An initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder

Newsletter
Donate
Home Blog Page 22

As winter wildfires burn, will they forever alter Colorado’s forests, water?

By
Fresh Water News
-
Research at Spring Creek Fire burn scar
Camille Stevens-Rumann, a forestry researcher at Colorado State University, graduate assistant Zoe Schapira, and field technician Zane Dickson-Hunt gather data in 2019 at the 2018 Spring Creek Fire burn scar, near La Veta, Colo. Here, aspen and scrub oak have sprouted but all pine trees and cones were destroyed in the fire. Photo by Mike Sweeney

By Jason Plautz

The megafire era gripping the West isn’t just a threat to human development. Fires now burn so intensely that they literally reshape forests, shift tree species, and turn calm waterways into devastating mudflows.

A 2017 University of Colorado study analyzing 15 burn scars left from fires in Colorado and New Mexico found that as many as 80% of the plots did not contain new seedlings. In a 2020 follow-up study project under different climate change scenarios, the most severe scenario, where climate change continues unabated through 2050, showed as many as 95% of ponderosa pine and Douglas fir forests would not recover after a fire. In a “moderate” scenario where emissions decline after 2040, more than 80% of the forest would be replaced by scrubby grassland.

That, said study author Kyle Rodman, could have serious implications for waterways, due to the lack of established trees to stabilize soil and reduce the risk of flooding.

“Just because there aren’t trees doesn’t mean there’s no vegetation. Grasses and shrubs can hold back the soil, but it won’t be the same,” says Rodman, now a postdoctoral research assistant at the University of Wisconsin.

Nearly two decades later, the site of the 138,000-acre Hayman Fire, which burned in an area southwest of Denver in 2002, is still marred with patches of bare ground. That fire, according to a U.S. Forest Service (USFS) study, was so severe in areas that it consumed the canopy foliage as well as the seed bank for the forest’s ponderosa pines and Douglas firs, limiting regeneration. Overall, the study predicted “gradual return to preferred conditions” in the Hayman Fire area, though some of the worst-hit patches may see permanent vegetation changes.

In lower elevations, some of the heartier species, like the ponderosa pine and Douglas fir, are having trouble regrowing because of the increased heat and months-long drought. A 2018 study found that even seedlings of those species that were given supplemental water in burned areas had lower survival rates than expected because of the harsh natural conditions.

“When you’re planting a garden, those first few days are so critical. The plants need water to establish their roots and get healthy,” Rodman says. “Trees work a much longer timescale. Those first few years should be cool and wet and we just don’t have those conditions too often.”

Some tree species, like the high-elevation lodgepole pine, generally rely on fire because the heat helps them open and release seeds. But recent fires are burning so intensely that even lodgepole cones are consumed.

A 2020 study in BioScience found that burned forests are showing “major vegetation shifts” and recovering more slowly than expected. In some cases, heartier species might give way to drier shrub-dominated vegetation that can burn more easily. The study found that, generally, those post-fire “forested areas  will have climate and fire regimes more suited to drier forest types and non-forest vegetation.”

That means that hearty forests used to adapting to natural changes are now facing conditions “outside the realm of the disturbances that some forests can handle,” says lead author Jonathan Coop, a professor of environment and sustainability at Western Colorado University.

“We have this paradigm that fire is a natural part of the forest and that forests will always recover,” Coop adds. “These days, we shouldn’t count on that.”

That vegetation shift is especially worrisome for waterways. Normally, forest floors soak in rain and snowmelt, releasing it to waterways slowly throughout the spring and summer. Burn-scarred watersheds, however, have faster runoff and a lower water yield because of the loss of natural material and because of hydrocarbons from smoke permeating the soil. A USFS analysis found that more than 50% of wildfire-scarred land area in Colorado showed increased erosion potential, mudslide threats, and sediment in streams for at least 3-5 years after a fire.

Those effects can last even longer depending on natural conditions, says USFS research engineer Pete Robichaud. The wild seasonal swings from climate change are challenging forests by dumping more precipitation on less stable ground.

“The drought cycle is bigger and the wet cycle is more intense,” Robichaud says. “The perfect storm is a high-severity fire followed by a high-intensity rainfall event.”

The harsh natural conditions, as well as widespread damage from bark beetles, has complicated typical recovery efforts. Some scientists say the rapid changes in forest conditions and fire characteristics make it hard to know what the best recovery strategy is. In some forests, for example, aspen trees that regenerate from low-ground structures rather than relying on seeds to sprout may dominate. Especially in low-elevation areas, shrubbier species like the Gambel oak may regrow faster in forests once driven by conifers.

While replanting is a natural step in recovery (USFS hosts six national nurseries that act as seed banks, although it has restrictions on where certain species can be planted), there are even concerns that the natural conditions should prompt a re-examination of how best to revitalize forests. Ultimately, Coop says, we should expect that forests may not look the same as they did in a pre-megafire era.

“I think this points to the need for all stakeholders and the public to start to think outside the box as far as how we evaluate the forests and ecosystems we depend on,” says Coop. “We might have to think about what ecosystems we are saving and under what circumstances we’ll have to let things go and let some changes unfold.”

This article was first published in the Headwaters magazine Fall 2021 issue.

Jason Plautz is a journalist based in Denver specializing in environmental policy. His writing has appeared in High Country News, Reveal, HuffPost, National Journal, and Undark, among other outlets.

Fresh Water News is an independent, nonpartisan news initiative of Water Education Colorado. WEco is funded by multiple donors. Our editorial policy and donor list can be viewed at wateredco.org.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Scarcity the theme of Colorado River conference

By
Aspen Journalism
-
Lake Powell image
Lake Powell near Page, AZ on Dec. 13. Inflow into the Colorado River’s second largest reservoir was the second-lowest ever last year and current projections from the Bureau of Reclamation suggest this year could be similar. Water scarcity was a main topic of discussion at a gathering of water managers and experts in Las Vegas this week. Credit: Heather Sackett/Aspen Journalism

By Heather Sackett

LAS VEGAS — Sobering. Troubling. The new abnormal. Crazy bad. These were the words used to describe conditions on the Colorado River at the largest annual gathering of water managers and experts in Las Vegas this week.

