Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

HomeNewsLocal News

Groups back bills to boost flows in state waterways

Published January 31, 2008 at 12:30 a.m.

Text size  

Environmentalists and outdoor recreation interests on Wednesday endorsed a package of bills designed to make it easier to leave water in Colorado's streams and rivers.

Citing the report, "Healthy Rivers, Healthy Economy" funded by the group Environmental Defense, proponents of the bills said a slight increase in water flows in the state would generate another $4.4 million in recreational spending and create 340 more jobs in the rafting and fishing business.

But keeping water in its rivers has long been a challenge for Colorado. More than a century of state water law has put a higher priority on using the water for farms, utilities and homes than for kayaks, fish and scenic beauty.

That has started to change in the past decade. Environmentalists, the outfitting industry and local communities have put a higher premium on "in-stream flows" in waterways that are sometimes depleted by the demands of agriculture and other uses.

"Offering ranchers, farmers and cities more freedom to leave their water in local rivers and streams benefits our quality of life, environment and the Colorado economy," said Dan Grossman, regional director for Environmental Defense.

Depleting streams also has created problems for wastewater treatment plants. The Fraser River, for example, runs so low at times that there's not enough water to dilute the treated wastewater, making it harder for sewage operators to comply with environmental laws protecting water quality.

The bills, backed by a coalition of interest groups, wastewater officials and outdoor suppliers, are designed to remove legal bottlenecks to keeping water in rivers. The bills include:

* Measures that make it easier for ranchers, farmers and other water-right holders to contract with the Colorado Water Conservation Board to leave their water in streams without jeopardizing their rights to the water.

* Creation of a $1 million fund to assist the state with purchase of water rights to keep healthy water flows in streams. Currently, the state relies on voluntary donations of water rights.

* Creation of tax incentives for water-right owners who leave their water in local streams and rivers.

Comments

  • January 31, 2008

    5:57 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    forwhatitis writes:

    Boy, the wording here is critical. Making it easier for owners of water rights to keep their water in rivers and streams. How the hell do you keep your water in rivers and streams and prevent it from flowing downstream and eventually out of our state? What a crock!!! And I'm sure that the city's water customers would also face higher water prices and restrictions because all of our water was "kept" in the rivers and streams instead of our reserviors? This is a joke and is nothing more than special interest trying to get what they want at the detriment of all the water users in our state.

  • January 31, 2008

    8:15 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jbowen43 writes:

    The state should buy water rights and then sell the water to downstream users when it can do so without harming the river. Flows adequate for a healthy river are necessary.

  • January 31, 2008

    9:46 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Growthbuster writes:

    This is a big step in the right direction. Water flowing in the rivers is where it belongs. If it flows out of state, that's a good thing. If it makes it all the way to the ocean, that's even better. It's as nature intended, and the less we do to interfere with it, the better. We've pulled enough water out of the natural flow. It's time to say "enough," and realize that acting sustainably means we acknowledge we've hit the limit of water development (population growth) in the state.

    Dave Gardner
    Producer/Director
    Hooked on Growth: Our Misguided Quest for Prosperity
    www.growthbusters.com