Water Ambassador booklet

Background Literature for Water Ambassadors

Written and Compiled by:
Jacob Bornstein for:

Douglas County Water Resource Authority’s
2009 Water Ambassador Program

Copyright © 2009 Douglas County Water Resource Authority
All Rights Reserved

Please visit out website at: www.dcwater.org

The purpose of this document is to supplement the PowerPoint presentation Water
Ambassadors receive during training. Rather than repeat the information provided
there, this document provides further background information that will be useful in
understanding the backdrop of water issues in the arid American West, Colorado,
the South Platte River Basin, and Douglas County regions.

Background Document Outline  DCWRA  January 3, 2009
Page 2 of 35

Section I. Water in the Arid American West:

A. Weather in the Arid West
Water in the Arid American West is markedly different than in the eastern half of the country or
in the coastal northwest regions. Because rainfall is, on average, less than 15 inches per year,
water scarcity is a fact of life for many communities across this region (see figure 1). There are
some areas that receive higher levels of precipitation, notably in the Rocky Mountains. The
Rocky Mountain’s towering peaks force clouds and air upwards. As air masses gain elevation,
they lose the ability to hold moisture. The moisture is forced to fall as precipitation, often in the
form of snow. This pattern casts a ―weather shadow‖ on the flatter areas of the region, leaving
little moisture left in the air to fall elsewhere. On average, Castle Rock receives 17.34‖ of
precipitation annually.
White snow reflects the sun’s rays, reducing evaporation. In the spring and summer months, as
temperatures increase, the snow melts and can be used for storage in mountain reservoirs, by
municipalities, in industry, for hydropower plants, for agriculture, and also to support aquatic life
and recreational activities. Temperature fluctuations affect the timing of the snow melt and the
amount of precipitation lost to evaporation.

Continental
Divide

Figure 1: Average annual precipitation in the United States of America.

Precipitation in the United States in measured by ―water year.‖ This begins October 1st every
year. One way to track snowpack, precipitation, and how full storage reservoirs are on a daily,
monthly, and historical basis in the western United States is to visit
www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/partnerships/links_wsfs.html. Another site that tracks temperature and
precipitation highs and lows in the form of an interactive map is www.wrcc.dri.edu/coopmap/
DCWRA  www.dcwater.org  dcwater.org@gmail.com
NOTE: This document is not to be reproduced or shared without the express written consent of DCWRA.
Copyright© 2009 DCWRA All rights reserved.

Page 3 of 35

(see figure 2). These tools are helpful in understanding where our water resources are currently
at and how we can compare them to historical levels.

Figure 2: Example of precipitation and temperature stations, as represented on Western US COOP.

B. Geology of the American West
It took billions of years to lay the layers of rocks, minerals, mountains, and canyons that make
up the American West. This geological history has made the region rich in natural resources,
from gold and silver to coal and natural gas. It also made the West one of the most beautiful
regions in the world, sculpting the great Rocky Mountains and the Grand Canyon. Much of
human history and current natural resource management in the region can be seen through the
light of how humans interact with the effects of geology. Examples include the laws that shape
how the west manages water, our weather, mining, or growing energy development.
One way to study geology is to imagine cross
sections of rock layered on top of each other.
Each of these layers was deposited during
different periods of the earth’s history.
Geologists date those rocks to understand the
history of the landscape. In some cases,
canyons or cliffs can expose these layers of
rock (see figure 3). In other cases such history
needs to be discovered by drilling deep into the
ground and taking core samples. Below is a
cross section of one area of the Grand Canyon Figure 3: The Colorado River has cut its channel
(see figure 4). From the rocks, geologists can through layers of limestone, shale, granite and
tell when oceans covered much of North schist to form the Grand Canyon.
America, when there was volcanic activity, and Credit: Ian, Kelly & Kaitlyn Tullberg
through fossils found in the rocks, what
organisms populated the region at that time.


Page 4 of 35

Figure 4. Cross section of the Grand Canyon. Copyright © Bob Ribokas.

The geological timeline (see figure 5) helps us understand why there are rich reserves of coal,
gas, and oil, which can be used for energy. It helps us understand where uranium or copper can
be mined, or why pollutants like selenium may exist in our soils and leach into our waterways.
The geology of the region has formed rivers for rafting and kayaking, and many different types
of fish, insect, and avian habitats. It is the basis for where towns and cities formed, and how
they get their water, whether from snowmelt or utilizing ―fossil‖ water trapped in underground
aquifers. The richness of resources leads to many competing uses for the land, but across the
arid American West, the limiting factor is water, or rather a lack of it. The shallow seas and
swamps that once existed in the West are long gone, and now the beneficial uses for water,
such as agriculture, municipal (e.g. water for households), energy, environmental, and
recreational, often exceed the amount of water that is available.


Page 5 of 35

Period Era Ma*

Trilobite

Figure 5: Timeline of the earth’s history, with relevant life and how many million years ago (Ma*) they
existed. Source: Ancient Denver.

While this is not the place to discuss geology of the Western United States in depth, it is
important to understand how important the geology we find ourselves in continues to shape
policy and the natural world around us.


Page 6 of 35

Energy Resources Highlight
Many millions of years ago, the plant and animal life in
the west lay down major energy reserves in the United
States. The Department of Energy indicates that ―One
quarter of the world’s coal reserves are found within
the United States, and the energy content of the
nation’s coal resources exceeds that of all the world’s
known recoverable oil…. Coal [supplies] more than
half the electricity consumed by Americans.‖ Western
coal is the largest producing area in the U.S., and the
only one in 2007 to increase production, while other
regional production declined (see figure 6).
According to the Wyoming Geological Survey,
―Western coals were formed between 100 and 45
million years ago in two completely different types of
swamps. The earlier coal swamps (100 to 65 ma) Figure 6. Coal Production by Coal-Producing
were marginal to the Cretaceous Epeiric Sea much Region, 2007 (Million Short Tons and Percent
like the eastern swamps were some 200 million years Change from 2006). Regional totals do not include
earlier. These are the coals of Utah, Colorado, and refuse recovery.
western Wyoming. The younger western coals (65 to Source: Energy Information Administration,
45 ma) originated in intermontane valley swamps in Quarterly Coal Report, October-December 2007,
eastern Wyoming and SE Montana far removed from DOE/EIA-0121(2007/Q4) (Washington, DC, March
any marine influence.‖ 2008).
This rich reserve of coal also produces natural gas in the form of methane. For instance, the Piceance
Basin in Colorado holds vast quantities of methane in the seams of its coal formations, representing one
nd
of the largest natural gas reserves in the United States. (Colorado is 2 , after New Mexico, in U.S.
coalbed methane production.) Extraction of coalbed methane involves removal of groundwater to release
the gas.
A much more water intensive energy extraction process is oil shale. Combined, these resources are
already causing an energy boom in Western Colorado. For instance there are now 4,100 operating
natural gas wells in Garfield County, and 2,600 permits for additional wells were issued in 2007. There
were very few wells there until 1999. It is expected that by 2035, there will be approximately 40,000 wells
in the region.
Energy takes water. While only 0.2 acre-feet of water produces enough natural gas to run an entire home
for a year and less than 50 gallons on average to produce a ton of coal, it takes about 5 barrels of water
(including indirect demand) to produce just one barrel of oil from oil shale. An active energy economy
based on oil shale could produce about 1.55 million barrels of oil per day, which would require 378,310
acre-feet of water per year, or enough for about 1.6 million people.
Help offset these impacts. Save water, save energy. It is estimated that 19% of all electricity is used to
move water.

