DOCSLIB.ORG

Dolores Project Drought Contingency Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dolores Project Drought Contingency Plan DOLORES PROJECT DROUGHT DOLORES WATER CONSERVANCY CONTINGENCY DISTRICT PLAN A plan to reduce the impacts of drought for users of the Dolores Project by implementing mitigation and response actions to decreases theses impacts January 2018 0 Table of Contents TABLES AND FIGURES .............................................................................................................. 3 APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................ 4 ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS ..................................................................................... 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ 9 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 10 Purpose of the Drought Contingency Plan ..................................................................... 10 Planning Area ................................................................................................................. 10 History of Dolores Project.............................................................................................. 18 Dolores Project Drought Background ............................................................................ 25 2 Funding and Public Stakeholder Involvement ...................................................................... 32 Planning Task Force ....................................................................................................... 32 Task Force Involvement ................................................................................................. 32 Public Stakeholders ........................................................................................................ 32 Public Stakeholder Involvement and Comments ........................................................... 32 3 Drought Monitoring .............................................................................................................. 34 Summary of Monitoring ................................................................................................. 34 Methodology for Monitoring, Accounting, and Determining Drought ......................... 35 Description of Past Dolores Project Droughts ............................................................... 38 Current Drought Monitoring and Potential Future Improvements................................. 39 4 Vulnerability Assessment ..................................................................................................... 41 Impact of Past Dolores Project Droughts on Water Users ............................................. 41 Summary of Past and Future Risk of Economic Losses ................................................ 58 Summary of Past and Future Risk of Social and Environmental Losses ....................... 58 Assessment of Climate Change on Future Risk ............................................................. 60 5 Mitigation Actions Prior to a Drought .................................................................................. 63 Structural Mitigation Actions ......................................................................................... 64 Non-Structural Mitigation Actions................................................................................. 94 Summary Tables of Potential Mitigation Actions ........................................................ 103 1 6 Response Actions to a Drought........................................................................................... 106 Active Communication Structure ................................................................................. 106 Improve Water Supply Projections and Timing ........................................................... 107 Use of DWCD Water Portfolio for Other Project Uses During a Drought .................. 110 Narraguinnep Reservoir Re-Operations ....................................................................... 111 Municipal Water Conservation .................................................................................... 111 Summary Table of Potential Response Actions ........................................................... 112 7 Operation and Administrative Framework ......................................................................... 113 Roles ............................................................................................................................. 113 Responsibilities & Procedures ..................................................................................... 113 8 Plan Update Process ............................................................................................................ 115 Plan Evaluation Process ............................................................................................... 115 Measuring the Effectiveness of the Plan ...................................................................... 115 Timing of Updates to the Plan...................................................................................... 116 9 Priorities of Drought Plan Actions ...................................................................................... 117 Priorities of Potential Mitigation and Response Actions ............................................. 117 Priorities of Potential Response Actions ...................................................................... 120 2 TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. Dolores Project Allocations .......................................................................................................... 34 Table 2. FRE Drought Water Supply and Income ...................................................................................... 42 Table 3. Full Service Irrigation Drought Water Supply and Income* ........................................................ 43 Table 4. Full Service Irrigation Crop Census Summary ............................................................................. 45 Table 5. Dolores County Drought Crop Yield Per Acre ............................................................................. 46 Table 6. Montezuma County Drought Crop Yield Per Acre ...................................................................... 46 Table 7. Total MVIC Project and Non-Project Water Supply* .................................................................. 47 Table 8. Downstream Fishery Project Water Supply* ................................................................................ 49 Table 9. Installation Cost Estimate ............................................................................................................. 