- About WIP
- Participating Entities
- Animas-La Plata Water Conservancy District
- Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority
- Empire Electric Association
- Florida Water Conservancy District
- Harris Water Engineering
- High Desert Conservation District
- Dolores Water Conservancy District
- La Plata Archuleta Water District
- La Plata Electric Association
- La Plata Water Conservancy District
- La Plata West Water Authority
- Mancos Conservation District
- Montezuma Valley Irrigation Company
- Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD)
- Pine River Irrigation District
- San Juan Water Conservancy District
- Southwestern Water Conservation District
- Town of Silverton
- Town of Telluride
- Regional Water Projects
- Animas-La Plata Project (Lake Nighthorse)
- Animas River Stakeholders
- Cloud Seeding Program
- Dolores Project (McPhee Reservoir)
- Dry Gulch Reservoir (Pending)
- Florida Project (Lemon Reservoir)
- Mancos Project (Jackson Gulch Reservoir)
- Long Hollow Reservoir
- Pine River Project (Vallecito Reservoir)
- Rio Blanco Restoration Project
- River Protection Work Group
- Water Information
- Contact WIP
Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District
Local officials still are skeptical of pending legislation that would establish a flex marketing water right. The bill, HB1026, as introduced would have allowed agricultural water to be used anywhere, any time and for any purpose, apparently in contradiction of the state’s anti-speculation doctrine.
The water buffaloes are relentless in their devious pursuit of easier, quicker ways to take Colorado’s irrigated agricultural water and market it to the urban Front Range. If they have their way, these voracious urban-suburban interests would destroy rural communities while fueling lucrative but unwise population growth up north.
A time-out from Arkansas Valley surface irrigation rules is unlikely, even though farmers say they’re paying for water they’re not even using. At this week’s meeting of the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District, Dale Mauch, a Lamar farmer on the Fort Lyon Canal, asked State Engineer Dick Wolfe if the 2010 surface irrigation rules could be s
November 21, 2011--The Pueblo Chieftain, on estimates about the state's future water needs (Journal Advocate)
W hen Colorado water buffaloes tried to estimate the state's future water needs, they only looked at what they thought municipal and industrial users might need in the future. They paid scant attention to agriculture, except to accept the orthodoxy that ag water would be the source of the resource for cities. But wait a minute.
The benefits of a potential summer aerial cloud-seeding program in the Lower Arkansas Valley were explored last week by a district charged with keeping water in the basin. Cloud-seeding, using silver iodide crystals fired from ground cannons, is already widely used in Colorado.
The nagging suspicion that the state may be trying to solve the wrong water problem crept up again at this month’s meeting of the Arkansas Basin Roundtable. “We’ve established that there is a need for municipal and industrial water by 2050, and it’s a discussion point at a very high level in the state,” said Reeves Brown, a Beulah rancher who also sits on the
The Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District board has lingering concerns about whether seep ditches should be curtailed by the state engineer, following a meeting last month. “It has been OK for 100 years. It does not seem right.
After three years of work, the state is close to implementing rules limiting the increase of consumptive use from surface irrigation improvements. Still, farmers do not understand why the rules are needed and feel the state is not doing enough to truly help them.
In nearly every Water Court case in the Arkansas River basin, the state Division of Water Resources finds itself in court. Usually, the state is an objector, attempting to make sure the water rights of other water users are not injured when a new application for how water is used is processed by the court.
The cumulative impacts of water sales to cities from farms are greater than traditional economic models show, a new study on rural “tipping points” claims. “The discussion has been, ‘What really happens when you have a dry-up of ag land?’ ’’ said Peter Nichols, water attorney for the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District.