage water will serve a greater benefit because the Rio Grande would only have a 30-40 percent obligation rather than the 50-percent obligation it would have to meet if the water was released now...
In a related report to the Rio Grande Water Conservation District Board on Tuesday, District Engineer Allen Davey said the unconfined aquifer study area in the west-central part of the Valley reflected improvement this year. "It is very encouraging," he said. The aquifer levels increased more than 200,000 acre feet, much of that improvement occurring in the latter part of the summer according to Davey. "You did not see that decline that you normally see in the latter part of the summer," he said.
Category: Colorado Water
9:01:11 AM
|
|
Here's an update on two water cases in the San Luis Valley from The Valley Courier. They write:
As one water court case continues through the system another is preparing for trial in the San Luis Valley. Rio Grande Water Conservation District Attorney David Robbins told the district board during its quarterly meeting this week that the confined aquifer rules case is before the supreme court. "It has not been scheduled but it should be soon," he said. "The briefs were filed. There will be an argument before the supreme court," Robbins said. District/Water Judge O. John Kuenhold heard the Colorado Division of Water Resources State Engineer's confined aquifer rules case during a lengthy trial in early 2006 and approved the state's rules in November, 2006. Objectors to the state's rules subsequently appealed Kuenhold's decision. The rules regarding new groundwater withdrawals from the confined aquifer of the Rio Grande Basin (San Luis Valley) maintain that the basin is overappropriated so new withdrawals must be replaced on a one-for-one basis to prevent further injury to the basin and its Rio Grande Compact obligations...
In the sand dunes case, both sides have submitted expert reports to the judge, Robbins said, and a status hearing is scheduled on January 10 of next year with the trial to occur a month or two later. The opponent in the sand dunes water case is also one of the opponents in the confined aquifer rules case, Cotton Creek Circles LLC. Representing Cotton Creek are attorneys Allan Hale who was involved in the 2006 trial and John Hill of Gunnison. In the sand dunes water case the federal government is applying for groundwater appropriation in the unconfined or shallow aquifer system under the park and the surface flows that recharge the underlying aquifers "for the purpose of maintaining ground water levels, surface water levels, and stream flows on, across, and under the Park, such that the ground water table elevation in the unconfined aquifer is maintained unimpaired, subject to natural, hydrologically driven variation, and subject to water uses existing as of November 22, 2000." That was the date congress enacted the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve Act.
Proponents of the dunes water application state, "Pursuant to the Act, Congress recognized that the Great Sand Dunes, together with the associated sand sheet and the adjacent wetland and upland, contain a variety of rare ecological, geological, paleontological, scenic, historical, and wildlife components that merit protection and preservation. These components, specifically including the unique pulse flow characteristics of Sand and Medano Creeks that are integral to the existence and maintenance of the dunes system, comprise a setting of irreplaceable national significance ... Congress therefore mandated the preservation of the existing diversity of resources in order to ensure the perpetuation of the entire ecosystem for the enjoyment of future generations, and authorized the designation of the Great Sand Dunes National Park.
Category: Colorado Water
8:49:14 AM
|
|
Here's a look at the Northern Integrated Supply Project from High Country News. From the article:
Colorado's Cache la Poudre River tumbles 80 miles from its high-alpine headwaters in Rocky Mountain National Park down to the South Platte River on the plains below. The upper Poudre is the only designated wild and scenic river in the state - but after it exits Poudre Canyon, 90 percent of its flow is siphoned off for farmers and homeowners around Fort Collins. Now, a local water district wants to tap the remaining 10 percent to fill two new reservoirs...
The Army Corps of Engineers project includes not only the two reservoirs, but also pump stations and pipelines. Water from the South Platte River will fill the 40,000 acre-foot Galeton Reservoir, on the plains five miles northeast of Greeley. The much-larger Glade Reservoir - with a capacity of 170,000 acre-feet - will use Poudre River water to inundate a mountain valley about 10 miles north of Fort Collins. Two-thirds of Glade's water would come from existing diversions for agriculture, while the remainder would be pulled from the Poudre in peak-flow years, which occur about once every four years. That would cause a significant decline in peak-flow volumes - and therein lies the problem...