65 Table 10. Connection of Irrigated Lands to Rocky Ford Cost Estimate ..................................................... 67 Table 11. Lower Arickaree Canal Cost Estimate ........................................................................................ 73 Table 12. Piping of Existing Goodland Canal Cost Estimate ..................................................................... 76 Table 13. Piping of Goodland Canal Tailwaters to THC Cost Estimate .................................................... 77 Table 14. Moonlight Canal Cost Estimate .................................................................................................. 80 Table 15. Potential Structural Mitigation Actions .................................................................................... 104 Table 16 . Potential Non-Structural Mitigation Actions ........................................................................... 105 Table 17. Potential Response Actions ....................................................................................................... 112 Table 18. Potential Mitigation Actions Priorities ..................................................................................... 118 Table 19. Potential Mitigation Actions Priorities Continued… ................................................................ 119 Table 20. Potential Response Actions Priorities ....................................................................................... 120 Figure 1. Location Map ............................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 2. Yearly Streamflow of the Dolores River at the Town of Dolores (1896-2016) .......................... 15 Figure 3. Precipitation at Great Cut (Water Year 1986-2016) .................................................................... 16 Figure 4. Average Cumulative Snow Pack on May 1 for Lone Cone, El Diente Peak, Lizard Head Pass, and Scotch Creek SNOTEL sites ....................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 5. McPhee Maximum Active Capacities ......................................................................................... 28 Figure 6. Total McPhee Reservoir Inflow .................................................................................................. 29 Figure 7. McPhee Ending Active Capacity and Yearly Spill ...................................................................... 30 Figure 8. Percentage of Full Allocation Available ....................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Draft Dolores Project Drought Contingency Plan
    DOLORES PROJECT DOLORES DROUGHT WATER CONSERVANCY CONTINGENCY DISTRICT PLAN A plan to reduce the impacts of drought for users of the Dolores Project by implementing mitigation and response actions to decreases theses impacts 0 Table of Contents TABLES AND FIGURES .............................................................................................................. 3 APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................ 4 ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS ..................................................................................... 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 6 DISTRICT BOARD RESOLUTION TO ADOPT PLAN ............................................................. 9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................... 10 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 11 1.1 Purpose of the Drought Contingency Plan ..................................................................... 11 1.2 Planning Area ................................................................................................................. 11 1.3 History of Dolores Project.............................................................................................. 18 1.4 Dolores Project Drought Background ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Partici Municipal
    COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD 102 Columbine Building 1845 Sherman Street Denver Colorado 80203 March 1975 DOLORES PROJECT The Dolores project is located in Dolores and Montezuma counties in southwestern Colorado Most of the project area lies outside of the present Dolores River basin Geologists believe that the Dolores River once flowed across the Montezuma Valley towards the southwest but was subsequently blocked and turned to the northwest by slowly rising mountains The project was authorized by the Congress in 1968 as a partici pating project of the Colorado River Storage Project The Dolores Water Conservancy District was organized in 1961 as the sponsoring and con tractual agency for the project The district includes portions of Dolores and Montezuma counties The Ute Mountain Ute Indian tribe is also a project sponsor Plan of Development The Dolores project would develop and manage water from the Dolores River for irrigation municipal and industrial use recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement It would also provide flood control improve summer and fall river flows downstream and aid in the economic redevelop ment of the area Supplemental irrigation supplies would be delivered to the Montezuma Valley area located in the central portion of the proj ect area Full irrigation water supplies would be provided to the Dove Creek area in the northwest and the Towaoc area in the south Municipal and industrial water would be furnished to Cortez Dove Creek and the Ute Mountain Ute Indian tribe at Towaoc Primary regulation of the Dolores
    [Show full text]
  • Cogjm.Crsp Prog Rpt April 1960.Pdf (1.729Mb)
    ""C C'"':) ""C C;") :::io :::io c::, ::ic:-, --1 c::, :::io :::ic, r-- ""C ~ c::, c::, c:.c- ""C ~ c::, ::ic:-, :::ic, CD :::io c:::: c::, :::io :::io c::, -~ ::- ~ ::ic:-, r-- :::ic, ~ C'"':) ~ :::io c::, --1 C;") --1 ~ C;") c::, Construction of the Colorado River Storage Under the a~thor~zing le~islation four great TH f CQ L Q R A O Q RI Vf R Project is well under way. Men and their giant earth water storage umts will be built, as well as many moving machines are working under full steam to "participating pr?jects" in Colorado, New Mexico, SJ Q RA G f pR Q J f CJ tame the mighty Colorado River and its tributary Utah, and Wyommg. streams and to reshape the destiny of a vast basin Water and power from the project will provide in the arid west. opportunity for industrial expansion, agricultural Great strides have been made in building the development, growth of cities, and will create new four-state project since President Eisenhower in jobs for thousands of Americans. The project will 1956 pressed the golden telegraph key in Washing­ create new markets, stimulate trade, broaden the ton, D. C., that triggered the start of this huge tax base, and bolster national economy. reclamation development. The Colorado River Storage Project is a multi­ Appropriations by the Congress have enabled purpose development. Storage units will regulate construction to proceed - and at costs less than stream flows, create hydroelectric power, and make engineers' estimates. much-needed water available for agricultural, in­ Construction of Glen Canyon, Flaming Gorge and dustrial and municipal use.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the Upper Colorado River Commission Has Been Compiled Pursuant to the Above Directives
