DENVER – The state’s top water official is urging calm after some on the Western Slope raised fears that a proposed strategy for the future of water in Colorado may include transmountain diversion plans.
Development of Colorado’s Water Plan – stemming from more than 10 years of conversations – has been relatively smooth and collaborative up until the last week. A group from the Western Slope on Tuesday delivered a petition to Gov. John Hickenlooper urging his opposition to any transmountain diversions that would take water from Western Colorado for use along the Front Range.
James Eklund, director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board – and a key Water Plan stakeholder – has found himself puzzled by the petition, signed by nearly 1,500 Western Slope residents.
For one thing, Eklund pointed out that the plan deliberately does not prescribe policy, instead outlining goals to conserve 400,000 acre-feet of water. The goals, however, could lead to policy, which has always been the intent of the Water Plan.
“We’ve always said that we’re not going to name any projects in the plan, and we continue to say that,” Eklund said.
The plan focuses on conservation, storage, agriculture, land use, water gaps, innovation, funding, the environment and watershed health.
“We have to talk about all those topics and really put in measurable objectives so people can judge for themselves whether or not we’re being successful in implementing this plan,” Eklund said.
Some Western Slope interests worry after large Front Range municipalities pushed officials to include transmountain diversion in the plan, which is expected to be submitted to the governor Nov. 19.
“The simple truth is that the Western Slope in Colorado has no more water to give,” said Michael Langhorne, president of the Rifle Regional Economic Development Corporation and a member of Citizens For West Slope Water. “The impacts of additional transmountain diversions to the Front Range would be an economic disaster for us.”
Many of the demands outlined by the Western Slope interests already are included in the Water Plan, including focusing on storage and delivery innovations, considering agricultural needs and prioritizing conservation.
The Western Slope supplies more than 500,000 acre-feet of water per year to the Front Range, according to Citizens For West Slope Water. A concern is that water storage should not come at a disadvantage to the Western Slope, with interests pointing to potential shortfalls by 2050 given Front range growth.
One of the hopes with the Water Plan is to avoid contentious West versus East fights that have long plagued water discussions in Colorado. Eklund remains optimistic, despite the recent divisiveness.
“It’s value added to the Front Range and it’s value added to the Western Slope to have the discussion laid out in front of everybody before the deal gets done,” Eklund said.
