America's Most Endangered Rivers of 2005

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

America’s Most Endangered Rivers of 2005 ten rivers reaching the crossroads in the next 12 months WWW.AMERICANR IVERS. ORG AOL KEYWORD: A MERICAN R IVERS 20th Anniversary Edition 20 Years of Saving Rivers With this edition of the America’s Most Endangered Rivers report, American Rivers celebrates 20 years of cooperative action to highlight rivers across the country facing pressing threats and uncer- tain futures. The first of its kind, this annual effort has contributed to a long and growing list of vic- tories — saving rivers and the benefits they provide: clean water, public health, wildlife populations, economic opportunity, and opportunities for family outdoor fun. The America’s Most Endangered Rivers report is the voice of large and growing watershed protection and restoration movement. American Rivers solicits nominations annually from thousands of river groups, conservation organizations, outdoor clubs, and individual activists. Over the past 20 years, 399 organizations have participated in the effort. Our staff and scientific advisors review the nominations for the following criteria: ■ The magnitude of the threat to the river ■ A major turning point in the coming year ■ The regional and national significance of the river This report is more than a warning: it offers solutions, identifies those who have the power to save the river, and highlights opportunities for the public to speak out. This year, American Rivers thanks and recognizes Bert and Barbara Cohn, whose financial support has made this campaign possible for the past ten years. “Every child should have the opportunity to swim or fish in a nearby river or stream,” the Cohns say. By spreading the word about threats to our rivers, and highlighting rivers in the most precarious of situations, the Cohns hope more attention will be paid to our water sources before they become endangered. about american rivers American Rivers, founded in 1973, is the leader of a nationwide river conservation movement. American Rivers is dedicated to protecting and restoring healthy natural rivers, and the variety of life they sustain, for the benefit of people, fish and wildlife. On the Cover: The concentrations of pollutants shown on the front cover label do not necessarily reflect a national average, and will vary depending on the region, type of sewer and treatment system, and the volume of stormwater in the system. The current numbers are based on a moderate climate with moderate rainfall, and were obtained from the U.N. Department of Technical Cooperation for Development. Printed on 20 percent post-consumer recycled paper, using the waterless printing process. Waterless printing conserves water and eliminates the use of volatile compounds (VOCs), linked to the deterioration of the ozone layer, used in con- ventional printing. Table of Contents Introduction When It Rains, Sewage Pours . .2 Map: Most Endangered Rivers of 2005 . .6 Most Endangered Rivers (by rank) 1. Susquehanna River . .7 2. McCrystal Creek . .10 3. Fraser River . .12 4. Skykomish River . .14 5. Roan Creek . .16 6. Santee River . .18 7. Little Miami River . .20 8. Tuolumne River . .22 9. Price River . .24 10. Santa Clara River . .26 20 years of saving rivers together . .28 When it Rains, Sewage Pours This is the situation along the Susquehan- na River — which tops this year’s America’s Most Endangered Rivers list. One hundred and twenty three major sewer systems in the Susquehanna River watershed link toilets and faucets from New York to Maryland. Where the Susquehanna widens and becomes the AMERICAN RIVERS PHOTO LIBRARY Chesapeake Bay, vanishing sea grasses and dwindling seafood harvests provide evidence of poor sewage treatment and frequent sewage spills upstream. A Threat to Human Health Untreated human sewage teems with salmo- nella, hepatitis, dysentery, cryptosporidium, and many other infectious diseases. One hun- dred years ago, epidemics of these diseases helped limit the life expectancy of a U.S. citi- zen to about 50 years. Estimates vary for how many people sewage still sickens or kills each year, but they are all large. Germs linger even after the stench of sewage has dispersed. Healthy adults may never realize that yesterday’s swim caused SEWER SPILLS AND Where does human waste mingle today’s cough, diarrhea, or ear infection. OVERFLOWS THREATEN with household chemicals, per- Young children, their grandparents, and people TO MAKE LIFE’S SIMPLEST sonal hygiene products, pharmaceuticals, and already weakened by illness are more likely to PLEASURES UNSAFE. everything else that goes down the drains in become seriously ill or die. Scientists believe American homes and businesses? In sewers. as many as 3.5 million Americans get sick And what can you get when rain, pesti- each year after swimming, boating, fishing, or cides, fertilizers, automotive chemicals, and otherwise touching