Arkansas Valley water districts and Aurora plan to open talks as soon as December aimed at providing aid to the region to offset the impact of a controversial, large-scale water purchase by Aurora that will periodically dry up thousands of acres of farmland.
The talks are likely to include renegotiating a hard-fought, 21-year-old agreement among water providers, Aurora, Pueblo, Colorado Springs and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and others.
The agreement is not set to expire until 2047, but Bill Long, president of the Southeastern Water Conservancy District, which manages the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project for the Bureau of Reclamation, said the districts and Aurora have agreed to reopen the pact early to find ways to compensate the valley for the new loss of farm water.
“We hope that this issue can be resolved in a way that’s beneficial to both parties,” Long said. “What that looks like at this point I am not sure. We strongly believe the agreement has been violated and appropriate mitigation, or them not taking the water out of the valley, needs to occur. In our minds, there is no gray area.”
Aurora declined an interview request, but spokesman Gregory Baker acknowledged via email that Aurora has agreed to the talks, though a firm date has not been set.
Baker also confirmed that the water rights have been placed in a special account and won’t be used for two years while negotiations are underway.
The original 2003 agreement helped settle a number of lawsuits and disputes with Aurora after it asked to use the federally owned Fryingpan-Arkansas Project and Pueblo Reservoir. The deal gave Aurora the right to use the federal system for moving farm water it owned at the time in exchange for $25 million in cash payments over the 40-year life of the deal, among other provisions. The contract with the federal government was finalized in 2007.
The latest battle erupted this spring shortly after Aurora announced its $80 million purchase of more than 5,000 acres of farmland and the irrigation water used to farm the land in Otero County.
Southeastern’s board quickly voted unanimously in April to oppose the purchase, and others, such as Colorado Springs and the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District in Rocky Ford, followed suit.
Jack Goble, general manager of the Lower Arkansas Valley district, said the planned talks should pave the way for ensuring the valley’s farmers and ranchers are better protected against urban water harvesting.
“This is a big deal,” Goble said.
Aurora facing growth pressures
While Lower Arkansas officials argue that the 2003 agreement prohibits future water exports by Aurora, city officials have said previously that the purchase does not violate the pact, in part, because it involves leasing the water temporarily, rather than permanently removing it from the valley.
Fast-growing Aurora, Colorado’s third largest city, has had a controversial role in the history of agricultural water in the Arkansas Valley. In the 1970s and 1980s, it purchased water in several counties, drying up the farms the water once irrigated, and moving it up to delivery and storage systems in the metro area.
The Fryingpan-Arkansas project was built in the 1950s to gather water from the Western Slope and the headwaters of the Arkansas River and deliver it to the cities and farms of the Arkansas Valley. Local residents, via property taxes, have repaid the federal government for most of the construction costs and continue to pay the maintenance and operation costs of the massive project, according to Southeastern’s Long.
Aurora isn’t the only city that has moved to tie up agricultural water in the Lower Arkansas Valley. Recently, Colorado Springs inked a deal with Bent County and Pueblo Water has purchased water in the historic Bessemer Ditch just east of Pueblo.
At the same time, irrigated farm and ranch lands, the backbone of the state’s $47 billion agricultural economy, have been disappearing across the state. A new analysis by Fresh Water News and The Colorado Sun shows that 32% of irrigated ag lands have been lost to drought and urban development, and to other states to satisfy legal obligations to deliver water.
Long said the pending talks are “a recognition by Aurora that when making deals to acquire ag water, they need to be responsible and make sure there are benefits for all the parties. When we get to the table they may play hard ball, but I truly do think they want to fix this issue. That is in the best interest of all of the parties.”
Print