Decree gives park water right

By DAVE BUCHANAN GJ Sentinel Sunday, January 11, 2009

The last day of 2008 also brought the end of Colorado’s longest-running water-rights contest.

On Dec. 31, state water court Judge Stephen Patrick in Montrose signed a decree finalizing a water right for the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park.

The decision recognizes a year-round base flow of 300 cubic feet per second along with seasonal peak and shoulder flows, echoing the natural rise and fall of the river, depending on water availability.

“This landmark ruling acknowledges that the Gunnison River offers recreational and natural resource benefits that deserve protection,” said Drew Peternell, director of Trout Unlimited’s Colorado Water Project.

http://www.gjsentinel.com/hp/content/news/stories/2009/01/11/011209_1a_Black_Canyon_water.html

Colorado & Western Water Project Staff Notes December 2008

We went to DC to testify to the Roadless Area Conservation National Committee (RACNAC) on a provision in the proposed CO Roadless Rule that would allow roads to be built into roadless areas to build future water pipelines and diversion structures for which no water right exists today. For more on the roadless issue in Colorado: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_11142283

http://www.cotrout.org/Conservation/CTURoadlessComments/tabid/301/Default.aspx

As part of the visit to DC, we also met with Hill Staff Clean Water Restoration Act:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h2421ih.txt.pdf

TU and most of the other parties to the Colorado water court proceedings to quantify the Black Canyon reserved water right have reached agreement on a proposed decree. The water court has established a 30-day period for any party to object to the proposed settlement. If there is no objection, the court should sign the decree before the end of the year.

http://www.cotrout.org/LinkPages/BlackCanyon/tabid/144/Default.aspx

We have been reviewing and commenting on a bill to be introduced in the 2009 Colorado General Assembly legislative session that would allow small-scale precipitation harvesting on a pilot basis: http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_9712027

We have met with representatives of Colorado Springs Utilities to discuss mitigation for the Southern Delivery System project:

http://www.sdswater.org/

http://www.chieftain.com/articles/2008/12/10/news/local/doc493f7e7c9ee76704242048.txt

The water court judge issued a ruling on the Supreme Court’s remand of the Dry Gulch case. The ruling on remand awards the applicants more water than is justified under the Supreme Court opinion. We have appealed the remand decree back to the Supreme Court.

http://www.cotrout.org/LinkPages/DryGulchGoestotheSupremeCourt/tabid/189/Default.aspx

We are working on comments on the draft EIS for the Windy Gap Firming Project (WGFP), released by the Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Army Corps earlier. Using Reclamation facilities, the project would take additional flows from the headwaters of the Colorado River and across the Continental Divide to supply municipal water to the metro area. The WGFP would utilize a concept called “prepositioning” to increase the firm yield of the very junior Windy Gap water rights. The increase in firm yield would result in further depletions to the Colorado River. Ongoing transmountain diversions already take over 50% of the Colorado’s native flows and a higher percentage of its tributary, the Fraser River.  Both rivers support highly valued recreational trout fisheries. The draft EIS does a very poor job assessing direct and cumulative impacts to the fisheries. The proposed action alternative also raises serious legal federal and state law questions. Comments are due December 29, 2008.

http://www.cotrout.org/Conservation/WindyGapCommentExt/tabid/310/Default.aspx

We are in contact with the Bureau of Reclamation and its contractor (Northern) for the Colorado-Big Thompson (C-BT) Project to modify project operations to ameliorate its impacts on the headwaters of the Colorado River and its Gold Medal trout fisheries. At a recent meeting, Northern unveiled a proposal to make up to 6,000 acre-feet of water a year available to deal with late summer low flow issues.

http://www.usbr.gov/dataweb/html/cbt.html

We are significantly involved in a stakeholder effort to develop a stream management plan for a section of the Colorado River being considered for potential WSRA designation. The group has representation from water suppliers, local governments, recreation, and conservation groups. A draft plan that includes measures to protect flows and water quality through the reach has been submitted to BLM, but many issues still need to be worked out. A final plan is due June 2009.

http://www.gjsentinel.com/hp/content/news/stories/2008/12/06/120708_5A_wild_scenic.html

TU staff met with upper management of the Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW) and Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) staff to discuss ways in which DOW can help promote efforts to obtain water leases for instream flow purposes. DOW is in a very good position to promote the program and seek opportunities, as many of its field and regional staff live and work in localities where leases may be needed/desirable, and it already has a realty program that promotes and engages in land conservation transactions. TU will continue to work with DOW and CWCB to expand the program.