water they thought was trash run off the streets and down the gutters safe. A 1998 study published in the Interna- into those very same sewers? Sewage backing tional Journal of Epidemiology blamed water up into people’s basements. Sewage spilling pollution for one-third of all reported gas- onto streets and parks. Sewage pouring into troenteritis cases and two-thirds of all ear rivers and streams. infections. Each year, more than 860 billion gallons of It’s not just the people who play in and this vile brew escapes sewer systems across around the water who are at risk. Between the country. That’s enough to flood all of 1985 and 2000, the Centers for Disease Con- Pennsylvania ankle-deep. It’s enough for every trol (CDC) documented 251 separate disease American to take one bath each week for an outbreaks and nearly half a million cases of entire year. waterborne illness from polluted drinking After bursting out of a pipe or manhole water in the United States. Another study by cover, this foul slurry pollutes the nearest the CDC and the National Academy of Sci- body of water. Downstream, some of it may ences concluded that most illnesses caused by be pumped out, treated, and piped into more eating tainted seafood have human sewage as homes and businesses. From there, it goes the root cause. back into a sewer system, and the cycle The price of sewage spills isn’t just mea- resumes. sured by the number of illnesses and deaths. 2 ◆ America’s Most Endangered Rivers of 2005 Recreational economies like those in Winter Park and Granby, Colo. could suffer if sewage makes the Fraser River (#3 on this year’s list) unapplealing or unsafe to swim and fish in. ANDREW HARVEY There are countless rural towns in the same position nationwide. The prognosis is for these problems to get worse… and soon. Treatment Plants from Yesteryear To understand why this is happening, it’s helpful to know some history. For centuries most American sewage poured into the near- est river or creek with little or no treatment, and few people gave it a second thought. That changed when Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972 and the federal government began making significant investments to mod- Runaway Development SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS ernize sewage treatment infrastructure serving Today communities across the country. NATIONWIDE CAN’T KEEP Today, many of the plants built with that Poorly planned development compounds the UP WITH RAPID, POORLY- initial investment are undersized or are near problem of aging infrastructure. As urban areas PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. the end of their effective lives. There are sprawl into the countryside, new expanses of 600,000 miles of sewer pipes across the coun- concrete and asphalt increase the amount of try and the average age is 33 years. Some pipes stormwater surging into sewers — and the in cities along the eastern seaboard are nearly amount of pollution spewing out. 200 years old. Some are even made of wood. In Consider this: A single acre of wetlands can 2001, The American Society of Civil Engi- hold up to 1.5 million gallons of rain or melt- neers gave America’s wastewater infrastruc- ing snow. When that wetland is replaced by a ture a “D” grade overall. parking lot or big box store, that water runs off and often winds up in the sewer sys- tem. Trees help keep water out of 3.5 million Americans sewer systems, too. In fact, the group get sick each year USDA NRCS American Forests estimates that as Washington, D.C.’s tree canopy after swimming, thinned by 43 percent between 1973 and 1997, the amount of stormwater boating, fishing, or running into the city’s aging sewer otherwise touching system increased by 34 percent. In the 1980s and 1990s, a boom in water they thought low-density, poorly planned develop- ment devoured millions of acres of was safe. wetlands, forest, and other habitat across the country. American Rivers estimates that metro Atlanta, for example, now contends with an additional 56 to 132 billion gallons more stormwater each year than it did before 1982. That’s as many as three and a half tanker trucks of polluted water running into the Introduction ◆ 3 When it Rains, Sewage Pours continued “Clean water sewer for each resident each year. Older without this level of sewage systems combine stormwater with investment, sewage prob- has no local household sewage, but even in systems where lems could return to boundaries… they are separated some stormwater ends up 1970s levels by 2016. in the sewer, where it contributes to raw This is a job that is too Americans sewage overflows. big for states and localities The compounding problems of aging sys- to do on their own, and believe this tems and new development are illustrated by the public knows it. is a national Ohio’s Little Miami River (#7 on this year’s “Clean water has no list).
Recommended publications
  • Watauga River Water Quality Management Plan (2002)

