Hendricks 1

Anna Hendricks

Professor Cassel

English Composition 1202

11 April 2020

Building Dams; Smart Resource Management or Ecologic Disaster?

Water is an essential element for humans to live and thrive day to day. The human

body in fact can only survive for a few days without it. Providing water resources to

expanding populations is a concern worldwide, particularly in areas of dense population, or

where natural precipitation is either limited or cannot be depended on throughout the year or

over time. To overcome these growing challenges, the solutions include impounding water

through the use of dams and reservoirs along with water transfers through tunnels or

aqueducts. Dams can also be used as a means of flood control, and have been successfully

employed in many locations for that purpose. Over 75,000 dams of varying size and

complexity have been built in the United States alone as a means of dealing with these varied

needs (“Introduction to Dams”). But these types of projects are not without controversy. Each

water project that is contemplated typically faces a fundamental question; do the benefits of

building more dams to meet growing water needs supersede and outweigh the possible

negative impacts to wildlife, water ecosystems, and natural terrain? The answers are not easily

found, and opposing camps routinely become quite committed to their viewpoint. Seeking the

truth requires a discerning eye on this important topic.

 Hendricks 2

While scarce water resources are a global issue, this research focuses primarily on the

water needs of a rapidly growing area known as the Intermountain West, a geologic and

geographic area of the Western United States. The map below shows the area that includes all

or parts of 12 large western states, taking in approximately 1/3 of the total Continental U.S.

land mass. This area demonstrates all of the features of the argument – it is where rapid

population shift/growth and increasing water demands meet the realities of a semi-arid

climate, the water needs of agriculture to feed the ballooning population, and the desire to

preserve the natural beauty of the local terrain and the wildlife it sustains. One of the primary

water sources serving seven of these states and Mexico is the Colorado River watershed

system. For the last 99 years, these seven states and Mexico have managed the use of this

massive water flow from this river under the jurisdiction of the Colorado River Compact.

While the Compact has been renegotiated numerous times, it has served as the means of

ensuring that all of the states get their share of the limited resource. But the dichotomy of

little precipitation and fast-growing cities in the Intermountain West is creating a problem,

and raises many questions of how to supply the necessary water while minimizing impacts to

the local area and surrounding wildlife – who wins, the growing population or nature? Or are

there reasonable ways to have both?

Main Point # 1: Irrigated farmland is being taken out of production because of water shortages

As the source of the river, the state of Colorado gets the first opportunity to capture portions

of the river named for their state. High up in the Rockies, the heavy snowpack, natural lakes

and springs form the headwaters of the massive 1450 mile long river. The water flows

westward toward the Pacific Ocean. According to the Colorado Water Center, 80 percent of

Colorado’s water falls and flows west of the Continental divide, while 80 percent of the
 Hendricks 3

population and irrigated farmlands lie to the east of the Divide (“Water Uses | Colorado Water

Knowledge | Colorado State University”). Colorado State University Water Center appear to

be an unbiased and authoritative source for this information. The added difficulty is that the

population centers located to the east of the Divide, are essentially built on adjacent, high

dessert plateaus with minimal natural rainfall. Unknown to most who might visit the state’s

largest city and capital Denver, the majority of the city’s water supply comes from the other

side of the 10,000’ high divide, through massive tunnels, cut through the rock thousands of

feet below the tops of the snow-covered mountains. This form of moving water is known as a

transfer. By removing water from the westward flowing river, and sending it to the east, water

is transferred out of the Colorado River, leaving less for those further downstream. This is not

without a negative affect however, as this means less water for poorer, downstream

agricultural needs. Investigators Tyler McMahon and Matthew Reuer predict that increased

population from 2000-2030 will result in as many as 428,000 irrigated agricultural acres being

taken out of production statewide in Colorado (McMahon). These water transfers help support

the growing and generally more affluent urban populations, but at the expense of the lower

income and smaller farming communities. Mr. Reuer is the director for the Colorado College

Environmental Sciences Program and writes the State of the Rockies Report Card. This team

also points out that 83 percent of Colorado’s population is considered urban, meaning that the

other 17 percent have their water supplies and costs influenced heavily by the urban majority

(McMahon). On the other hand, water transfers have enabled rapid and amazing growth. One

of the tunnels is the amazing Roberts Tunnel that celebrated its 50 th anniversary in 2012.

Erick Holck, an engineer with Denver Water states “the tunnel was needed by the 335,000

Denver residents in the 1950’s – Roberts was truly a visionary in anticipating the need of
 Hendricks 4

diverting water sources to meet demand” (Blankenbuehler). Clearly, as part of the team

required to deliver water to a growing city, Mr. Holck sees the water transfer capability of the

Roberts Tunnel as a needed success. Today the Denver metro area has a population exceeding

2.9M with annual economic activity of well over $200B, none of which could have happened

without continued water transfers. As a result, the argument sets up along both economic

lines, and urban/rural lines; for the dominant and economically powerful urban areas to

continue to grow and expand with a finite water resource, farm lands and thus smaller

communities with less economic power probably suffer.