“I just want to manage everyone’s expectations,” said Chuck Cullom, executive director of the Upper Colorado River Commission and former Colorado River Programs Manager for the Central Arizona Project. “It is super grim.”

Water scarcity — and a sense of urgency to address it — has underscored this year’s Colorado River Water Users Association conference. In 2000, the storage system was nearly full, but over the past two decades, the river’s two largest buckets, Lake Powell and Lake Mead, have fallen to just one-third of their capacity. In July, the Bureau of Reclamation began releases from three upper-basin reservoirs, including Blue Mesa in Gunnison County, to prop up levels at Lake Powell and preserve the ability to generate hydropower. In August, the federal government declared the first-ever tier-one shortage in the lower basin, which triggered mandatory cuts for Arizona farmers.

But scarcity, Cullom said, also drives innovation and collaboration. On Wednesday, lower-basin water managers signed a memorandum of understanding, or MOU, to spend up to $200 million to keep levels in Lake Mead from dropping to dangerously low levels. The agreement, known as the 500+ Plan, aims to add 500,000 acre-feet of water to the reservoir in both 2022 and 2023, which would raise the reservoir by about 16 feet.

The program will be funded by $40 million from the Arizona Department of Water Resources; $20 million each from the Central Arizona Project, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and Southern Nevada Water Authority; and $100 million in matching funds from the federal government.

The lower basin is taking action as a requirement of the 2019 Drought Contingency Plan, which set a threshold of 1,030-feet elevation in Lake Mead. It’s currently at 1,065 feet.

“We have all seen just how quickly the conditions have continued to deteriorate,” said Adel Hagekhalil, general manager of Metropolitan. “The lower-basin water users have recognized we don’t have a lot of time to wait. This unites Arizona, Nevada and California.”

The signing of the MOU came on the same day that the Bureau of Reclamation released its December 24-month study report, which predicts how much water will flow into Lake Powell, a critical data point for water planners. Last month, the bureau predicted the spring runoff would be about 82% of normal. But after a dry November in the upper basin, on Wednesday, the updated monthly estimate had fallen to just 64% of average. Water from Lake Powell feeds Lake Mead downstream. Modeling suggests Lake Powell could fall to below the minimum level needed to generate power by next fall.

Conditions are setting up to mirror a historically bad 2021, when a near-normal snowpack translated to only 31% of normal runoff. It was the second-worst inflow to Lake Powell ever. One of the culprits was a hot, dry previous summer and fall, underscoring the outsized impacts that continuing drought and rising temperatures from climate change are having on the flows of the Colorado River.

“The last 22 years has no 20th-century analogue,” said Brad Udall, senior water and climate research scientist at Colorado State University. “If you call it anything, call it the new abnormal.”

Upper Basin Colorado River Commissioner Pat Tyrrell, who represents Wyoming, said the 500+ Plan was a quick action to respond to the quickly deteriorating conditions.

“It is not painless, that part is self-evident,” he said. “There is no effective approach to the imbalance that doesn’t impact some water user somewhere.”

It’s still unclear where exactly the 500,000 acre-feet of water would come from. One possibility is paying irrigators to voluntarily leave water in the river.

The director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board, Rebecca Mitchell, who also serves as Colorado River commissioner for the state, told state water managers at a breakfast Wednesday that she had not yet seen the details of the water-savings plan from the lower basin.

“We have not seen anything in writing,” she said. “But anything to address and protect the reservoirs I’m obviously going to support.”

Aspen Journalism covers water and rivers in collaboration with The Aspen Times.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Working within Colorado River’s 1922 water compact for 21st century focus of annual meeting

By
Aspen Journalism
-
Lake Powell photo
Lake Powell is seen in a November 2019 aerial photo from the nonprofit EcoFlight. Keeping enough water in the reservoir to support downstream users in Arizona, Nevada and California is complicated by climate change, as well as projections that the upper basin states of Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico will use as much as 40% more water than current demand. A recent white paper from a lineup of river experts calls those use projections into question. CREDIT: ECOFLIGHT

By Heather Sackett

As the climate change-fueled Colorado River crisis worsens, hundreds of water leaders from each of the seven basin states will gather in Las Vegas next week for the annual Colorado River Water Users Association Conference.

The backdrop to many of policymakers’ discussions is sure to be one of the most important legal documents governing how the river’s waters are shared: the 1922 Colorado River Compact, which divvied up flows between the upper basin and lower basin. But this agreement is a relic of the 20th century. Those flows — totaling 15 million acre-feet, with 7.5 million for each basin — no longer exist, if they ever existed in the first place. The river was overallocated to begin with, and hotter and drier conditions mean flows will continue to dwindle.

These realities have some experts talking about how best to continue dividing the waters within the confines of the century-old agreement while tweaking it to adapt to 21st century conditions. Many water managers agree that renegotiating the compact is not realistic because it would require the agreement of too many competing interests as well as congressional approval. But it also may not be necessary.

“I think we can come to agreement around an appropriate response to these reduced supplies without going through the brain damage of renegotiating the compact,” said Anne Castle, a senior fellow at the University of Colorado’s Getches-Wilkinson Center, who will be moderating a panel at CRWUA.

Eric Kuhn is one of the thinkers proposing that basin states adopt something called a nonstationary set of compact guidelines. Kuhn is an author and former director of the Glenwood-Springs-based Colorado River Water Conservation District. He says that instead of allocating 7.5 million acre-feet annually each to the upper basin (Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico) and lower basin (California, Nevada and Arizona), the river should simply be split down the middle: Each basin gets half of the river’s flows, however much that may be.