But because the $400 million project is debt-funded, it relies on population growth and the subsequent newcomers to pick up most of the costs. "What the general public doesn't realize is that (the Northern Integrated Supply Project) actually promotes a vehicle to pave over farms," says [Gary] Wockner. "The exact growth that NISP relies on financially will occur on 20,000 acres of irrigated farmland in northern Colorado."
More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.
Category: Colorado Water
8:24:36 AM
|
|
Here's an update on efforts to open the south slope of Pikes Peak to reacreation from The Colorado Springs Gazette. From the article:
The 11-member board, appointed by the publicly owned utility, plans to spend two years studying the environmental, water and recreational issues surrounding the cityowned land and drawing up a recreation plan. The plan will eventually be given to City Council, which also acts as the utility board. "We really need to study this; it's uncharted territory for us. Colorado Springs Utilities has never done recreation," said Steve Berry, spokesman for Colorado Springs Utilities, who was also visiting the south slope for the first time Thursday...
The board is made up almost entirely of residents who want the area to be opened to some kind of public access. Peter Van Vuren described himself as the most reluctant person in the group when it came to recommending public access. As a resident living on Gold Camp Road, southeast of the south slope, he said he has seen the litter and vandalism in the national forest that can result from access without enough management. "If we're going to open it," he said, "first we need to make sure there's a plan and the resources in place to manage it. Otherwise, the place will get trashed."
More coverage from Fox21news.com. They write:
Williams said, "Rocky Mountain National Park is a great example of a wild area that is open to the public, so that would certainly be a model to look to to see what we could do up here." Parts of the south slope are delicate, especially above the tree line. C.S.U. Wildlife Biologist Kirsta Scherff-Norris said, "That's an area where the growing season is very short and revegetation takes a very long time." The south slope has been closed off for more than 100 years, but C.S.U. says the community now wants access and attitudes are changing. C.S.U. Spokesperson Steve Berry said, "We're trying to leave the past behind and move forward with our community to really look at the issues before us." Seven reservoirs cover the south slope of Pikes Peak. In all, they provide about 7.5% of the city's drinking water. C.S.U. said if the area were open to the public, its top priorities would be preserving that infrastructure of the water system as well as protecting the local ecosystem.
More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
Category: Colorado Water
8:09:25 AM
|
|
A sustainable water supply for Pueblo is the driving force behind the city's bid for shares in the Bessemer Ditch, according to The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
A plan to secure the Bessemer Ditch for use in Pueblo County will position the city well for the future while adjusting the water supply to changing conditions, water board officials told a crowd Friday. "The time is right, if you look what's happening along the Front Range," said Alan Hamel, executive director of the water board. "The time is now to take this next step." The water board unveiled its long-range water plan earlier this week. The plan includes purchase of a controlling interest in the Bessemer Ditch as its first choice to add to its water supply. Pueblo West could be a partner in the plan, but the metro district board won't vote on it until Nov. 13 at the earliest. The water board won't reveal the price per share until it meets with shareholders.
Friday, the water board shared broad details of the plan with about 200 alumni of the board's annual mountain tours. The board has sponsored 13 tours, with 550 participants representing a cross-section of the community over the past 14 years. "This is a good fit for the Bessemer shareholders and the community," said Nick Gradisar, president of the water board. "The water will be there if people want to keep farming for five, 10, 20 years or forever."[...]
The Bessemer was chosen because it has senior rights and is located in the county. Hamel said it is only one option and recognized it might not be possible. "Ditches are a property right, and we respect that," Hamel said. "It's just like your home. I can't just come in and buy it, you have to want to sell." The water board's intent is to improve the water supply for those who want to continue to farm, through preferential leases or improvements to the canal.