http://cwcb.state.co.us/StreamAndLake/WaterAcquisitions/

TU is participating in a “Shared Vision Planning” (SVP) process on the North Fork Cache la Poudre River near Ft. Collins, Colorado. SVP is a collaborative approach to formulating water management solutions that combines three disparate practices: 1) traditional water resources planning, 2) structured public participation and 3) collaborative computer modeling. The goal of SVP is to improve the economic, environmental and social outcomes of water management decisions. SVP is intended to facilitate a common understanding of a natural resource system and provide a consensus-based forum for stakeholders to identify tradeoffs and new management options. http://halligan-seaman.org/page.asp?pgID=48

Every Coloradan has a stake in healthy rivers

Opinion piece from Drew Peternell, Director of TU's Colorado Water Project: Re: “Diversions,” Oct. 26 Perspective article.

As the state’s leading coldwater fisheries conservation group, Trout Unlimited shares the concerns expressed in Gretchen Bergen’s commentary about the potential impact of the Windy Gap and Moffat Tunnel water diversion schemes on the health of the Colorado and Fraser Rivers and the wildlife and communities that depend on them.

http://blogs.denverpost.com/eletters/2008/11/10/every-coloradan-has-a-stake-in-healthy-rivers/

TU appeals Dry Gulch decision

By Chuck McGuire

PagosaSUN.com

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

According to TU attorney Drew Peternell, Lyman made appropriate improvements in his Sept. 11 decree, “but there are still flaws in his reasoning, and the diversion and storage rights are still excessive.”

Therefore, in this latest appeal, TU proclaimed an “Advisory Listing of Issues to be Raised on Appeal.” They include:

• Whether applicants (the districts) demonstrated the 50-year water rights planning horizon adopted by the water court to be reasonable, as required under the anti-speculation standard.

• Whether applicants substantiated population projections, based on a normal rate of growth, for the 50-year planning period, as required under the anti-speculation standard.

• Whether applicants demonstrated that the decreed amount of water is reasonably necessary, above their current water supply, to serve projected population through the planning period, as required under the anti-speculation standard.

The appeal also states, “The transcript of evidence taken before the trial court is necessary to resolve the issues raised on appeal.”

http://www.pagosasun.com/archives/2008/10october/103008/tuappealsdrygulch.html

PAWSD vs TU, Round Four

Pagosa Daily Post Glenn Walsh | 10/30/08

Monday afternoon, Andrew Peternell, director of the Colorado Water Project for Trout Unlimited, filed an appeal of Judge Gregory Lyman’s September 11 judgment awarding the Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District and the San Juan Water Conservancy District an additional water storage right of 19,000 acre feet for their Dry Gulch Reservoir project and the right to pump water from the San Juan River at the rate of 150 cubic feet per second.

PAWSD presently has the right to divert 6300 acre feet of water from the San Juan River for storage and to pump 6.9 cubic feet per second from the river to its Snowball treatment facility.  The 150 cfs grant in Lyman’s decision represents a more than twenty-fold increase.  Significantly, the 150 cfs right is 700% larger than the right the water districts’ engineer Steve Harris claimed was necessary to meet 2040 demand in his initially engineering report for the Dry Gulch reservoir.

http://www.pagosadailypost.com/news/10258/PAWSD_vs_TU,_Round_Four

Trout Unlimited Appeals Dry Gulch Decision

Pagosa Daily Post Sheila Berger | 10/29/08

The Appeal is based upon three issues: the reasonableness of a 50-year planning horizon, whether the 50-year population projections can be substantiated based upon a normal rate of growth, and whether the applicants sufficiently demonstrated that the decreed amount of water is reasonably necessary to serve this projected population.

http://gmc.websitewelcome.com/~ownpcom/pagosadailypost.php?mode=viewnews&id=10231&cat=1

Western & Colorado Water Project Staff Notes

September 2008

We continued to participate in the "visioning" exercise that Colorado's Inter-Basin Compact Committee is doing around what the state's water future will look like. http://ibcc.state.co.us/

The first printed copies of the WWP's 10th Anniversary Report, Water, People, Fish arrived in time for us to distribute to Board and annual meeting attendees. Additional copies will arrive soon and information will be available on CTU’s website and National’s Western Water conservation page.