“A set of guidelines that are based on a stationary set of rules for a nonstationary river is not going to lead to success,” Kuhn said. “We have to consider adopting a more flexible system that is tied to how much water there is in the upper basin.”

Kuhn laid out the concept at a presentation at the Colorado Mesa University Upper Colorado River Basin Forum last month. He also pointed out that requiring the upper basin, where most of the river’s flows originate as snowpack, to contribute the same fixed amount each year despite declining flows means that the upper basin is unfairly bearing the brunt of climate change. Under the compact, the upper basin is required to deliver the lower basin’s 7.5-million-acre-foot share or risk mandatory cutbacks.

“In the upper basin for a decade, we have been talking about the upper basin squeeze,” Kuhn said. “It’s when the flow goes down, but you have fixed commitments. That was somewhat theoretical until a few years ago.”

So far, it’s unclear whether Kuhn’s idea is one that is being seriously considered by water managers. But it has been gaining traction among academic circles, especially in the past few years as river flows have declined at unprecedented speed. This year’s upper-basin flows into the river’s second-largest reservoir, Lake Powell, ranked second worst, at 31% of average, despite a near-normal snowpack.

Climate scientist Brad Udall has found that flows at Lee Ferry — the dividing line between the upper and lower basins and where upper-basin deliveries are measured — have been about 20% less over the past 22 years than in the 20th century. A river system that once produced 15 million acre-feet has now dwindled to just 12.4 million.

Tying the upper basin’s delivery obligations to the variable river hydrology instead of a fixed number would be a way of solving the “significant math problem” where usage exceeds supplies, according to Castle. The concept could be adaptable to changing conditions year over year, she said.

“It could be in effect while supplies continue at the level we have been experiencing and wouldn’t continue if supplies go up in the future,” she said. “So there could be a return to previous delivery levels if there’s sufficient inflow in the river to support that. I don’t think it has to be thought of as a permanent change, but a mechanism that is triggered by some measurement of low levels of supplies.”

Map of Colorado River Basin
This map shows the Colorado River Basin and surrounding areas that use Colorado River Water, with four regions delineated, based on the degree to which flow is regulated and the channel physically manipulated. The dividing line for the upper and lower basin is Lee Ferry near Glen Canyon Dam. CREDIT: CENTER FOR COLORADO RIVER STUDIES

Law of the river should bend, not break

Karen Kwon and Jennifer Gimbel of the Water Center at Colorado State University last month released a paper called “Quenching Thirst in the Colorado River Basin.” The paper is devoted to understanding the historic issues that have shaped water use in the basin so that “the historical doctrines can bend to the needs of the present and future without eroding a foundation upon which we all stand.”

“There is a valid reason for asking that question of why something that was written in 1922 … why don’t we just redo it?” Kwon said. “But entire economies and societies have been built off the understandings and infrastructure that exists.”

Kwon, who is also moderating a panel discussion at CRWUA, hopes the paper will provide historic background and context for future negotiations and discussions about interim operating guidelines for reservoirs Powell and Mead. Achieving flexibility and parity between basins while staying within the framework of the compact should be the goal, she said.

Glen Canyon Dam photo
Glen Canyon Dam, at the bottom of the Glen Canyon Reservoir, aka Lake Powell. Water experts are exploring the concept of a flexibility set of guidelines for upper basin water deliveries to the lower basin.CREDIT: STEVE SKINNER

Who gives?

But getting both the upper and lower basins to agree to flexible allocations based on annual river flows means they each must give up something — a tricky and as-yet-unlikely prospect. The framers of the compact reserved 7.5 million acre-feet for the upper basin because it wasn’t developing as quickly as the lower basin. If states relied solely on the system of prior appropriation where older water rights get first use of the river, thirsty and fast-growing California could have used up the water decades ago, leaving none for the slow-growing upper basin.

The upper basin currently uses about 4.4 million acre-feet per year. The lower basin uses close to its full 7.5 million acre-feet.

“One of the reasons we need to stay within that framework is because that is what protects us in the upper basin,” Gimbel said. “The only way to protect us getting our fair share of the river was to allow us to develop over time.”

But upper-basin water managers are also reluctant to admit that their states probably won’t grow to use their full amount and jealously guard their apportionment. A February white paper by the Center for Colorado River Studies says these unrealistic future water-use projections by the upper basin make it hard to plan for a water-short future. Still, despite shortages, recently completed Basin Implementation Plans for each of Colorado’s river basins lay out a wish list for millions of dollars’ worth of future water-development projects.

“Bringing new water development into the equation makes the problem worse for everybody, and I don’t see how that can be part of an equitable solution,” Castle said.

Upper-basin water managers argue that their states have been taking shortages for years: When flows are low, they are forced to use less and can’t just draw down an upstream reservoir as can the lower basin with Lake Mead.

Lower-basin water managers may not want to allow a more flexible delivery obligation for the upper basin because it would probably mean that in dry years they would get less than the full 7.5 million acre-feet promised under the current interpretation of the compact.

Caesar's Palace fountain photo
A fountain outside of Caesar’s Place in 2019, the morning of a regional water conference that’s held every year in Las Vegas. This year’s gathering of hundreds of water managers and experts is Dec. 14-16. CREDIT: BRENT GARDNER-SMITH/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Complicated politics

The politics are really complicated, said Kathryn Sorenson, director of research at the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University and former director of Phoenix Water Services. People tend to get very excited about new technologies that could increase supplies — for example, desalination plants on the California coast — but balk at further cuts to water use.

“It’s easier to put those ideas forward than to put forward ideas about using less,” Sorenson said. “So that gives you some idea of what a lower-basin perspective might be.”

Both the upper basin and the lower basin have valid points, Kwon said. Sticking to what was promised to them under the compact, which has governed river operations for a century, makes sense. But navigating a water-short future will require moving beyond who is right and who is wrong. Anything else is just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, Kwon said.