    Watauga River Water Quality Management Plan (2002)

    WATAUGA RIVER WATERSHED (06010103) OF THE TENNESSEE RIVER BASIN WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION DIVISION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL WATERSHED MANAGEMENT SECTION August 13, 2002 WATAUGA RIVER WATERSHED WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Glossary Chapter 1. Watershed Approach to Water Quality Chapter 2. Description of the Watauga River Watershed Chapter 3. Water Quality Assessment of the Watauga River Watershed Chapter 4. Point and Nonpoint Source Characterization of the Watauga River Watershed Chapter 5. Water Quality Partnerships in the Watauga River Watershed Chapter 6. Future Plans Appendix I Appendix II Appendix III Appendix IV Appendix V Glossary GLOSSARY 1Q20. The lowest average 1 consecutive days flow with average recurrence frequency of once every 20 years. 30Q2. The lowest average 3 consecutive days flow with average recurrence frequency of once every 2 years. 7Q10. The lowest average 7 consecutive days flow with average recurrence frequency of once every 10 years. 303(d). The section of the federal Clean Water Act that requires a listing by states, territories, and authorized tribes of impaired waters, which do not meet the water quality standards that states, territories, and authorized tribes have set for them, even after point sources of pollution have installed the minimum required levels of pollution control technology. 305(b). The section of the federal Clean Water Act that requires EPA to assemble and submit a report to Congress on the condition of all water bodies across the Country as determined by a biennial collection of data and other information by States and Tribes. AFO. Animal Feeding Operation.
  • FIXING the UPPER COLORADO RIVER Paul Bruchez, Reeder

    FIXING the UPPER COLORADO RIVER Paul Bruchez, Reeder

    FIXING THE UPPER COLORADO RIVER Paul Bruchez, Reeder Creek Ranch Mely Whiting, Colorado Counsel, Trout Unlimited Lurline Curran, former Grand County manager Grand County’s most famous tourist was President Dwight Eisenhower, who in the 1950s spent summer vacations snagging trout from the Fraser River. That river even then was significantly depleted by diversion to Denver. Nearby, at Grand Lake, the Colorado-Big Thompson (C-BT) had begun a massive withdrawal of water from the Colorado River. Later, in the 1980s, came another major disruption to the local water-dependent ecosystems, a dam on the Colorado River near Windy Gap, where it is joined by the Fraser. It all adds up to what rancher and fishing guide Paul Bruchez described as death by a thousand cuts. The full extent of the problems became apparent in the 2002 drought and its aftermath. In old days, before all the diversions began, ranchers in the Kremmling area had just relied upon springtime snowmelt flooding by the river to deliver water to their hay fields. Because of the C-BT diversions, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation had installed pumps along the river, to ensure ranchers could get water into the fields. As river flows receded in the 21st century, those pumps had become inadequate even as Denver Water and Northern Water (beneficiary of the C-BT) pushed long-standing plans for further diversions. The net result: 80 percent of native flows in the Colorado River would be diverted across the Continental Divide. This could have gotten ugly, but Grand County instead chose a different approach.
  • Source Water Protection Plan Grand County, Colorado