Main Point #2: Dams and Reservoirs create water supplies for many uses, but also change
natural river flows and habitat

Another area of considerable contention and controversy relates to building dams to

create reservoirs along major waterways. By creating reservoirs water managers are able to

impound vast amounts of water during periods of rain and heavy snow-melt, to save for times

when the weather is hot and dry. One proposed project to meet the growing water demands in

the expanding Ft. Collins area (north of Denver) of Colorado, is the Glade Reservoir on the

Cache La Poudre River. The Poudre is renowned for scenic beauty and world-class trout

fishing. By their very nature dams create vast reservoirs on locations where none currently

exist. They change forever the land they cover, destroying or potentially changing wildlife

habitats as well. The proponents for this project are 15 fast-growing municipalities

incorporated as the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP), and has been making

headlines for decades (Marmaduke, “Huge Poudre River Water Project Back in the Spotlight,

with Key Dates Approaching”). In her reporting Marmaduke seems to approach the facts in a

fair and even way. The newspaper she writes for, the Coloradoan, has a reputation for

environmentalist viewpoints. There is of course strong opposition to this project from those
 Hendricks 5

who want the Poudre River to remain pristine, regardless of the impacts to future growth of

these 15 communities. These opponents argue that taking these 40,000 acre-feet annually out

of the Poudre will reduce the river’s natural flow which is key to flushing out contaminants

that keep the marine life healthy, and would reduce the flow to the popular whitewater park

(Marmaduke, “Huge Poudre River Water Project Back in the Spotlight, with Key Dates

Approaching”). They note as well that the growing city of Ft. Collins already takes half of

their water supply from the river – opponents argue that the river has nothing left to give.

Organized under the banner of “Save the Poudre”, opponents have filed lawsuits in federal

court to stop the permitting process for the Glade reservoir project. This project is more than

15 years from the first idea and so far only legal fights, permitting processes, and studies have

been accomplished.

Main Point #3: Ecological impacts are important to consider

Yet another point of contention is the ecologic impact of water projects. When a dam

is built, migratory fish species are blocked which can have harmful effects on their

reproduction if not planned for. Additionally, reservoirs tend to raise the temperature of the

water while it is impounded, thus increasing the temperature of the river when the water is

ultimately released. These temperature changes can have effects on fish and other marine life.

Finally, when the water flow is impounded, sediment and other silt builds up in unnatural

ways, and since the river flow rate is reduced, silts cannot be washed down the river in the

normal way (Armstrong). Again, this can affect fish in the river systems. Some species simply

do not do well in murky water created by silt. Colorado State University biology professor

LeRoy Poff who opposes the Poudre River project fears that the river will buckle when spring

and early summer rains are taken and diverted to reservoirs like the planned Glade Reservoir.
 Hendricks 6

He believes that research predicts the reduced flows will have severe consequences stating

“These factors will transform the river into a silty channel with loss of valued trees, and

exceedance of water quality standards, including temperature, which will threaten brown

trout.” (Marmaduke, “‘We’ve Taken Enough’: NISP Would Devastate Poudre River,

Opponents Warn at Hearing”). It should be noted that Colorado State University where

professor Poff works is located in Ft. Collins, which is located on the Poudre River. In

contrast, water planners for the 15 towns who favor the Glade Reservoir argue the project is

sustainable, and is a realistic way to avoid “buy-and-dry” policies while giving communities

the water security they need to grow (Marmaduke, “Huge Poudre River Water Project Back in

the Spotlight, with Key Dates Approaching”). Buy-and-dry is an approach whereby a town

purchases (the “buy”) formerly irrigated farmland to take them out of agricultural production

(the “dry”), to reduce the water needed for farmlands, making it available for municipal use.

There is of course the downside that fewer acres of farmland will be in cultivation which

affects food supplies locally, nationally, and potentially globally.

Main point #4: Conservation efforts may help but they do not address the major problems

The final area we will look at has to do with conservation measures. The principal

behind this is that through better conservation, water demand from municipalities could be

reduced. Groups like “Save the Poudre” want more focus on conservation at the municipal

level through low flow toilets, sinks, and showers, reduced landscape irrigation needs, water

re-use, and generally being more aware of reducing water consumption (Marmaduke, “Huge

Poudre River Water Project Back in the Spotlight, with Key Dates Approaching”). However

these groups do not offer concrete evidence that water savings could actually be achieved to

the levels needed for the reservoir to not be required. Their arguments appear to be based far
 Hendricks 7

more on feelings than on facts. City water managers responsible for ensuring access to water

for their constituents argue that while conservation measures can help, they are not the longer-

term answer. Mr. Paul Zillis is a water rights attorney for Erie, one of the fifteen towns

seeking water from the Glade Reservoir project. He states that “we will continue to try to save

water, but I don’t think it’s physically possible to conserve 6,500 acre-feet worth of water”