Energy Facts from ColoradoProspects.com:

 Oil - Colorado produced 20 million barrels of crude oil in 2005, ranking the state 11th in the country in
the production of crude oil. As of 2004, Colorado had the 11th highest proved reserves in the nation
with 225 million barrels. (U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, 2006)
 Coal - Colorado produced nearly 40 million short tons of coal in 2004. Colorado has the seventh
highest coal production of any state. (U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration,
2006)
 Natural Gas - Colorado is home to over 465 million barrels of natural gas liquids in reserve. Colorado
has the fourth highest reserves in the nation. (U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information
Administration, 2006)
 Colorado is one of 18 states with a renewable energy portfolio standard (RPS). As of 2004, only
2.68% of Colorado's total energy was generated  dcwater.org@gmail.com
DCWRA  www.dcwater.org from renewable sources. Amendment 37, passed in
November 2004, requires that Colorado reproduced10% by 2015. the express written consent of DCWRA.
NOTE: This document is not to be
achieve or shared without
 Solar Energy - Colorado and the southwest portion of the country offer solar quality of betweenreserved.
Copyright© 2009 DCWRA All rights 5000 and
7000 watt hours per square meter per day. (U.S. Department of Energy, 2006)
 Wind – Colorado is 11th in the U.S. for wind energy potential in 2004. (American Wind Energy Association, 2006)
 Biomass - Colorado could likely produce 5.2 billion Kwh from biomass. (U.S. Department of Energy, 2006)

Page 7 of 35

C. History and western water law
When settlers came to the east coast, they found that the
easiest way to manage their water resources was by tying
water rights and land ownership together. Water is owned by
the landowner that has water flowing through or adjacent to his
or her property. This type of law is called the ―Riparian
Doctrine.‖
If that law were to be applied to the Arid American West, there
would be vast tracts of land that could not be used. The
Puebloans in 750 A.D. were the first in Colorado to overcome
these arid limitations by building reservoirs in areas with rich
soils but fleeting water resources. They used the reservoirs to
water their maize crops. In the 1800’s, Hispanic settlers began
using community ditches, known as Acequias, in New Mexico
and the Rio Grande valley in Colorado. The very first water
right in Colorado, the people’s ditch, dates back to 1852.
From 1850-1875 seven western states and territories, either
through laws or high court rulings, adopted the
―appropriation doctrine,‖ which was founded on common law Figure 7: Collier #167. Hydraulic mining
established in mining camps. During the gold rush, miners uses hoses carrying high pressure water
established rules of discovery, giving ownership of the mine to spray gravel deposits, which washes
to the first person that discovered it and began mining it. all but the largest rocks into sluice boxes
where gold is recovered. Water came
Because of the aridity of the west, water did not always exist
from two ditches that carried water from
where it was needed to mine, and the same rule of the Fall River to Russell Gulch, a
appropriation was applied: ―first in time, first in right.‖ Such distance of twelve miles. The Russell
common law practices were first upheld in 1857 by brothers built the Consolidated Ditch
California’s Supreme Court. One of the best explanations of Company at a cost of $100,000.00 in
that period was written in 1879 by Supreme Court Justice 1860. Source: Keller Colorado Mining
Field who was formerly the California Chief Supreme Court Photographic Collection
Justice:
In every district which [miners] occupied they framed certain rules for their government, by which the
extent of ground they could severally hold for mining was designated, their possessory right to such
ground secured and enforced, and contests between them either avoided or determined. These rules
bore a marked similarity, varying in the several districts only according to the extent and character of
the mines; distinct provisions being made for different kinds of mining, such as placer mining, quartz
mining, and mining in drifts or tunnels. They all recognized discovery, followed by appropriation, as
the foundation of the possessor’s title, and development by working as the condition of its retention.
And they were so framed as to secure to all comers within practicable limits absolute equality of right
and privilege in working the mines. Nothing but such equality would have been tolerated by the
miners, who were emphatically the law-makers, as respects to mining, upon the public lands in the
state. The first appropriator was everywhere held to have, within certain well-defined limits, a better
right than others to the claims taken up; and in all controversies, except as against the government,
he was regarded as the original owner, from whom title was to be traced. But the mines could not be
worked without water. Without water the gold would remain forever buried in the earth or rock. To
carry water to mining localities, when they were not on the banks of a stream or lake, became,
therefore, an important and necessary business in carrying on mining. Here, also, the first
appropriator of water to be conveyed to such localities for mining or other beneficial purposes, was
recognized as having, to the extent of actual use, the better right. The doctrines of the common law
respecting the rights of riparian owners were not considered as applicable, or only in a very limited
degree, to the condition of miners in the mountains. The waters of rivers and lakes were consequently
carried great distances in ditches and flumes, constructed with vast labor and enormous expenditures

Page 8 of 35

of money, along the sides of mountains and through the canyons and ravines, to supply communities
engaged in mining, as well as for agriculturists and ordinary consumption. Numerous regulations
were adopted, or assumed to exist, from their obvious justness, for the security of these ditches and
flumes, and the protection of rights to water, not only between different appropriators, but between
them and the holders of mining claims. These regulations and customs were appealed to in
controversies in the State courts, and received their sanction; and properties to the values of many
millions rested upon them. [U.S. Supreme Court, Jennison v. Kirk, 98 U.S. 453, 457-458 (1879)]
The Colorado gold rush began in 1858, several years after California’s. Colorado gold was first
discovered in 1849 by seven Georgians taking thoroughbred horses to California. The
Georgians spent the winter camped where Denver would spring up in the coming decades,
though the gold was not thoroughly explored for fear of Indians in the mountains. (For a more
detailed early history of mining, including the hardships of the minors, visit
www.miningbureau.com.) The Colorado Gold Rush truly began in 1959, as described by Jim
Cappa, Chief of Minerals, Colorado Geological Survey:
In 1859 prospectors from Georgia found gold in gravel deposits in Cherry Creek just south of Denver.
Later prospectors discovered gold in vein deposits around present-day Blackhawk and Central City.
The rush to Colorado was on. Gold production from the central Front Range through 1990 was 7.3
million ounces. Since 1859 Colorado’s mines have produced about 45 million ounces of gold.
Colorado’s largest gold discovery was the Cripple Creek district in 1893. This one district alone
produced over 22 million ounces of gold. The Cripple Creek district contains the sole remaining gold
mine in Colorado with an estimated annual production of 240,000 ounces in 2000. [Colorado
Geological Survey, History of Mining in Colorado,
http://geosurvey.state.co.us/Default.aspx?tabid=237]
It wasn’t until 1872 that the Colorado Territory’s high court upheld the doctrine of appropriation.
Chief Justice Moses Hallett wrote, ―in a dry and thirsty land it is necessary to divert the waters of
the streams from their natural channels, in order to obtain the fruits of the soil, and this
necessity is so universal and imperious that it claims recognition of the law.‖ The appropriation
doctrine later became part of Colorado’s constitution in 1879, serving the uses that were
perceived as beneficial at that time, including mining, agriculture, and uses for Colorado’s
growing towns and cities.

