COLORADO WATER for the 21 ST CENTURY ACT PROGRESS UPDATE From THE SOUTH PLATTE BASIN ROUNDTABLE...
-
Upload
linda-washington -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of COLORADO WATER for the 21 ST CENTURY ACT PROGRESS UPDATE From THE SOUTH PLATTE BASIN ROUNDTABLE...
COLORADO WATER COLORADO WATER for thefor the
2121STST CENTURY ACT CENTURY ACTPROGRESS UPDATE PROGRESS UPDATE
From From
THE SOUTH PLATTE BASIN THE SOUTH PLATTE BASIN ROUNDTABLEROUNDTABLE
March 25, 2010March 25, 2010
Sterling, COSterling, CO
22
Colorado's Water Supply Future
South Platte Basin Roundtable South Platte Basin Roundtable Nonconsumptive Needs AssessmentNonconsumptive Needs Assessment
Bob StreeterBob Streeter
33
44
55
66
WhyWhy are we developing an are we developing an NCNA?NCNA?
Yes, it’s required by statute, but more importantly…Yes, it’s required by statute, but more importantly…
The NCNA will The NCNA will provide an objective, science-based set of toolsprovide an objective, science-based set of tools for for BRTs and other stakeholders.BRTs and other stakeholders.– Priority StreamsPriority Streams– Flow QuantificationFlow Quantification
To be used To be used to make informed decisionsto make informed decisions about future water supply about future water supply management. For example:management. For example:– What are the most important streams and rivers for our environment What are the most important streams and rivers for our environment
and recreation?and recreation?– How much water would we need to sustain those values?How much water would we need to sustain those values?– What tools and strategies can we use?What tools and strategies can we use?– How can we develop new water supplies that avoid impacts or provide How can we develop new water supplies that avoid impacts or provide
multi-purpose benefits to priority streams and wetlands?multi-purpose benefits to priority streams and wetlands?
77
Statewide Nonconsumptive Needs Statewide Nonconsumptive Needs Assessment MethodologyAssessment Methodology
EstablishPrioritiesEstablishPriorities
QUA
NTIF
ICAT
ION
QUA
NTIF
ICAT
ION
Build UponAttributes
Build UponAttributes
Areas Where BRTs Choose
to Conduct Quantification
Areas Where BRTs Choose
to Conduct Quantification
Pilot WatershedFlow Evaluation
Tool(s)
Pilot WatershedFlow Evaluation
Tool(s)
PRIO
RITI
ESPR
IORI
TIES
Site-SpecificQuantificationSite-Specific
Quantification
IMPLEMENTATION
88
ProductsProducts
GIS coverages representing Colorado’s GIS coverages representing Colorado’s important environmental and important environmental and recreational attributesrecreational attributes
Map of Basin Roundtable prioritized Map of Basin Roundtable prioritized areas and reachesareas and reaches
Results of flow evaluation tools and site-Results of flow evaluation tools and site-specific instream flow pilot studiesspecific instream flow pilot studies
Identification of flow and non-flow Identification of flow and non-flow related resource management optionsrelated resource management options
99
Initial Attributes ConsideredInitial Attributes ConsideredCWCB Instream Flow RightsCWCB Instream Flow RightsCWCB Natural Lake LevelsCWCB Natural Lake LevelsCWCB water rights where water CWCB water rights where water availability had a role in availability had a role in appropriationappropriationAudubon important bird areasAudubon important bird areasCDPHE WQCD 303(d) listed CDPHE WQCD 303(d) listed segmentssegmentsRare Riparian Wetland Vascular Rare Riparian Wetland Vascular PlantsPlantsSignificant Riparian/Wetland Significant Riparian/Wetland CommunitiesCommunitiesBoreal Toad Critical HabitatBoreal Toad Critical HabitatDucks Unlimited ProjectsDucks Unlimited ProjectsGreenback Cutthroat TroutGreenback Cutthroat TroutWaterfowl Hunting/Habitat ParcelsWaterfowl Hunting/Habitat ParcelsDucks Unlimited Focus AreasDucks Unlimited Focus AreasWhite Water ParksWhite Water ParksWild and Scenic ReachesWild and Scenic Reaches
Gold Medal Trout StreamsGold Medal Trout StreamsGold Medal Trout LakesGold Medal Trout LakesRecreational In-Channel Recreational In-Channel DiversionsDiversionsRafting and Kayak reaches Rafting and Kayak reaches (flatwater and whitewater)(flatwater and whitewater)High Recreation CorridorsHigh Recreation CorridorsNationwide Rivers InventoryNationwide Rivers InventoryAdditional Wilderness Area Additional Wilderness Area WatersWatersPlains and Northern Leopard FrogPlains and Northern Leopard FrogPreble’s Jumping MousePreble’s Jumping MouseRiver OtterRiver OtterYellow Mud TurtleYellow Mud TurtleCommon Garter SnakeCommon Garter SnakeOther Threatened and Other Threatened and Endangered Fish SpeciesEndangered Fish Species
1010
South Platte Basin South Platte Basin Attribute CategorizationAttribute Categorization
EnvironmentalEnvironmentalEnvironmentalEnvironmental
Special Value WatersSpecial Value WatersState Endangered, State Endangered,
Threatened and Threatened and Species of ConcernSpecies of Concern
Rare Plants and Rare Plants and Significant Plant Significant Plant
CommunitiesCommunities
RecreationalRecreationalRecreationalRecreational
ImportantImportantFishingFishing
Whitewater and Whitewater and Flatwater BoatingFlatwater Boating
Waterfowl Habitat Waterfowl Habitat and Recreationand Recreation
High Recreation High Recreation CorridorsCorridors
1111
Why are we here?Why are we here?
