Can Colorado Trump-proof its Precious Waters? We Can Try.

 

Barely noticed in the flurry of executive orders during the new Administration last week was the pronouncement of an "Energy Emergency" allowing oil and gas developers to proceed to drill and bulldoze without worrying about pesky environmental concerns.This includes development on fragile wetlands, around rivers and streams, and on banks and beaches. The damage that could be caused would be permanent and far-reaching, not only to water quality and stream flow, but also to plant and wildlife, habitat, historical and sacred sites, and future viability. 

Colorado is well familiar with the harm that extractive industries can cause. With its history of mining, the state has been dealing with polluted waters from mine runoff for over a century. Such metals as gold, silver, copper, molybdenum, lead, and uranium have been mined in the mountainous regions of the state. Often, chemicals were used to extract the metal from the ore, compounding the toxicity. Many waterways have never recovered and are leaching toxic pollutants today. Cleanup by mining companies is uncertain. Some have gone bust, leaving local citizens to clean up as best they can. Others have found legal loopholes, escaping from their responsibility, leaving waters that are poisonous and devoid of aquatic life. 

Leaders in Colorado have a growing awareness of their unique responsibilities as a Headwaters State. Forty million people depend on the water from the Colorado River alone. The Rio Grande is another mighty river quenching the thirst of many. The Platte, Arkansas, Green, Thompson, Poudre, and other rivers extend from Colorado into vast regions bringing lifegiving moisture.










Postcard from the early 1900s of a residential Los Angeles neighborhood. Courtesy of the Werner Von Boltenstern Postcard Collection, Loyola Marymount University Library.

In other posts on this blog, I've reported on state legislators', regulators', and citizens' work to put safeguards in place so that the henchmen of this Administration could not proclaim a free-for-all to allow widespread development and destruction.  In response to the trumped-up "Energy Emergency" legislators have tried to reassure Coloradans that state waters are safe from the bulldozers (See "Colorado law protects lakes, rivers, and wetlands no matter who is in the White House" reported in the Colorado Sun on January 30.) But there are loopholes. Federal lands are still managed by the US Corps of Engineers, who can waive Clean Water Act requirements. The protections are not actually in place yet. Final rulemaking is expected at the end of 2025. Until then, small projects can go ahead with no limitations. There has already been damage and more is to come. 


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Wetlands Workshop Focuses on Mitigation

Image
A large and diverse group met in person this morning at an environmental consultancy in Golden and even more people joined in via Zoom. The topic was wetlands mitigation, somewhat mysteriously. More than one attendee agreed with my thought that we were beginning in the middle of the water quality control and waterway preservation process.  Mitigation means to remedy the negative effects of one action with another action. So, mitigation comes after a company, be it a home developer, road and bridge builder, or other infrastructure constructor has been allowed to destroy or harm a wetlands by building next to it or on it. They are then required to "mitigate" the harm by purchasing credits or offsets in a wetlands "bank" elsewhere, working with a nonprofit such as Ducks Unlimited to create or rehabilitate another wetlands elsewhere, or do their own mitigation by creating a wetlands somewhere, which can be similar to the one they've destroyed or different. And they ...
Read more

Reactions to the Hurried New Regs on Old Growth Forests

Image
New NFS Landscape Plan Guidance Threatens Modified Trees in Old Growth Forests The first I heard about new Old-growth forest regulation changes was on September 18th when I read an op-ed by Dr. Peter Brown in the Colorado Sun . He cautioned that the oldest trees in these forests may not look very old and may have a smaller circumference than many younger trees.  He should know. Dr. Brown is a dendrochronologist, a scientist who can date trees by analyzing their growth rings. He has found that circumference doesn't necessarily equate to age and is concerned that if smaller trees are removed from the landscape haphazardly, old growth trees may disappear.  This is already happening. In the foothills above Boulder, Colorado, I visited a landowner's newly acquired property adjacent to her home. She purchased the 13-acre plot to keep it from being developed into a large residence or ranch. All over her original land as well as the new property, trees were marked for removal with blu...
Read more

Urgent Need for Participation in Protecting Sacred Places with Water

Image
Concerned Citizens Urged to Participate in Public Meetings and Workshops Colorado is home to a priceless treasure of waterways, wetlands, snowpacks, and watersheds.  Colorado is a high desert plagued with droughts, wind and dust storms, and extreme erosion.  Both of these statements are true as well as the range of truths between and around them. So, the process of preserving and protecting our waters is complex. It got more challenging last year when the U.S. Supreme Court shot down two major provisions of the Clean Water Act.  The first provides for protection of streams that are ephemeral, existing only during the snowmelt season, for example. Streams and wetlands that dry up periodically could be dredged and filled in to construct homes, roads, or other operations. Wildlife, native plants, habitats, graves, and places sacred to Native American peoples could be destroyed.  The second provision to be removed by the Supreme Court covers streams connected to a water ...
Read more