D. Heavy population growth City (pop.
State Population
Percent
over 500,000) growth
Today, the West is the fastest growing region of
the country (see Ft. Worth TX 653,320 4.8%
table 1 and figure 8). Cities like Phoenix (2.9%), Phoenix AZ 1,512,986 2.9%
Albuquerque (2.1%), Denver (1.5%), and Las Austin TX 709,893 2.7%
Vegas (1.4%) continue to have rapid annual San Antonio TX 1,296,682 2.6%
growth. Charlotte NC 630,478 2.3%
Increased populations require more water, and Albuquerque NM 504,949 2.1%
cities must ensure that adequate planning takes El Paso TX 609,415 1.9%
place to meet that need. Such measures San Jose CA 929,936 1.6%
include conservation, reuse, and traditional and Denver CO 566,974 1.5%
novel approaches to obtaining additional Jacksonville FL 794,555 1.5%
surface water rights from rivers, streams, lakes Table 1: Ten fastest growing large cities (U.S.
and reservoirs. In some cases, such measures Census Bureau, 2007)
negatively impact water quality, aquatic life,
agriculture, recreational opportunities and rural communities. Many cities help reduce impacts of
increased water consumption. They do this not only by conserving and reusing as much water
as possible, but also by working with the affected parties. They may do this by providing


Page 9 of 35

additional storage to local communities, timing reservoir releases to assist with aquatic life and
recreational needs, using measures such as rotational crop fallowing to minimize the impact to
agriculture, treating wastewater, or taking water during high flow periods. There are increasingly
innovative ways that communities partner to initiate mutually beneficial arrangements.

Figure 8: Average population percent change from 1993-2020
Source: Population Profile of the United States, U.S. Census Bureau, 2008.

E. Vagaries of climate change complicate water use
The West’s need for water is further underscored by the effects of climate change. While not all
climate change prediction models fully agree with how the West’s temperature and precipitation
will be affected, there are some general themes which predict significant disruption to the way
water is currently managed. Even if precipitation increases, more of it is predicted to fall in the
form of rain rather than snow. Liquid water evaporates more quickly than reflective snow, and
therefore the total amount of available water is likely to decrease. While it is not yet clear what
is ―weather variability‖ and what is ―climate change‖, either way water management tasks are
becoming more complex. Similarly, snowmelt, which so many communities ultimately depend
upon, is likely to continue happening earlier in the season and more rapidly (see figure 9). Many
reservoirs are currently not designed to store so much water at one time and some have already
been forced to make flood-control releases, storing less for summertime needs. More water
storage projects are therefore needed for the American West. These projects can take fifteen to
twenty years to design and build, so work on such incremental storage needs should begin
immediately.


Page 10 of 35

Figure 9. South Platte River Basin Time Series Snowpack Summary. Notice that the meltout date from
2005-2008 is 13 to 32 days earlier than the average (1971-2000). Definition: WY- Water Year
Source: Provisional Natural Resources Conservation Service SNOTEL data as of Sept. 30, 2008,
available at ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/CO/Snow/snow/watershed/daily/basinplotsp08.gif
In summary, the American West is dry compared to the rest of the country, making water, upon
which so many human activities and ecosystems depend, limited. Increased demand for energy,
rapidly growing cities, and the vagaries of climate change combine with the needs of threatened
or endangered species, rural communities, and agriculture to underscore the scarcity of water in
the region. Innovative solutions will have to be used, and states and communities will have to
prioritize, making tough choices. Nonetheless, there are many solutions which either reduce
negative impacts or are mutually beneficial.


Page 11 of 35

Figure 10: Colorado water history timeline.
Source: Citizen’s Guide to Colorado’s Water Heritage.

NOTE: This document is not to be reproduced or shared without the express written consent of DCWRA. Copyright© 2009 DCWRA All rights reserved.

Page 12 of 35

Section II. Colorado’s Water:
A. The landscape
Colorado straddles the continental divide, and many major rivers originate in the Rocky
Mountains. Because of this it is one of only two headwaters states in the United States. Water
flows to the north, south, east and west to 19 other U.S. states and Mexico, finally arriving to
either the Pacific or Atlantic oceans. There are only a few small exceptions where water flows
into the state. Colorado can be divided into eight major basins (see figure 11). West of the
Continental Divide all of the rivers eventually flow into the Colorado River which then makes its
way to Mexico and into the Sea of Cortez (a.k.a. Gulf of California). These basins include the
Northwest Basin (Yampa, White, and Green rivers), the Gunnison River Basin, the Southwest
Basin (San Juan, San Miguel, and Dolores rivers), and the Colorado River Basin itself. East of
the Continental Divide, the Arkansas Basin, South Platte Basin (which includes the Republican
River), and North Platte Basin eventually flow into the Missouri River Basin, which combines
with the Mississippi River flowing through New Orleans and into the Atlantic Ocean’s Gulf of
Mexico. The Rio Grande flows south through New Mexico and then along the Texas/Mexican
border until it too reaches the Gulf of Mexico. Different basins in Colorado receive different
amounts of precipitation and rely on different economies. Areas west of the Continental Divide
receive approximately 80% of the water, but currently only has 11 percent of the population.
Nonetheless, many communities on the west slope are expected to nearly double by the year
2030 (see table 3). Agriculture and recreational driven tourism are economic bases for these
communities. Recreational activities highly dependent on water resources range from skiing and
golfing to fishing, kayaking, and rafting. In contrast, the I-25 corridor from Fort Collins to
Colorado Springs is much more dependent upon service economies common to cities. The
Eastern Plains are reliant upon agriculture.

Figure 11: Colorado’s eight major basins.

Approximately 90% of the amount of water taken out of Colorado’s rivers, streams, and
groundwater is used for agriculture. The remainder is used for municipal, industrial, and

Page 13 of 35

thermoelectric power plants’ needs (See figure 12). However, this does not reflect how much
water is actually used in the state. Much of this water goes back into the water table and is used
by others downstream. When managing water rights and negotiations between states, it is the
remaining water that must be considered compared to the amount Colorado actually uses up,
which is known as ―consumptive use.‖

Thermoelectric Power
156,373 AF
1%
Industrial
135,814 AF
1%
Municipal
1 acre-foot of water floods
1,093,289 AF
8%
one acre of land to a depth of
one foot. It’s equivalent to
325,851 gallons. A family of
four uses ½ ac-ft of water per
Agriculture
12,922,069 AF
90%
year.

