Sychohants

Dry Gulch – Act II; Scene I

First, a disclaimer. The views expressed in this article are personal to me, and do not necessarily reflect the views of any member of the board of directors for San Juan Water Conservancy District or the District as an entity. The board of directors has acted on behalf of the District by passing a strategic plan going forward with the Dry Gulch Water Storage Facility project, and that document represents the current consensus of the board on issues related to the proposed project.

Bill Hudson took time to reprise his self-appointed role of community naysayer with a three (3) piece series on the proposed Dry Gulch water facilty storage project. To be fair, Bill did get a couple of things right. For instance, the current board for the Pagosa Area Water & Sanitation District (“PAWSD”) is no longer interested in championing the Dry Gulch Project, but the San Juan Water Conservancy District (“SJWSD”) is. Things get blurred after that point, and Bill digresses into assumed notions of conspiracy to undermine democracy in search of a legitimate conclusion. Bill is long on being “agin” it, but short on solutions.  SJWCD voted unanimously to pursue development of an 11,000 AF water storage facility after it had a series of joint meetings with PAWSD a year ago; it’s a solution to a number of issues and the only one on the table at this point.

To be clear; Dry Gulch as a proposed water storage facility is about as good as it gets. It has no relation to being in “zombie” status. It is a perfectly proportioned off-stream site, with little watershed that could it expose it to contamination. It can be filled to a relatively high level by an existing gravity flow ditch. Both PAWSD and SJWCD own shares in the Park Ditch.  The site is relatively close to the populations it will serve, has non-consumptive use potential, and will require very little work to clear the basin. The dam site is narrow and protected on both sides, which limits access, enhances security of the site and mitigates costs. Soil tests show good structure for minimal water loss and/or seepage. It is no wonder the inventory of potential reservoir sites eventually focused on Dry Gulch.

PAWSD is a recognized special district with the mission to provide water within its jurisdiction. It has an elected board in accordance with it’s enabling legislation, and is doing its best to fulfill its mission to those it serves. No one has been indicted, and there are no indications anyone will be indicted for decisions made by PAWSD. The PAWSD board has capable staff, and they are working diligently to deal with a myriad of issues that have nothing to do with Dry Gulch. They made an informed decision to withdraw support for the project, and now seek to mitigate the expenses they incurred during the time they took the lead on the project.

SJWCD celebrated twenty five (25) years of existence this last year. Voters overwhelmingly approved forming this district in accordance with a law for special districts separate from the one PAWSD drew enablement.  SJWCD, like PAWSD, has a mission that provides it will acquire, hold and convey water rights in the public’s interest. The SJWCD board is appointed by the district judge for this jurisdiction, which is a different structure from PAWSD. Bill Hudson pontificates on the lack of voter input on the actions of SJWCD in contrast to the political response that caused big changes at PAWSD, but I think that contrast is exactly what the legislature intended. Not every facet of government is subject to the foibles of politics for good reason. The process allows SJWCD board members to avoid the politics associated with each decision, and give more attention to long range goals that may not be particularly popular in the short term.

The Southwest Water Conservation District (“SWCD”) transferred various conditional water rights to SJWCD when it was formed.  SJWCD is required to report to the water court on progress toward “beneficial uses” for those water rights every six (6) years. SJWCD has taken appropriate actions to convert its paper water rights into wet water for the benefit of this community, but there is opposition now being waged against SJWCD to take away those rights. SJWCD is in a “use it or lose it” position.

However, as a practical matter, this community cannot afford to build and maintain an 11,000 acre foot water storage facility that may not be needed for another fifty years. Therefore, SJWCD had  to adjust to the hand it was dealt or fold the tent entirely. The loss of PAWSD as partner in the project also took away anticipated beneficial uses SJWCD could make of its water rights. Ironically, if the reservoir had been built, a new law passed by the Colorado legislature would have protected the rights to the water in that reservoir for SJWCD.  BootJack Ranch, one of the objectors, even refused to discuss the public benefits these conditional water are expected to provide.

Without the financial resources to fight opposition to the water rights SJWCD holds, it is being forced to concede to objector demands, and that hurts the ability of SJWCD to fulfill its mission and hold those water rights to further the public interests of this community. SJWCD was formed to assure future water needs for Archuleta County are met, and it has never lost sight of that mission. SJWCD has re-doubled its efforts to find beneficial uses for its water rights.

Besides having marginal resources to promote a project the size of Dry Gulch, SJWCD has a grant for $1 Million, which will convert to a loan with backdated interest if Dry Gulch is not built. If SJWCD does not even have the resources to secure its conditional water rights, it certainly does not have the capacity to carry the debt load for a $1 Million loan. The good news on this point is that SJWCD has until 2024 to break ground. I have made every effort to cultivate a good working relationship with officials at the Colorado Water Conservation Board and other potential stakeholders in an effort to advance prospects for completion of this project while mitigating any financial impacts to this community.