    FIFTY-SEVENTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE Upper Colorado River Commission SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH SEPTEMBER 30, 2005 ii iii This page intentionally left blank. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Letter of Transmittal . iii Preface ..................................................................... 1 Commission ................................................................. 2 Alternate Commissioners ....................................................... 3 Officers of the Commission . 3 Staff ....................................................................... 3 Committees ................................................................. 4 Advisors to Commissioners ..................................................... 5 Meetings of the Commission . 7 Activities of the Commission. 7 A. Engineering-Hydrology ................................................... 8 1. Colorado River Salinity Program ........................................ 8 2. Forecast of Stream Flow . 8 3. Summary of Reservoir Levels and Contents ................................9 LakePowell ........................................................9 LakeMead ........................................................12 4. Flows of Colorado River ...............................................23 B. Legal .................................................................31 1. Water Newsletter . 31 2. CourtCase .........................................................31 3. Legislation ..........................................................31 Colorado River Storage Project And Participating
    [Show full text]
  • Sixty-Seventh Annual Report of the Upper Colorado River Commission Has Been Compiled Pursuant to the Above Directives
    SIXTY-SEVENTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE Upper Colorado River Commission SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH SEPTEMBER 30, 2015 33 II III iii (This page has been intentionally left blank.) IV TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Letter of Transmittal ....................................................................................................................iii Preface ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Commission ................................................................................................................................ 2 Alternate Commissioners ........................................................................................................... 3 Officers of the Commission ........................................................................................................ 3 Staff ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Committees ................................................................................................................................ 4 General Advisors to Commissioners .......................................................................................... 4 Meetings of the Commission ...................................................................................................... 5 Activities of the Commission......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Reconnaissance Investigation of Water Quality, Bottom Sediment
    Reconnaissance Investigation of Water Quality, Bottom Sediment, and Biota Associated with Irrigation Drainage in the Dolores Project Area, Southwestern Colorado and Southeastern Utah, 1990-91 by David L. Butler, U.S. Geological Survey; Richard P. Krueger and Barbara Campbell Osmundson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and Errol G. Jensen, Bureau of Reclamation___________ U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 94-4041 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS Denver, Colorado 1995 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director The use of trade, product, industry, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Center Box 25046, MS 415 Open-File Reports Section Denver Federal Center Box 25286, MS 517 Denver, CO 80225 Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 CONTENTS Glossary of scientific names for biological organisms ......................................................................................................... viii Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Introduction .........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Environmental Impact Statement
    DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ASPINALL UNIT OPERATIONS ASPINALL UNIT—COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT GUNNISON RIVER, COLORADO VOLUME I U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Upper Colorado Region Western Colorado Area Office Grand Junction, Colorado January 2009 Mission Statement: The Mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American Public. ASPINALL UNIT OPERATIONS: ASPINALL UNIT— COLORADO RIVER STORAGE PROJECT GUNNISON RIVER, COLORADO Draft Environmental Impact Statement Cooperating Agencies: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation (lead agency) Fish and Wildlife Service National Park Service State of Colorado Colorado Department of Natural Resources Colorado Water Conservation Board Colorado Division of Water Resources Colorado Division of Wildlife U.S. Department of Energy Western Area Power Administration Colorado River Water Conservation District Southwestern Water Conservation District Platte River Power Authority Abstract: The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, proposes to implement a plan to avoid jeopardy to four endangered fish in the Gunnison and Colorado rivers downstream from the Wayne N. Aspinall Unit, a Colorado River Storage Project facility in western Colorado. The plan focuses on modifying the operation of the Aspinall Unit to provide sufficient releases of water at times, quantities, and duration necessary to avoid jeopardy and adverse modification to designated critical habitat, while maintaining authorized purposes of the Aspinall Unit. Four action alternatives are presented to address Flow Recommendations developed by the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program for downstream endangered fish and are compared to the No Action Alternative.