“All of those statements are accurate, but we need to rise above it,” Kwon said. “I hope that we can find a way to have a discussion that protects people’s interests without just outright staking positions, but recognizes and honors interests so we can move the boat instead of just moving the deck chairs.”

This story ran in the Dec. 12 editions of The Aspen Times, Vail Daily, Steamboat Pilot & Today and the Sky-Hi News.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Ouray County asks state water board to delay filing aimed at instream flow protection

By
Aspen Journalism
-
Cow Creek photo
Ouray County Water Users Association wants to build Ram’s Horn Reservoir on the upper reach of Cow Creek, shown here. Ouray County has requested that the CWCB delay a filing for an instream flow water right below this reach. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

By Heather Sackett

Ouray County is asking the state water board to delay a water court filing designed to protect streamflows so it can try to resolve issues in a separate but related water court case.

In July, the Colorado Water Conservation Board approved an instream flow water right on Cow Creek, a tributary of the Uncompahgre River, and asked staff to file for the right in water court by the end of this year. Instream flow rights are held exclusively by the state with the goal of preserving the natural environment to a reasonable degree. The state board, which is charged with protecting and developing Colorado’s water supply, holds instream flow rights on about 1,700 stream segments and 9,700 miles of stream throughout the state.

Now, Ouray County is asking the CWCB to delay the filing by six months so that the two governmental entities can try to work out the board’s opposition to a reservoir and pipeline project on Cow Creek on which the county is a co-applicant. CWCB directors will consider the request at their regular meeting Thursday. 

In a November letter to Ouray County, Robert Viehl, the CWCB’s chief of the Stream and Lake Protection Section, noted that state statutes set clear rules and timelines for commenting and making hearing requests, and that the county’s request to delay the filing falls outside of those parameters.

“Any entity had the opportunity to state concerns with the Cow Creek appropriation and filing of the water right at the CWCB’s March, May and July 2021 meetings, when the appropriation was noticed before the board,” the letter reads. “This request by Ouray County is outside of the set administrative process for the appropriation and filing on instream flow water rights.” 

The CWCB, at the recommendation of Colorado Parks & Wildlife, is seeking instream flow protections for a 7.4-mile reach of Cow Creek — from its confluence with Lou Creek to its confluence with the Uncompahgre River, downstream of Ridgway Reservoir. CPW says this reach contains important fisheries, including the last-known remnant population of bluehead sucker in the upper Uncompahgre River basin. 

But although these state agencies want to keep water in Cow Creek, Ouray County is hoping to develop more water out of it with a pipeline and reservoir project. The county — along with Tri-County Water Conservancy District, Ouray County Water Users Association and Colorado River Water Conservation District — is proposing a project that would take water from Cow Creek and pipe it to Ridgway Reservoir. The pipeline would be above the stretch CPW is proposing for instream flow protections.

The stored water would be released for the benefit of senior downstream users such as the Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association. The applicants are also seeking to build Ram’s Horn Reservoir on the upper reaches of Cow Creek, which would hold 25,000 acre-feet of water behind a 260-foot-tall and 270-foot-long dam. Proponents say the project would help alleviate water shortages in the upper Uncompahgre River basin.

CWCB and CPW have filed statements of opposition to the project, claiming it could injure their existing water rights on streams in the area. In an October letter to the CWCB, Ouray County attorney Carol Viner said the county will have to file its own statement of opposition if the state follows through on filing an instream flow water right by the end of the year.

“If you file in December, it will mean we must oppose your case, which will complicate not only your case, but ours,” the letter reads.

In his November reply letter, Viehl disagreed, saying that the CWCB does not feel that Ouray County’s filing as a party to the instream flow case would complicate either water court case. 

Cow Creek photo 2
Ouray County Water Users Association wants to build a 260-foot dam at this location on Cow Creek that would hold about 25,000 acre-feet of water. The CWCB opposes the project and Ouray County says if the state board files an instream flow water right on the lower reaches of Cow Creek, the county will have to oppose it. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Issue of ‘sequencing’

Ouray County Commissioner Ben Tisdel said the issue is one of sequencing. The Ram’s Horn Reservoir and pipeline project should get its water right approved before the instream flow water right, he said. 

“We don’t want them to not do an instream flow necessarily, but if they get it right now, we would have to oppose it,” Tisdel said. “Until we have an adjudication, we don’t have a water right. And CWCB and CPW are opposers in our case. It’s that simple, really.” 

According to Colorado water law, older water rights get to use their share of the river first. If approved by a water court, Ouray County’s water right would have a priority date of 2019, while the CWCB instream flow right would have a 2021 date, meaning the instream flow would be junior to the Ram’s Horn project. 

But Viner, the Ouray County attorney, said the county would oppose the instream flow filing anyway. 

“We would be senior to them, but they have a rigid and inflexible stream management system, and we want more flexibility and local control,” she said. “We want to be able to give the CWCB what they want without an instream flow.”

Representatives from CWCB and CPW gave a presentation to Ouray County in December 2020 about the proposed instream flow water right, at which time Viner’s letter says county commissioners raised concerns about postponing the filing. But state officials say they do not remember a request from the county to postpone a filing, nor do the meeting minutes say anything about a request. The entities met again to discuss the water project and the two water court filings in February 2021, and CPW and CWCB staff said they planned to present the proposed instream flow filing to the CWCB board at the March meeting. 

The CWCB has received comment letters from Boulder-based conservation group Western Resource Advocates and the Uncompahgre Watershed Partnership, which are opposers in the Ram’s Horn case, asking the board not to delay the instream flow filing. 

“The board should not lightly consider the drastic departure from its established procedures that the county now proposes,” wrote Uncompahgre Watershed Partnership Board President Dennis Murphy. “The county had more than ample opportunity to participate in public comment and/or request a hearing at appropriate points along the way.”

Viner said that the county also wants to protect flows and fish in Cow Creek and that the entities should be able to come to an agreement. The county could have protections equivalent to an instream flow written into its water-right decree, instead of the CWCB imposing a state-level mandate, she said.