1.1. PLAN UpfrontPLAN Upfront– Plan for multi-objective projects upfront when an area Plan for multi-objective projects upfront when an area
includes nonconsumptive needsincludes nonconsumptive needs– Avoid long National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Avoid long National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and
litigation processes (be a useful guide for water supply litigation processes (be a useful guide for water supply planning up front), planning up front),
– Avoiding Endangered Species Act “train wrecks” (help plan Avoiding Endangered Species Act “train wrecks” (help plan to prevent species of special concern from becoming to prevent species of special concern from becoming federally listed),federally listed),
– Point to win/win opportunities for future multi-objective Point to win/win opportunities for future multi-objective projects, andprojects, and
– Help identify where future conflicts may occurHelp identify where future conflicts may occur2.2. Cultural, Ethical, and Aesthetic ValuesCultural, Ethical, and Aesthetic Values3.3. EconomicsEconomics
1212
Next StepsNext Steps
Quantification of water needsQuantification of water needs
Implementation of projects to sustain and Implementation of projects to sustain and improve recreational and environmental improve recreational and environmental attributesattributes
1313
1414
1515
Colorado's Water Supply Future
South Platte Basin Roundtable South Platte Basin Roundtable
Consumptive Needs AssessmentConsumptive Needs Assessment
Joe FrankJoe Frank
Colorado Water for the Colorado Water for the 21st Century Act21st Century Act
Consumptive Needs AssessmentConsumptive Needs Assessment
Basin RoundtablesBasin Roundtables– ““Develop a basin-wide consumptive and non-Develop a basin-wide consumptive and non-
consumptive water supply needs consumptive water supply needs assessment.”assessment.”
Consumptive Needs: Municipal, industrial Consumptive Needs: Municipal, industrial and agriculturaland agricultural
Non-consumptive Needs: Environmental Non-consumptive Needs: Environmental and recreationaland recreational
South Platte Basin RoundtableSouth Platte Basin Roundtable
Three-Part Approach to Consumptive Three-Part Approach to Consumptive Needs Assessment:Needs Assessment:
1.1. 2004 Statewide Water Supply Initiative 2004 Statewide Water Supply Initiative (SWSI), Phase 1. (SWSI), Phase 1.
Adopted as an Adopted as an interiminterim needs needs assessmentassessment
2.2. Detailed analysis of five key areasDetailed analysis of five key areas
3.3. Assessments based on 2050 demandsAssessments based on 2050 demands
Map of the RoundtableMap of the Roundtable
Part 1: Statewide Water Supply Part 1: Statewide Water Supply Initiative, Phase 1Initiative, Phase 1
Findings based on 2030 demands:Findings based on 2030 demands:– Municipal and Industrial (M&I) demands Municipal and Industrial (M&I) demands
projected to increase statewide by 630,000 projected to increase statewide by 630,000 acre-feet (AF).acre-feet (AF).
– M&I demands in the South Platte Basin M&I demands in the South Platte Basin Roundtable area were projected to increase Roundtable area were projected to increase by 200,000 AF.by 200,000 AF.
– Optimistic projections by local M&I providers Optimistic projections by local M&I providers indicate the ability to meet 80% of the indicate the ability to meet 80% of the increased demand.increased demand.
Findings, cont’dFindings, cont’d– The gap or shortage indentified for 2030:The gap or shortage indentified for 2030:
Statewide: 118,000 AFStatewide: 118,000 AF
South Platte Basin Roundtable: 28,000 AFSouth Platte Basin Roundtable: 28,000 AF
Overall South Platte: 90,600 AFOverall South Platte: 90,600 AF
Note: One acre-foot is a volume of water Note: One acre-foot is a volume of water one foot deep over one acre of area. One one foot deep over one acre of area. One acre-foot is also 325,851 gallons.acre-foot is also 325,851 gallons.
Part 1: Statewide Water Supply Part 1: Statewide Water Supply Initiative, Phase 1Initiative, Phase 1
Part 1: Statewide Water Supply Part 1: Statewide Water Supply Initiative, Phase 1Initiative, Phase 1
2030 Agricultural Demands for the South 2030 Agricultural Demands for the South Platte Basin:Platte Basin:- - 20002000 Irrigated LandIrrigated Land 1,027,000 acres1,027,000 acres
Water DeficitWater Deficit 257,000 ac-ft*257,000 ac-ft*- 2030- 2030 Irrigated LandIrrigated Land 850,000 acres850,000 acres
Water DeficitWater Deficit 210,000 ac-ft*210,000 ac-ft*
Note that the total irrigated acres are projected to Note that the total irrigated acres are projected to decrease by 2030.decrease by 2030.
* Consumptive use numbers.* Consumptive use numbers.