    [Show full text]
  • DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIVISION NO. 4, COLORADO Case Nos. 86-CW-226 and 88-CW-178
    DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIVISION NO. 4, COLORADO Case Nos. 86-CW-226 and 88-CW-178 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECREE ON WATER AVAILABILITY In the Matter of the Applications for Conditional Water Rights of THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO, for the UNION PARK PROJECT in Gunnison County, Colorado. I. INTRODUCTION A. INTRODUCTION OF ISSUES, TRIAL DATA, PARTIES & COUNSEL: This Decree addresses the threshold issue of "Water Availability" with respect to two applications and an amended application for conditional water rights pursued by the Board of County Commissioners of Arapahoe County, Colorado ["Arapahoe" or the "Applicant"] with respect to the Union Park Project in Gunnison County, Colorado. Following extensive pretrial activity over a period of five years, the Court conducted a trial to the Court in Gunnison, Colorado, from June 3, 1991, through July 3, 1991. The Court viewed some areas relating to the subject water applications (i.e. Union Park, the Taylor River and the Taylor Park Reservoir) on July 1, 1991, and heard closing argument on July 24, 1991. Written briefs regarding proposed forms of this Decree were filed thereafter. The last brief was received by the Court on August 15, 1991. Counsel actively involved in the presentation of the case included the following: Party Counsel Applicant: County of Arapahoe Robert F. T. Krassa John R. Henderson William A. Hillhouse II Paul J. Zilis Opposers: City of Gunnison Timothy J. Beaton Colorado River Water Conservation District Donald H. Hamburg Crystal Creek Homeowners Association, Perkins D. Sams and Ernest H. Cockrel Charles B. White & Wayne B.
    [Show full text]
  • CRWAS Phase I San Juan and Dolores Basins – Statemod Model Brief
    CRWAS Phase I San Juan and Dolores Basins – StateMod Model Brief 1. Introduction................................................................................................................................. 2 2. Model Components..................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Inflow Hydrology.................................................................................................................4 2.1.1 Data Sources and Filling Techniques.........................................................................6 2.2 Physical Systems.................................................................................................................. 7 2.2.1 Data Sources and Filling Techniques.........................................................................8 2.3 Water Demands.................................................................................................................... 9 2.3.1 Data Sources and Filling Techniques...................................................................... 10 2.4 Legal and Administrative Conditions................................................................................ 10 2.4.1 Data Sources and Filling Techniques.......................................................................11 3. Model Calibration......................................................................................................................12 3.1 First Step Calibration..........................................................................................................12
    [Show full text]
  • Brief History of the Bureau of Reclamation
    Brief History of The Bureau of Reclamation Glen Canyon Under Construction Colorado River Storage Project - April 9, 1965 Photographer - unknown 2 THE MOVEMENT FOR RECLAMATION Only about 2.6 percent of the earth's water supply is fresh, and some two-thirds of that is frozen in icecaps and glaciers or locked up in some other form such as moisture in the atmosphere or groundwater. That leaves less than eight-tenths of 1 percent of the earth’s water, about 30 percent of fresh water, available for humankind’s use. The largely arid American West receives a distinctly small share of that available supply of fresh water. As a result, water is a dominating factor in the arid West’s prehistory and history because it is required for occupation, settlement, agriculture, and industry. The snowmelt and gush of spring and early summer runoff frustrated early Western settlers. They watched helplessly as water they wanted to use in the dry days of late summer disappeared down Western watercourses. Settlers responded by developing water projects and creating complicated Western water law systems, which varied in detail among the various states and territories but generally allocated property rights in available water based on the concept of prior appropriation (first in time, first in right) for beneficial use. At first, water development projects were simple. Settlers diverted water from a stream or river and used it nearby; but, in many areas, the demand for water outstripped the supply. As demands for water increased, settlers wanted to store "wasted" runoff for later use. Storage projects would help maximize water use and make more water available for use.
