Will well ruling quench water woes for Colorado ag producers?
Will well ruling quench water woes for Colorado ag producers?
A decision by Colorado District 1 Water Court Judge Roger Klein to accept a water augmentation plan submitted by the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District has given agricultural producers in northeast Colorado some cause for hope. But the million-dollar question remains: Will the Oct. 19 decision give producers in the drought-stricken state the necessary water resources to bring in crops in 2008?
Following a 30-day trial in Water Court in Greeley, CO, Judge Klein issued a 101-page document outlining his decision after four months of deliberation. The judge's decision revolved around sufficiency of water supply, replacement sources and use of augmentation wells.
Kathy Parker, public affairs assistant for the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District in Greeley, offered a cautiously optimistic response. "We like that this order will give well owners a chance to pump and will allow us to build on the plan," she told The Produce News.
Her message, however, was tempered with a caveat. Agricultural producers that do not have water augmentation plans in place will either have to purchase these rights or do without water in 2008.
Seventeen months ago, wells were ordered to shut down because 30 objectors stated that water augmentation plans did not show that sufficient water would be returned to the South Platte River. According to the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, continued drought conditions in the state reduced water flows in the river, and those with senior water rights contended that junior water-right holders were injuring them as a result through the taking of water.
Initially, the district's water augmentation plan covered a total of 440 wells, but that number dropped to the current 215 wells in the South Platte Basin covered in Judge Klein's decision.
Owners of the wells were prohibited from pumping water to irrigate crops, and last year the shutdowns were ordered after a number of producers had already planted crops. "Historically, this is the first time we've had so many wells ordered to cease pumping," Ms. Parker stated.
Colorado producers continued to feel the effects of severe drought, and Ms. Parker said that conditions in 2002 were the worst in 200 years. She said that ongoing water depletions in the South Platte River continued to grow without adequate recharge. Although the Centennial State experienced higher levels of precipitation this past winter, Ms. Parker said that runoff volume was not sufficient to turn around the water deficit.
The water district and the Riverside Irrigation Co., also located in Greeley, filed two motions for reconsideration following Judge Klein's decision based upon projections for diversions for water recharge and storage, Ms. Parker said. Key to the motions is the issue of well priority dates.
"We feel the date should be the actual date" wells were brought into the priority system, Ms. Parker explained. Judge Klein's decision was based upon a 2003 water priority entry date.
Some objectors have filed against the motions for reconsideration, and briefs addressing the motions were filed last week. Ms. Parker said that the water district will have until mid-December to respond to the issues that have been raised by objectors.
"We're projecting the court will issue an order on all motions in mid- February," Ms. Parker said, adding that the court could take a number of actions such as accepting or denying the motions for reconsideration or requesting the submission of additional information.
"We're hoping by [March] to have a final decree," Ms. Parker indicated. "This coming spring, [agricultural producers] will be on firmer ground knowing what they can pump."
As the water augmentation plan currently stands, Ms. Parker said all members of the water augmentation sub-district will be on an equal footing. The Colorado Department of Natural Resources is requiring junior water users to submit water augmentation plans. "Some well owners are getting plans on their own. Others are looking to ditch companies," Ms. Parker said. Producers may also purchase augmentation water from the district.
When asked about the cost to purchase an augmentation plan, she responded, "For most growers, it's prohibitive for them to get their own augmentation plans."
The court case pitted senior water right holders -- many of them representing urban interests -- against junior water right holders such as agricultural producers. As for the general reaction of agricultural producers to the decision, Ms. Parker said, "They're encouraged the judge ruled so favorably on many issues. But they realize there is a long road ahead."
Ms. Parker acknowledged that the atmosphere has been contentious at times. But she added, "We've been getting some wonderful offers of cooperation [since the decision was issued]. A lot of people feel for our growers. It's a real change to see some cooperation."
Agricultural producers are not the only entities to be affected by well shutdowns and the need for augmentation water. According to Ms. Parker, the list of well users also includes nurseries, a homeowners association and a school district that needs to water its football field.