Part 2: Five Key AreasPart 2: Five Key Areas
The consumptive needs assessment The consumptive needs assessment involves the detailed analysis of Five Key involves the detailed analysis of Five Key Areas:Areas:
1.Competition for the same water supply1.Competition for the same water supply
2. Identification of any unappropriated water2. Identification of any unappropriated water
3. Current and historical river administration3. Current and historical river administration
4. Increasing use of wholly consumable effluent4. Increasing use of wholly consumable effluent
5. Water conservation plans by providers5. Water conservation plans by providers
Part 2: Five Key AreasPart 2: Five Key AreasConclusionsConclusions
1.1. There is significant competition for the same There is significant competition for the same water supplies including competition from the water supplies including competition from the Denver Metro AreaDenver Metro Area
2.2. There is very little un-appropriated water There is very little un-appropriated water availableavailable
3.3. There will be increased frequency and duration There will be increased frequency and duration of senior calls on the riverof senior calls on the river
4.4. Increase reuse of consumable effluent will result Increase reuse of consumable effluent will result in less water in the South Platte Riverin less water in the South Platte River
5.5. Water conservation will help reduce future water Water conservation will help reduce future water demands but will not alone be sufficient to meet demands but will not alone be sufficient to meet future demandsfuture demands
Part 3: Consumptive Needs Part 3: Consumptive Needs AssessmentAssessment
Approach to the Needs Assessment:Approach to the Needs Assessment:
– Projection of 2050 Agricultural DemandsProjection of 2050 Agricultural Demands
– 2050 Municipal and Industrial Demands 2050 Municipal and Industrial Demands Projected StatewideProjected Statewide
– Available Water SupplyAvailable Water Supply
– Calculation of the 2050 Projected Gap Calculation of the 2050 Projected Gap or Shortage or Shortage
Part 3: Consumptive Needs Part 3: Consumptive Needs AssessmentAssessment
2030 Projected Agricultural Demands:2030 Projected Agricultural Demands:
– 2005 irrigated acres were used as a 2005 irrigated acres were used as a base line for projecting future base line for projecting future Agricultural water needs. Agricultural water needs.
– Due to the high decree of uncertainty in Due to the high decree of uncertainty in estimating the 2050 irrigated acreage estimating the 2050 irrigated acreage the decision was made by the the decision was made by the Roundtable to use updated 2030 Roundtable to use updated 2030 acreage estimates fromacreage estimates from SWSI Phase 1. SWSI Phase 1.
2030 Projected 2030 Projected Agricultural Demands, cont’dAgricultural Demands, cont’d
2005:2005: Irrigated LandIrrigated Land 840,000 acres840,000 acres Water DeficitWater Deficit 210,000 AF*210,000 AF*
2030: Irrigated Land 2030: Irrigated Land 684,000 -- 797,000 acres684,000 -- 797,000 acres Water DeficitWater Deficit 171,000 -- 198,000 171,000 -- 198,000
AF*AF*
The current and projected Agricultural water The current and projected Agricultural water shortage in the overall basin:shortage in the overall basin:– 200,000 acre-feet of consumptive use*200,000 acre-feet of consumptive use*– 364,000 acre-feet of actual diversion364,000 acre-feet of actual diversion– Note: That the irrigated acres have decreased Note: That the irrigated acres have decreased
70,000 acres from 2001 to 2005.70,000 acres from 2001 to 2005.
Part 3: Consumptive Needs AssessmentPart 3: Consumptive Needs AssessmentMunicipal and Industrial ProjectionsMunicipal and Industrial Projections
2050 Population Estimates2050 Population Estimates
LocationLocation Year/RangeYear/Range PopulationPopulationStatewideStatewide 20052005 4,782,0004,782,000
2050 Low2050 Low 8,664,0008,664,000
2050 Med2050 Med 9,331,0009,331,000
2050 High2050 High 10,327,00010,327,000
Denver MetroDenver Metro 20052005 2,359,0002,359,000
2050 Low2050 Low 4,052,0004,052,000
2050 Med2050 Med 4,289,0004,289,000
2050 High2050 High 4,728,0004,728,000
2050 Population Estimates, cont’d2050 Population Estimates, cont’d
LocationLocation Year/RangeYear/Range PopulationPopulationSouth Platte BasinSouth Platte Basin 20052005 945,000945,000
RoundtableRoundtable 2050 Low2050 Low 1,779,000 1,779,000
2050 Med2050 Med 1,902,000 1,902,000
2050 High2050 High 2,079,0002,079,000
Logan, Morgan,Logan, Morgan, 20052005 60,10060,100
Sedgwick,Sedgwick, 2050 Low2050 Low 97,50097,500
WashingtonWashington 2050 Med2050 Med 103,600103,600
CountiesCounties 2050 High2050 High 113,500113,500
Data Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board “State of Data Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board “State of Colorado 2050 Municipal and Industrial Water Use Projections.”Colorado 2050 Municipal and Industrial Water Use Projections.”
Part 3: Consumptive Needs AssessmentPart 3: Consumptive Needs Assessment2050 M&I Water Demand2050 M&I Water Demand
LocationLocation Year/RangeYear/Range Acre-FeetAcre-FeetStatewideStatewide 20082008 1,200,0001,200,000
2050 Low2050 Low 2,100,0002,100,000
2050 Med2050 Med 2,300,0002,300,000
2050 High2050 High 2,900,0002,900,000
Denver MetroDenver Metro 20082008 490,000490,000
2050 Low2050 Low 749,000749,000
2050 Med2050 Med 795,000795,000
2050 High2050 High 877,000877,000Note: For the Medium 2050 Demand the State will need Note: For the Medium 2050 Demand the State will need another 1,100,000 AF of water.another 1,100,000 AF of water.
