Water ’22 is calling upon all Coloradans to come together to collectively meet the urgency of the moment…
— from the Water22.org website
But maybe they are not calling on all Coloradans?
Maybe Water Education Colorado and their main funding partners, the Walton Family Foundation and the Colorado Water Conservation Board, don’t really want to confront the water users who consume 89% [“eighty-nine percent”] of the water Colorado?
That would be the agricultural users, according to Colorado State University.
None of the “22 Ways to Care for Colorado Water in 2022” suggested on the Water22.org website apply to ‘agricultural’ water consumption.
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Colorado had a workforce (as of October) of about 3.14 million employed workers, of whom 2.90 million worked in non-farm jobs — suggesting that ‘farm’ jobs account for about 8% [“eight percent”] of the state’s job opportunities.
In terms of agriculture’s overall economic output in the state, here’s a quote from the University of Arkansas “Economic Impact of Agriculture” web page:
Economic Contribution and Impact Research
In 2020, Colorado generated around $7.3 billion in agricultural cash receipts with the highest valued commodities being cattle and calves, dairy products, specifically milk, and corn. That same year, the value of Colorado’s agricultural production and processing industries represented 2.3 percent of total state GDP.
Meanwhile, the Colorado legislature, last June, allocated $2 million for 2023, to encourage individuals, businesses, and governments to replace turf grass — lawns — with alternative, water-saving landscaping types. The $2 million in initial funds for this ‘Cash for Grass’ program won’t stretch very far, however, according to Peter Mayer with engineering consulting firm Water Demand Management.
“The amount of money being spent in Colorado is ultimately nothing compared with what’s being spent in a single year in southern Nevada or southern California,” Mayer claims.
The Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA), for example, hands out grants of up to $500,000 to home owners associations and business parks, as rebates for grass removal. The program was launched in 1999 — 23 years ago — and is credited with the removal of 197 million square feet of purely decorative grass (not athletic playing fields or parks)… enough to wrap a strip of sod around the entire globe. The agency says they are about halfway through the intended project.
Here in Colorado, after subtracting staffing and administration costs, some $1.5 million will remain from HB 1151 for incentives, equal to about three large SNWA grants. For the program to continue beyond 2025, Colorado will have to find additional funding.
But let’s look at the situation from a local perspective… given that all water is, in a sense, local water.
Disclosure: I currently serve on the Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD) Board of Directors, but this editorial series reflects only my personal opinions, and not necessarily the opinions of the PAWSD Board as a whole.
There’s an interesting story in yesterday’s Pagosa Springs SUN, written by reporter Josh Pike. A controversy has arisen out in the agricultural areas of Archuleta County — the agricultural areas that constitute maybe 90% of the private land in the community. Certain agricultural landowners have proposed the creation of dedicated “event centers” that can host weddings, family reunions, conferences, and similar types of events. Not only would these “event centers” impact the (already substandard) rural roads in the affected neighborhoods, they would likely generate noise and human activity in areas that were traditionally home to cows.
Cows, not being known for causing noise and other disturbances. Or damage to roads.
The Archuleta Board of County Commissioners are in the midst of a lawsuit filed by a group of 21 ‘agricultural zoned’ landowners, challenging an April 2021 decision by the BOCC to issue a conditional use permit to ‘The Barn on the Sombrilla LLC’. The permit allegedly allowed the Sombrilla Springs Ranch owners to offer ‘glamping’ (luxury camping), wedding receptions, and related activities on their property.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit allege that, at the time the Sombrilla permit was issued, “event centers” were not specifically allowed within the County’s agricultural zoning, but similar uses such as bars, restaurants, and entertainment facilities, were in fact prohibited on agricultural ranches.
Reportedly, the Sombrilla Springs Ranch has since been directed to cease its glamping activities. But the lawsuit continues.
This dispute (as far as I can tell) has very little to do with the ’22 Ways to Care for Colorado Water in 2022′. But it does reflect something about ‘agricultural’ land and its uses.
In the early days of white settlement — the period from 1890 through about 1960 — Archuleta County’s economy was based largely on timber extraction, with support from a livestock industry. In other words, the local economy was supported almost entirely by ‘agriculture’ — when defining timber harvesting and processing as an ‘agricultural’ sector. By 1920, most of the working ranches in Archuleta County had already acquired legal water rights necessary to grow acres and acres of grass, for hay and for grazing livestock.
By 1975, nearly all the lumber mills had gone out of business, and the economy gradually shifted toward tourism… and home construction and real estate, aimed mainly at retirees and second-home owners.
Some of those retirees and second-home owners built or purchased modest homes in the downtown and suburban parts of the county. But some developers and wealthier home-buyers purchased ‘agricultural’ properties, with no real intention of conducting farming or ranching as income-producing operations, but instead, to enjoy the vast open spaces afforded by those properties.
This development pattern has produced an interesting situation. Where previously, farming and ranching had been conducted by families with fairly modest incomes — some might even call them, ‘poor’ families — the new use of wide open spaces, in Colorado and in Archuleta County, has increasingly accrued to millionaires and billionaires… along with the ‘agricultural water rights’ connected to those previously hard-working ranches and farms.
As Archuleta County’s tourism industry has grown… and grown… and grown… due in part to millions of dollars of tax money spent by our local government to promote that particular industry… glamping and event operations like ‘The Barn at the Sombrilla LLC’ have naturally promised a profitable bottom line for ambitious investors.
And increasingly, the importance of actual ‘agriculture’ to the Pagosa Springs economy has diminished.
But the 19th century water rights, connected to those previously-struggling ranches and farms, persist. Basically, Colorado is trying to deal with a 21st century water crisis, using 19th century water law.
If we truly care about Colorado water, we won’t worry too much about flushing dead insects, or about picking up pet poop to keep E. coli out of the water supply, or about full loads of laundry… in spite of what Water22.org might want us to focus on.
If we truly care about Colorado water, we will elect representatives who have the cojones to confront the real issues.
Bill Hudson began sharing his opinions in the Pagosa Daily Post in 2004 and can’t seem to break the habit. He claims that, in Pagosa Springs, opinions are like pickup trucks: everybody has one.