    [Show full text]
  • September 10, 2020 ______
    These written minutes represent the general discussion of the DWCD Board of Directors, DWCD staff, and participants at the DWCD board meeting, and they include a record of any and all board actions taken at the meeting. The written minutes are not intended to provide a word-for-word account of the board meetings. Nor are they a direct quote of any statements offered at board meetings. All DWCD board meetings are recorded on audio tape. DOLORES WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT WATER ACTIVITY ENTERPRISE ________________________________________ MINUTES Regular Meeting September 10, 2020 ________________________________________ CALL TO ORDER Bruce Smart, President, called the meeting to order at 7:05 PM ROLL CALL Bruce Smart, President Simon Martinez, Vice President Don Schwindt, Secretary-Treasurer-Via Teleconference Godwin Oliver, Director Wes Wilson, Director Sheldonna Z. Ives, Director-Via Teleconference Glen Fish, Director-Via Teleconference Ken Curtis, General Manager Patrick McKeever, Chief of Engineering and Construction Rob Walker, Engineering Technician-Via Teleconference Lisa Jordan, Office Administrator Adam Reeves, Attorney- Via Teleconference Dan McCarl, Attorney- Via Teleconference Robert Stump, Bureau of Reclamation - Via Teleconference INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS Via Telephone/Teleconference Eric Sprague, DWCD Engineering Tech, Brandon Johnson, General Manager, MVIC; Ed Millard, Montezuma County/IBCC/SWBRT, Doug Pickering, CDWR; Rich Landreth, City of Cortez MINUTES APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES MOTION: TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED FOR THE AUGUST 13, 2020 ENTERPRISE MEETING. MOTION: SIMON MARTINEZ SECOND: GODWIN OLIVER MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS MOTION: TO APPROVE THE JULY ’20 FINANCIAL STATEMENT AND APPROVE THE STATEMENT OF PAYABLES AS PRESENTED. O&M: AP/CHECK #38637-38741 & PR/CHECK #124137-124190 $334,354.55 MOTION: WES WILSON SECOND: GODWIN OLIVER MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    SEVENTY-FIRST ANNUAL REPORT OF THE Upper Colorado River Commission SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH SEPTEMBER 30, 2019 2 UPPER COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION 355 South 400 East • Salt Lake City, UT 84111 • 801-531-1150 • www.ucrcommission.com May 15, 2020 President Donald J. Trump The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear President Trump: The Seventy-First Annual Report of the Upper Colorado River Commission, as required by Article VIII(d)(13) of the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948 (“Compact”), is enclosed. The report also has been transmitted to the Governors of each state signatory to the Compact, which include Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming and Arizona. The budget of the Commission for Fiscal Year 2020 (July 1, 2019 – June 30, 2020) is included in this report as Appendix B. Respectfully yours, Amy I. Haas Executive Director and Secretary Enclosure 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE .................................................................................................. 8 COMMISSIONERS .................................................................................... 9 ALTERNATE COMMISSIONERS ........................................................... 10 OFFICERS OF THE COMMISSION ....................................................... 10 COMMISSION STAFF ............................................................................. 10 COMMITTEES ......................................................................................... 11 MEETINGS OF THE COMMISSION ....................................................... 12 ACTIVITIES
    [Show full text]