Field scientist Delia Malone and Colorado Headwaters President Jerry Mallet walk through wetlands at the edge of the Holy Cross Wilderness on Aug. 21. Two Colorado cities, Aurora and Colorado Springs, are planning to build a dam and reservoir that would destroy the wetlands.
New homes being built at Painted Prairie Development in Aurora. It is estimated each such home wiil need some 800 acre-feet of water/ yr.
As I noted in previous posts, it is a certainty that with the current extreme drought and heat (over 30 days of 90-plus temperature days so far) Colorado is now on the cusp of a permanent water crisis. This was brought home with a Sunday Denver Post report (p. 1A) on how two major Colorado cities (Aurora and the Springs) are planning to destroy a wilderness-wetlands area to build a dam and reservoir. The plan is utter folly given that without firm limits to more growth there simply won't be enough water for anyone. In the words of Ken Neubecker (American Rivers' Colorado Projects director):
"The Front Range municipalities need to realize there's no more reliable water supply available from the West Slope and Colorado River Basin. And that was true before the impacts on water from climate change were really incorporated into our thinking."
He was referring to the fact there is a source and distribution anomaly regarding water in our arid state. That is, the water in Colorado is primarily on the Western Slope but the eastern Front Range cities are the ones consuming most of it. Worse, most of these cities just keep growing because their leaders place no limits on further growth - despite the clear lack of fresh water sources.
Colorado Springs, for example, as noted in the article, currently has 476,000 population and is expected to increase to 723,000 by 2070. Apart from the fact there's scant place to put the projected homes, there is also no idea of how to get water to them. Hence, the brainstorm notion to inundate the natural water storage wetlands to build a dam and reservoir. A nifty idea in theory, but in practice it's doomed to failure.
The fact is the Springs' leaders haven't come to grips with the water crisis staring them in the face. The new home "build out" will require some 136,000 acre -feet of water per year, at minimum. This is up from the current 70, 766 acre-feet used. Hence, nearly double the existing supply despite that supply basically vanishing by the year 2070 if not before. But lo and behold, the power brokers and developers are intent on destroying the wetland wilderness area to try to get that water.
Why a bad idea? Field scientist Delia Malone has the primary reason, being quoted in the Post piece:
"The natural processes that enable water storage are more efficient in a changing climate. Think of our mountains as big towers of water. So why would you want to destroy that natural storage system?"
The answer from the rapacious developers is 'forget the natural storage, we need (and demand), the sacrifice of the natural processes for the purpose of sustaining population growth'. In other words, let humans pile into the state like so many two- legged locusts to gobble up the water and other resources...and let everyone go down in the process. Growth goes on and limits to growth be damned.
Ironically, 30 years ago when Front Range cities proposed the Two Forks Dam - very similar to the current concept - the EPA promptly killed it. The agency cited "unacceptable environmental damage." What changed in the interim? My guess is Colorado grew too popular (e.g. as an alternative to Sunbelt states like Florida and Arizona) So the money for development just became too enticing for local towns and real estate sharks to pass up. See e.g.
Little known or appreciated by these developers is that the fens that make up the wilderness areas play a key role not only in efficient storage, but also ensuring that streams and rivers still flow after winter snow melts. In effect, as climate change leads to earlier melting and depletes surface water (i.e. in the Colorado River) the natural wetlands are essential to let life hang on.
What are these fens? They are spongy, grassy peat bogs and according to Marcia Gillies (deputy district ranger for the White River National Forest's Eagle-Holy Cross area): "When you step on them it's almost like stepping on a waterbed.It moves under your feet. And once they are destroyed they cannot easily be restored because they take thousands of years to develop."
This is exactly why a number of environmental groups are gearing up for legal combat "should the given cities seek state, county and federal permits" to do their dirty work. What we know for sure is it will be an uphill battle given that, historically, Colorado has sacrificed nature to enable population growth and development. It is as if the state has taken a lethal "kool aid" that will destroy the very beauty and quality of life that makes it a desirable place to live.
For a brief time, maybe 5-7 years ago, municipalities like the Springs were ready to halt unlimited growth, for example out into the Banning Lewis Ranch area east of the city. To that end the City Council (at that time) had proposed a 10 percent levy on all new homes to be built - to help pay for water and infrastructure support. But the developers raised a hue and a cry and the levy plan was dropped. Instead higher and higher utilities rates would be levied on existing home owners. Neat.
Why are dams like the one planned so bad, so destructive to the natural environment. According to Jen Pelz (WildEarth Guardians attorney):
"Building dams today is even more irresponsible than in the past because we now know they disconnect aquatic and riparian habitat, cause species extinction, disrupt ecosystem function, dry up rivers. We need to start removing dams not building more."
But, to do that - remove the dams or not build any more- we first have to limit the growth and that means limiting the influx of people to the state. It is those human numbers that propel the higher demand for thousands of acre-feet of water per year. Eliminate the influx, and you halt the growth and the need for the dams. That in turn means Colorado towns need to put a manacle or chain on the developers instead of letting them run riot and intensify high density urban demand. A start would be to reimpose levies on any new homes built, of a least 10 percent of each new home's value, to be paid by the real estate developers themselves. So for every $400,000 new home that means a $40,000 up front payment. This is to support what the city will have to do to deliver water, utilities, sidewalks etc. to support the new residence and its residents.
Draconian solution? Maybe. But it's preferable to having our state turn back into an uninhabitable, arid wasteland.
See also:
No comments:
Post a Comment