http://www.tu.org/site/c.kkLRJ7MSKtH/b.3022975/

We completed the white paper about the next generation of TU’s Conservation Success Index (CSI) and made a presentation with the task force's recommendations to TU’s Board of Directors. More information on this will be forthcoming and expect to see some changes on the CSI website as a result of this effort as well.

http://www.tu.org/site/c.kkLRJ7MSKtH/b.4347959/

Excellent news on the hiring front! The Colorado Water Project hired Greg Espegren to be its aquatic specialist. Formerly, Greg was with the Colorado Division of Wildlife and the Colorado Water Conservation Board. And, after a thorough search of an excellent pool of candidates, we've filled the WWP Communications Director position with Randy Scholfield, the editorial writer for the Wichita Eagle newspaper and an avid TU member and angler, who was previously an organizer with the Great Plains Earth Institute and a teacher after having been awarded a PhD in English.

TU and the other parties to the Colorado water court proceedings to quantify the Black Canyon reserved water right are engaged in mediation. The lawyers have reached agreement on a proposed decree. The parties’ principals are now reviewing.

We met with the proponents of expanding Rio Grande Reservoir. The proponents claim that expanded storage capacity could be used to improve late season flows in the Rio Grande River. We are evaluating the expansion and will be providing input.

http://www.wildernet.com/pages/area.cfm?areaID=CORSRG&CU_ID=1

The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) has released its Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on Colorado Springs’ Southern Delivery System (SDS). We have prepared draft comments on the EIS. We have also been discussing mitigation measures with the BOR and Colorado Springs: http://www.sdseis.com/

The Army Corps of Engineers released its Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Northern District’s Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP). We submitted comments on the EIS in September. http://www.ncwcd.org/project_features/nisp_main.asp

http://www.savethepoudre.org/

We will be reviewing Denver’s Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license application related to expanding Gross Reservoir on South Boulder Creek. Comments are due at the end of September.

http://www.denverwater.org/search/searchframe.html

Lots of Water, Lots of Debt

The Pagosa Daily Post is doing an entertaining series on the Dry Gulch Reservoir development. Thanks to Coyote Gulch for the links. Part One: http://www.pagosadailypost.com/news/9040/Lots_of_Water,_Lots_of_Debt,_Part_One/

Part Two: http://www.pagosadailypost.com/news/9049/Lots_of_Water,_Lots_of_Debt,_Part_Two/

Part Three: http://www.pagosadailypost.com/news/9064/Lots_of_Water,_Lots_of_Debt,_Part_Three/

Part Four: http://www.pagosadailypost.com/news/9086/Lots_of_Water,_Lots_of_Debt,_Part_Four/

Part Five: http://www.pagosadailypost.com/news/9103/Lots_of_Water,_Lots_of_Debt,_Part_Five/

A previous water rights application for Dry Gulch was approved in 2004, based on a 35,000 acre-foot reservoir — plus the right to refill the reservoir with up to 64,000 acre-feet of water pumped from the San Juan River.  That decree by Judge Greg Lyman — which curiously took place just as Archuleta County voters were turning down a ballot measure to fund Dry Gulch — was subsequently appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court by non-profit fishing organization Trout Unlimited.  The Supreme Court remanded the case back to Lyman for additional findings of fact, citing several key problems with Lyman’s original decree.

Trout Unlimited: SDS report flawed, 'illogical'

By CHRIS WOODKATHE PUEBLO CHIEFTAIN

The Bureau of Reclamation used a flawed basis for evaluating the impacts of a proposed pipeline project and underestimated impacts on fish, the head of Trout Unlimited’s Colorado Water Project says.

Speaking on behalf of Trout Unlimited’s 150,000 national and 10,000 Colorado members, Drew Peternell said the bureau’s draft environmental impact statement for the proposed Southern Delivery System is flawed because one stated purpose and need is to develop Colorado Springs Water Rights.

“Development of water rights is not a legitimate purpose for the bureau to issue contracts for the project,” Peternell’s letter states. “Justifying SDS on a need to develop existing water rights would be analogous to justifying construction of a coal-fired power plant - not on demand for the energy - but on a purported ‘need’ to burn available coal resources.”

http://www.chieftain.com/articles/2008/06/20/news/local/doc485b5b7ce5c0a606338043.txt

New laws balance river protection, water rights

Op-ed from TU's Colorado Water Project Director, Drew Peternell. http://www.chieftain.com/articles/2008/06/15/editorial/doc48548f8a71053517891884.txt