“There’s a way to accomplish what they need and a way to accomplish what we need,” Viner said. “We want this to be a local project and we want them to be a partner, but we don’t want them telling us what to do.”

Aspen Journalism covers water and rivers in collaboration with The Aspen Times. For more information, go to www.aspenjournalism.org.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

In Vegas, experts eye declining Colorado River flows, electricity woes and federal budget impacts

By
Fresh Water News
-
Las Vegas Strip
Las Vegas Strip, Dec. 14, 2021. Credit: Allen Best

By Allen Best

Las Vegas: For every month that Lake Powell’s drought-strapped hydropower system fails to produce enough electricity to sell to Colorado utilities and others across the West, millions of dollars are being lost.

That federal power revenue supports vital salinity reduction programs for farmers and efforts to recover endangered fish. But with no prospect of relief in sight — inflows into Powell this year were just 26% of average — utilities and states will see their costs rise to make up the shortfall, experts said Tuesday at the Colorado River Water Users Association conference in Las Vegas.

“We have to explore a lot of alternative funding strategies with the hydropower sector likely to diminish in time,” said Don Barnett, executive director of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum, in a session called “No Spare Change.”

Much more rain and, especially, snow in Colorado and other Upper Colorado River Basin states will be needed during the next two years to ensure continued production of electricity in Glen Canyon and other dams in the Colorado River system.

Since the creation of the dams on the Colorado and other rivers across the American Southwest, hydropower has provided a relatively inexpensive source of electricity to municipal and cooperative utilities in Colorado and other states. Portions of the revenue from hydroelectric sales go to support the salinity and endangered fish programs.

Already this year, shrinking river flows in the Colorado and several other rivers in the Southwest have reduced power sales 37% in the Colorado River Storage Project, which includes Lake Powell, Flaming Gorge Reservoir, Blue Mesa Reservoir and Navajo Reservoir.

Now there is a heightened focus on the reservoir levels at Lake Powell, where Glen Canyon Dam generates 75% to 80% of the electricity distributed by the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA).

“In case nobody was paying attention, there is a drought in the Upper Colorado River Basin,” Tom Vigil, the Montrose, Colo.-based manager of the Colorado River Storage Project for WAPA, said. “Things have gotten a little bit worse lately and there’s a cumulative effect.”

Record-low inflow into Powell in the water year ending in September triggered a first-ever shortage declaration in August, meaning that Arizona, Nevada and California will have to cut their water use. WAPA in October projected a one-in-three chance that Glen Canyon Dam might be at minimum power pool in 2023, unable to produce power at all. That level is elevation 3,525 feet. Even now power production is falling because the low reservoir levels mean less pressure on the turbines. With less pressure, power production is reduced.

But WAPA must still deliver power to its customers. This is done by buying more expensive electricity on the open market. To cover those costs, WAPA raised its rates Dec. 1 to $3 per megawatt hour, a 14% increase.

WAPA will likely increase rates even more, but there’s a limit to how much it can charge. At some point, customers will go elsewhere to buy their power. And that, of course, means less revenue from WAPA and the federal programs that depend upon WAPA revenues.

In the short term, WAPA has been delaying some maintenance and capital projects. Delay can work for only so long, however. Vigil said deferred maintenance to the transmission system — one of the major assets of the agency — can result in rising risk of disrupted power supplies. Payments to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the operator of the dams and the generator of the electricity distributed by WAPA, have also been postponed.

Shrinking federal power sales revenue has Barnett and others involved in the salinity program anxious. The program has about $15 million in delayed work.

Barnett made the case for the cost-effectiveness of salinity control in the Upper Basin states. The diminished salt in the Colorado River saved Clark County, home to Las Vegas, $45 million in just last year.

In a snapshot of the current state of affairs, Barnett explained that the federal program has a cost-share obligation with states of $10 million. The federal fund from hydropower sales has delivered only $8.5 million. That means a delay of $1.5 million of salinity control programs for next year. “We are pretty anxious about that.”

The endangered fish recovery programs in the upper Colorado River, San Juan and lower Colorado River offer a parallel story. Tom Chart is the recently retired former director of the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program.

The program has had successes, including the efforts to recover populations of four species in the upper Colorado River above Moab, Utah. The most recent milestone was the No. 17 down-listing of the humpback chub from endangered to threatened.

Chart said he foresaw the need to shift funding for the continuation of the fish program, currently at 50% federal and 50% states, to a larger role for state funding, as much as 70%.

Long-time Colorado journalist Allen Best publishes Big Pivots, an e-magazine that covers energy and other transitions in Colorado. He can be reached at allen@bigpivots.com and allen.best@comcast.net.

Fresh Water News is an independent, nonpartisan news initiative of Water Education Colorado. WEco is funded by multiple donors. Our editorial policy and donor list can be viewed at wateredco.org.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Glenwood Canyon monitoring project gets funding for second phase

By
Aspen Journalism
-
Canal sediment build up photo
Nathan Bell, a consultant with the Silt Water Conservancy District points to the sediment built up where the canal that takes water from the Colorado River feeds into the pump house. An upstream water quality monitoring project, which received funding approval from the Colorado Basin Roundtable, could help alert the district when mudslides occur in Glenwood Canyon. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

By Heather Sackett

SILT — Water managers are dealing with the after effects of the Grizzly Creek Fire and subsequent mudslides in Glenwood Canyon by continuing a water quality monitoring program. 

The Middle Colorado Watershed Council received funding approval this week for the second phase of a program that will continue to collect and distribute data about weather and river conditions downstream of the Grizzly Creek burn scar. The Colorado Basin Roundtable approved $72,200 in state grant money for continued data collection at seven rain gauges in Glenwood Canyon, which will provide information to the National Weather Service, an automatic water quality sampler, soil moisture sensors, a new stream gauge and water quality monitoring station in the Rifle/Silt area and a data dashboard for easy access of the information. 

