The Conservation Colorado report card giving the Dolores River a D-minus (Journal, July 18), is superficial and irrelevant given the level of planning, cooperation and extensive monitoring that went into the management of the 2017 release from McPhee Reservoir.
As Dolores Water Conservancy District manager, I appreciate the fact that the Journal’s reporter called me and Sam Carter, President of Dolores River Boating Advocates, to give us a chance to describe the 2017 managed-release which included boatable flows for 86 days, with peak releases of 4,000 cubic feet per second and 11 days above 2,000 cfs.
With the cooperation of The Nature Conservancy, American Whitewater and DRBA, flow adjustments were made and monitoring efforts were coordinated via weekly phone calls involving these partners, DWCD and the Bureau of Reclamation.
For its depth and level of cooperation, I would put the 2017 ecological response and boater experience monitoring on the Dolores up against any effort in the West.
So why the D-minus from Conservation Colorado? I can only speculate, since I am not aware of anything they have ever contributed to collaborative efforts on the Dolores. Their “report card” appears to second-guess water allocations from the Dolores Project, which go back decades in providing water to irrigate 35,000 acres of land, including 7,600 acres that are a centerpiece to the Colorado Ute Indian Water Rights Settlement, while providing water capable of supporting the growth of our towns for the next 50 years.
Conservation Colorado appears not to be aware that we have spent 15 years in the worst hydrologic period on record.
Can we improve on our ability to take care of the lower Dolores River while continuing to provide these vital water supplies? We certainly can, if we stick together as partners. The biggest risk of this superficial report card exercise is the risk of polarizing the excellent working relationships among water users, local governments, conservation and boating advocates, all of whom have partnered to take care of the Dolores River as well as the water needs of local communities.
I am pleased to report that local partnerships are strong; I advise Conservation Colorado to become a constructive supporter of collaborative efforts if the organization is truly interested in the Dolores River.
One year from now, I challenge Conservation Colorado to grade itself on any constructive contributions it may make to the health and well-being of the Dolores River and those who value and depend on this unique river.
Mike Preston
Cortez