2050 M&I Water Demand, cont’d2050 M&I Water Demand, cont’d
LocationLocation Year/RangeYear/Range Acre-FeetAcre-FeetSouth Platte BasinSouth Platte Basin 20082008 268,000*268,000*
Roundtable Roundtable 2050 Low2050 Low 485,000 485,000
2050 Med2050 Med 515,000 515,000
2050 High2050 High 558,000558,000
Logan, Morgan,Logan, Morgan, 20082008 27,100 27,100
Sedgwick,Sedgwick, 2050 Low2050 Low 49,300 49,300
WashingtonWashington 2050 Med2050 Med 51,200 51,200
CountiesCounties 2050 High2050 High 54,20054,200
**The 2008 demand reflects a 13% decrease from the 2000 The 2008 demand reflects a 13% decrease from the 2000 demand. This reduction is due to current conservations efforts.demand. This reduction is due to current conservations efforts.
2050 M&I Water Demand, cont’d2050 M&I Water Demand, cont’d
2050 Medium Demand for the South Platte 2050 Medium Demand for the South Platte Basin Roundtable area will need another Basin Roundtable area will need another 247,000 AF of water for M&I 247,000 AF of water for M&I 2050 Medium Demand for Denver Metro 2050 Medium Demand for Denver Metro area will need another 305,000 AF for M&Iarea will need another 305,000 AF for M&ICompare this to the following:Compare this to the following:– C-BT Project Annual Yield: 213,000 AFC-BT Project Annual Yield: 213,000 AF– Poudre River Annual Yield: 298,000 AFPoudre River Annual Yield: 298,000 AFWe will need another C-BT Project and We will need another C-BT Project and another Poudre River.another Poudre River.
SWSI: South Platte Basin and SWSI: South Platte Basin and Metro 2050 new demandMetro 2050 new demand
South Metro Denver Metro Northern Upper Mountain Lower Platte
Moffat Firming Windy Gap Firming NISP Halligan-Seaman
South Metro Counties Rueter-Hess
ECCV Northern Non-trib GW Denver Metro
Counties Aurora Prairie
Waters Thornton
Poudre Pipeline Ag Transfers Gravel Lakes Northern Counties
CBT acquisitions, ag transfers and local storage
552,000 AF new demand
in 2050(mid range)
South Platte Basin RoundtableSouth Platte Basin RoundtableMajor Identified Projects & ProcessesMajor Identified Projects & Processes
Identified Projects and Processes (IP&Ps)Identified Projects and Processes (IP&Ps)
– Northern AreaNorthern Area 146,500 AF146,500 AF
– Upper MountainUpper Mountain 16,500 AF 16,500 AF
– Lower RiverLower River 8,900 AF 8,900 AF
– High PlainsHigh Plains 800 AF 800 AF
– TOTALTOTAL 172,700 AF172,700 AF
South Platte Basin RoundtableSouth Platte Basin RoundtableMajor Identified Projects & ProcessesMajor Identified Projects & Processes
Northern Area:Northern Area: Annual YieldAnnual YieldWindy Gap FirmingWindy Gap Firming 30,000 30,000
AFAF
Northern Integrated Supply PlanNorthern Integrated Supply Plan 40,000 AF40,000 AF
Halligan-Seaman Reservoir ProjectsHalligan-Seaman Reservoir Projects 20,000 AF20,000 AF
TOTALTOTAL 90,000 AF90,000 AF
These projects are currently in the permitting process These projects are currently in the permitting process and do not have the necessary permits to move and do not have the necessary permits to move forward.forward.
Meeting the 2050 M&I Basin DemandMeeting the 2050 M&I Basin Demand
South Platte (excludes Denver Metro Area)South Platte (excludes Denver Metro Area)
LowLow MediumMedium HighHigh
2050 Demand2050 Demand 485485 515515 558558
Current DemandCurrent Demand 268268 268268 268268
New DemandNew Demand 217217 247247 290290
IP&Ps at 100%IP&Ps at 100% 173173 173173 173173
GapGap 4444 7474 117117
Gap Calculation (all values in 1000 ac-ft)
Meeting the 2050 M&I Basin DemandMeeting the 2050 M&I Basin Demand
South Platte and Denver Metro Area CombinedSouth Platte and Denver Metro Area Combined
LowLow MediumMedium HighHigh
2050 Demand2050 Demand 1,2341,234 1,3101,310 1,4351,435
Current DemandCurrent Demand 758758 758758 758758
New DemandNew Demand 476476 552552 677677
IP&Ps at 100%IP&Ps at 100% 319319 319319 319319
Gap (100%)Gap (100%) 157157 233233 358358
Gap Calculation (all values in 1000 ac-ft)
Meeting the 2050 Meeting the 2050 M&I Basin Demand M&I Basin Demand
The amount of additional future water The amount of additional future water supply depends on the rate of success of supply depends on the rate of success of the IP&P’s and which population scenario the IP&P’s and which population scenario happens.happens.
The Roundtable looked at supply The Roundtable looked at supply numbers based on 25%, 50%, 75% and numbers based on 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% success rate of the IP&P’s.100% success rate of the IP&P’s.