The first phase of the project, which was implemented early last summer before the monsoons, addressed immediate water quality issues, collecting data at the rain gauges every 15 minutes.  

The second phase of the project amounts to an early warning system that will let water users downstream of Glenwood Canyon know when dirty water from mudslides is headed their way. The MCWC hopes to have all the pieces in place before spring runoff.

“With the way post-fire events happen, we are going to be looking at impacts for the next two to five years,” said Paula Stepp, executive director of the Middle Colorado Watershed Council. “The part I’m really excited about is the cooperation between stakeholders and downstream users.”

On July 29, a heavy rainstorm triggered mudslides in Glenwood Canyon, which left some motorists stranded overnight, and closed Interstate 70 for weeks. Because soils scorched by the 2020 Grizzly Creek Fire don’t absorb moisture, the rain sent rocks, sediment and debris flowing down drainages, across the highway and into the Colorado River. 

But the mudslides didn’t just affect the river at the site of the rainstorm. The cascade of dirty water also had impacts to agricultural and municipal water users downstream in Silt, whose only source of water is the Colorado. 

The sediment-laden water caused problems for the town of Silt’s water treatment plant, which had to use more chemicals to get the sand to settle out. The increased manganese and iron suspended in the water gave it a brownish tint at taps. It also fouled a set of filters, which the town spent $48,000 to replace. The filters normally last four to five years, but had to be replaced after just one, said Trey Fonner, public works director for the town.

“If we knew what was coming down the river, we could shut off the intake and we could let the river clean up a little bit before we turned it back on,” Fonner said. “If our tanks are full, we can shut off and let the worst part of it go by.”  

Filters affected by turbid water from the mudslides in Glenwood Canyon photo
Town of Silt Public Works Director Trey Fonner points out how the water treatment plant’s filters were affected by turbid water from the mudslides in Glenwood Canyon last summer. The town had to replace them at a cost of $48,000. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

Conservancy district impacts 

The mudslides also created challenges for the Silt Water Conservancy District, which delivers water from the river to about 45 headgates via a canal and pumphouse. Although the town can temporarily shut down its intake because it has about a three-day supply of water in storage, the conservancy district pumps water continuously and shutting off for a brief period of time is difficult. 

“It’s not really a system that can be shut down easily,” said Nathan Bell, a consultant for the district and roundtable member. “It’s extremely cumbersome. It’s a nightmare.” 

The main problem for the district is that the earthen canal which takes water from the river to the pump station silts up. The turbid water also acts like sandpaper, causing more wear and tear on the machinery and reducing its lifespan. The district is planning on more frequent canal cleanings and installing drop structures to catch the mud before it makes it to the pump house.

The data generated from the monitoring project will allow the district to better plan and budget for the inevitable increased maintenance and repairs, Bell said.

“It reduces the variables you’re having to manage,” he said. “It lets us get ahead of the game.”

The data dashboard will let downstream users and the general public set up text alerts for when a parameter of interest is too high or outside a specific window. Silt water users, for example, could set an alert for when rain gauges in Glenwood Canyon record a certain amount of rain, which increases the likelihood a plume of dirty water is headed their way. 

The total cost of phase two of the project is nearly $1.3 million. The watershed council is asking the Colorado Water Conservation Board for about $650,000 in grant money and they also expect funds from the U.S. Geological Survey. Garfield County has committed to $15,000 over the next three years and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment will contribute $50,000. 

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Water Desk supports journalists covering Colorado River

By
The Water Desk
-
The Colorado River in Grand Canyon National Park. Photo by Ted Wood/The Water Desk.

The Water Desk is excited to announce the recipients of new grants to support water journalism connected to the Colorado River Basin.

The grantees will be reporting on a range of critical water issues facing the region, including climate change, drought, pollution, growth, biodiversity, agriculture and energy. Many of the journalists will be exploring equity issues in the water sector.

The 11 awards, up to $10,000 each, are being funded thanks to the support of the Walton Family Foundation. A total of $83,129 has been approved in this round of grantmaking.

The recipients of The Water Desk’s 2021 grants (in alphabetical order):

MacKenzie Elmer and Adriana Heldiz, Voice of San Diego

Sam Fromartz and Stephen Robert Miller, Food & Environment Reporting Network

Paul Ingram, Bennito L. Kelty and Dylan Smith, TucsonSentinel.com

Tasmiha Khan, independent journalist

Stephanie Maltarich, independent journalist

Stephanie Mencimer, Mother Jones

Shannon Mullane, independent journalist

Victor Renné Rodriguez, independent journalist

Luke Runyon, KUNC

Julia Simon, independent journalist

Nicola Twilley and Cynthia Graber, Gastropod Podcast

The Water Desk maintains strict editorial independence from its funders and the University of Colorado. Funders of The Water Desk have no right to review or to otherwise influence stories or other journalistic content that is produced with the support of these grants. For more about our editorial independence, please see our funding page.

Congratulations and best of luck to our grantees. We look forward to seeing the water journalism they produce!

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Aspen officials release plan laying out 50 years of water projects

By
Aspen Journalism
-
Integrated Water Resources Plan land photo
An aerial view showing the 63-acre parcel of land, located to the left of the racetrack and gravel pit, purchased by the city of Aspen due to its being a potential site for a new reservoir contemplated as part of an 50-year Integrated Water Resources Plan. A new reservoir in Woody Creek would require an 8-mile pipeline to convey water to the city’s treatment plant. CREDIT: BRENT GARDNER-SMITH/ASPEN JOURNALISM

By Heather Sackett

The city of Aspen’s recently released integrated water resource plan outlines the strategy for an adaptable, phased approach to meet increasing demands and a large pool of “emergency” storage to protect against threats to supplies from Castle and Maroon creeks.