Storage is the next part of the long-range plan, Hamel said. The water board needs more storage upstream, downstream and at Lake Pueblo, he said. It has filed a water court application to enlarge Clear Creek Reservoir, worked for enlargement of Lake Pueblo and contemplated storage sites downstream of Pueblo Dam. Hamel ruled out John Martin Reservoir, the only other on-channel storage downstream, saying water quality issues require something closer, in Pueblo County. Many of the guests asked questions about some of the details of the plan, but some offered strong statements of support for the water board's action. "I would ask all of you to understand the nerve the board has to take this step," said Bob Jackson, a local businessman and former member of the Colorado Water Conservation Board. "We are not in the same position we were 40 or 50 years ago. There are lots of people in the South Denver metro area who have million-dollar houses, 40-year mortgages and a 10-year supply of water."
The Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District is hoping to convince farmers on the Bessemer ditch to join the proposed "Super Ditch" rather than sell out to Pueblo, according to The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
Farmers need to weigh the benefits of selling water rights against alternatives that preserve agricultural ownership, the chairman of the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District said Wednesday. "The (Pueblo) Board of Water Works is looking to potentially purchase controlling interest in the Bessemer Ditch," Chairman John Singletary said at the monthly meeting. "Are we going to allow municipal water providers to continue with these buy-and-dry situations?"[...]
Singletary asked the Lower Ark board to think about the potential impacts of the proposed deal, however, saying the buy could ultimately harm agriculture. "We're at a crossroads," Singletary said, saying the buy itself may not seem significant, but is part of a pattern of water rights transfers. "Does the Rocky Mountain West want to see houses grow while the nation becomes a net importer of food?"[...]
The water board is more concerned about maintaining control over the water supply, said Executive Director Alan Hamel. Earlier this week, Hamel said the water board does not want to stand in the way of the Super Ditch, but also does not want to participate. "A water leasing program is not a good option for Pueblo," Hamel said. "Directing and controlling our own water future is better for us than leasing. We think for our future and for security, this option is better for us."[...]
While the Bessemer amounts to only about 10 percent of the potential water in the combined ditches, it has relatively senior water rights, higher consumptive use and more exchange capacity than other ditches in the Lower Ark's study. Singletary said he respects the water board for trying to look after Pueblo's interests, but said he thinks farmers would be happier in a lease program than with whatever offer is made by the water board. "They retain ownership of the water and share in the appreciation of water as time moves along," Singletary said. "Obviously, an outright sale is an option, but we, as the Lower District, have found a better place than a sale."
Singletary also said conservation easements have netted as much as $5,000 a share on the Bessemer Ditch, while still allowing profits from farming. "The Bessemer is one of the most valuable ditches because of the quality of water," Singletary said. "We need to keep it in irrigation." Singletary said there are also community benefits of keeping ground in irrigation. "The crux of it is that we've reached a crossroads," Singletary said. "We need to look at irrigated farm ground in the same way we do a national forest. How many other acres are there in Pueblo County that we could put houses on?"
More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.
Category: Colorado Water
8:02:02 AM
|
|
Here's an article about the health of Grand Lake from The Rocky Mountain News. They write:
Grand Lake, known for its spell-binding clarity and cold blue waters, turned a shocking green in August, sending out a distress call heard around the state.
For now cooler fall weather has killed the toxic algae that prompted the first-ever stop- drinking order. The ban was lifted, but the precarious state of the water is indicative of Grand Lake's annual battle to maintain itself while serving as a major water conduit to the Front Range. Grand Lake's struggle is painful for the hundred or so families who live around the unique glacial pool, a Colorado icon that federal officials promised to protect forever when they built a massive water system around it in the 1950s...