Mid-Range Mid-Range Hypothetical ExampleHypothetical Example
Assume the IP&P’s are 50% successful Assume the IP&P’s are 50% successful and assume 2050 medium-range and assume 2050 medium-range population.population.– Gap (i.e.: the shortage) to meet in the South Gap (i.e.: the shortage) to meet in the South
Platte Basin Roundtable is 160,000 AFPlatte Basin Roundtable is 160,000 AF– Gap to meet in Denver Metro area is 233,000 Gap to meet in Denver Metro area is 233,000
AF (393,000 AF total for South Platte) AF (393,000 AF total for South Platte) – The statewide gap at 50/50 is approximately The statewide gap at 50/50 is approximately
800,000 AF.800,000 AF.
3939
Existing Supplies
IPPs if 50% Successful
2050 Water Needs High
2050 Water Needs Medium
2050 Water Needs Low
South Platte Basin Roundtable’s Future M&I Water NeedsSouth Platte Basin Roundtable’s Future M&I Water Needs
South Platte Basin RoundtableSouth Platte Basin RoundtableCombined M&I and Agricultural DemandCombined M&I and Agricultural Demand
If 50% of IP&P’s are successful, the If 50% of IP&P’s are successful, the mid-range gap in 2050 due to M&I mid-range gap in 2050 due to M&I and agricultural shortages in the and agricultural shortages in the South Platte Basin Roundtable area South Platte Basin Roundtable area is estimated to be 360,000 AF* is estimated to be 360,000 AF* (593,000 AF* for overall Basin)(593,000 AF* for overall Basin)
*Consumptive use*Consumptive use
Conclusions of the RoundtableConclusions of the Roundtable
The 2050 water supply gap in the Basin is large The 2050 water supply gap in the Basin is large and likely growing.and likely growing.The future water supply gap in the Basin is an The future water supply gap in the Basin is an urgent problem that must be addressed with all urgent problem that must be addressed with all due speed.due speed.Efficient use of all existing water supplies within Efficient use of all existing water supplies within the Basin is already happening and will increase the Basin is already happening and will increase in the futurein the futureLarge scale dry-up of irrigated agriculture will Large scale dry-up of irrigated agriculture will cause significant economic damage to the Basin cause significant economic damage to the Basin and the State.and the State.The Basin and the State must proceed with a The Basin and the State must proceed with a sense of urgency to evaluate and develop all sense of urgency to evaluate and develop all potential water supply options.potential water supply options.
4343
Colorado's Water Supply Future
State Wide Perspective – Path ForwardState Wide Perspective – Path Forward
Eric HecoxEric Hecox
ObjectivesObjectives
1) Current Planning Activities1) Current Planning Activities
2) On-Going Technical Support of Needs 2) On-Going Technical Support of Needs AssessmentAssessment
4444
4545
Current Planning Activities
Draft ReportsDraft Reports
State of Colorado 2050 Municipal and Industrial Water State of Colorado 2050 Municipal and Industrial Water Use ProjectionsUse Projections
Nonconsumptive Needs Assessment Priorities MappingNonconsumptive Needs Assessment Priorities Mapping
Watershed Flow Evaluation Tool Pilot Study for Roaring Watershed Flow Evaluation Tool Pilot Study for Roaring Fork and Fountain Creek Watersheds and Site-Specific Fork and Fountain Creek Watersheds and Site-Specific Quantification Pilot Study for Roaring Fork WatershedQuantification Pilot Study for Roaring Fork Watershed
Evaluation of Water Supply StrategiesEvaluation of Water Supply Strategies
To access the reports visit: To access the reports visit:
http://cwcb.state.co.us/IWMD/COsWaterSupplyFuture/
4646
Key FindingsKey FindingsColorado’s population will nearly double by 2050 requiring between Colorado’s population will nearly double by 2050 requiring between
830,000 and1.7 million acre-feet of additional water 830,000 and1.7 million acre-feet of additional water to meet M&I to meet M&I
needsneeds
Environmental and recreational Environmental and recreational water needs have been identified water needs have been identified
statewide. Identifying projects and methods to meet those needs statewide. Identifying projects and methods to meet those needs
will continue to be a prioritywill continue to be a priority
In order to meet these consumptive and nonconsumptive needs, In order to meet these consumptive and nonconsumptive needs,
Colorado will rely on a mix Colorado will rely on a mix of conservation, agricultural transfers, of conservation, agricultural transfers,
and new water supply developmentand new water supply development
Meeting Colorado’s consumptive and nonconsumptive needs will Meeting Colorado’s consumptive and nonconsumptive needs will
require substantial investment. For example, a new water supply require substantial investment. For example, a new water supply
project yielding 250,000 acre-feet will project yielding 250,000 acre-feet will cost between $7.5 to $10 cost between $7.5 to $10
billion. billion. This exceeds previous cost projections.This exceeds previous cost projections.
4747
4848
Existing Supplies
IPPs if 100% Successful
2050 Water Needs High
2050 Water Needs Medium
2050 Water Needs Low
4949
Existing Supplies
IPPs if 50% Successful
2050 Water Needs High
2050 Water Needs Medium
2050 Water Needs Low
5050
Existing Supplies
IPPs if 50% Successful
2050 Water Needs High
2050 Water Needs Medium
2050 Water Needs Low
Reduction in Existing Supplies Due to Climate Change
Reduction in Existing Supplies Due to Loss of Groundwater
Development of Portfolios and Evaluation of Water Supply Strategies
• During 2008, Colorado's water community embarked on a visioning process to address the following questions: – If we let Colorado's water supply continue to evolve
the way it is now, what will our state look like in 50 years?