    Source Water Protection Plan Grand County, Colorado

    TOWN OF FRASER RESOLUTION 2018-05-03 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE FRASER RIVER PARTNERSHIP SOURCE WATER PROTECTION PLAN WHEREAS, A Source Water Protection Plan identifies a Source Water Protection Area (SWPA), lists potential contaminant sources, and outlines best management practices (BMPs) to reduce risks to the water source. WHEREAS, The Fraser River Source Water Protection Partnership (FRSWPP) was established to provide a framework for public water systems in the Fraser River Valley to collaborate on the protection of their drinking water sources from all potential sources of contamination. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO THAT: The Town Board hereby adopts the attached Fraser River Partnership Source Water Protection Plan. DULY MOVED, SECONDED AND ADOPTED THIS 2ND DAY OF MAY 2018. Votes in favor: ___ BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE Votes opposed: ___ TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO Abstained: ___ Absent: ___ BY: Mayor ATTEST: (S E A L) Town Clerk Fraser River Source Water Protection Partnership Source Water Protection Plan Grand County, Colorado June 28, 2017 Written by: Ryan Lokteff Fraser River Source Water Protection Partnership Fraser River Source Water Protection Partnership Source Water Protection Plan Contents WATER SYSTEM CONTACT LIST ..................................................................................................................... 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................
  • Classifications and Numeric Standards for Upper Colorado River Basin and North Platte River

    Classifications and Numeric Standards for Upper Colorado River Basin and North Platte River

    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. November 12, 2020 Regulation No. 33 - Classifications and Numeric Standards for Upper Colorado River Basin and North Platte River Effective March 12, 2020 The following provisions are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes with these few exceptions: EPA has taken no action on: • All segment-specific total phosphorus (TP) numeric standards based on the interim value for river/stream segments with a cold water aquatic life classification (0.11 mg/L TP) or a warm water aquatic life classification (0.17 mg/L TP) • All segment-specific TP numeric standards based on the interim value for lake/reservoir segments with a warm water aquatic life classification (0.083 mg/L TP) Code of Colorado Regulations Secretary of State State of Colorado DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT Water Quality Control Commission REGULATION NO. 33 - CLASSIFICATIONS AND NUMERIC STANDARDS FOR UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASIN AND NORTH PLATTE RIVER (PLANNING REGION 12) 5 CCR 1002-33 [Editor’s Notes follow the text of the rules at the end of this CCR Document.] 33.1 AUTHORITY These regulations are promulgated pursuant to section 25-8-101 et seq. C.R.S., as amended, and in particular, 25-8-203 and 25-8-204.
  • TROUT HABITAT FLOW ANALYSIS Reach Selection the Relationships

    TROUT HABITAT FLOW ANALYSIS Reach Selection the Relationships

    Environmental Flows, Methods for Determination Appendix A TROUT HABITAT FLOW ANALYSIS Reach Selection The relationships between available trout habitat and streamflow were investigated during the 2007 field season in 11 of the 27 Grand County stream reaches using the PHABSIM (Physical Habitat Simulation) system (Bovee 1997; USGS 2001). The 11 reaches were selected for study based on several criteria, including streamflow magnitude, history of hydrologic alteration, location within the county’s river drainage network, relative importance for recreational and other water uses and, in most cases, the lack of previous detailed instream flow studies. These reaches and the study sites sampled are described in Table A1. Eight additional PHABSIM sites were selected and sampled in 2008 and in 2009 as described in Table A2 and A3. Table A1. Site Details for the 10 Reaches Selected for PHABSIM Surveys and Modeling in 2007 Streamflow (cfs) Location Site Dates Sampled Number of Transects High Medium Low Vasquez Ck F-VC 9 102 63 8 Jun 24 Jul 5 Jul 30 St Louis Ck F-StL 11 58 30 12 Jun 22 Jun 24 Aug 2 Fraser River F6 10 233 45 18 Jul 5 Jul 30 Oct 25 @ WWTP Fraser River @ Granby F9 11 219 75 52 Jul 2 Jul 31 Oct 25 Ranch Colorado R. @ Miller CR3 9 109 52 36 Jul 4 Aug 1 Oct 27 Ranch Colorado R. u/s K-B CR5 7 547 269 217 Jul 4 Aug 1 Oct 27 ditch Colorado R. d/s K-B CR6 8 518 267 191 Jul 3 Aug 1 Oct 27 ditch Colorado R.
  • Colorado's 303(D) List of Impaired Waters

