Environmental groups won

Environmental groups won't fight Plateau Creek dam

July 14, 2001

By Jim Mimiaga
Journal Staff Writer

Two national environmental groups have backed off their initial opposition to a proposed dam which, if built, would benefit downstream fish habitat on the lower Dolores River.

The Colorado chapter of Trout Unlimited and Environmental Defense had filed letters with the state water court opposing the Dolores Water Conservancy District’s claim for rights in Plateau Creek, a northern tributary of McPhee Reservoir.

But in the spirit of cooperation, both organizations have agreed not to fight the water-right petition, preferring instead to push for alternatives that do not involve building a dam.

"We’re open-minded on how we get to the target fishery pool," said Dave Nickum, executive director for Trout Unlimited. "But the dilemma for us is that our funding sources do not look kindly on asking to buy fishery water that is attached to dam-building, so we want to look at other alternatives that avoid that."

The DWCD water-rights filing is the first step towards constructing an earth dam on the small creek, expected to create a 20,000-acre-foot reservoir, which would back up into nearby Lone Mesa State Park.

The additional storage would be used to augment a deficient fishery "pool" held in McPhee Reservoir. The reserved water is released throughout the year to benefit threatened trout waters below the dam.

Trout Unlimited, Environmental Defense, and the boating community are generally opposed to building an additional dam, citing environmental concerns and a recently commissioned but controversial hydrology study showing unused water in McPhee, the state’s second-largest lake.

Biologists with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and Bureau of Reclamation determined in 1990 that McPhee’s operation plan mistakenly underestimated the amount of water needed to support a thriving native trout habitat below the dam.

In the last 10 years, releases as low as 20 cfs in the hottest months contributed to massive fish kills in the tailwaters below the dam. Since then, McPhee has been managed to increase flows during the summer. The amount, around 70 cfs, is still insufficient to improve a declining fish population from the dam to the Bradfield bridge year round, biologists say.

Additionally, non-native German brown trout better tolerate warmer, shallow temperatures and are competing with native trout for food and territory.

A coalition of fishing, rafting and agriculture agencies have been struggling to boost the fishery pool to the biologist goal of 36,500 acre-feet (or 3,300 acre-feet more than what is set aside now). The group, known as the Dolores Instream Flow Partnership, is looking to conduct a comprehensive feasibility study on alternatives for improving the fishery.

Who will do the study has caused friction. TU doesn’t trust the District to do it, since they favor the dam project. And the district doesn’t trust TU or ED to do it because they rely on a hydrology study, conducted by Boulder-based Hydrosphere Resources, showing water is available in McPhee.

The district, and its engineer, Steve Harris, believe all McPhee water is already allocated and assert that the study is based on flawed data and is biased.

At a compromise worked out at a DWCD meeting Thursday, engineers from both Hydrosphere and the district will meet with TU and ED to discuss a "scope of work" for the proposed study.

"We continue to believe the additional fishery water is there, but we saw litigation in water court as an impediment to productive, good-faith discussions," said Jim Martin, Environmental Defense’s lead attorney, on Friday from Washington.

Martin said that the dam is still not a preferred solution, because "there are cheaper, faster, cleaner ways of doing it. But we have not convinced them of this and they have not convinced us of their solution, so we need to continue talking."

The paradox of building a dam for the benefit of fish downstream may be tough for environmentalists to swallow, but the threat of sending water downstream for fish during extended drought is equally disturbing to farmers.

"We’re verging on an empty reservoir as it is," said Joe Mahaffey, DWCD board member and farmer. "If there is a shortage to irrigators, alfalfa-farmers’ lives will be jeopardized, so that needs to be understood."

The growing popularity of the thirsty alfalfa crop, and its lucrative market, has also put more demands on McPhee water than ever expected.

Analysis needs to be done to determine if the current fishery pool can be better managed for fish habitat, suggested Jim Fisher, DWCD board member. Furthermore, there needs to be proof that implementing Plateau Creek dam is even practical, he said.

"We do not want to sink millions of dollars into this and end up with an empty reservoir," he said.

Following an airplane tour of the site with DWCD General Manager John Porter, Nickum conceded that the proposed reservoir "looks like it would benefit more than harm, except for the rafters."

The rafting community is a opposed to the building of Plateau Creek Dam, because it would catch water otherwise released for a whitewater-rafting season in the lower Dolores Canyon.