The last complicating factor going forward is the need to secure additional land for a pool basin that will exceed 300 acres. There is a small amount of acreage owned by private parties, but the bulk of the land needed for this project is controlled by the U.S. Forest Service. SJWCD re-wrote the application submitted by PAWSD with the local forest service office, and re-submitted it earlier this year. SJWCD just responded to a letter in follow-up to that application outlining additional information in support of the application. The good news is the forest service will not make a decision on the application before 2016, and the bad news is SJWCD does not have the resources to fund a large scale land exchange with the forest service, or pay the carrying charges for a special permit to secure the forest service land. 2016 may sound like it is a long way off, but in terms of getting on top of the application – time is short.

Dry Gulch – Act II; Scene II

On May 14, 2013 Governor Hickenlooper issued an executive order mandating completion of a statewide water plan by the end of 2014. The Colorado Water Conservation Board (“CWCB”) is sheparding development of the plan on a very ambitious schedule that utilizes bottom-up efforts through the regional water roundtables to make it happen.

Although Colorado is physically at the headwaters of a number of vital river arteries, which gives it first access to mountain snow melt water, each basin is subject to Compact Agreements that have the weight of law. The Colorado River is no exception. In 1922, the western states within the Colorado River Basin entered into the Colorado River Compact, which allotted Colorado 5 million acre feet (“AF”) of Colorado River water.  Since most of the water in the Colorado River comes from Colorado, there is also a mandate to deliver all water in excess of that amount downstream. The upper basin states must provide 7.5 million AF of water annually to the lower basin states.

In recent years, the Colorado River has only produced about 12 million AF of water annually. To make matters worse, the United States entered into an international treaty with Mexico to deliver 3 million AF. It does not take a lot of math to discern that a significant gap exists between supply and demand. This gap is a key factor prompting Governor Hickenlooper to order a State Water Plan. Each river basin in the State has a water roundtable to evaluate water projects for funding and support, and those roundtables are now charged with contributing to the State Water Plan.

In our area, this is the Southwest Basin Water Roundtable (“the Roundtable”). The Roundtable has historically met quarterly and concentrated on funding and supporting local water projects in the seven water drainages within their jurisdictional control. Most of the roundtables deal with one drainage, but southwest Colorado, is unique in having multiple sub-basins. All of these sub-basins ultimately reach the Colorado River, but not until long after they have left the State of Colorado. The Southwest Basin also has a unique trans-continental diversion of water from the Rio Blanco into the Rio Grande drainage - known as the Chama Diversion. This is not a trickle of water, but a major export of water from the San Juan drainage consisting of approximately 25% of the San Juan’s annual flows. This diversion has had a major adverse effect on the upper Rio Blanco river, which is a story in-and-of itself.

In the early days of diversions from west slope resources for east slope purposes, a handshake agreement, which provided a quid pro quo; in return for west slope water, the western slope received additional storage facilities. As the front range cities grew and the west slope lost its political power, the agreement was set aside so the western slope was not compensated for the loss of water. Such is the case with the Chama diversion; our community was never compensated for the water now going into the Rio Grande drainage. Dry Gulch is not being built as an off-set to the water lost by the Chama diversion, but it is a good reason why the State of Colorado needs to step up with the financial resources needed to create water storage for this community.

The Colorado River Basin Report was released in December 2012. The report concluded demand for Colorado River water far outstripped the river’s resources, and it is only going to get worse. Half of the water the Denver Water Board uses comes from the Colorado River so challenges to the resources of the Colorado River are a statewide concern. The report triggered a series of reports, initiatives and legislation throughout the region. There are a number of Indian Tribal Nations along the Colorado who have organized to protect their water rights in response to the report, for instance. Here in Colorado, this year’s highlights have been as follows:

• Colorado River Basin Report
• No/Low Regrets Action Plan
• Colorado Drought Mitigation & Response Plan
• 2013 Roadmap Memorandum
• Drinking Water; Infrastructure

• SB 41 – Protecting Stored Water & Water Rights
• HB 1130 - Interrputable Water Supply Agreements
• SB 19 – Promte Water Conservation
• HB 1013 – Protect Water Right Ownership Rights
• HB 1044 – Authorize Graywater Use
• SJR 5 – Addresses adverse effects from diverting Revenue from Water Projects
• HJR 1007 – Concerning approval of water Project Revolving Fund Eligibility

The legislature also authorized an Interim Committee on water issues to come up with additional legislation and action on water issues. The year is not over, and more is expected to happen leading up to the 2014 legislative session.

I sit on the Roundtable as the SJWCD representative. Archuleta County and PAWSD both have seats on the Roundtable, but have chosen not to participate in recent years. In response to the Governor’s executive order, the Roundtable voted to meet every other month and has hired staff to help put a water plan together for this basin. Efforts are already underway to update the list of identified projects and processes (IPP) done in 2010 as part of the Statewide Water Supply Initiative (“SWSI”).  Dry Gulch is on the IPP list at Table 5-1 as the #1 project for Archuleta County. As such, both the basin and the State recognize this project as important to the future water needs of the State of Colorado. Designation on the IPP list makes the project eligible for funding, and it is anticipated it will also lead to being part of the State Water Plan. Although Colorado is allotted 5 million AF of water from the Colorado River, the State has never utilized anywhere near that amount of water, but once that unused water leaves the State, other states below Colorado can and do make use of that water.