Aspen Utilities Director Tyler Christoff, Utilities Resource Manager Steve Hunter and John Rehring of Carollo Engineers, the Denver-based firm that the city hired to complete the study, presented the IWRP to City Council members at a work session Monday night. The report, which looks 50 years to the future, uses projections about population growth and climate change impacts to determine that the worst shortfalls could occur in two consecutively dry years and be about 2,300 acre-feet total over the course of both years.

To make up for that gap, the report offers six different portfolios of potential new water sources, including storage, nonpotable reuse, groundwater wells, Hunter Creek, enhanced water conservation and drought restrictions. The IWRP says storage is included in five of the six portfolios because no single supply option or combination of supply options can completely mitigate shortages without the use of at least some operational storage. 

Two storage pools

The plan proposes two separate storage pools to meet demands under projected conditions in 2070: a 520-acre-foot operational pool and a 5,300-acre-foot emergency-storage pool to provide up to 12 months of water. 

Since the report recommends a phased approach with each additional implementation coming after a predetermined trigger is reached, the first phase of operational storage would be for just 130 acre-feet to buffer the seasonal shortage. Streams are highest with runoff in the spring, but demands on Aspen’s water system are highest in late summer, when streamflows are low — and this is the gap operational storage aims to fill. 

The construction of the combined 5,820 acre-feet of storage and its associated pipelines and pumps comes with a hefty price tag — it is estimated to cost more than $400 million in 2021 dollars as it is implemented over the coming decades. 

Aspen Utilities Resource Manager Steve Hunter photo
Aspen Utilities Resource Manager Steve Hunter stands at the city’s Castle Creek water diversion in this February 2021 file photo. Castle Creek is the source of most of Aspen’s potable water, but the city recently released a report laying out options for increasing its access to water supply from other sources in case something prevented the city from using its diversion infrastructure tapping Castle and Maroon creeks, or flows on those creeks were greatly reduced due to climate change. CREDIT: HEATHER SACKETT/ASPEN JOURNALISM

“We want to make it flexible and adaptable so that we are ready for that worst-case condition,” Rehring told council members. “We implement as needed as we see those conditions unfold over time.”

The report says the emergency-storage pool must be full and ready for use when the need arises — if, for example, an avalanche makes the city’s supplies in Castle and Maroon creeks unusable. “Regardless of siting and co-location, emergency-storage volumes would be filled and maintained at their defined capacity until needed for an emergency,” the IWRP reads. 

Storing water specifically until an emergency occurs is not a decreed beneficial use under Colorado water law. But municipal water providers often have a lot of leeway to plan for future needs, which could include storage projects.

Part of the goal of the IWRP is to narrow the city’s options for moving its conditional water rights for reservoirs in Castle and Maroon valleys. After a lengthy court battle, in which 10 entities opposed Aspen’s plans, the city gave up its water rights in those particular locations. One of the places to which the city could move them is a 63-acre plot of land that it bought in Woody Creek in 2018. If the city stores water there, it would have to pump it back uphill to the water-treatment plant via an 8-mile pipeline.

City Council member Ward Hauenstein asked about the timeline for storage and renewing the city’s conditional water rights.

To keep these rights, the city will have to show, through a 2025 filing in water court, that it still intends to use them and that it is making progress on a project. 

“Recent history across Colorado shows that it could take decades to implement a storage project, even after sizing and siting analyses are completed,” the report reads. “Therefore, reservoir planning must start immediately.” 

Aspen City Council will vote on whether to adopt the IWRP at a later meeting. Mayor Torre thanked the staff, consultants and community members who weighed in on the plan. 

“The work you guys are doing on this is some of the most important work Aspen is going to have the benefit of over the coming 10, 20, 30 years,” he said. “Thank you.” 

This story ran in the Nov. 23 edition of The Aspen Times.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

Just in time for the holidays, feds offer $500,000 high-tech water contest

By
Fresh Water News
-
NASA researchers in Colorado San Juans photo
NASA researchers in Colorado San Juans. Credit: NASA

By Jerd Smith

As climate change and drought continue to sap streams and rivers, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is offering $500,000 to anyone 18 years old and older worldwide who can produce a better tool to measure how much water snowflakes contain.

“Our technology must advance to meet the particular challenges of climate change and extreme weather,” said Greg Lipstein, a principal at DrivenData, one of the firms partnering with Reclamation and NASA to conduct the challenge.

The high-tech challenge comes as Colorado and other Western states are experiencing a shockingly dry fall and early winter. Denver, for instance, broke the record for the latest first snow in November and is still seeing little if any of the white stuff.

And the seven-state Colorado River system is struggling as well, with lakes Powell and Mead hitting record lows this year and little relief in sight.

Cities and farms across much of the West rely primarily on mountain snowmelt for their water supplies. While periodic drought has always been part of the West’s water story, before the region became highly populated, in most years there was enough water to serve the people who relied on it. But as climate change has triggered decades-long megadroughts, and populations have soared, water is becoming an ever-increasingly scarce resource.

In the world of snow forecasting, it’s important to be able to know early how snowy a winter season is likely to be, and even more important to know how much water is contained in the snow that falls. Flakes that come down in ultra-cold weather can contain much less water than those that fall during warm spring storms.

To bring more certainty to efforts to forecast and therefore manage snow-based water supplies, the Reclamation has partnered with three technology companies to challenge anyone older than 18 to develop a tool that can predict snow water content, also known as snow water equivalency, with greater accuracy. Reclamation is the largest water supplier in the West and operates major reservoirs such as lakes Powell and Mead.

During the winter of 2020-21, ultra-dry soils absorbed melting mountain snowpacks that in some areas were about average. As a result, the melting snow generated just 30% of what had been forecast in some areas on Colorado’s Western Slope and in California and elsewhere.

Traditionally, the federal government has used ground-based tools known as “SNOTEL” sites, short for snow telemetry, to measure the snow as it accumulates. In Colorado, for instance, the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) maintains and monitors more than 150 sites across several states, many of them in remote mountain regions. But the SNOTEL sites are limited in the amount of data they can produce.

