Fort Collins and Northern Colorado saw record snowmelt and precipitation this spring, which caused the Poudre River to crest on June 12th at over nine feet in town. You can read a first-hand report about the hydrologic excitement – which most of us in Fort Collins were only barely aware of – here (Steven Goddard, 13-Jun-10, "Poudre sets a record," online at wattsupwiththat.com).

The city of Greeley, which is downstream from Fort Collins, was very much aware of the record-setting hydrology that hit this region. Floods inundated low-lying fields and homes and caused the closure of county roads and city streets.

So, the Poudre River made some waves this year – although the second week of June is when the river usually crests.

The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District recognized the Poudre's high water flow and distributed a press release describing the large volume of water that might have been impounded for future use, if Glade Reservoir and the NISP project had been built by now. I've cited the press release above and reproduced it below (where the highlighting's mine).

The press release also speculates on how Glade Reservoir, had it been built, would have "alleviated some of the recent regional flooding concerns."

Mark Easter – who's chairman of the organization Save The Poudre – responded to the press release in a Coloradoan editorial (cited above and reproduced below, where the highlighting's mine). Easter focuses on the claim that Glade Reservoir will help protect Northern Colorado from flooding – which is not an important theme in the press release. You have to wonder why Easter goes to such lengths to refute something that the press release only mentions in passing. But, I guess hysteria and an uncompromising, knee-jerk reaction are what we expect from environmentalists, aren't they?

Easter explains how water impoundment, for conservation purposes in a reservoir, reduces a river's flow, which in turn results in sedimentation of the river channel. In other words, when you reduce the flow of water down a river, a river becomes shallower – both in water depth and in channel depth. Less water means less water, so that's easy to understand.

But, why should the channel fill in? Because the force from the river's spring flow, during which the river is raging, carries away accumulated silt from the river channel. That's good. The water rises within the channel but not into your basement (assuming your house isn't built on a flood plain). Easter points out that impoundment reservoirs, such as Glade, increase the risk of downstream flooding.

Actually, the Poudre River's flow is already greatly reduced because of high mountain dams, which have been in place for a long time. As a consequence of those dams, Easter explains, Greeley must spend $12-$16 million this year to dredge out the Poudre channel. Greeley – and other Northern Colorado cities – will have to spend even more than that on dredging and flood control, if Glade Reservoir is built.

Who pays for the flood control needed by Fort Collins, Timnath, Windsor, Greeley and the other towns and cities, which have to protect their citizens and property from the elevated risk of flooding that will result from Glade Reservoir? Not the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Not Brighton and all the other cities that lust after Poudre River water... Fort Collins will pay for flood control. Timnath will pay for flood control. Windsor will pay for flood control. Greeley will pay for flood control.

And on top of that, all we get is a "depleted, stinking ditch" of a former river. Locals disproportionately bear the impacts from Glade Reservoir and receive no benefits from it... And that's why Easter's explanation of the relationship between Glade Reservoir and flooding is worth reading twice. Your wallet will thank you if you do.

For Immediate Release – June 11, 2010
Contact: Brian Werner 970-622-2229 (office)/970-481-2927 (cell)

Proposed Glade Reservoir Would Be Half Full
NORTHERN COLORADO – It's been a wet spring and many of the region's rivers have been raging for the past week, especially the Poudre River. Much of that water could have been conserved for later use if additional storage were available.

The proposed Northern Integrated Supply Project includes 215,000 acre feet of storage. Diversions for this storage would mostly be available during high runoff years. Galeton [Reservoir] would have filled during the past fall and winter and remained full with the huge spring runoff.

"More than 50,000 acre feet of water from this spring could have been stored in Glade Reservoir were it built, in addition to water during 2009," said NISP Manager Carl Brouwer. "And Galeton Reservoir would have been full."

Glade and Galeton reservoirs are the key components to NISP, which is proposed by 15 Northern Front Range cities, towns and water districts and is currently under review by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. When full, Glade would store 170,000 acre feet of water and Galeton would hold 45,000 acre feet.

"This is one of those years when you wish we had these projects in place so the water could be saved for the citizens of Northern Colorado," said Northern Water General Manager Eric Wilkinson. "It also means a lot of water that Colorado is entitled to is flowing out of state to Nebraska over and above our legal requirements."

With NISP online some of the recent regional flooding concerns would have been alleviated and the floodwaters would have been stored for future use.

"NISP could be storing water right now and we could be pumping 2,000 acre feet a day to storage and still have a significant amount flowing downstream to Nebraska," Brouwer said.

The Poudre River peaked on Tuesday at more than 4,300 cubic feet per second at the canyon mouth. The average peak for the river is a little more than 2,900 cfs. While the river's flow has slowed the past few days there is the possibility of another peak flow with rain in the forecast this weekend.

It's a good year for water supplies throughout Northeastern Colorado and years like 2010 illustrate the reason storage reservoirs are a practical, prudent and responsible method to provide water to Colorado's 5 million residents.

Additional information about NISP can be found at gladereservoir.org.

Morphing Project Vows Cure for All Water Woes
In a June 11 news release, the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (Northern) speculated that if the NISP/Glade project had been built already it could have reduced recent flooding on the Poudre and South Platte Rivers.

NISP/Glade project has morphed into a new brand of snake oil, promising to cure all of our water ills, flooding included. Northern has a tendency to tout every meteorological, environmental and economic whim and trend as a reason to Build NISP/Glade and destroy the Cache la Poudre River. Got drought? Build NISP. Got flooding? Build NISP. Expecting climate change? Build NISP. But when one looks carefully at the facts behind the issues, the case for NISP unravels, as is the situation once again.

NISP would actually increase flooding risk below Poudre Canyon. Case in point: Greeley and the Corps of Engineers are preparing to spend between $12 million and $16 million of taxpayer money to dredge the Poudre River to reduce flooding risk. Why? Because nearly two–thirds of the Poudre River's flows have already been stripped from the river by upstream dams and diversions. The river through Greeley no longer has the flow level and energy needed to flush sediment out of its way. Every year, the river perches inches higher within its banks as sediment builds up in the streambed. NISP/Glade would dramatically worsen that problem by taking away the last of the regular peak flows.

In extraordinary years like this one, there would be no place for the river to go but out of the banks and into the streets – and living rooms – of Bellevue, LaPorte, Fort Collins, Windsor and Greeley. All of these communities would be locked into long-term, costly flood-control programs that Greeley now confronts if NISP/Glade is built. Why not let the river do that work for us by protecting peak flows?

NISP/Glade is not a flood-control project. Flood control is nowhere in the project's objectives. Ask any dam engineer about the differences between water storage and flood-control projects, and he or she will say they are engineered very differently. Northern's recent claims about NISP/Glade and flood control are like most others they have made – only true in a very narrow context. This project is chock full of irony, and it presents an interesting conundrum – Greeley's recent flooding problems are caused by past dam and diversion projects coupled with poor land-use decisions. Building another dam is like a physician prescribing a larger belt and bigger pants to a patient with a weight control problem.

NISP/Glade would turn the Cache la Poudre River into a depleted, stinking ditch. Follow the money: Nearly all of the so–called benefits of the project would go south to Denver suburbs, leaving the rest of us to deal with the expensive, ugly mess it would leave behind. The proposal for NISP/Glade is already on life support, and Northern seems prepared to do or say anything to resuscitate it. They just want to build a dam, period; the rest of us be damned.

Mark Easter, chairman of Save The Poudre: Poudre Waterkeeper
Fort Collins