John Salazar, the State’s Agriculture Commissioner, gave a speech at the Summer Colorado Water Congress expressing concern that agriculture has already been damaged significantly by diversion of water resources, and further efforts to cut ag water will only exacerbate the situation. He called on the State to do better land use planning that mitigates the need for additional water supplies for development projects. Governor Hickenlooper gave a speech at the same meeting emphasizing that any conversation on water has to start with conservation.

One might ask what purpose Dry Gulch might serve in benefitting the State, and how a reservoir can be part of a conservation plan. The answer is still only a vague concept; it’s called “water banking”.  Water banking has been around awhile – Arizona pumps water from the Colorado River into depleted underground aquifers under a water banking program. They are trying to keep California from that water as much as they are setting aside resources for growing populations and a strong agricultural economy.

In a way, water banking here would benefit both Colorado and the lower basin states. Half of the water Denver uses comes from west slope sources, and front range cities have been raiding traditional agricultual water resources. Colorado is depleting its aquifers, but cannot re-charge those aquifers like Arizona has. As presently envisioned, water storage on the west slope would be released should a compact call on the Colorado River occur.  This would prevent post-compact trans-continental diversions from being curtailed, and prevent further draw downs of Colorado aquifers.

Dry Gulch could be part of a system of water storage facilities created to mitigate the negative impacts on the State of Colorado if and when the lower basin states make a compact call that would require Colorado to meet its obligations under that 1922 agreement to supply 7.5 million AF to the lower basin states.

Dry Gulch – Act II; Scene III

Bill Hudson has attempted to drive a wedge between PAWSD and SJWCD, and in some instances has come out ahead in doing so, or at least he gets a story while the rest of us get an uneasy stomach. Bill was instrumental in drawing attention to how the two boards were operating, and big changes have been made on both boards as a result of Pagosa Daily Post articles. Bill called attention to some serious issues, and steps were taken to rectify those issues.  However, Bill is still fighting the last war, and trying to incite further discord. He is using project cost figures created for a 35,000 AF reservoir with an expensive pump station attached. We are into the second act for this project, with new players, a different audience and the sets have all been switched out.

The Daily Post covered the open joint meeting discussions held last year, and most recently, Bill alerted me to the infamous “cease & desist” letter; a phrase he himself coined for a rather innocuous and poorly written letter that went nowhere. The Pagosa Sun did an article on events surrounding the controversial letter.

Bill’s most recent effort followed his appearance at the August 13, 2013 SJWCD board meeting. Also in attendance for the board meeting were a number of notables, including State Representative Mike McLachlan. Mike quietly watched the proceedings until the very end when he related he had been against the Animas-LaPlata Project until recently. He went on to voice support for planning water storage facilities in Colorado, and offered support for the Dry Gulch Project as it moves forward.

At the other end of the spectrum that evening was Glenn Walsh, a member of the PAWSD board. In contrast to Representative McLachlan’s quiet and respectful approach to the meeting, Glenn weighed in on issues as if he had a seat on the SJWCD board. He sought to engage individual board members in conversation, talked in terms that inferred he represented the PAWSD board rather than himself, and drolled on using metaphors that made little if any sense.

In spite of Glenn’s intrusions on the process, the SJWCD board moved through an ambitious agenda quickly, asking good questions and making appropriate inquiries on issues. The board of directors is engaged, gives attention to detail and makes positive contributions to the issues at hand. At this last meeting, a new strategic plan for Dry Gulch was approved, a “next steps” letter to the forest service was approved, several reports were made on progress of various projects – including updating the Bylaws, and steps were taken to make sure even more gets done. I anticipate the board will offer sage advise I can carry to the Roundtable discussions on the State Water Plan.

Others in attendance, and who contributed to the board’s knowledge were John Ramberg, former member of the citizens advisory board to PAWSD, and Joe Crabb, Water Commissioner for this jurisdiction. The public is always welcome at any SJWCD board meeting.  Generally SJWCD board meetings are held the second Monday of even-numbered months. Check the SJWCD website for particulars.

It took decades to build the Animas-LaPlata Project, but Lake Nighthorse is now a reality. Work has started on another project called Long Hollow in this basin, and a newly formed water district is already laying pipe. Great strides have been taken to create water storage facilities and then utilize that available water to enhance the quality of life of persons served by those facilities. Drought and competing interests will take a toll too. Dry Gulch is not needed by this community today, but it will be needed in another generation. As the examples above show, it is important for this community to begin the work in developing this project now so it will be available when it is needed.

Replacing PAWSD with a viable partner for the project will usher in Act III. Calling this project “a zombie” only makes it more difficult for SJWCD to find a new partner, and for PAWSD to get out from under the financial obligations incurred as a partner in this project. I can’t dwell on what others assume, suppose and speculate – I just want to carry out the mission of SJWCD by moving this project forward.