Total Withdrawals
14,307,546 AF

Figure 12: Colorado water withdrawals in 2000.
AF=Acre feet, or one acre of water one foot deep.
Source: Calculated from ―Estimated Use of Water in the
United States in 2000,‖ U.S. Geological Survey

B. Interstate Compacts
Because so many other states depend upon water that flows out of Colorado, there are
numerous water agreements between Colorado and its neighboring states (see table 2). Such
agreements either specify a certain amount of water Colorado must deliver to states
downstream, a certain percentage of water Colorado is permitted to retain, or a combination of
the two. In addition, there are additional Federal regulations concerning endangered species
that affect how Colorado must manage its water (see figure 21).

In a 100-year period, a molecule of water spends
only three weeks as surface water.


Page 14 of 35

Flows Legally Available
under Compact or Interstate Compact, Equitable Year of
Decrees for Future Apportionment Decrees and Endangered Compact or
River Basin Development Species Recover Programs Decree
Arkansas Arkansas River Compact 1948
Kansas vs. Colorado 1995
Colorado  Colorado River Compact 1922
Upper Colorado River Compact 1948
Upper Colorado Endangered Fish Recovery
-
Program
Dolores/San  Colorado River Compact 1922
Juan/San Miguel La Plata River Compact 1922
Animas-La Plata Project Compact 1969
San Juan Endangered Fish Recovery
-
Program
Gunnison  Colorado River Compact 1922
Aspinall Unit Operations -
-
Program
North Platte/Laramie  Nebraska vs. Wyoming 1945
Wyoming vs. Colorado 1957
Platt River Endangered Species Program -
Rio Grande Rio Grande River Compact 1938
Costilla Creek Compact 1944
South Platte  South Platt River Compact 1923
Republican River Compact 1942
Platt River Endangered Species Program -
Yampa/White/Green  Colorado River Compact 1922
Upper Colorado River Compact and Yampa
1948
River Portion
-
Program
Table 2: Major Interstate Compacts, Decrees, and Endangered Species Programs by Basin.
Source: Statewide Water Supply Initiative, Table 7-2.

Much of the water leaving the state does not ―belong‖ to Colorado, despite originating here (see
figure 13). Downstream communities depend upon Colorado’s snowmelt, and these needs
were realized fifty or more years ago by long-term planners who laid the legal framework that
currently dictates much of Colorado’s water management.


Page 15 of 35

Figure 13: Estimates of Current Flows, Population, and Irrigated Acreage, by Basin. All numbers are in
thousands (1=1,000). AFY = Acre-feet per year
Source: Statewide Water Supply Initiative (SWSI) from State of Environment (SOE) and Colorado
Department of Local Affairs (DOLA), Demography Section.

87% of the water leaving Colorado flows out of the Colorado River
Basin toward the Pacific Ocean. The remaining 13 percent of the
water leaving Colorado flows mostly out of the South Platte,
Arkansas and Rio Grande river basins toward the Atlantic Ocean.
While there is not space to go over the specifics of each compact, program, or ruling two
important interstate agreements are summarized below:
South Platte River Compact (from Colorado State University’s Water Knowledge):
 Division of the waters of the South Platte River is accomplished by this compact
between Colorado and Nebraska, with consent of the Unites States Congress.
 From the 15th day of October until April 1, Colorado has full use of the water of the
South Platte River within the boundaries of the State except that Nebraska is entitled to
divert surplus waters if the proposed Perkins County Canal is constructed.

Page 16 of 35

 From the first day of April to the 15th day of October, if the mean flow at the interstate
station is less than 120 cubic feet per second, Colorado shall not permit diversions from
the lower section of the river to supply appropriators with dates of priority subsequent to
June 14, 1897.

Upper Colorado River Compact (adapted from Colorado State University’s Water Knowledge):
In 1948, the Upper Basin states (Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and New Mexico) entered into a
compact which apportioned among themselves the waters of the Colorado River available to the
Upper Basin by the 1922 Colorado River Compact. According to the 1922 compact, the lower
basin states, Arizona, Nevada and California, receive a total of 7.5 million acre-feet. It was
agreed in a 1944 treaty that Mexico would receive 1.5 million acre feet.
The 1948 Compact apportioned the Upper Basin states each a percentage of the remaining
water available as follows:
Colorado 51.75%
Utah 23.00%
Wyoming 14.00%
New Mexico 11.25%

If 7.5 million acre-feet is available to the Upper Basin states annually, the above calculations
indicate Colorado can consume up to 3,855,375 acre-feet of water every year. During periods of
drought available water for the Upper Basin states is likely closer to 6 million acre-feet or less,
reducing the amount of water each state can consume. This variability in water supply supports
the case for building incremental storage capacity.
Today Colorado consumes 2.3 million acre-feet of Colorado River water annually. There are
ongoing highly political discussions concerning how much additional water supply is available
for use by growing cities or energy development or other interests. The State of Colorado has
attempted to quantify these numbers by way of a two-part process called the Statewide Water
Supply Initiative (SWSI).

C. Colorado’s rapid population growth
Like much of the West, Colorado is experiencing rapid population growth, with a high degree of
urbanization (see table 4). The South Platte basin is projected to have the most new people,
with nearly two million additional people expected to be in the region by 2030. That’s only 21
years from now! The majority of these numbers will populate the urban areas. At the same
time some rural areas are growing at increasingly fast rates, with populations expected to
increase in the Gunnison, Southwest, and Colorado basins. Population growth will increase the
amount of water needed in all of these communities. What is Colorado doing to meet these
needs?


Page 17 of 35

Table 4: Population Projection by Basin. Notice that the greatest population growth is in Denver/S. Metro.
Source: SWSI from Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA), Demography Section

Population growth in cities and towns are tied to jobs.
Because of this, water supply is calculated as water
uses of a typical municipal system, which includes
residential, commercial, industrial, irrigation, and
firefighting. This is called municipal and industrial water
needs, or M&I for short (see figure 14 and table 5). The
increased percent of M&I water needs closely follows the
amount of population growth.