– Is that what we want it to look like? – If not, what can and should we do about it?
51
• The status quo approach to water supply will not lead to a desirable future for Colorado– Status Quo = Significant loss of irrigated acres– If not the Status Quo then what?
• Colorado will need a range of demand side and supply side strategies
• We need to work together to examine the trade-offs, risks, and uncertainties associated with different strategies and combination of strategies
52
IBCC/CWCB Visioning ProcessBasic Conclusions
1,403 KAF
100 KAF
High Demand
Low Supply
Mid Demand
Mid Supply
High Demand
High Supply
Low Demand
Low Supply
Low Demand
High Supply
Mid Demand
Low Supply
Mid Demand
High Supply
1,174 KAF
1,123 KAF
944 KAF
835 KAF
769 KAF
700 KAF350 KAF
Colorado River System Supply
Sta
tew
ide
Dem
and
Building combinations of strategies or “portfolios” for Building combinations of strategies or “portfolios” for meeting Colorado’s future water needs. Different mixes of:meeting Colorado’s future water needs. Different mixes of:
-- IPPs-- IPPs-- Conservation-- Conservation
-- New Supply Development-- New Supply Development-- Ag Transfers-- Ag Transfers
5454
5555
PortfoliosPortfolios
Building combinations of strategies or “portfolios” for meeting Colorado’s future water needs – different mixes of:• IPPs• Conservation• New Supply Development• Ag Transfers• Reuse
Strategies Projects and MethodsP
ort
foli
o
• Green Mountain• Yampa
• Flaming Gorge• Blue Mesa
Status Quo Scenario & Status Quo Scenario & Supply PortfolioSupply Portfolio
5757
IPP - Success rate varied by basinIPP - Success rate varied by basinConservation - 20% reduction from 2000 Conservation - 20% reduction from 2000 water usage rates by basinwater usage rates by basinNew Supply – Future development of CO New Supply – Future development of CO River water beyond IPPs will occur for River water beyond IPPs will occur for uses on the West Slopeuses on the West SlopeAg Transfer – Remaining East Slope M&I Ag Transfer – Remaining East Slope M&I Demands will be met through ag transfersDemands will be met through ag transfers
5858
Status Quo Portfolio(Incremental Ag Transfer)
5959
M&I Needs Statewide West Slope
North Platte/Rio Grande
M&I Water Needs (AFY) 922,800 203,100 11,200SSI Water Needs (AFY) 84,400 45,300 0Oil Shale Water Needs (AFY) 43,700 43,700 0
Total M&I Needs (AFY) 1,050,900 292,100 11,200
StrategiesIPPs (AFY) 281,000 94,800 3,900Conservation (AFY) 85,400 34,100 2,300New Supply Development (AFY) 163,200 163,200 0
Reuse (AFY) 0 0 0New Supply Development Sub-Total (AFY) 163,200 163,200 0
Ag Transfer (AFY) 349,300 0 5,100Reuse (AFY) 172,100 0 0
Ag Transfer Sub-Total (AFY) 521,400 0 5,100
Reduction in Irrigated Acres (percent) 19% 4% 1%28% Arkansas44% South Platte
Reduction in Irrigated Acres (acres) 501,100 38,667 455,600 6,80088,200 Arkansas
367,400 South Platte
39%
East Slope
182,300
708,500
0747,600
49,000
39,100
0
516,300
00
344,200172,100
6060
6161
Alternative Scenario & Alternative Scenario & Supply PortfolioSupply Portfolio
6262
During December 2009 meeting the IBCC develop several portfolios for the mid-demand & mid-supply portfolio. Common themes included:
• Promote success of Identified Projects and Processes
• Minimize agricultural transfers to meet future needs on the East Slope and West Slope
• Increase conservation• Increase reuse of consumable supplies• Utilize Colorado River System supplies on West
Slope and East Slope
63
• IPPs - 60 to 70 Percent Statewide Success Rate• Conservation - 20 to 25 Percent off of 2008 Demand• 350,000 Acre-Feet from Colorado River System (142kaf for East
Slope and 208kaf for West Slope)• Ag Transfers to Meet Remaining Demands• Reuse of Fully Consumable Water
65
M&I Needs Statewide West Slope North Platte/Rio Grande
M&I Water Needs (AFY) 1,021,000 262,000 11,100SSI Water Needs (AFY) 84,000 45,000 0Oil Shale Water Needs (AFY) 61,000 61,000 0
Total M&I Needs (AFY) 1,166,000 368,000 11,100
StrategiesPassive Conservation 102,000 13,000 1,400IPPs (AFY) 363,000 95,000 3,900Active Conservation (AFY) 119,000 52,000 1,300Landuse (AFY) 35,000 0 35,000 0New Supply Development (AFY) 350,000 208,000 0
Reuse (AFY) 96,000 0 0New Supply Development Sub-Total (AFY) 446,000 208,000 0
Ag Transfer (AFY) 62,000 0 4,400Reuse (AFY) 39,000 0 0
Ag Transfer Sub-Total (AFY) 101,000 0 4,400
Reduction in Irrigated Acres (percent) 8% 7% 1%12% Arkansas17% South Platte
Reduction in Irrigated Acres (acres) 219,000 31,077 182,300 5,60039,400 Arkansas
142,900 South Platte
Colorado River Depletions (MAF) 0.284 MAF (New) 2.918 MAF (Total)NOTE: There may be some discrepancies in totals due to rounding.
