City of Grand Junction Resolution No. 71-93

 Clifton Water District Resolution No.______

 

 

 

 

JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF GRAND JUNCTION

AND

THE CLIFTON WATER DISTRICT

CONCERNING THE WOLFORD MOUNTAIN PROJECT

 

 

The Clifton Water District and the City of Grand Junction adopt this Resolution to explain the rationale underlying our present decision and to provide a written record for future decision-makers.

 

•   Presently 425,000 to 630,000 acre feet of Western Slope water are permanently diverted to the Front Range each year. To date the only compensatory water given the Western Slope is Green Mountain Reservoir which Congress authorized in Senate Document 80 which provided 100,000 acre feet to the Western Slope as compensation for water diverted to the Front Range. The agreement was to assure compensation for further dewatering of the Western Slope. This would preserve the Western Slope's ability to grow.

 

•  Now Denver and the River District want to transfer Green Mountain water for Front Range growth and give the Western Slope Muddy Creek water in exchange. This means a permanent loss of an additional 15,000 acre feet each year. Wolford Reservoir is but the first of nine proposed Denver exchange projects that will further dewater the Western Slope.

 

•  In addition the Wolford Mountain Reservoir is saltier than Green Mountain water. During periods of substitution it will increase salinity in the Grand Valley. The nine Denver projects may bring further salinity increase to the Grand Valley.

 

•  The Lower Colorado River Basin states and Mexico have demanded a limit to salinity. A standard has been set and is measured at Imperial Dam. If this standard is exceeded, Upper Basin development may be halted. Federal projects, such as the Grand Valley salinity control program, are attempting to reduce salinity to preserve growth opportunities.

 

•  This means that all regions of the River Basin compete for the increment of salinity available for growth. Each transmountain diversion leaves less water in the River, increases salinity, and constrains the Grand Valley's growth potential.

 

•  The City and Clifton have sought assurance from Denver and the River District that Wolford's salinity impacts will be limited. They have agreed to changes that may reduce these impacts. However, neither has been willing to guarantee a limit.

•  Clifton and Grand Junction are not trying to stop Denver's growth. However, such growth should not come at the expense of the water users in the Grand Valley. The Secretary/Engineer of the Colorado River District in a 1985 speech to the Colorado Water Workshop agreed, saying:

   

"...the removal of major quantities of the basin's purest waters from its headwaters brings about a wide range of impacts in the basin, including but not limited to: decreased crop production, diminished fisheries, increased water treatment costs, a poorer range of recreational experiences, increased capital costs for water and sewer plants, and more...

 

History is replete with the empty promises made to Western Colorado for mitigation... promises for such consideration have been made by state officials, by representatives of Denver and quickly forgotten. History is replete with examples of the destruction, chaos, and greater burden caused by the lack of such consideration. One such example, the raping and pillaging of Owens Valley by the City of Los Angeles, not only offers a lesson, but frightening parallels to the Denver/West Slope tradition."

 

•  The Colorado River Water Conservation District and the Colorado Water Conservation Board indicate they are responsible for developing the Colorado River for the beneficial use of the entire state even if this means transmountain diversions. This statewide perspective requires them to compromise the interests of the Grand Valley in favor of all. In this case we believe Grand Valley interests have suffered.

 

•  Clifton and the City do not have the resources to continue this battle alone. Until all water users in the Grand Valley join in one strategy, it is likely that our water will continue to be transverted and degraded. Increment by increment, we will lose our River flows and our ability to grow.

 

•  The Grand Valley water interests must be wary of Wolford and similar exchange projects. A long-term strategy supported by all Grand Valley water interests is essential to protect our River flows, water rights, water quality and growth opportunities.

 

•  Clifton and the City cooperated with efforts by the Grand Valley agricultural users to minimize the impact of Wolford on the fruit industry. Those changes in the operations of Wolford do not resolve the issue of systematic dewatering of the Western Slope nor the loss of growth potential.

 

•  The benefits of the Wolford project include recreation facilities for some headwater areas and small amounts of additional water for the Fraser Valley and Middle Park. We recognize that such benefits require trade offs. However, the City and Clifton do not believe trading Blue River water for Muddy Creek water is in our best interests.

 

 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CLIFTON WATER DISTRICT AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO:

 

That a stipulation for the settlement of the Wolford litigation to preserve the Grand Valley's ability to fight another day the continuing loss of Western Slope's right to develop its own water, any degradation of the Colorado River in the Grand Valley, and the continuing loss of water flowing in our rivers, be prepared with due regard for these principles and assumptions.

 

 

 PASSED and ADOPTED this 3rd day of November, 1993.

 

Attest:

 

 

 

 

 

______________________________  __________________________________

City Clerk President of the Council

 

Attest:

 

 

 

 

______________________________ _________________________________

Secretary            President

Clifton Water District