(Runyon). His point is that even with conservation efforts at their fullest, households and

cities still will use substantial amounts of water and that cannot be avoided. Mr. Runyon’s

reporting of Mr. Zillis’ comments are straight-forward, and reflect Zillis’ position as a

attorney supportive of the water project moving forward. The thoughts expressed by Mr. Zillis

seem to be correct when overall water use in the state is considered. Of the 5.3M acre-feet of

water consumed in the state each year, 4.7M of that goes to agricultural uses (“Water Uses |

Colorado Water Knowledge | Colorado State University”). With that in mind it seems clear

that conservation alone will not solve the water shortages projected for the future. The

Colorado Water Center also predicts that the state will need to find an additional 600,000 to

1,000,000 acre-feet of water annually by 2050 to meet the demand of the projected population

of 8.6 to 10.0M, nearly double the population today (“Water Uses | Colorado Water

Knowledge | Colorado State University”). Unless agricultural production is going to be

reduced substantially, there does not seem to be a way to make up for the supplies these

future, planned reservoirs would bring.

One common misconception surrounding this subject is that somehow there is a way to

have the population of the state of Colorado constantly increase, but not build any additional

water reservoirs or transfer systems to accommodate the growth. For the groups that simply

say no more water projects, they must actually be saying then no more population growth.
 Hendricks 8

But that is impossible. To believe that you can have growth while not providing any

additional water projects, and that the difference is going to be made up through conservation,

is not supported by any data.

Colorado, like the rest of the Intermountain West, is attractional to others from

different areas. It is a curious phenomenon; the very beauty of the area that attracts tourists

and new residents by the tens of thousands, is in danger of being altered in substantial ways to

allow for those very people to come. As a result of migration and population shifts, growth

will continue to put pressure on limited water supplies, which will in turn put added pressure

on agriculture which uses the majority of the currently available water supplies. As more

people flood into these desirable areas, the question and debates will continue; should we alter

more waterways with dams, transfer more water, even if it means scarring the landscape,

impacting wildlife, and altering ecosystems? Are people willing to give up their white water

rafting and trout fishing to have drinking water in every home? It seems clear that if the

growth continues, there will be no choice – populations are going to need more water, and the

projects are going to have to move forward. What seems like a choice today probably will not

be a choice at some point. Population flow to these areas will dictate that it must be.

Hopefully it can be done in as thoughtful and careful a way as possible, but the projects will

inevitably go forward.
 Hendricks 9

Works Cited

Blankenbuehler, Paige. “Roberts Tunnel Celebrates 50 Years.” Www.summitdaily.com, 6 Sept.

2012, www.summitdaily.com/news/roberts-tunnel-celebrates-50-years/. Accessed 20

Mar. 2021.

Armstrong, David. “Shibboleth Authentication Request.” Login.sinclair.ohionet.org, 2011, web-

a-ebscohost-com.sinclair.ohionet.org/ehost/detail/detail?vid=18&sid=12e67d23-2153-

435a-9a94-b10e1614cea4%40sdc-v-sessmgr02&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ

%3d%3d#AN=375081&db=nlebk. Accessed 11 Apr. 2021.

“Introduction to Dams.” Www.e-Education.psu.edu, www.e-

education.psu.edu/earth111/print/book/export/html/893. Accessed 20 Mar. 2021.

Marmaduke, Jacy. “‘We’ve Taken Enough’: NISP Would Devastate Poudre River, Opponents

Warn at Hearing.” The Coloradoan, 25 Aug. 2020,

www.coloradoan.com/story/news/2020/08/25/nisp-would-devastate-poudre-river-

opponents-warn-1041-hearing/3400991001/. Accessed 20 Mar. 2021.

---. “Huge Poudre River Water Project Back in the Spotlight, with Key Dates Approaching.” The

Coloradoan, 24 June 2018, www.coloradoan.com/story/news/2018/06/24/nisp-glade-

reservoir-decrease-poudre-flows-fort-collins-water-project/718360002/. Accessed 20

Mar. 2021.

Runyon, Luke. “Population Growth Looms Large in Debates over Proposed Colorado Water

Project.” KUNC, 9 Sept. 2020, www.kunc.org/api-only/2020-09-09/population-growth-

looms-large-in-debates-over-proposed-colorado-water-project. Accessed 20 Mar. 2021.

Tyler McMahon, Matthew Reuer. “The Impacts of Water Transfer on Rural Communities Must

Be Considered.” Gale in Context: Opposing Viewpoints, Gale in Context, 2010, go-gale-

 Hendricks 10

com.sinclair.ohionet.org/ps/retrieve.do?

tabID=Viewpoints&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=MultiTab&hit

Count=84&searchType=BasicSearchForm¤tPosition=2&docId=GALE

%7CEJ3010670219&docType=Viewpoint+essay&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=ZX

AY-MOD1&prodId=OVIC&pageNum=1&contentSet=GALE

%7CEJ3010670219&searchId=R5&userGroupName=dayt30401&inPS=true. Accessed

20 Mar. 2021.

“Water Uses | Colorado Water Knowledge | Colorado State University.” Colorado State

University: Colorado Water Knowledge, waterknowledge.colostate.edu/water-

management-administration/water-uses/. Accessed 20 Mar. 2021.