    Colorado's 303(D) List of Impaired Waters

    COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT WATER QUALITY CONTROL COMMISSION 5 CCR 1002-93 REGULATION #93 COLORADO'S SECTION 303(D) LIST OF IMPAIRED WATERS AND MONITORING AND EVALUATION LIST 93.1 Authority These regulations are promulgated pursuant to section 25-8-101 et seq C.R.S. as amended, and in particular, 25-8-202 (1) (a), (b), (i), (2) and (6); 25-8-203 and 25-8-204. 93.2 Purpose This regulation establishes Colorado’s Lists of Impaired Waters. These waters include Water- Quality-Limited Segments Requiring Total Maximum Daily Loads (“TMDLs”), impaired waters that do not require a TMDL, and Colorado’s Monitoring and Evaluation List: (1) The list of Water-Quality-Limited Segments Requiring TMDLs fulfills requirements of section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act which requires that states submit to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency a list of those waters for which technology-based effluent limitations and other required controls are not stringent enough to implement water quality standards. These segments are included in Section 93.3 with parameters included in the Clean Water Section 303(d) Impairment column. (2) Colorado’s Monitoring and Evaluation List identifies water bodies where there is reason to suspect water quality problems, but there is also uncertainty regarding one or more factors, such as the representative nature of the data. Water bodies that are impaired, but it is unclear whether the cause of impairment is attributable to pollutants as opposed to pollution, are also placed on the Monitoring and Evaluation List. This Monitoring and Evaluation list is a state-only document that is not subject to EPA approval.
  • Pursuant to C.R.S., §37-92-302 , As Amended, You Are Notified That the Following Pages Comprise a Resume of the Applications An

    Pursuant to C.R.S., §37-92-302 , As Amended, You Are Notified That the Following Pages Comprise a Resume of the Applications An

    PURSUANT TO C.R.S., §37-92-302 , AS AMENDED, YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE FOLLOWING PAGES COMPRISE A RESUME OF THE APPLICATIONS AND AMENDED APPLICATIONS FILED WITH THE WATER CLERK FOR WATER DIVISION 5 DURING THE MONTH OF AUGUST 2000. 1. 00CW138 1. Grand County Water & Sanitation District No. 1, c/o Bruce Hutchins, P.O. Box 3077, Winter Park, CO 80482, (970)726-5583. 2. Stanley W. Cazier, Baker, Cazier and McGowan, P.O. Box 500, Granby, CO, 80446, (970)887-3376. 3. Grand County Water and Sanitation District No. 1 Reservoir. 4. APPLICATION FOR FINDING OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE. 5. Fraser River. 6. Location: NE1/4SW1/4 of Section 28, T1S, R75W of the 6th P.M. The initial point of survey is located at a point on the North line of said NE1/4SW1/4, 200 feet East of the Northwest corner of said NE1/4SW1/4. 7. Domestic and municipal. 8. Reservoir. 9. 8 acre-feet. 10. The Reservoir is constructed, but the Districts has not applied the water to beneficial use. Additionally, the Applicant has engaged in those activities described on attached Exhibit A in pursuing putting this water right to beneficial use. 11. The application contains a detailed outline of the work performed during the diligence period. (4 pages) 2. 00CW139 GARFIELD COUNTY – THREE MILE CREEK, ROARING FORK RIVER. Anthony and Sandra Threinen; P.O. Box 1213; Eagle, CO 81631 970-328-6885. Sue’s Spring – Application for Water Rights (Surface). Location: the point of diversion is located in the SE¼SW¼ Sec. 20, T.
  • Fish and Drought DON't MIX

