Options Would Give Region Needed Storage

Home Browse Search

Option would give region needed storage Page 2 of 2 The parties involved also changed. Instead of working with staff of the city planning department, the city attorney's office took the lead. Now, that's understandable given the fact that the city needed to file for a water right for the kayak course, but the whole tone of discussions between the city and the communities participating in developing the PSOP changed. Throughout the last few months the city and the district have continued discussions. We've offered proposals to the city and they've countered. And, we've countered their counterproposal. Obviously, since the city opposed our federal legislation, we haven't reached a resolution. So, here we are: More than 20 communities in Southeastern Colorado have documented their need for additional water storage, including Pueblo, and have committed to the district to pay their share of the development costs of the PSOP. They have also committed to participate in a flow management program to protect flows below Pueblo Dam (and yes, I agree with the city that there should be more guarantees in the district's proposed flow management program - so long as it doesn't injure senior water rights on the river). Additionally, H.R. 3881 is supported by the Board of Water Works of Pueblo, Pueblo County, Pueblo West, St. Charles Mesa Water District, counties and cities in the Arkansas Valley, communities in the Upper Arkansas that also need storage, Action 22, Colorado Springs (some in Pueblo may not want to support a project benefiting Colorado Springs; however, they are in the Southeastern District and support the Fry-Ark Project with their tax dollars), the Colorado Water Conservation Board, State Parks Board, the Department of Natural Resources, Friends of the Arkansas, and even the Arkansas River Outfitters Association, which has worked with the district and the Bureau of Reclamation on the Upper Arkansas flow management program for nearly 10 years. The real "travesty in the making" is that the City of Pueblo and the publisher of The Chieftain don't appear to value the regional nature of the Fry-Ark Project and the proposed Preferred Storage Options Plan, or the fact that we have to work together in order to accomplish community- specific goals and our shared goals that would serve the entire nine -county service area of the district. The rest of Southeastern Colorado needs the City of Pueblo to rejoin the Arkansas Valley community; we need to be united in our efforts. Otherwise, our constituents lose because we won't be prepared to meet the water needs of the next generation, or provide additional recreation opportunities. None of us will succeed if any one of us has a "my way or the highway" approach, that includes the PSOP participants, the City of Pueblo, and the Bureau of Reclamation. Two other things for the record: The community of Pueblo will benefit from the passage of H.R. 3881. The Board of Water Works of Pueblo, which serves the same Pueblo citizens as the City Council, has asked for 5,000 acre -feet of firm storage space to better manage existing supplies as a part of the proposed enlargement of Pueblo Reservoir. And, an enlarged Pueblo Reservoir means even more unique benefits from the Fry-Ark Project for Pueblo - great recreation opportunity in our back yard. Additionally, Pueblo already has a long -term storage ( "reoperations ") contract, supported by the district, to store their water in excess capacity in Pueblo Reservoir. Other communities in the district want and deserve the same option that Pueblo already benefits from. Lastly, in response to The Chieftain publisher's continued criticism of the district, Aurora has an as- available type contract with the Bureau of Reclamation to store their Arkansas Basin water rights in Pueblo Reservoir. That has been the case since 1986, despite the objections of the Southeastern District. H.R. 3881 would allow that practice to continue, and avoid a costly court battle that would benefit no one. But, at all times, Aurora's use of excess capacity is subordinate to project needs and all in- district needs, and Aurora pays a higher rate for their use of this storage. They store water rights bought from farmers in the valley on a willing -seller to willing -buyer basis. Enough said. The Fry-Ark Project has given us a legacy that demonstrates what cooperation can achieve. Let's all (PSOP participants and the City of Pueblo) refocus our efforts to uphold that legacy. Steve Arveschoug is general manager of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District. ©1996 -2002 The pueblo Chieftain Online http:/ /www.chieftain.com/print/archive /2002 /mar /31 /edi4.htm 04/02/2002