This fall, half a century after giant pumps began pulling water through its depths, an unprecedented effort is under way to save the state's largest natural lake, to restore what was once one of the clearest bodies of water in north America. Locals want results by next summer. They want the lake safe to drink from and ski on. Federal and state officials say there may be progress by then, but a long-term fix could take years. "This is a big experiment," said Jeff Drager, project manager for the Northern Water Conservancy District, which operates the federally owned Colorado Big Thompson Project. "We may get it right in some years, but it may not work very well in others. It's going to be a learning experience for quite a while."[...]
To change the way the lake is operated will require the cooperation of nearly a dozen county, state and federal agencies. Among the proposals being considered:
- Periodically silencing the massive pumps that pull water through the lake for 750,000 people on the Front Range to determine how the lake responds.
- Studying the feasibility of another pipeline that would allow Grand Lake to be taken off the water delivery route all together.
- Establishing a clarity standard - this by the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission - that would seek to restore and protect the lake's original character.
For decades scientists and locals have embarked on what is now a familiar exercise, lowering a flat, round, black-and- white disc on a long cord into the deepest parts of the lake. When the Secchi disc, as it is known, disappears from view, they note the depth on the cord, and pull it up from the frigid depths. On this day, Paul and his neighbor, Jane Kemp, can see roughly 9 feet down, much deeper than this summer, when clarity was less than 3 feet and the water was the color of pea soup. In the 1940s, scientists routinely reported clarity at depths of more than 30 feet...
But its restoration requires solving a series of complex problems, some caused by the transfer of water, others caused by water pollution from nearby communities. When the Bureau of Reclamation began building the Colorado Big Thompson Project, it created two man-made reservoirs just below Grand Lake: Shadow Mountain Reservoir and Lake Granby. Both of these reservoirs are more shallow and warmer than Grand. When water is pumped from Shadow Mountain and Granby through Grand and into the Alba B. Adams Tunnel on its way to the Front Range, it warms Grand, stirs the water there, and brings heavy nutrient loads into the lake's naturally clear, deep water. The nutrients, when combined with warmer water, allow algae carried in from Shadow Mountain, to bloom. Last summer, toxin levels in Grand Lake rose so high that a stop-drinking order was issued...
Now, the residents, as well as Grand County, want the Bureau of Reclamation and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District to step up and re-evaluate how they move water so that Grand Lake can begin to recover. And they want the state to set a clarity standard, similar to one that now protects Lake Tahoe, which straddles the California-Nevada border. This process too is likely to be controversial. Utilities are worried the standard might limit their ability to move and deliver water, while area developers worry that it will affect their activities...
Next month, the Colorado Water Quality Control Division will begin holding public hearings to gather information on the issue. Next summer, [Sarah Johnson, the state's manager of technical support for water quality standards] said, it will formally consider whether to set the standard, and if so, how to enforce it. While agencies such as the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District say they're ready to begin lake rescue work, they also believe that they're not the only culprit. Years of development around the three lakes and pollutants from runoff and sanitation systems are all contributing factors. Locals don't dispute that. But they say new water sanitation systems have fixed most of those problems and they are working with area towns to make sure everyone contributes to the rehab effort.
More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
Category: Colorado Water
7:50:06 AM
|
|
Some of the well owners along the South Platte alluvial aquifer that were shut down by the State Engineer will be allowed to start pumping again, according to The Greeley Tribune (free registration required). From the article:
More than 17 months after farmers were ordered to shut down their wells in central Weld County, a water judge ruled Friday to allow some of them to pump again. An official with the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District has called the decision "landmark," but said it is too early to determine what the ruling has on next year's pumping. Judge Roger Klein issued his decision Friday following one of the largest and most complicated water cases in Colorado history. He had deliberated for four months following a 30-day trial in Division 1 Water Court in March. The decision is contained in a 101-page document. The decision concerns those wells in Central's Well Augmentation Subdistrict and involves more than 200 irrigation wells.