Figure 14: Projected increase in gross M&I
(AFY) and percent increase from 2000 to
2030 by basin. Source: Statewide Water
Supply Initiative, Figure 5-7

Table 5: Summary of Combined Gross Water Use for M&I in 2000 and 2030. Source: SWSI, table 5-6


Page 18 of 35

D. Conservation
Municipalities and towns are slowing the rate of water needed through conservation efforts by
10-15%. Communities in Douglas County are already doing an exemplary job of water
conservation. The first type of conservation is achieved by Level 1 Conservation. This involves
households adhering to modern plumbing codes and fixture standards from the National Energy
Policy Act over time as old toilets, showers, and pipes wear out and are replaced. Over 100,000
acre-feet of water (on average 14%) is expected to be saved statewide from Level 1
Conservation alone (see figure 15). Communities have varying abilities to conserve water. For
instance, Denver’s infrastructure is far older than Douglas County’s, providing more
opportunities to conserve. Nonetheless, many communities further slow down the need for
additional sources of water by:
Level 2 Conservation includes level 1 and:
 Metering and
 Detecting leaks
Level 3 Conservation includes the above and:

You will save 12,000 gallons (0.04 acre-feet) per year if you shower less than 5 minutes.
 Education,
 Rebates for toilets & washers,
 Providing water & landscape audits, and
 Increasing water rates
 Steep pricing rates & surcharges
 Rebates for landscape changes,
 Turf replacement & restriction
 Rebates for irrigation sensors & controllers,
 Fixture retrofits upon sale of property, and
 Elimination of single-pass cooling

Single-pass cooling systems remove heat by transferring it to clean water and
letting it go down the sewage system. Newer recalculating systems make single-pass an outdated
and inefficient use of water, leading to higher sewer and water bill costs. Outmoded equipment
that may have single-pass cooling include air conditioners, refrigerators, coolers and ice machines.

 Replacement of all inefficient water fixtures & appliances,
 Elimination of leaks by all customers,
 Elimination of high-water using landscapes, and
 Installation of non-water using urinals


Page 19 of 35

Colorado towns and cities are in-creasingly
adopting the measures that work for them.
Many of these conser-vation techniques are
quite costly for citizens and municipalities to
adopt. At the same time, developing new
sup-plies are even more expensive, and
have impacts on other communities.
Conservation alone is insufficient to meet
the needs of our growing population.
Additional water supplies will have to be
garnered to meet these needs. How will
Colorado address these responsibilities?

E. Agriculture in Colorado
According to the Bureau of Economic
Analysis, the state received $1.4 billion from
crop and animal production in 2006. This Figure 15: Projected M&I Water Demand with Level
compares with a total 2006 Gross Domestic 1 Conservation savings Source: SWSI
Product for Colorado of $226 billion with
real estate, government, and professional & technical services being the top three economic
drivers (Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis). According to these GDP figures, agriculture
made up 0.62% of Colorado’s economy in 2006, and used 90% of the State’s water
resources. The table below indicates market value of agricultural products sold in 2002, with a
break down by category (see table 6).
Item Quantity U.S. Rank
MARKET VALUE OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS SOLD ($1,000)

Total value of agricultural products sold 4,525,196 16
Value of crops including nursery and greenhouse 1,216,278 24
Value of livestock, poultry, and their products 3,308,918 12

VALUE OF SALES BY COMMODITY GROUP ($1,000)

Grains, oilseeds, dry beans and dry peas 448,378 21
Tobacco
Cotton and cottonseed
Vegetables, melons, potatoes and sweet potatoes 297,752 12
Fruits, tree nuts, and berries 15,735 26
Nursery, greenhouse, floriculture and sod 261,426 16
Cut Christmas trees and short rotation woody crops 398 41
Other crops and hay 192,590 14
Poultry and eggs 113,256 28
Cattle and Calves 2,632,740 4
Milk and other diary products from cows 247,095 21
Hogs and pigs 179,415 14
Sheep, goats, and their products 72,479 2
Horses, ponies, mules, burros and donkeys 21,365 13
Aquaculture 28,805 11
Other animals and other animal products 13,763 21

Table 6: Market value of Colorado agricultural products sold in 2002. Source: 2002 Census of
Agriculture State Profile, United States Department of Agriculture, Colorado Agricultural Statistics Service

Page 20 of 35

Because of global economic pressures and the need for municipalities to increase their water
supply, agricultural water use is decreasing across the state. Many agricultural water rights have
been transferred to municipal use. In 2004, SWSI estimated that in most cases the numbers of
irrigated acres are likely to go down (see figure 16). This will impact some rural communities
and landscapes, as may the push for increased renewable energy sources. Already, the
demand (and price) of corn for ethanol has increased, and the number of planted corn acres
has followed. Growing and processing corn for energy is not an economic renewable energy
solution. Other, less water thirsty practices such as dry land farming of switch grass, growing
algae using hydroponics, wind turbines, and solar panels may increase their presence in rural
communities.

Figure 16: Potential changes in irrigated acreage by 2030
Source: SWSI, figure 5-5, from Colorado’s Decision Support Systems and Basin roundtable/ Basin
Advisor input.

There have been several recent laws that have been adopted by Colorado to help municipalities
provide for their water needs, while reducing impacts to agricultural communities. These
include:
a. Water ―loans‖ by agricultural interests during times of drought, which provide
instream flows for environmental or municipal use.
b. Rotational Crop Management, which can now be managed by the same approval
criteria applied to changes in water rights.


Page 21 of 35

F. Colorado’s water supply needs
Much of Colorado’s surface water supply needs were described in Section II.A. Colorado’s
Landscape. Here we discuss groundwater and how much water is still needed in the state. In
Colorado, water is diverted from rivers, streams, lakes, and reservoirs or pumped from wells
drilled into underground aquifers to meet a broad set of needs. Water from our waterways is
simply called surface water, while water from aquifers is called groundwater (see figure 17).
Groundwater is often linked to surface water via the water table. These waters are called
tributary groundwater, because like a tributary to a river, they are an attribute of it. When
groundwater levels fall, so do the connected river levels, and vice versa.
Error!

Figure 17. Total water withdrawals by county with percent groundwater to surface water
Source: SWSI, from Colorado Geological Survey, 2003.

There is another type of groundwater, which is water trapped eons ago that has little if any
connection to surface water. This water can be considered ―fossil water,‖ and is legally referred
to as non-tributary groundwater. Fossil water is a limited resource, whereas the other forms of
water are renewable, meaning replenished by precipitation. Counties like Douglas, Elbert, and
Kit Carson are reliant upon these non-tributary, non-renewable groundwater sources.

Through surface and groundwater diversions, conservation, reuse, storage management, and
other techniques, Colorado can meet just 80% of the water supply it will need by 2030. 80%
means that everyone can have water 5.6 days per week. Furthermore, this is only true if every
identified project as of 2004 is built and all of the conservation and reuse measures identified
are adopted. State and local officials do not currently know how they are going to make up
about 20% of their needed water. This left over amount is called the gap. The gap amounts by


Page 22 of 35

basin are described in figure 18. The largest gap exists in the South Platte Basin in the S.
Metro/Douglas County region.

Figure 18: Effectiveness of identified projects and processes in meeting 2030 M&I demands.
Source: SWSI, Figure 8-3.

In 2004 interbasin water transfers conveyed 515,371 acre-feet of water from the Upper
Colorado River Basin to the South Platte and Arkansas River basins. These transfers supplied
enough water to supply the needs of one million Colorado families.

