|
Home Page
News & Information
River Basin Plans
Basin Advisory Groups
Planning Products
|
Green River Basin Water Plan
Final Report
II       Basin Water Use and Water Quality Profile
-
- A. Overview
This chapter describes and quantifies the various current uses made of water in
the Green River Basin. The estimation of consumptive use of water is valuable
for evaluating the overall use of water in the Basin relative to Compact allotments,
the location of use relative to water supplies, and the relative amounts of the varying
uses when growth is considered. In the following discussions, the terms consumptive
use and depletion are often used interchangeably. Both refer to the degree to which
a use actually reduces the water available at that point or downstream.
As with all chapters in this final plan report, explicit lists of references are not provided.
Instead, all references to reports, documents, maps, and personal communications are
maintained in the Technical Memoranda that were prepared during the current planning
process. Should the reader desire to review a complete list of references for the
information presented in this chapter, the following memoranda should be consulted:
-
- B. Agricultural Water Use
History of Agricultural Practices in the Basin
The Green River Basin of Wyoming has seen the use of water for beneficial
agricultural purposes since Territorial days. Irrigated agriculture was the first
large user of surface water in the Basin, and it remains the largest water consumer
in the Basin and the State. In the 1970 Framework Water Plan (Wyoming
Water Planning Program, 1970), the depletion attributable to agricultural uses
totaled 267,900 acre-feet, or 90 percent of the total depletion of 296,100
acre-feet in the Basin. In the 1998 Bureau of Reclamation Consumptive Uses
and Losses Report (CULR) irrigation depletions in Wyoming's Green River
Basin were calculated to average 399,000 acre-feet for the 1986-1990 period,
or about 79 percent of Wyoming's estimated average total depletions in the Basin
of 502,000 acre-feet per year for the same period. The reason irrigation
depletion estimates by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) exceed 1970
Framework Plan estimates, given that irrigated acres have not equally increased,
is uncertain but probably is due to revised consumptive requirement values and
the construction of reservoirs (e.g. Meeks Cabin and Stateline Reservoirs and
Fremont Lake enlargement) which provide late season water. The reason
irrigation depletions have reduced as a percentage of total basin use is largely
attributable to increases in industrial use.
Historically, irrigation diversions occurred where lands "susceptible of irrigation"
lay near a reliable watercourse from which water could be diverted with the least
work. Bottomlands were developed first because of the relative ease with which
they could be put under irrigation from a ditch. Reservoirs for irrigation water
storage (and other uses) were constructed as direct flow rights eventually exceeded
the reliable supply of streams. In the words of Elwood Mead in his first report as
Territorial Engineer, storage was needed "
to hold the waste water of winter and
the surplus from the summer floods
.On many of our streams is already felt the
pressing need for an auxiliary summer supply which the reservoir would furnish."
Oftentimes, reservoir storage was developed in mountainous terrain where water
levels in existing alpine lakes could easily be raised by the simple addition of a dike
or small dam at the natural outlet. Fremont Lake near Pinedale is such an example.
Because of the relative aridity of the central Green River Basin, irrigation first began
along the tributaries leading from the various mountain ranges that fringe the Basin.
These included, as examples, the Little Snake, New Fork and Blacks Fork Rivers as
well as other tributaries such as the Piney Creeks west of Big Piney, Smiths Fork
Creek near Lyman and the Hams Fork. These and smaller streams and creeks not
only provided water nearer the source, but headgates located thereon were less
susceptible to washout and therefore more easily maintained than those constructed
on the mainstem of the Green River. As happened early on in much of Wyoming,
tributaries were more quickly developed than the larger watercourses they fed.
Today, the development of irrigation works in the Basin still is defined by these early
efforts. The bulk of irrigation in the Basin occurs along tributaries, with the primary
agricultural areas located in the Little Snake, Blacks Fork, Big Sandy and New Fork
River valleys as well as along the numerous streams emanating from the northwest
(Piney Creeks and others).