    Fish and Drought DON't MIX

    February 12, 2019 Drought and Fish: https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/ Overview of CPW’s 2018 Aquatic Experiences David Graf and Lori M. Martin, Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Grand Junction State of CO Policy and CPW Mission • It is the policy of the state of Colorado that the wildlife and their environment are to be protected, preserved, enhanced, and managed for the use, benefit, and enjoyment of the people of the state and its visitors. C.R.S. 33-1-101 (1) • Our mission is to perpetuate the wildlife resources of the state, to provide a quality state parks system, and to provide enjoyable and sustainable outdoor recreation opportunities that educate and inspire current and future generations to serve as active stewards of Colorado's natural resources. CPW Regions NW Aquatics Team Areas of Responsibility Dave Graf - NW Region Water Specialist NW REGIONBill Atkinson AQUATIC BIOLOGISTS Tory Eyre Jon Ewert Jenn Logan Lori Martin - NW Senior Aquatic Biologist Kendall Bakich Ben Felt U.S. Drought Monitor for Colorado, 2018 Jan. 23, 2018 Feb. 20, 2018 Mar. 20, 2018 Apr. 24, 2018 May 22, 2018 June 21, 2018 July 24, 2018 Aug. 21, 2018 Sep. 18, 2018 Oct. 23, 2018 Nov. 20, 2018 Dec. 18, 2018 https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/ Drought and Fish (Toward a better understanding of freshwater fish responses to an increasingly drought-stricken world; Lennox et al. 2019 Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries) • How does drought affect fish habitat? • What are drought refuges for fishes? • How does drought influence fisheries? • What is drought tolerance in fishes? • What kills fish during drought? • What is the nature of species succession in drought-stricken waters? • What are the long-term consequences of drought to fishes? • How does climate change affect drought-fish interactions? River Continuum Concept (Vannote et al.
  • Revised Land and Resource Management Plan United States Department of Agriculture

    Revised Land and Resource Management Plan United States Department of Agriculture

    Revised Land and Resource Management Plan United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Region Cherokee National Forest Management Bulletin R8-MB 114A January, 2004 Supervisor’s Office P.O. Box 2010 Cleveland, TN 37320 2800 N. Ocoee Street. Cleveland, TN 37312 Office: (423) 476-9700 Fax: (423) 339-8650 Ocoee/Hiwassee Ranger District Nolichucky/UnakaRanger District Rt. 1, Box 348-D 4900 Asheville Highway, SR70 Benton, TN 37307 Greeneville, TN 37743 Office: (423) 338-5201 Office: (423) 638-4109 Fax: (423) 338-6577 Fax: (423) 638-6599 Tellico Ranger District Watauga Ranger District 250 Ranger Station Road P.O. Box 400 (4400 Unicoi Drive) Tellico Plains, TN 37385 Unicoi, TN 37692 Office: (423) 253-2520 Office: (423) 735-1500 Fax: (423) 253-2804 Fax: (423) 735-7306 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. CHEROKEE NATIONAL FOREST TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................. i LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................................
  • Philanthropic Advisor Packet

    Philanthropic Advisor Packet

    COLORADO WATER TRUST Driven by a mission to restore flow to Colorado’s rivers in need The Colorado River runs through the heart of my family ranch near Kremmling, where I live and work and which supports our family ranch and fly-fishing business. The river is my family’s livelihood, just as it is for thousands of ranchers and farmers, and recreation business owners on other rivers across the state. Colorado Water Trust helps our rivers and water users find solutions, and for this reason, they are some of the most effective river stewards in our state. Paul Bruchez, Board Member of Colorado Water Trust 3264 Larimer Street, Suite D | Denver, Colorado 80205 720.570.2897 | www.coloradowatertrust.org Dear Philanthropic Advisor, Thank you for taking the time to learn about Colorado Water Trust. Here’s what you should know: WHO WE ARE Colorado Water Trust works within Colorado’s complex system of water rights, to maintain the integrity of our rivers and streams. We pay fair market value for water while offering voluntary solutions for water users to contribute some of their water to rivers in need, all the while protecting their water rights from injury. Our Board of Directors is comprised of a diverse group of accomplished water professionals including ranchers, water attorneys, water engineers, municipal representatives, and more. We are all committed to preserving Colorado’s way of life, as well as our environment. WHY IT’S IMPORTANT These are challenging times for Colorado’s rivers and the local economies that depend on them. With increasing population and demands on rivers, and the reduction in flows due to climate change, more of our rivers and streams are being stressed.
  • The Supreme Court of the State of Colorado 2 East 14Th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80203

