Options Would Give Region Needed Storage

Home Browse Search

Option would give region needed storage Page 1 of 2 The Pueblo Chieftain Online Select file then print to print this article. Publish Date: March 31, 2002 Option would give region needed storage evelirvesdioug Last week, I had the experience of testifying before the water and power subcommittee of the House of Representatives' Resources Committee. I testified in support of H.R. 3881 - the legislation being advocated by the communities within the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District to start the process of developing much needed additional water storage capacity in the Arkansas River basin. It was a humbling experience, not because of the grand decor of the subcommittee hearing room, or the protocol of the proceedings - everyone saying "Mr." and "Congressman," and talking nice about each other even though they disagreed. No, it was a humbling experience because I now have a better understanding of the dedication it took to create the Fry-Ark Project as it exists today, and because the future of communities in Southeastern Colorado is vested in our ability to create a vision that unites us. To think that more than 40 years ago leaders from Southeastern Colorado did the same thing I did last week - walked the halls of congressional office buildings, made the sales pitch to members of Congress, and testified before the Resources Committee. Their efforts gave us the Fry-Ark Project. This time, 40 years later, we're trying to do the same thing - prepare for our future water resource needs. Southeastern Colorado needs additional storage. Conditions are dry this year and they'll be dry in the future. Our towns have grown the last 10 years and they'll continue to grow, and we need to manage our water resources more effectively. And, like before, we need water storage capacity as a tool to meet these challenges. For the last five years communities throughout the Southeastern District, including Pueblo, as represented by the elected board of the Pueblo Board of Water Works, have studied water needs throughout the Arkansas River basin, analyzed many different alternatives for providing future water supplies, worked with agricultural and municipal water providers, recreation interests, local environmental groups, and state and federal resource agencies, to devise a plan to prepare us to meet water needs in the basin into the year 2040. The plan is called the Preferred Storage Options Plan (PSOP) and it has two main goals. First, it's designed to better utilize capacity in the existing Fry -Ark Project by allowing communities within the district the option to store their own water in storage capacity not used by the project at the time. That concept (called "reoperations ") can provide as much as 48,000 acre -feet of storage each year without impacting the original purposes of the project. The second goal of the PSOP is to consider the enlargement of Pueblo and Turquoise reservoirs. The enlargements would provide firm storage capacity, while the reoperations contracts provide as- available storage (storage that is subject to spill and subordinate to the need to store Fry -Ark Project water). The first step in the process of enlarging these reservoirs is to ask that a federal-level study be conducted to consider all the issues surrounding such a project. That's over and above the studies we've done on a local level over the last five years. Throughout our study process we've spent a considerable amount of time looking at not only Southeastern Colorado's need for storage, but also at the environmental and recreation issues that must be considered, including detailed consideration of flows below Pueblo Dam through the City of Pueblo. In fact, we traded information with the City of Pueblo staff as they were working on the river restoration project with the Corps of Engineers. We suggested a 100 cfs target flow below Pueblo Dam and the development of a cooperative flow management program. A conunitment to this type of approach to manage river flows and support the city's Legacy Project was made in the fall of 2000 and again in the spring of 2001 in the district's Preferred Storage Options Plan reportand the PSOP Implementation Committee report. At that time city staff believed that to be a workable solution - one that would balance the needs for water storage and recreation interests. The Corps of Engineers even included the 100 cfs target flow as proposed in our PSOP report in their draft and final EIS for the restoration project. Again, it appeared to be a workable solution. Over the last few months the whole idea of cooperation has gotten more difficult to achieve. The city presented the Southeastern District with new concerns - additional flows to protect the city's ability to comply with its waste -water discharge permits, and to add a kayak course demanding flows of 500 cfs much of the year. http:// www.chieftain.com/print/archive /2002 /mar /31 /edi4.htm 04/02/2002