Blog — Colorado Trout Unlimited

A water solution that bridges Divide

Denver Post Guest Commentary - by Drew Peternell - director of Trout Unlimited's Colorado Water Project in Boulder. 12/20/2009 Re: "Dividing line over diverting water," Dec. 9 news story.

The Denver Post story casts Denver Water's proposed Moffat Tunnel project as yet another divisive standoff between conservation interests and water developers.

It's true that many conservation groups oppose Denver's Moffat project as it is currently envisioned — and for good reason. Denver already takes 65 percent of the natural flow of the Fraser River. Under the Moffat proposal, Denver would take another 20 percent of the Fraser's water, and several tributaries would be sucked dry. The Moffat project could, in short, drive the Fraser to the brink of collapse.

It's also true, however, that the Moffat project offers an opportunity for Denver to embrace a balanced water solution, one that meets the needs of Denver's citizens while preserving rivers and communities on Colorado's Western Slope.

Trout Unlimited, a sportsmen's group committed to preserving Colorado's rivers and fisheries, can accept a Moffat project if Denver agrees to responsible measures to protect western Colorado. That means, at a minimum, guaranteeing healthy year-round stream flows in the Fraser, Williams Fork and upper Colorado Rivers.

That also means improving Denver's track record on water conservation. Denver has implemented some meaningful conservation measures, but there is much more it can do — such as offering incentives for households to replace water-thirsty turf with drought-tolerant landscaping.

The projections Denver uses to justify Moffat are based on unconstrained use — that is, no watering restrictions even during severe drought. Denver residents clearly are prepared to do more. In a 2005 survey, 73 percent of Denver's citizens agreed they should conserve water to reduce impacts on mountain regions of the state.

What's at issue in the Moffat plan is our willingness on the Front Range to accept a modest tradeoff to preserve Colorado's magnificent outdoor resources. With smart resource management, we have enough water to sustain both our home places and our wild places — we don't need to choose between the two. If it respects diverse needs, Denver Water can find pragmatic water supply solutions that work for everyone, on both sides of the Divide.

Winter fly-fishing? Try below the Pueblo Dam

Environmentalists oppose Denver project to divert more water from Western Slope

By Bruce Finley The Denver Post

Denver has not managed to push through a project on this scale since construction of Dillon Reservoir in 1963. The Environmental Protection Agency's 1990 veto of Denver's proposed $1 billion Two Forks Dam still looms in water-authority boardrooms. That project, backed by developers and opposed by environmentalists, also was aimed at preventing shortages.

The $225 million cost is already covered by a recently approved rate hike for Denver Water customers, which will raise typical water bills by about $40 a year.

Denver already owns rights to the water it would divert from the upper Colorado River basin — from the Blue River in Summit County and from the Fraser and Williams Fork rivers and dozens of streams in Grand County.

But Trout Unlimited sportsmen's advocates said that stream flows there already are dangerously low, threatening aquatic life, with algae increasing and once-clear Grand Lake turning cloudy. Boulder-area residents warned of harm to wildlife and lifestyle disruptions during construction to raise the dam and clear trees in expanding Gross Reservoir.

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_13956553

Colorado & Western Water Project Notes

December 2009 We attended a national staff communications meeting in Santa Fe, NM, and brainstormed with the group on a range of communications issues, including how to better coordinate messaging themes across programs, how to make better use of video and social media, and new ideas for the Web site and Trout magazine.

TU staff continues to provide environmental perspective on several large cooperative endeavors including the Halligan Seaman Shared Vision Plan and the Colorado River Wild and Scenic Management Plan Alternative. TU  is also continuing to evaluate and/or monitor the progress of several Environmental Impact Statements for various water development projects around the state such as the Windy Gap Firming, Denver Moffat Expansion, and Northern Integrated Supply Project. The deadline for submitting comments on Denver’s Moffat Expansion is currently set for the end of January 2010.

TU staff continues to work with state and local governments, water providers and other environmental groups to draft an Upper Colorado River Wild and Scenic Management Plan Alternative (MPA). Most recently, the east slope and west slope water users have been trying to finalize a concept for protecting the outstandingly remarkable recreational fishing and floatboating opportunities.

We have been working with several other conservation groups and a contractor on an analysis of the gap between water supply and demand on Colorado’s Front Range. We submitted two letters to the state – one on future water demands and the other on tools for meeting that demand.

TU staff and local chapter members are working within the Chatfield Reservoir Reallocation process to negotiate winter baseflows in the South Platte River below Chatfield Reservoir.

We have had several discussions with other conservation groups, the Yampa Valley Agricultural Alliance and faculty of Colorado State University about designing a study of opportunities for making irrigation water available for stream flows without requiring the complete dry-up of irrigated lands.

TU and the Forest Service completed a number of culvert removal projects in Colorado River cutthroat trout habitat in the South Fork Slater Creek basin. We will be removing a number of additional barriers in cutthroat habitat in the Elkhead Creek drainage next summer. We recently submitted a pre-proposal for an exclusionary fencing project to benefit cutthroat on the South Fork Little Snake River.

,

Trout habitat now on the line

,

BY BOBBY MAGILL The new plan requires a compromise: Keep La Poudre Pass Creek dry during the winter, but restore more than 43 miles of trout habitat in the Poudre River Watershed, mostly in Rocky Mountain National Park.