    The Supreme Court of the State of Colorado 2 East 14Th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80203

    Opinions of the Colorado Supreme Court are available to the public and can be accessed through the Judicial Branch’s homepage at http://www.courts.state.co.us. Opinions are also posted on the Colorado Bar Association’s homepage at http://www.cobar.org. ADVANCE SHEET HEADNOTE July 1, 2019 2019 CO 68 No. 16SA291, City & Cty. of Denver v. Consol. Ditches of Water Dist. No. 2—Water Law—Priorities—Exchange and Substitution Operations. Under a 1940 water use agreement, Denver agreed, in lieu of making releases from certain streambed reservoirs to replace seepage and evaporation losses, not to reuse or successively use return flows from water imported from the western slope. Earlier litigation established that this reuse prohibition in the 1940 agreement applies only to return flows derived from decreed water rights from Colorado River sources with appropriation dates before May 1, 1940; Denver may therefore use return flows derived from sources that were appropriated or acquired after that date. The question in this appeal is whether the 1940 agreement prohibits Denver from using return flows from water imported from the Blue River system under exchange and substitution operations decreed in 1955 and administered under a 1946 priority date using water stored in the Williams Fork Reservoir under a 1935 priority as a substitute supply. Because the water imported through the Roberts Tunnel under Blue River exchange and substitution operations is a source acquired by Denver after May 1, 1940, the supreme court concludes that the resulting return flows are not subject to the 1940 Agreement and Denver may reuse and successively use them.
  • Benchmarking Colorado Storage

    Benchmarking Colorado Storage

    Benchmarking Table: Raw Water Storage in Colorado Water source(s) Raw Water Storage Redundancies City of Aspen Castle Creek and Maroon Creek 9 AF in Thomas Reservoir, classified as on Direct flow diversions can be made from operational reservoir because of limited either Castle Creek, Maroon Creek, or both. storage. Aspen has rights to 500 AF of storage in Ruedi Reservoir which can only be used for augmentation and power generation due to its location. Eagle River Water and Gore Creek and Eagle River; 17 wells 3,300 AF in Eagle Park Reservoir; 500 AF 2 interconnected water systems covering Sanitation District / Upper between East Vail and Cordillera Homestake Project water; 625 AF Black Lakes 25 miles and 3,000 vertical feet. 3 surface Eagle Regional Water on Vail Pass. water treatment plants, and 17 Authority 2,800 AF of Green Mountain and Wolford groundwater wells. Water sources and Mountain storage to satisfy Colorado River diversion points can be changed to react to calls. water quality conditions or stream flows, can move water between District and Authority systems as needed. Town of Breckenridge Blue River 770 AF in Goose Pasture Tarn 2nd WTP coming under construction to provide treatment redundancy and operational flexibility, discussions about constructing an emergency interconnection with the Town of Frisco and diversifying water supply. Town of Carbondale Surface water supply from Nettles 500 AF in Ruedi Reservoir; The combination of surface water supplies Creek; 3 alluvial wells along Roaring High mountain lakes in Nettles Creek from Nettle Creek and groundwater Fork River, 1 alluvial well along Crystal watershed provide some storage, though supplies from the Crystal River and Roaring River; back-up supplies from Ruedi unmeasured.