New technologies are also being tested, such as airplane-based LiDAR systems in which flyovers are conducted to monitor large swaths of mountain terrain using gear that can detect snow depth and water content. This new tool can generate thousands of data points, but the flyovers cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, according to NASA.

The airborne technology is already being used in Colorado and California by large utilities who are willing to foot the bill.

Satellite imagery is also being used, but it too has limits, according to Karl Wetlaufer, a Colorado hydrologist with the NRCS. Some satellite services can provide daily reports with what he calls “coarse” data that doesn’t provide enough detail for scientists and modelers.

Other satellite platforms provide finer data, but might only do so every 16 days, too infrequently to deliver the precision water managers need, Wetlaufer said.

“Over the last several years there has been a lot of emphasis on getting snow water equivalency data. Agencies like NASA are good at attacking it from a research standpoint, but this competition is going to take a lot of NASA’s research and actually come up with a near real-time operational model blending microwave, radar, airborne snow observatory, and SNOTEL.

“This push by Reclamation is a big boost to putting this research into an operational model that can be used day to day,” Wetlaufer said. “I think it’s a really awesome concept that could be potentially valuable to the community.”

The contest launches this week and will continue through July 2022, according to Reclamation.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

New era? Western cities using wetland parks, stormwater capture and mobile wastewater collection

By
Fresh Water News
-
Lake Powell, created with the 1963 completion of Glen Canyon Dam, is the upper basin's largest reservoir on the Colorado River. But 2000-2019 has provided the least amount of inflow into the reservoir, making it the lowest 20-year period since the dam was built, as evidenced by the "bathtub ring" and dry land edging the reservoir, which was underwater in the past. Credit: EcoFlight
Lake Powell, created with the 1963 completion of Glen Canyon Dam, is the upper basin’s largest reservoir on the Colorado River. But 2000-2019 has provided the least amount of inflow into the reservoir, making it the lowest 20-year period since the dam was built, as evidenced by the “bathtub ring” and dry land edging the reservoir, which was underwater in the past. Credit: EcoFlight

By Jerd Smith

Los Angeles is creating wetland parks in low-income neighborhoods, and using them to help clean polluted runoff.

Seattle has begun a mobile wastewater collection program to gather gray and black water from RVs and improve the city’s water quality, which had begun to deteriorate as the homeless population grew and wastewater spills from campers became more common.

Las Vegas has structured its water rates to encourage people to conserve while ensuring that low-income households have access to affordable, clean water.

“We’re facing challenging times,” said Adel Hagekhalil, general manager of the Metropolitan Water District of California, the largest water utility in the United States. His comments came Nov. 3 at the Water in the West Symposium in Denver, a conference sponsored by Colorado State University and Denver Water.

“We’re facing drier days, hotter days and shrinking water supplies across our region. We need new chapters in our playbook,” Hagekhalil said.

Hagekhalil was among several Western water utility leaders who said efforts to address shrinking water supplies due to drought and population growth means utilities will have to change dramatically in the next 50 to 100 years.

MWD, for instance, has always imported water to distribute to a service area that includes some 20 million people. But now the agency is looking for ways to increase local supplies as its Colorado River supplies shrink.

The answer, in part, is a sophisticated effort to capture the region’s sometimes copious rainfall and inject it into aquifers, where space is plentiful. The utility is also creating urban wetland parks where former parking lots stood and providing subsidies to help low-income homeowners repair unsafe and leaking water delivery pipes.

“It’s no longer enough for us to be an importer of water,” Hagekhalil, said. “We need to leverage resources to create more local water and to collaborate across our region to store our groundwater.”

In Seattle, a water-rich city, the challenges lie in soaring water treatment costs and a growing population base that includes a significant number of campers and RV dwellers, driven out of traditional housing because of rising prices.

“Like everyone else, we are trying to change the way we do business,” said Andrew Lee, interim general manager of Seattle Public Utilities.

After watching the number of wastewater spills rise almost as quickly as housing prices, the utility decided to create a mobile collection program for people who had no other way to dispose of their sewage.

“It’s been a game changer and a life changer for a number of people,” Lee said.

Western utilities are spending millions of dollars to build water recycling plants and new storage systems and to upgrade water treatment systems. At the same time, the call for more affordable water is growing as well.

To address the issue Las Vegas provides a 50% subsidy on the first 5,000 gallons of residential water used and charges service fees based on the size of the delivery pipe. Smaller homes pay just $5 a month, while the area’s largest homes pay a service fee of $300, according to John Entsminger, general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority, which serves Las Vegas and the surrounding area.

“We need our water prices to send a conservation signal to the high water users,” Entsminger said.

“But we want lower water users to have affordable water.”

To that end, the utility charges customers just $1.74 per thousand gallons for low levels of use.

“That’s how we attempt to make sure that the disadvantaged parts of our community and the poorest parts of it still have access to clean, cheap water supplies for necessary uses,” Entsminger said.

And to help the region address ongoing water shortages, Nevada lawmakers this year made it illegal to use any precious Colorado River water on “non-essential turf.”

But more work lies ahead and the utility leaders said the answers would be found in better integrated water systems capable of addressing supply and affordability issues.

Jerd Smith is editor of Fresh Water News. She can be reached at 720-398-6474, via email at jerd@wateredco.org or @jerd_smith.

Fresh Water News is an independent, nonpartisan news initiative of Water Education Colorado. WEco is funded by multiple donors. Our editorial policy and donor list can be viewed at wateredco.org.

The Water Desk’s mission is to increase the volume, depth and power of journalism connected to Western water issues. We’re an initiative of the Center for Environmental Journalism at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Water Desk launched in April 2019 with support from the Walton Family Foundation. We maintain a strict editorial firewall between our funders and our journalism.

1...212223...50Page 22 of 50

Recent stories

© Copyright The Water Desk | How to use our multimedia