16%
East Slope
264,000
748,000
0787,000
66,000
39,000
238,000
97,000
87,000
142,00096,000
58,00039,000
S
SR
PCLA
TR
CA
N
AR
Next StepsNext Steps
Further refinement of Further refinement of mid-demand/mid-mid-demand/mid-supply portfoliossupply portfolios-Can we agree on a portfolio?-Can we agree on a portfolio?
Development of Development of portfolios for other portfolios for other scenariosscenarios-Are there common elements -Are there common elements
between portfolios?between portfolios?
6666
6767
On-Going Technical Support
M&I DemandsM&I Demands
CWCB Staff have gathered comments on CWCB Staff have gathered comments on M&I Demands to 2050 reportM&I Demands to 2050 report
CWCB will respond to comments and CWCB will respond to comments and revise report 2revise report 2ndnd quarter of next year quarter of next year
Report will be included as an appendix to Report will be included as an appendix to statewide update of consumptive and statewide update of consumptive and nonconsumptive needs – October 2010nonconsumptive needs – October 2010
6868
Nonconsumptive Focus Areas Nonconsumptive Focus Areas MappingMapping
CWCB Staff have gathered feedback on CWCB Staff have gathered feedback on reportreport
CWCB will respond to comments and CWCB will respond to comments and revise reportrevise report
Report will be included as a section in the Report will be included as a section in the statewide update of consumptive and statewide update of consumptive and nonconsumptive needs – October 2010nonconsumptive needs – October 2010
6969
Nonconsumptive Projects and Nonconsumptive Projects and MethodsMethods
CWCB will examine past studies:CWCB will examine past studies:– Existing studies and plans by "ISF recommending entities"Existing studies and plans by "ISF recommending entities"– Watershed restoration plans and flood DSS for identified Watershed restoration plans and flood DSS for identified
restoration projectsrestoration projects– Other relevant restoration and quantification studies, plans Other relevant restoration and quantification studies, plans
and processesand processes– Other WSRA funded studies or Basin Roundtable StudiesOther WSRA funded studies or Basin Roundtable Studies
Information will be summarized by focus areaInformation will be summarized by focus areaResults will be included in statewide update of Results will be included in statewide update of consumptive and nonconsumptive needs – October consumptive and nonconsumptive needs – October 20102010
7070
Agricultural shortagesAgricultural shortages
CWCB will update the agricultural shortages CWCB will update the agricultural shortages from SWSI 1 from SWSI 1
CWCB will summarize results of Yampa and CWCB will summarize results of Yampa and Gunnison Agricultural WSRA studiesGunnison Agricultural WSRA studies
CWCB will review information with roundtables CWCB will review information with roundtables 11stst and 2 and 2ndnd quarter 2010 quarter 2010
Information will be included in statewide update Information will be included in statewide update – October 2010– October 2010
CWCB will also review the Alternative CWCB will also review the Alternative Agricultural Transfer Methods Grant ProjectsAgricultural Transfer Methods Grant Projects
7171
Consumptive Gap AnalysisConsumptive Gap Analysis
CWCB will update M&I gap analysis from SWSI CWCB will update M&I gap analysis from SWSI 1 using updated IPP database1 using updated IPP database
CWCB will update agricultural shortages CWCB will update agricultural shortages statewide statewide
CWCB will review information with roundtables CWCB will review information with roundtables 11stst and 2 and 2ndnd quarter 2010 quarter 2010
Information will be included in report updating Information will be included in report updating consumptive and nonconsumptive needs consumptive and nonconsumptive needs statewide – October 2010statewide – October 2010
7272
Report summarizing needs Report summarizing needs assessments (October, 2010)assessments (October, 2010)
CWCB will provide update of statewide CWCB will provide update of statewide consumptive and nonconsumptive needs based consumptive and nonconsumptive needs based on recent reports and Basin Roundtable Needs on recent reports and Basin Roundtable Needs Assessment effortsAssessment efforts
Target completion date of report is October 2010Target completion date of report is October 2010
7373
7474
QuestionsQuestionsEric HecoxEric Hecox
[email protected]@state.co.us
Colorado's Water Supply Future
Where do we go from here?Where do we go from here?By Mike ShimminBy Mike Shimmin
Mid-range gap in 2050 = 360,000 af/yrMid-range gap in 2050 = 360,000 af/yr
Virtually no new water left to develop in Virtually no new water left to develop in SPRSPR
What options are there to meet gap?What options are there to meet gap?
Basic optionsBasic options
Work to get the IPPs builtWork to get the IPPs built
Implement more M & I conservation Implement more M & I conservation measures measures
Develop new water rights from the Develop new water rights from the Colorado RiverColorado River
Large-scale dry-up of irrigated agriculture Large-scale dry-up of irrigated agriculture (25-44%)(25-44%)
Comparative Analysis of Comparative Analysis of South Platte Agricultural South Platte Agricultural
Economics Economics
By Bill JerkeBy Bill Jerke
#8 Larimer$101million
#1 Weld$1,100million
#3 Morgan$448million
#4 Logan$380million
#2 Yuma$543million
#9 Adams$448million
#5 Kit Carson$206million
#7 Otero$106million
#6 Prowers$183million
#10 Alamosa$95million
70% of StateAg Production
Top 10AgriculturalProductionCounties
Agricultural Products Sold: By County Agricultural Products Sold: By County
In the worst drought in 300 years, 2002, In the worst drought in 300 years, 2002, Colorado produced 4.5 billion dollars in Colorado produced 4.5 billion dollars in Agricultural products sold. Agricultural products sold.