Significant planning will be required to close the gap. The state recently formed a process
featuring nine Roundtables. Each Roundtable is made up of public stakeholders concerned with
water resources, such as municipal, industrial, agricultural, environmental, and recreational
interests. The Roundtables are designed to work together to decide how to effectively manage
water resources. It is unclear as to how effective this process will be in meeting the needs of
future generations of Coloradoans. Roundtable meetings are open to the public. You may want
to attend a meeting to ask participants how they see your future shaping up.

Page 23 of 35

Section III. South Platte River Basin

Figure 19:
S. Platte Basin Area Map

A. The landscape
The South Platte River basin is very diverse, with high mountain regions, Colorado’s most
urbanized areas, and a large amount of agriculture (see figure 20 for diverse water uses).
Because of a large amount of transmountain diversions, South Platte Community’s water supply
is subject to the Colorado River Compact and other federal regulation associated with the
Western Slope. In addition, it has its own compacts:
o South Platte River Compact of 1923
The South Platte River Compact establishes Colorado’s and Nebraska’s rights to use
water in Lodgepole Creek and the South Platte River. Nebraska has the right to fully use
water in Lodgepole Creek. Colorado has the right to fully use water in the South Platte
River between October 15 and April 1. Between April 1 and October 15 if the mean flow


Page 24 of 35

of the South Platte River at Julesburg is below 120 cubic feet per second (cfs) and water
is needed for beneficial use in Nebraska, water rights in Colorado between the western
boundary of Washington County and the state line with priority dates junior to June 14,
1897 must be curtailed or augmented through an approved plan.
o Republican River Compact of 1942
The Republican River Compact establishes the rights of Colorado, Nebraska and
Kansas to water in the Republican River Basin and makes specific allocations of the
right to make beneficial consumptive use of water from identified streams.
o Nebraska vs. Wyoming The Nebraska vs. Wyoming U S Supreme Court Decrees
equitably apportions water in the North Platte River between Colorado, Nebraska and
Wyoming Those portions of the decree affecting Colorado limit total irrigation in Jackson
County to 145,000 acres and 17,000 AF of storage for irrigation during any one irrigation
season. It also limits total water exports from the North Platte River in Colorado to no
more than 60,000 AF during any 10-year period.
o Sand Creek Memorandum of Agreement This Memorandum of Agreement between
Colorado and Wyoming allocates the waters of Sand Creek between the states in
accordance with the priority water rights in each state and provides for certain minimum
deliveries to the state line by Colorado if physically available and needed for irrigation in
Wyoming.

Surface Water Diversion in Acre-feet by Use

Irrigation
Storage
Municipal
C ommerical
Domestic
Stock
Industrial
Recreation
Fishery
Augmentation
Recharge

Figure 20: Diverse water uses in the South Platte Basin

Water use in the South Platte is also affected by endangered species, specifically the
Whooping Crane, Least Tern and Piping Plover, which are three bird species dependent
upon riparian and aquatic habitats (see figure 21) The water plans contemplated for the
South Metro/Douglas County region utilize ―consumptive use‖ water rights from agriculture,
and therefore may see limited impacts from S. Platte River compacts and decrees. The
Endangered Species Act was intended to ensure that species do not become extinct. This
process rightly requires major projects to consider endangered and threatened species. As
a result it has complicated water management practices, increased costs, and extended the
time required to bring a project on line. Unfortunately there have been some instances
where the law has been abused, further amplifying the length of time it takes for a project to
get approved – sometimes extending to decades.


Page 25 of 35

Figure 21: Endangered Species affecting Colorado’s water use. Source: SWSI, Figure 6-1.

B. South Platte Basin Water demand projections
As discussed above, the South Platte has the greatest future need for water (409,700 AF) and
the largest remaining gap (90,600 AF). The South Metro region has the majority of the shortfall
in 2030 (see table 7). This is described in the South Platte Fact Sheet, ―Nearly two-thirds of the
increase in the state gross municipal and industrial demand by 2030—or approximately 409,700
acre-feet— will be in the South Platte Basin.‖ Most of the water supply needs are in the Denver
Metro Area. These water needs must be addressed in your lifetime. How would you like to see
these needs met?

Section IV. Metro Basin
Much has been studied and written about the Metro, and especially South Metro areas, which
includes Douglas County. This section explores the region’s use of groundwater, reuse &
conservation, and its plans to overcome the obstacles that would otherwise lead to water
shortage. Below is a brief summary from SWSI outlining the major themes in this section:

The South Metro area has a projected future increased demand of 88,600 AF per year. Among the
major water providers in this area Aurora is embarking on its long range plan to meet future needs as
its key Identified Process. This plan will rely heavily on the recapture and reuse of its return flows and
agricultural transfers from downstream of the Denver Metro area.


Page 26 of 35

Table 7. South Platte Basin Demand Projections.
Source: South Platte Basin Fact Sheet, Colorado Water Conservation Board from SWSI

The East Cherry Creek Valley Water and Sanitation District is implementing a similar program and
the Parker Water and Sanitation District has recently received a permit for the construction of Reuter
Hess Reservoir. The South Metro Water Supply Study included many of the water providers in
Arapahoe and Douglas Counties that currently rely primarily on non-tributary non-renewable
groundwater. As noted in the South Metro Study, the costs of continued reliance on non-renewable
Denver Basin aquifer water will increase dramatically as well yields decline and additional wells and
infrastructure are needed to maintain current level of groundwater pumping. These costs will not
resolve the issue of the long term reliability of the resource and the ultimate need to develop a
renewable source of water. [As use continues and well yields decline] the amount needed to close
the gap between supply and demand will become significantly larger in the northern portion of the
basin. The South Metro Study identified potential solutions including the development of a CU
[consumptive use] [project from agriculture in the lower South Platte whereby] surface water would be
diverted stored and treated in wet years to reduce the reliance on groundwater pumping. The South
Metro user’s needs of approximately 40,000 AF would increase by an additional 40,000 AFY if non-
tributary wells fail or become technically or economically infeasible to continue current levels of
groundwater pumping in the future. As noted in Section 7 [of SWSI] there are no reliable surface
water supplies that can be developed from the South Platte using surface water diversions as the
sole water supply source. The South Metro Water Providers have [therefore] indicated that [additional
Western Slope transmountain diversion alternatives need to be developed for meeting South Metro,
as well as Front Range and Colorado water needs. Potential transmountain diversion projects
include the Yampa River, as well as pump back projects from Flaming Gorge, Green Mountain, Blue
Mesa, and Reudi Reservoirs.]

A. Nonrenewable Groundwater
Much of the South Metro region is dependent upon ―fossil‖ groundwater. Wells reach
underground 500-2,000 feet to pump water from these aquifers. Primarily Douglas, Arapahoe,
and northern El Paso counties are dependent upon these resources. These communities rely
upon a water source called the ―Denver Basin.‖ This basin is made up of four groundwater
aquifers that have little or no interaction with surface water or precipitation (see figure 22)


Page 27 of 35

Figure 22: Denver geological cross section and associated Denver Basin Groundwater Description.
Sources: Ancient Denvers for Figure, Citizen’s Guide to Denver Basin Groundwater for description.

