Home

Words

Pictures

Sounds

Letters to the Editor

Links

High and Dry

Group claims power plant leaves river 'Essentially dry'

The exterior of the Salida Hydroelectric project's lower plant, as it appears today.

A report on Colorado rivers produced by a national environmental group claims two hydroelectric plants on the South Fork of the Arkansas River have depleted fish and wildlife habitat, despite counter claims by plant operators.

In the 20 page report, “A Dry Legacy — The Challenge for Colorado’s Rivers,” Trout Unlimited focuses on environmental problems associated with 10 Colorado drainages, including the South Fork of the Arkansas River. The publication attacks the water diversions in place Fooses Creek on the South Fork of the Arkansas which feed two antique hydroelectric plants operated by Xcel Energy.

“The South Arkansas and Fooses Creek are classic examples of why we need stronger tools to protect our rivers,” said Melinda Kassen, the director of Trout Unlimited’s Colorado Water Project. “Hydropower is a valid use of our rivers, but it should not be allowed to leave the rivers themselves high and dry.”

Alfred Hughes, who heads Xcel Energy’s hydroelectric division in the state, said the report unfairly paints the power company as an enemy of the environment.
&We have worked to improve the habitat for fish and other species on the river, and have followed all the guidelines for bypass flows in our license” Hughes said. “This report make no mention of the efforts we have made, or the fact that we have worked with Trout Unlimited and the Forest Service to improve river habitat.”

The river, commonly known as the South Arkansas or the Little River, runs approximately 16 miles from the Continental Divide to its junction with the main stem of the Arkansas River, south of Salida.

Built in 1906, the two units of the Salida Hydroelectric Project are located on the river east of Garfield and below Maysville, fed by water diverted from dams on the river and Fooses Creek. “The Ames plant near Telluride, where Tesla proved some of his theories, was the first AC generating station in the world, and is still running,” Hughes said.
"With the plants at Tacoma (near Durango) and here, these are some of the oldest working power plants in the world.”

Hughes said the upper plant was upgraded in 1925, bringing total output to 1.5 megawatts with sufficient water.
"These are high pressure, low volume units, originally designed to power the mines and camps in the area," he said. "They are simple, efficient, and I would consider them to be a ‘green’ renewable energy source.

"Loosely, we figure one megawatt will light 6,000 homes, so this is a relatively small part of the company’s output. Historically though, they are some of the oldest operating plants in the state. The Salida Hydro, along with the Shoshone Hydro, were the original units of Colorado Power Company, which became Public Service. This is where our whole company was born.”

The Salida Hydroplant lower unit generators, as they appeared in the 1920's. The unit on the left is still in operation today.


In the report, Trout Unlimited points to that historical use as a long term threat to the ecosystem along the river.

"Diversions for agricultural irrigation and hydroelectric power have adversely effected the South Arkansas for over 100 years, leaving numerous stretches of the river dry," states the report.
"Since 1900, over 95 water rights claims were staked on this short stretch of river.”

The report claims Fooses Creek is “essentially dry” from August through May over a nearly three-mile stretch.

“It’s more like a half a mile, and like everywhere in Colorado, it depends on the year if there is water or not,” Hughes said.

When the plant was re-licensed by the Federal Environmental Regulatory Commission in 1997, (over objections by Trout Unlimited) Xcel was required to create minimum in-stream flows on both streams for the benefit of the environment. Flow levels are set to increase incrementally over the next 20 years until reaching an ‘adequate’ level.

The report claims because of opposition from Xcel, the increased in-stream flow needed may never be attained.
"What we foresee is disagreeing over is what is ‘adequate,’” said David Nickum , Colorado representative of Trout Unlimited.
"The operators of the plant have agreed to do continued monitoring. The fish are coming back, and they are responding to the changes. But how much is enough? I can see a scenario where there are ‘dueling experts’ trying to convince the government how much is necessary.”

Hughes admitted that as flows to the plants are decreased, it will be harder for them to produce power efficiently. “We are generating less now because of the bypasses, but there is really no way to change that without going through the licensing process again,” he said.
"It is still absolutely worth it to have them operating. They save 4,400 tons of coal annually. They are important, not just a part of Colorado history, but of man’s history.”

Water Commissioner Bruce Smith said Trout Unlimited's report used river flow data he collected, but the ideas have been slanted to reflect one philosophy. “It’s fairly accurate, but obviously biased,” Smith said. "That plant has been there a long time. It’s really hard to say what kind of effect it’s had, because we don’t know what was there before. But obviously, you can see it does change the flow of the South Arkansas and Fooses Creek.”

Smith said the conflicting desires of Trout Unlimited and Xcel for how the water should be used ultimately don’t leave room for compromise. “There may not be a way for a win-win situation here,” Smith said. “I don’t think that if Trout Unlimited got the bypass flow they wanted there would be enough for power generation.”

A full copy of the Trout Unlimited report “A Dry Legacy— The Challenge for Colorado’s Rivers,”” is available for download here.

A version of this article appeared in The Mountain Mail, Feb. 5, 2002.