Seven of the top ten producing counties in Seven of the top ten producing counties in Colorado were in the South Platte Basin. Colorado were in the South Platte Basin.
Irrigated Acres by BasinIrrigated Acres by Basin
South Platte: 1,027,000 South Platte: 1,027,000 Greater Colorado Combined: 875,000Greater Colorado Combined: 875,000Rio Grande: 633,000Rio Grande: 633,000Arkansas: 405,000Arkansas: 405,000North Platte: 116,000North Platte: 116,000
These numbers come from the SWSI Study. I have taken the liberty, at These numbers come from the SWSI Study. I have taken the liberty, at great risk to myself, of combining the Colorado River and it’s tributaries. County lines great risk to myself, of combining the Colorado River and it’s tributaries. County lines don’t always follow basin and tributary boundaries. To keep it as easy to follow as don’t always follow basin and tributary boundaries. To keep it as easy to follow as possible combining some systems and areas seemed prudent. possible combining some systems and areas seemed prudent.
The South Platte’s irrigated acreage includes the Republican River The South Platte’s irrigated acreage includes the Republican River because there is no other logical place to put it. because there is no other logical place to put it.
Agricultural Products Sold: By BasinAgricultural Products Sold: By Basin
Basin Dollars PercentBasin Dollars PercentSouth Platte: $3,186,000,000 70%South Platte: $3,186,000,000 70%Greater Colorado Combined: $304,000,000 6%Greater Colorado Combined: $304,000,000 6%Rio Grande: $299,000,000 6% Rio Grande: $299,000,000 6% Arkansas: $692,000,000 15%Arkansas: $692,000,000 15%North Platte: $ 16,000,000 >1%North Platte: $ 16,000,000 >1%
The South Platte sales speak for themselves!The South Platte sales speak for themselves!
Number of Dollars Generated Per Irrigated Number of Dollars Generated Per Irrigated Acre by BasinAcre by Basin
Basins: Products Sold: Irrigated Acres: Dollars Per Acre:
South Platte $3,186,000,000 1,027,000 $3,102
Greater Colorado:
$304,000,000 875,000 $347
Rio Grande: $299,000,000 633,000 $472
Arkansas: $692,000,000 405,000 $1,709
North Platte: $16,000,000 116,000 $138
Acre Feet Diverted By BasinAcre Feet Diverted By Basin
Basin Acre Ft. DivertedBasin Acre Ft. Diverted
South Platte 2,545,000South Platte 2,545,000
Greater Colorado 5,277,000Greater Colorado 5,277,000
Rio Grande 1,619,000Rio Grande 1,619,000
Arkansas 1,770,000Arkansas 1,770,000
North Platte 397,000North Platte 397,000
First RT observationFirst RT observation
Large-scale dry-up of irrigated agriculture Large-scale dry-up of irrigated agriculture has major adverse economic impacts has major adverse economic impacts
Dry-up of ag lands also has major Dry-up of ag lands also has major environmental impacts, since much of the environmental impacts, since much of the SPR environment was created by return SPR environment was created by return flows from irrigationflows from irrigation
This is not a good option for the basin (or This is not a good option for the basin (or the state)the state)
Second RT observationSecond RT observation
Success of IPPs is important to meeting Success of IPPs is important to meeting the gapthe gap
To the extent they are not successful, To the extent they are not successful, other options will have to take their place other options will have to take their place (ag dry-up seems to be the most likely (ag dry-up seems to be the most likely candidate)candidate)
Third RT observationThird RT observation
Additional water conservation efforts are Additional water conservation efforts are crucial, but will not alone be enoughcrucial, but will not alone be enough
Dec. IBCC meeting seemed to generate Dec. IBCC meeting seemed to generate some consensus that 30% savings from some consensus that 30% savings from 2000 usage rates needs to (and can) be 2000 usage rates needs to (and can) be achieved for new developmentachieved for new development
This could yield about 87,000 af/yr (30% of This could yield about 87,000 af/yr (30% of 290,000 af new mid-range demand)290,000 af new mid-range demand)
Fourth RT observationFourth RT observation
We need to develop whatever available We need to develop whatever available water remains in the Colorado River basinwater remains in the Colorado River basin
Studies underway to calculate how much Studies underway to calculate how much there isthere is
To achieve this, we need cooperation and To achieve this, we need cooperation and water sharing with the West Slopewater sharing with the West Slope
Fourth RT observation Fourth RT observation (continued)(continued)
This will result only if we have ongoing This will result only if we have ongoing dialogue and some mechanism for dialogue and some mechanism for cooperationcooperation
IBCC and Roundtables are meeting this IBCC and Roundtables are meeting this needneed
Fifth RT observationFifth RT observation
We need a closer connection and better We need a closer connection and better coordination between land use planning coordination between land use planning and water supply planningand water supply planning
This should happen at the local gov’t levelThis should happen at the local gov’t level
RT needs your input and helpRT needs your input and help
Thoughts and reactions to our Thoughts and reactions to our observations?observations?
New ideas?New ideas?
Support for state funding of IBCC and Support for state funding of IBCC and Roundtable processRoundtable process
End of PresentationEnd of Presentation