Unfortunately, groundwater resources are declining rapidly in some areas due to aquifer levels
falling 20 feet or more per year and reduced pressure. This makes each well less able to draw
as much water, jeopardizing the long-term sustainability of relying on these non-renewable
sources (see figure 23). From 1990 to 2000 aquifer levels have dropped from 100 to nearly 300

Page 28 of 35

feet in some areas. Water levels have declined as much as 40 feet in a single year (see figure
24). Water managing bodies, such as Douglas County Water Resource Authority, South Metro
Water Supply Authority, Denver Water, and the Colorado River Water Conservation District and
the Colorado Water Conservation Board are all concerned with these trends. Some of these
entities partnered in the 2004 South Metro Water Supply Study, which assessed alternative
sources to water supply. Additionally there is a master plan, which delineates several options
(see below).

The orange area has been defined by
Douglas County commissioners as
Margin A, where dried up wells and
lowered pressure have forced limits on
development.

The yellow area is in less danger but still
faces problems.

Figure 23: Douglas County areas of Concern.
Source: Colorado Foundation for Water Education (CFWE) Citizen’s Guide to Denver Basin
Groundwater.

Some communities in Douglas County, like those around Sedalia have already experienced well
dry ups (see figure 23). In the highlighted areas of the map depicted above, developers must
prove that they have a renewable and sustainable supply of water to build, and landowners
either have to dig their wells deeper or truck water in. It is predicted that without adopting the
South Metro Water Supply Authority plans for further conservation, reuse, and new sources of
water such as water from agriculture in the lower South Platte and a transmountain diversion
project, these landowners may not be able to access any water within 15 years.


Page 29 of 35

N
S. Platte
River

Watkins
Denver Aquifer

Laramie- Fox Hills Aquifer

Annual rates of water level change in wells
in the aquifers of the Denver Basin.
More than -48 feet Colorado
Springs
-48 to -40 feet
-40 to -32 feet
S
-32 to -24 feet
-24 to -16 feet
-16 to -8 feet
-8 to 0 feet
Arapahoe Aquifer 0 to +8 feet
+8 to +16 feet

Figure 24: Aquifer level changes for each of the four Denver Basin aquifers and cross sections.
Source: CFWE Citizen’s Guide to Denver Basin Groundwater.

B. Reuse and Conservation
Because water resources are limited in the Douglas County region, reuse and conservation are
especially important. Reuse can only be applied to water diverted from another basin, ―fossil‖
groundwater, water rights undergoing a change of use, and on a new water right. All fresh water
is reused through the natural water cycle, and hundreds of times as water travels downstream.
Much of the water we use is not consumed, and eventually continues downstream to be taken
up by another user. However, reuse can be a more active process, whereby a municipality
chooses to use water that has already gone through the municipal system on its parks or to
reprocess it for consumption. There are many technologies that work well to process this water.
Some municipalities store water underground and pump it back out after letting the soil and

Page 30 of 35

gravel pre-treat the water. Others utilize a reverse osmosis plant, which pushes water through a
synthetic membrane to purify it, leaving the concentrated waste water behind (see figure 27).
R/O is extremely energy intensive. A current popular approach combines both methods. Future
technologies may enable reuse to become an ever more important piece of meeting water
supply needs.
Reuse captures most all of the water used by a household, but only a small amount of the water
used outdoors. Over 50% of water use by households is for landscaping. Yards and gardens
consume the largest amount of water (see figure 25). Municipalities can save time, money, and
especially water through conservation practices. Reducing how much time you spend in the
shower, ensuring there are no leaks in your plumbing, using high efficiency appliances, or
simply turning the water off while you brush your teeth are simple and effective ways to reduce
residential water use. However, the most effective way to help your community cope with
increasing water demands and costs is to use only as much water as is needed for
irrigating your lawn and plants. Consider replacing some of these existing plants with
alternatives that do not need as much water. In order to ensure an adequate supply of water,
the communities in the South Metro area are going to need to invest in water infrastructure,
which will likely cost nearly $1 billion dollars by 2020 and $2.7-$4 billion by 2050 (see table 8 for
a list of proposed projects). Keep these costs down by only using what you need.
Residential Water Use
Denver Service Area
Faucets Laundry
6% 11%
Leaks/Misc
5%
Toilets
13% Dishwashers
1%

Showers/Baths
10%

Landscaping
54%

Figure 25. Residential Water Use in the Denver Service Area.

C. South Metro Water Supply Authority Master Plan
Water conservation and reuse are not enough. We cannot conserve our way out of this water
supply issue. Additional water resources will be needed to service the South Metro region. The
South Metro Water Supply Authority Regional Master Plan outlines the change from non-
renewable groundwater to renewable sources both in the near and long term. The 12 water
providers currently have 111,000 acre-feet of nonrenewable groundwater water rights, but hope

Page 31 of 35

to only use about 15,000 acre-feet of these nonrenewable fossil water sources in the long term
(see figure 26).

Figure 26: Projected Sources of Supply, Aggregated for all 12 SMWSA Water Providers.
Source: SMWSA Regional Master Plan, Figure ES-4.
In addition to ensuring that water supply meets current demand in a sustainable fashion, the
area needs to acquire approximately 50,000 additional acre-feet of water for mid and long-term
water supply demand. In order to do this, the plan identifies several options (see table 8). To
meet mid-term needs, the area will use additional agricultural rights and reuse water supplies for
consumption in the middle South Platte River. This water requires extensive treatment in order
to make it potable (see fig. 27).

Figure 27: Conceptual Treatment Process: Lower South Platte/Arkansas Water Treatment Plant.
Source: SMWSA Master Plan Presentation by CDM.
Definitions: Reverse Osmosis- a synthetic membrane process by which clean water passes through a
permeable membrane, leaving a brine of dirty water on the other side, which can be reprocessed through
a secondary membrane. TDS- Total Dissolved Solids measures non H2O compounds found in water.
mg/l- milligrams per liter. GAC- Granular Activated Charcoal is used for filtration of radon and organic
chemicals. UV- Ultraviolet treatment is used to kill microbes.

In addition, it will be necessary to partner with either the East Cherry Creek Valley (ECCV)
Northern System or the Aurora Prairie Waters Project; both costly endeavors (see figure 28).


Page 32 of 35

Figure 28: Various costs for capital infrastructure and operation & maintenance (O&M) presented in Net
Present Value (NPV, 2007 dollars). These are costs for the mid-term East Cherry Creek Valley Northern
System dedicated for South Metro Water Supply Authority (SMWSA) Treatment and Transmission
Alternatives. Source: SMWSA Master Plan.

