PIM.Steamboat.FINAL_11.10 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

agricultural land conversion will be next. We need to develop additional storage now. The Upper Yampa River and the City of Craig are well protected, but other areas, particularly some of the agricultural areas, are not adequately protected against water shortages. ± The growth of down-river states has been astronomical. This growth places tremendous demands on our water. Residents have to cut back on water use because our water is supplying those states. It becomes a Western regional issue, not just an issue for this basin. ± The basin?s population projection raises two questions: (1) Where did the water come from to supply the growth of the last decade, and (2) where will it continue to come from for future growth? Moreover, there are additional draws on the system; no one has built any additional storage that the cities can draw upon. The normal hydrology of the basin typically provides the main stem with the water it needs, but the same is not true of the tributaries. ± All the towns and cities are on the main stem. If they need more water, they put in another pump and pump it. This was the case even in the last couple of drought years. Despite the low flow of the last couple of years, the river continued to meet municipal needs, with the exception of Dayton. Oak Creek has an adequate supply. ± If the Colorado River Return Aqueduct occurred and pumped back all of Colorado?s Colorado River Compact entitlement, then this basin would be locked in with the supplies we have now and we would be unable to divert more water. ± A wild card with regard to future supplies is the endangered fish issue. No one believes that flow is the limiting factor that is endangering the fish. Everything points to the non-native fish population. In the Yampa/White basin, we are trying to protect the fishing resource for our sports fishermen at the same time we are trying to manage the non-native fish issue. Flow isn?t the limiting factor for the fish, but that could be one thing that hampers the basin in terms of supply. ± The flow of the Yampa and the White Rivers are fueling growth in the rest of the state, and the rest of the state owes our basin for our water. Explore options for increasing water in basin tributaries: ± The basin only uses 10% of the water in the river now. Half of the water is committed to Utah by the compact, so another 400,000 acre-feet is there for use. We have plenty of water ? the issue is whether or not it is available to us to use. Our basin is pursuing a process with the Fish and Wildlife Service that will allow the development of two increments of future supplies as long as the fish are being protected. Because of this process, a recent study by Brown, Bortz and Coddington concluded that our water supply should be adequate to meet our future needs. Most of the towns are well positioned in terms of the future water supply. It is the tributaries that go short and, from an agricultural perspective, that is the area of greatest concern. ± Colorado needs an intra-basin contract, or compact, to protect tributaries and our environment, so we can avoid in Colorado what happened in California. Such a compact is important to protecting the basin?s long-term economic development ability. This compact should equitably distribute the remaining interstate compact entitlement within the basin so that all share fairly in access to that water. ± Our basin did a small reservoir study and found that irrigation and fisheries are an alternative way to, in effect, store water on water-short tributaries without having to build new storage facilities. These alternative storage methods provide water storage that stretches the use of existing storage facilities. ± Most of the towns are well positioned for future water supplies; however, we have a problem if the tributaries go short. They have historically been water-short and