Site search
sponsored by
Home
News
SUMMIT COUNTY — Although a proposed local pumpback project on the Blue River is at least temporarily on hold, the wider idea of "recycling" stream water by diverting it upstream through a pipeline seems to be the flavor of the month among Colorado water managers.
The Colorado Water Conservation Board is preparing to request up to $500,000 from the state Legislature to study a series of pumpback projects around the state, including in the Yampa Basin, another in the Gunnison Basin and along the South Platte. Locally, water managers are studying a plan to pump water from Green Mountain Reservoir back up as far as Silverthorne, or even into Dillon Reservoir.
The granddaddy of pumpback projects may also get another look, according to John Rosapeppe, of Trout Unlimited, who explained that the so-called Big Straw is still on the radar screen. The Big Straw would involve tapping unused Colorado River water rights at the Colorado-Utah border and delivering them far back upstream for use on the West Slope and as a diversion to the Front Range. A study on the Big Straw a few years ago concluded that the project is feasible, but only at an enormous cost.
The various pumpback schemes, along with other water issues, could come up at a pair of meetings, including the quarterly Colorado River headwaters forum, set for Thursday, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m., at the North Branch Library in Silverthorne.
Also on the agenda is some discussion of interbasin roundtables, established to create collaborative planning for water transfers between river basins. Forum participants will also get an update on newly adopted stream temperature standards that will enhance protection for trout fisheries.
Locally, the Blue River pumpback was proposed by the Breckenridge Sanitation District to increase flows in the Blue River between Breckenridge and Dillon Reservoir. Permitting negotiations with the Board of County Commissioners faltered when the parties couldn't agree on a few key issues, including the question of whether the county has regulatory authority over the pumpback.
But the idea is not dead, said sanitation district manager Andy Carlberg.
"We're revisiting it every day," Carlberg said, explaining that the district is in the process of establishing water rights for the pumpback in court.
<b>Pumpback concerns</b>
The idea of pumpbacks as a way to provide new water supplies is of concern to Ken Neubecker, vice president of Colorado Trout Unlimited, a conservation group protecting cold-water fisheries.
"It's the mindset that sees it as nothing more than plumbing - pipes and pools," Neubecker said. With that mentality, nature doesn't enter into the equation, Neubecker added.
The fact that water managers are increasingly looking at various pumpback projects is a clear warning sign to Neubecker that Colorado's raw water supplies are just about tapped out.
"It's just a further depletion of West Slope water," Neubecker said, explaining that, once the water from a pumpback is diverted across the Continental Divide, it's gone forever. "It's something of a shell game. We're running out of water," he said.
It's important for the general public to understand that a pumpback doesn't create any new water, Neubecker explained. One potential problem is that, if upstream communities come to rely on a water supply from a pumpback, any shortages would be further exacerbated in a future drought - the pumpback water simply may not be available during dry years.
"It's lulling people into a false sense of security," he said.
Neubecker said he also plans to address the issue of minimum instream flows for the Colorado River between Kremmling and Dotsero at the Silverthorne forum. The Colorado Water Conservation Board holds such water rights on a number of streams in order to protect aquatic life to a "reasonable" degree. But for now, there are no such flows anywhere on the Colorado between its confluence with the Blue River and the Utah state line, Neubecker said.
At the same time, he wants to start discussions with the Bureau of Land Management about a potential wild and scenic river designation for parts of the Colorado in that reach. Neubecker said the Colorado is worthy of such designation because of its outstanding fishery and other recreational and scenic values. A wild and scenic river designation would likely prove highly controversial, but could ultimately help protect the Colorado from further depletions.
The Colorado Water Conservation Board is preparing to request up to $500,000 from the state Legislature to study a series of pumpback projects around the state, including in the Yampa Basin, another in the Gunnison Basin and along the South Platte. Locally, water managers are studying a plan to pump water from Green Mountain Reservoir back up as far as Silverthorne, or even into Dillon Reservoir.
The granddaddy of pumpback projects may also get another look, according to John Rosapeppe, of Trout Unlimited, who explained that the so-called Big Straw is still on the radar screen. The Big Straw would involve tapping unused Colorado River water rights at the Colorado-Utah border and delivering them far back upstream for use on the West Slope and as a diversion to the Front Range. A study on the Big Straw a few years ago concluded that the project is feasible, but only at an enormous cost.
The various pumpback schemes, along with other water issues, could come up at a pair of meetings, including the quarterly Colorado River headwaters forum, set for Thursday, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m., at the North Branch Library in Silverthorne.
Also on the agenda is some discussion of interbasin roundtables, established to create collaborative planning for water transfers between river basins. Forum participants will also get an update on newly adopted stream temperature standards that will enhance protection for trout fisheries.
Locally, the Blue River pumpback was proposed by the Breckenridge Sanitation District to increase flows in the Blue River between Breckenridge and Dillon Reservoir. Permitting negotiations with the Board of County Commissioners faltered when the parties couldn't agree on a few key issues, including the question of whether the county has regulatory authority over the pumpback.
But the idea is not dead, said sanitation district manager Andy Carlberg.
"We're revisiting it every day," Carlberg said, explaining that the district is in the process of establishing water rights for the pumpback in court.
<b>Pumpback concerns</b>
The idea of pumpbacks as a way to provide new water supplies is of concern to Ken Neubecker, vice president of Colorado Trout Unlimited, a conservation group protecting cold-water fisheries.
"It's the mindset that sees it as nothing more than plumbing - pipes and pools," Neubecker said. With that mentality, nature doesn't enter into the equation, Neubecker added.
The fact that water managers are increasingly looking at various pumpback projects is a clear warning sign to Neubecker that Colorado's raw water supplies are just about tapped out.
"It's just a further depletion of West Slope water," Neubecker said, explaining that, once the water from a pumpback is diverted across the Continental Divide, it's gone forever. "It's something of a shell game. We're running out of water," he said.
It's important for the general public to understand that a pumpback doesn't create any new water, Neubecker explained. One potential problem is that, if upstream communities come to rely on a water supply from a pumpback, any shortages would be further exacerbated in a future drought - the pumpback water simply may not be available during dry years.
"It's lulling people into a false sense of security," he said.
Neubecker said he also plans to address the issue of minimum instream flows for the Colorado River between Kremmling and Dotsero at the Silverthorne forum. The Colorado Water Conservation Board holds such water rights on a number of streams in order to protect aquatic life to a "reasonable" degree. But for now, there are no such flows anywhere on the Colorado between its confluence with the Blue River and the Utah state line, Neubecker said.
At the same time, he wants to start discussions with the Bureau of Land Management about a potential wild and scenic river designation for parts of the Colorado in that reach. Neubecker said the Colorado is worthy of such designation because of its outstanding fishery and other recreational and scenic values. A wild and scenic river designation would likely prove highly controversial, but could ultimately help protect the Colorado from further depletions.