Beyond early to mid-2020’s, agricultural water rights and return flows are still expected to be
water supply sources, but it will likely be necessary to bring new water rights across the
continental divide from Western Colorado. Major projects will require support at both the state
and federal levels, and may take as much as 20 years or more to get approved and developed.
Therefore, it is important for the region to be thinking about these needs now. Some of the west
slope options that have been investigated for their potential to provide long-term supplies to the
region are the Flaming Gorge Project, Green Mountain Pumpback, Blue Mesa Pumpback, and
the Yampa Pumpback. The costs for these projects will be significant (billions of dollars), and
the longer we wait the more they will cost.

As described above, using additional supplies is likely to have a negative impact on other
communities. This underscores the reasons for reuse and conservation measures, and also
provides an opportunity to assist in mitigating for the impacts on these communities and
ecological systems. Many people move to Colorado because of its recreational activities and
natural beauty. Everyone in Colorado should be aware of and responsible for his or her water
use as Colorado continues to be a thriving state.


Page 33 of 35

Table 8. Major identified ongoing projects and processes in the Denver/ South Metro Counties.
Source: SWSI, Table 8-3.
Below is a summary of the individual issues in the South Platte Basin and Denver South Metro
Counties as summarized in the SWSI Report:
1. The South Platte is Colorado’s most diverse and industrialized basin. Agriculture is
still a dominant water use but rapid changes are occurring and the impacts to rural
communities are a key concern
2. Competition for water is fierce and it is unclear how much competition there is for the
same water supplies
3. The lack of any new major water storage in the last 20 years (and the failure of the
Two Forms Dam and Reservoir project) led to reliance upon non renewable
groundwater in Douglas County and part of Arapahoe County.
4. Explosive growth in these counties coupled with the lack of surface water supplies
led to the creation of multiple small water districts and makes coordinated water
development a challenge and less efficient especially in light of limited renewable
surface water supplies
5. Water reuse and conservation are major components to meeting future water needs
but this will put added pressure on agriculture as return flows diminish
6. The urban landscape is very important to the economy and an important component
to quality of life
7. Transfers of agricultural water rights to M&I use will continue to be a significant
option for meeting future needs

 PLEASE READ: 1) CDM. Regional Water Master Plan. Greenwood Village: South Metro
Water Supply Authority (2007) at www.southmetrowater.org/resourcesdownloads.html 2)
Citizen’s Guide to Denver Basin Groundwater. Colorado Foundation for Water Education
(2007) at http://cfwe.org/CitGuides/CitGuides.asp and 3) check out the Douglas County Water
Resource Authority website at www.dcwater.org for information on regional water
conservation efforts.


Page 34 of 35

Section V. Additional Resources:
 ―Ancient Denvers.‖ Denver Museum of Nature and Science. Internet, December, 14, 2008. Available at
www.dmns.org/main/minisites/ancientDenvers/index.html.
 Bastin, Edson S. ―History of Mining.‖ Mining Bureau. Internet, December 8, 2008. Available through
Keller Colorado Mining Photographic Collection and www.miningbureau.com.
 Brown, Karla A., ed. Citizen’s Guide to Colorado Water Law, Revised Edition. Colorado Foundation for
Water Education (2004). Available at http://cfwe.org/CitGuides/CitGuides.asp.
 Brown, Karla A., ed. Citizen’s Guide to Colorado Water Heritage. Colorado Foundation for Water
Education (2004). Available at http://cfwe.org/CitGuides/CitGuides.asp.
 Bureau of Economic Analysis. ―Regional Economic Accounts.‖ U.S. Department of Commerce (2006).
Internet, December 8, 2008. Available data download at www.bea.gov/regional/gsp/.
 Cappa, Jim. ―History of Mining in Colorado.‖ Colorado Geological Survey. Internet, December 8, 2008.
Available at http://geosurvey.state.co.us/Default.aspx?tabid=237.
 Campbell, Paul R. ―Population Profile of the United States.‖ U.S. Census Bureau (2008). Internet,
December 8, 2008. Available at www.census.gov/population/www/pop-profile/stproj.html.
 CDM (Camp, Dresser & McKee). Statewide Water Supply Initiative. Denver: CO Water Conservation
Board, State of Colorado, 2004. Available at http://cwcb.state.co.us/IWMD/SWSITechnicalResources.
 Christensen, NS; Wood, AW; Voisin, N; Lettenmaier, DP and Palmer, RN. ―The Effects of Climate
Change on the Hydrology and Water Resources of the Colorado River Basin.‖ Climactic Change 62. 1-3
(2004): 337-363. Available for free download at www.springerlink.com/content/t66120x0hw672395/.
 Colorado Agricultural Statistics Service. ―Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold Including Direct
and Organic: 2002 and 1997.‖ U.S. Department of Agriculture. Internet, December 2008. Available data
download at www.nass.usda.gov/Census/Create_Census_US_CNTY.jsp#top.
 CDM. ―South Platte Basin Fact Sheet.‖ Colorado Water Conservation Board (2006). Available at
http://cwcb.state.co.us/Home/RiverBasinFacts/.
 Energy Information Administration. Quarterly Coal Report. (Oct.-Dec. 2007). Internet, December 8,
2008. Available though the Department of Energy at www.eia.doe.gov/fuelcoal.html.
 Hutchins, Wells A. Water Rights Laws in the Nineteen Western States. 3 volumes. New Jersey: The
Lawbook Exchange, 2004.
 Hutson, SS; Barber, NL; Kenny, JF; Linsey, KS; Lumia, DS and Maupin, MA. ―Estimated Use of Water
in the United States in 2000.‖ United States Geological Survey (2004). Internet, December 8, 2008.
Available at http://water.usgs.gov/watuse/data/2000/index.html for data download and
http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2004/circ1268/ for full publication download.
 Inter Basin Compact Committee. ―Western Slope resource impacts of coalbed methane and natural gas
drilling.‖ IBCC Minutes (February 2008). Available at http://ibcc.state.co.us/Basins/IBCC/.
 Loomis, John. ―The Economic Contribution of Instream Flows in Colorado: How Angling and Rafting
Use Increase with Instream Flows.‖ Economic Development Report, Department of Agricultural and
Resource Economics, Colorado Sate University (2008). Available at http://dare.colostate.edu/pubs.
 Pickton, Todd; Sikorowski, Linda. ―The Economic Impacts of hunting, fishing, and wildlife watching in
Colorado.‖ Colorado Division of Wildlife & BBC Research & Consulting (2004).
 Saunders, Stephen and Maxwell, Maureen. ―Less Snow, Less Water: Climate Disruption in the West.‖
The Rocky Mountain Climate Organization (2005). Available for free download at
www.rockymountainclimate.org/website%20pictures/Less%20Snow%20Less%20Water.pdf.
 URS Corporation. ―Energy Development Water Needs Assessment (Phase I Report).‖ Yampa/White
and Colorado River Basin Roundtables (2008). Available at http://ibcc.state.co.us/.


Page 35 of 35


Water Ambassador booklet

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (16)

Similar to Water Ambassador booklet

Similar to Water Ambassador booklet (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Water Ambassador booklet