Alan Frank, who farms west of Gilcrest had his wells shut down. He said he has not heard any details, "but at least it got the door open. It's sure a lot better than a kick in the mouth." Frank also said the decision showed a lot of common sense on Klein's behalf. "He's got a lot more common sense than I was giving him credit for," Frank said.
The Central Colorado Water Conservancy District's Well Augmentation Subdistrict will conduct a public meeting at 7 p.m. Oct. 30 at the Island Grove Regional Park Event Center to discuss the details of the decision rendered by Judge Roger Klein on Friday. It is hoped by that time, details will be known on how much water wells will be allowed to pump for the 2008 growing season.
More coverage from 9News.com. They write:
Farmers across northern Colorado are breathing a sigh of relief. A 100-plus page ruling released this week may allow them to start pumping water from their wells, which have been dormant since the state shut them down last year. The Central Colorado Water Conservancy District (CCWCD) says it has to work through the document to determine the exact result of the ruling, but says, basically, Water Court Judge Klein accepted a plan that could mean that more than 200 well owners will be able to access groundwater in 2008. CCWD says there are limitations that still need to be investigated."
More coveage from The Rocky Mountain News. They write:
More than 200 wells along the South Platte River -- roughly half the number ordered shut down in May 2006 -- may be allowed to start pumping again, but only if they can meet stiff new requirements for replenishing the river...
"Given the complexity of the court's order and the uncertainty of flow conditions in the future, it's not immediately clear to me whether this will allow the wells to pump next year and if so, how much," said Jim Hall, top water regulator in the South Platte Basin. Senior water rights owners and several cities, who have long fought the well-owners, declared victory in the case, saying the court's complex 101-page order likely means farmers won't be able to restart their irrigation wells next spring. "I don't know whether they will ever be able to pump those wells again," said Alan Curtis, an attorney representing senior water rights owners and cities such as Highlands Ranch and Boulder. "They lost on nearly every issue."
But officials from the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District, which serves the well owners, said they need more time to evaluate the ruling and to calculate how much additional water the well owners will need. "It's a little early to tell what it means," said Greg Hertzke, Central's external affairs manager. "But this order gives us a framework to build upon. Without it, we were pretty much out of luck."
More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
Category: Colorado Water
7:37:18 AM
|
|
Several water and sanitation districts and Kodak are collaborating on sharing water quality data for the Poudre River according to The Fort Collins Coloradoan. From the article:
A new water monitoring collaboration involving Fort Collins will provide more-comprehensive data on the Poudre River, something officials say will lead to better health for the watershed. The Cache la Poudre Water Quality Monitoring Agreement, an alliance between Fort Collins, Greeley, Windsor, the Boxelder and South Fort Collins sanitation districts and Kodak Colorado Division, will bring together entities that all have impact on the river because of discharges to the Poudre. "Before, we were all collecting our own data," said Keith Elmund, environmental services manager for the city of Fort Collins. "We shared it with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, and then the data went back on the shelf." Each entity was monitoring its own discharge as required by the state but now can monitor the river waters as a whole, said David Pusey, formerly of Kodak in Windsor. "It will help from a regulatory point of view, giving us a better picture of how water looks in Fort Collins and downstream," Elmund added. "This will eliminate redundancy but still allow us to collect the data we need."[...]
The monitoring program supports 10 sampling sites from Fort Collins to Greeley, which will be tested by Colorado State University. Water quality data collected will also be available to the public on the Web. Data will be posted within about a year after collection, Elmund said...
The unique collaboration stemmed from an Environmental Protection Agency-sponsored program, Performance Track, a program Kodak was involved in, said Richard Kashmanian, senior economist for the EPA. Performance Track is a program organizations participate in to improve water, air and land.
Category: Colorado Water
7:24:18 AM
|
|
|
|
© Copyright
2007
John Orr.
Last update:
11/1/07; 6:43:45 AM.
|
|
|