"It's something scientists have been pushing for, for a long time," said David Nickum, director of Colorado Trout Unlimited. "The chance to try to put that science in action and do what would be the largest native cutthroat trout restoration project ever in Colorado - we're excited about that prospect."

http://www.coloradoan.com/article/20091207/NEWS01/912070310/1002/CUSTOMERSERVICE02/Trout-habitat-now-on-the-line

Moffat Public Hearings Begin

By David Nickum - Colorado Trout Unlimited Executive Director Around 80 concerned citizens gathered at the Boulder Country Club last night (Dec. 1) for the first of the Army Corps of Engineers public hearings on the proposed Moffat Firming Project / Gross Reservoir enlargement.  The attendees included a mix of conservation-minded citizens with general concern, residents from the vicinity of Gross Reservoir, a mix of west slope residents & second-home owners, and a few local government officials.  About 1/4 of those in attendance spoke during the hearing.

Grand County Commissioner James Newberry led off the evening by expressing concern over cumulative impacts from past and proposed projects, which collectively could divert about 72% of the Colorado River's headwaters above Windy Gap.  He referenced their ongoing efforts to develop a mitigation plan with Denver and others, and urged the Corps to recognize that plan.

Bob Crifasi from City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks described their work with Denver and Lafayette in developing an "environmental pool" proposal for Gross Reservoir - a measure to provide 5,000 acre-feet of storage to Boulder and Lafayette to be used with flow management efforts to assure minimum winter flows in South Boulder Creek.  TU's Larry Quilling and David Nickum also voiced support for this concept, while noting the need to include safeguards so that the environmental pool does not lead to any additional depletions of west-slope water.  TU also supported Commissioner Newberry's call for meaningful mitigation to address cumulative impacts to the Colorado headwaters.  This theme was further reinforced by a number of west-slope residents and Front Range residents with second-homes or other interest in the Upper Colorado watershed.

Representatives and residents of Grand Lake expressed concern over water quality impacts associated with Colorado-Big Thompson and Windy Gap project pumping of more nutrient-rich waters into Grand Lake; by reducing dilution flows in the Fraser that would normally flow into Windy Gap, they fear that the Moffat project will worsen this problem.

There were numerous calls for more aggressive conservation efforts by Denver and its customers - recognizing that Denver has some good conservation programs in place, but could do much more (particularly in terms of outdoor water use).  As one citizen, Derek Turner put it, Denver is certainly a state leader with water conservation but they should be a national leader.

Turner also noted that the EIS indicates that Denver will completely divert 100% of the flow from eight different streams in Grand County, and called for at least SOME protection of those resources.

Numerous residents of the Magnolia and Coal Creek Canyon areas - which would be impacted by the proposed multi-year constructon of the enlarged dam for Gross Reservoir - raised concerns about effects on the community, including heavy construction traffic on small rural roads, noise, and development of numerous quarries.

Several individuals highlighted the need to look beyond large engineering solutions for water supply and to instead look at options for conservation and water marketing opportunities including further leases of agricultural water.  One witness emphasized that the rationale for the project was not based on basic water supply needs, but rather was based on the reliability standard - in other words, how severe of a drought should supplies provide for without the need for customers to go under restrictions (such as those that were used in the 2002 drought)?  He noted that Denver planned to have far more water (and rarer need for restrictions) than did the City of Boulder, and suggested that the entire project supply might be unnecessary if Denver simply adjusted its planning expectations on this point.

The evening included an exclamation point from physicist Michael Thomason who noted the presence of Gross Reservoir along one of only two major wildlife migration corridors in Boulder County from the subalpine to the plains - suggesting that, given its role in blocking historic wildlife migrations, the question should be how to remove Gross Reservoir rather than how to enlarge it.

Overall, the evening included a wide range of concerns expressed by citizens coming from a variety of different perspectives.  There were no major supporters/champions for the project who spoke during the public hearing.

Meyers: No easy solution for fish kill

By Charlie MeyersThe Denver Post

Help may be on the way in a Denver Water plan to boost West Slope diversion through the Moffat Tunnel, boosting storage in Gross Reservoir. A companion arrangement would allow the water suppliers for the cities of Boulder and Lafayette to utilize storage in the reservoir.

The potential to use this to enhance winter flows has caught the attention of Trout Unlimited, which long has sought a solution to the South Boulder Creek puzzle.

"If we can use this increased storage to boost flows in the creek," this would be something we could support," said Drew Peternell, director of TU's Western Water Project.

But Peternell's concern also extends to a larger matter, which is a Denver Water push to acquire more water from the upper Fraser River basin, then deliver it through the Continental Divide via its Moffat Tunnel complex.

http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_13904847

Trout Unlimited revives Vail Valley chapter

Scott N. Millersmiller@vaildaily.com Vail, CO Colorado

VAIL VALLEY, Colorado — Rivers may look alike on maps, but the people who fish those Vail Valley streams know better. That's one reason the Eagle Valley has its own Trout Unlimited chapter again.

Trout Unlimited, an organization dedicated to preserving and protecting coldwater fisheries around the county, has had a presence in Eagle County almost since its founding 50 years ago. In fact, the local chapter was among the first 10 created in the country.