Once a final decree is issued, a meeting will be held in Evans, CO, in February or March to discuss details with well owners, Ms. Parker said. "Keep the faith," she went on to say. "Central is working closely to get the maximum benefit for our water users."
Following a 30-day trial in Water Court in Greeley, CO, Judge Klein issued a 101-page document outlining his decision after four months of deliberation. The judge's decision revolved around sufficiency of water supply, replacement sources and use of augmentation wells.
Kathy Parker, public affairs assistant for the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District in Greeley, offered a cautiously optimistic response. "We like that this order will give well owners a chance to pump and will allow us to build on the plan," she told The Produce News.
Her message, however, was tempered with a caveat. Agricultural producers that do not have water augmentation plans in place will either have to purchase these rights or do without water in 2008.
Seventeen months ago, wells were ordered to shut down because 30 objectors stated that water augmentation plans did not show that sufficient water would be returned to the South Platte River. According to the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, continued drought conditions in the state reduced water flows in the river, and those with senior water rights contended that junior water-right holders were injuring them as a result through the taking of water.
Initially, the district's water augmentation plan covered a total of 440 wells, but that number dropped to the current 215 wells in the South Platte Basin covered in Judge Klein's decision.
Owners of the wells were prohibited from pumping water to irrigate crops, and last year the shutdowns were ordered after a number of producers had already planted crops. "Historically, this is the first time we've had so many wells ordered to cease pumping," Ms. Parker stated.
Colorado producers continued to feel the effects of severe drought, and Ms. Parker said that conditions in 2002 were the worst in 200 years. She said that ongoing water depletions in the South Platte River continued to grow without adequate recharge. Although the Centennial State experienced higher levels of precipitation this past winter, Ms. Parker said that runoff volume was not sufficient to turn around the water deficit.
The water district and the Riverside Irrigation Co., also located in Greeley, filed two motions for reconsideration following Judge Klein's decision based upon projections for diversions for water recharge and storage, Ms. Parker said. Key to the motions is the issue of well priority dates.
"We feel the date should be the actual date" wells were brought into the priority system, Ms. Parker explained. Judge Klein's decision was based upon a 2003 water priority entry date.
Some objectors have filed against the motions for reconsideration, and briefs addressing the motions were filed last week. Ms. Parker said that the water district will have until mid-December to respond to the issues that have been raised by objectors.
"We're projecting the court will issue an order on all motions in mid- February," Ms. Parker said, adding that the court could take a number of actions such as accepting or denying the motions for reconsideration or requesting the submission of additional information.
"We're hoping by [March] to have a final decree," Ms. Parker indicated. "This coming spring, [agricultural producers] will be on firmer ground knowing what they can pump."
As the water augmentation plan currently stands, Ms. Parker said all members of the water augmentation sub-district will be on an equal footing. The Colorado Department of Natural Resources is requiring junior water users to submit water augmentation plans. "Some well owners are getting plans on their own. Others are looking to ditch companies," Ms. Parker said. Producers may also purchase augmentation water from the district.
When asked about the cost to purchase an augmentation plan, she responded, "For most growers, it's prohibitive for them to get their own augmentation plans."
The court case pitted senior water right holders -- many of them representing urban interests -- against junior water right holders such as agricultural producers. As for the general reaction of agricultural producers to the decision, Ms. Parker said, "They're encouraged the judge ruled so favorably on many issues. But they realize there is a long road ahead."
Ms. Parker acknowledged that the atmosphere has been contentious at times. But she added, "We've been getting some wonderful offers of cooperation [since the decision was issued]. A lot of people feel for our growers. It's a real change to see some cooperation."
Agricultural producers are not the only entities to be affected by well shutdowns and the need for augmentation water. According to Ms. Parker, the list of well users also includes nurseries, a homeowners association and a school district that needs to water its football field.
Once a final decree is issued, a meeting will be held in Evans, CO, in February or March to discuss details with well owners, Ms. Parker said. "Keep the faith," she went on to say. "Central is working closely to get the maximum benefit for our water users."
