Arkansas - Upper Ark WCD Hydrologic Water Balance Study_Application

Home Browse Search

Water Supply Reserve Account- Grant Application Form Form Revised May 2007 c. Funding from this Account will reduce the uncertainty that the water activity will be implemented. For this criterion the applicant should discuss how receiving funding from the Account will make a significant difference in the implementation of the water activity (i.e., how will receiving funding enable the water activity to move forward). WSRA funding will make a significant difference in the implementation of the water availability study, because WSRA funding alone will allow UAWCD to leverage federal funds from USGS that otherwise will not be made available. Typically, uncertainty regarding implementation of water projects involves not only funding constraints; lack of appropriate partners, lack of long-term planning, and lack of stakeholder involvement can also bog projects down. UAWCD worked since 2005 to reduce uncertainty that the project will be implemented. TABLE 8: REDUCED UNCERTAINTY Uncertaint How Addressed Funding In early 2007, obtained commitment of USGS for -33% of project cost or -$133,000 In late 2008, obtained commitment of U AWCD, counties, municipalities, and water providers for cost share Funding contributions totalin -$93,000 or -23 /o of bud et Primary partnership is with the USGS Water Science Center in Pueblo, which has site-specific knowledge: 01982-1984 Water Resources Appraisal of the Upper Arkansas River Basin from Leadville to Pueblo, Partnerships Colorado (Crouch 1984) estimated that aquifer storaae in the upper 200 feet was 3.81VI a.f. 02000-2003 Hydrogeology and Quality of Ground Water in the Upper Arkansas River Basin from Buena Vista to Salida, Colorado Watts 2005 estimated drainable water in the u er 300 feet was 472,000 a.f. Since 2005, worked with Chaffee County Water Focus Group to narrow the scale of initial proposed study Long-term involving tlrilling -10 deep wells to -2000 feet to investigate aquifer storage properties; in 2006, conferenced planning with USGS regarding site-specific study based on its two prior studies; in 2007, USGS wrote proposal for Phase I, II and III; in 2008, USGS wrote final ro osal for the focused Chaffee Count Phase I for $406,000 Stakeholder In 2008, obtained -30 letters of support from consumptive water users (irrigation, municipal, economic Involvement develo ment and non-consum tive water users recreation, education, resource mana ement Stakeholder Since September 2005, participated in transbasin planning on the Arkansas BRT, the largest of the Colorado Involvement BRTs, with 53+ members Population Growth Rates for the State of Colorado and the d. There is an urgency of need for the water Counties of Lake, Chaffee, Fremont, and Custer activity and/or any compelling "window of 180 opportunity" that may be missed without 160 funding from the Account. ,ao Urgency of need is related to projected 120 population growth and estimated climate 100 change. Upper Arkansas headwaters region so population growth is projected to grow 72% so from 2000 to 2030 (SWSI 2006). Projections of qo growth between 2000 and 2035 on a county- ; by-county basis are shown at left. Forecasted 20 ?. growth ranges from 160% in Lake County (the o Lake charree -Fremoni-' custer ? colorado location of the Phase II Leadville Basin water CI Change 1990 to 2000 ? Forecasted Change 2000 to 2035 balance study) and 60% in Fremont County (the location of the Phase III Wet Mountain SOURCG: Pupul.«ion data for ihe ycars 1990,,nd 2000 arc Lom thc U.S. Department Basin water balance study). oC Commen;e, Bureau of the Census decelmi;d census repons, nnd 16e forecasted figuros are from R-e(iminan' Pnpu7auinn Fnreeacts (3y County 2000- 2035, ColuraJu Division of Local Govcrnmcnt, State Dcmography Officc, Novcmbcr 2007 Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District (UAWCD) Page 13 of 42