Storage Water
The majority of water in storage reservoirs within the Green River Basin is permitted
for irrigation use. Other users, such as industry, municipal and recreation, are small
in comparison. In sub-basins where storage is available, irrigation seasons are often
lengthened and summer supplies more reliable than in other areas. For this reason,
consumptive use of water for irrigation is typically higher in sub-basins with storage
than without. The largest reservoir in the interior of the Basin, Fontenelle Reservoir,
is downstream of virtually all of the upper Green River irrigated areas, unavailable to
other sub-basins, and therefore is virtually unused for irrigation.
Since the Framework Plan was published, several reservoirs have been constructed in
the Basin to assist with irrigation supplies. These include Viva Naughton, Meeks
Cabin and Stateline Reservoirs. Meeks Cabin and Stateline provide supplemental
irrigation water and are permitted as such. Viva Naughton is permitted for industrial
use, but through informal arrangements, releases are made to assist Hams Fork irrigators
when supplies are available. Also since 1970, enlargements to Boulder Lake, Fremont
Lake and Fontenelle Reservoir have been constructed. In the case of Fontenelle Reservoir,
the enlargement only activated previously inactive capacity and was not a physical
enlargement. More recently, in 1997, ownership of Middle Piney Lake was transferred to
the U.S. Forest Service. Since that time Middle Piney has not been used, or available, for
supplemental irrigation supply.
The technical memorandum entitled Major Reservoir Information describes the larger
(>1,000 ACRE-FEET) reservoirs in the Basin as well as some smaller ones. Aside from
Fontenelle (very little irrigation use), Flaming Gorge (out of state), Viva Naughton
(industrial), Kemmerer No. 1 (municipal) and High Savery (yet to be constructed) Reservoirs,
the Basin contains approximately 212,000 acre-feet of storage primarily devoted to
supplemental irrigation supply. The distribution of this storage within the Basin is uneven,
meaning that some irrigated areas are well served by one or several reservoirs above them
while others are devoid of storage of any size. The following lists storage available by
sub-basin:
| Storage
Availability for Agricultural Uses, Green River Basin |
| Sub-Basin | Total Storage*, AF |
Irrigated Acres | Available Storage,
AF/Acre |
| Little Snake | 17,430 | 15,483 |
1.1 |
| Henrys Fork | 6,180 | 15,086 |
0.4 |
| Blacks Fork | 48,808 | 58,007 |
0.8 |
| Hams Fork | 1,198 | 9,942 |
0.1 |
| Big Sandy | 55,943 | 21,318 |
2.6 |
| New Fork | 94,315 | 50,447 |
1.9 |
| Upper Green & Tribs | 6,495 | 119,302 |
0.05 |
| * Where irrigation is included with other uses, total storage is used in this comparison |
Irrigated Lands Mapping
Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping of irrigated lands, water rights,
diversion points, and irrigation wells allowed for accurate, computerized spatial
representation and analysis of current irrigation and acreage for use in modeling,
estimation of potential shortages, and future storage development strategies,
among other possible uses. The process of developing GIS mapping of all
recently irrigated lands and associated water rights within Wyoming's Green
River Basin included four phases:
- Aerial and Satellite Interpretation and Mapping
- Field Verification
- Water Rights Attribution
- Production of Final GIS Products and Databases
The current mapping project was performed much as it was for the first
comprehensive irrigated lands mapping of the Basin, conducted for the Green
River Basin Water Plan by the Wyoming Water Planning Program (WWPP)
in 1970. Ortho-rectified, infra-red satellite imagery supplemented the aerial
photography interpretation completed during the 1970 project. The process
involved shifting some irrigated polygons to portray positional accuracy
according to the rectified images, and adding or deleting represented lands
according to 1997-1999 vintage images.
The water rights attached to each individual irrigated polygon were abstracted
from the original records on file in the office of the Wyoming State Engineer and
State Board of Control located in Cheyenne, Wyoming. These rights were
attached as attributed point features within each associated irrigated polygon.
The points of diversion for the irrigation ditches were plotted and attributed, as
were all water wells permitted for over 50 gallons per minute.
Final coverages produced include irrigated lands, water rights, points of diversion,
and water well permits. Information contained in the irrigated lands coverage
includes acreage, irrigation type (irrigated or sub-irrigated), drainage designation,
and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle in which the lands
are located.
Table II-1 provides a summary of the irrigated acreage calculated from the GIS
mapping for each sub-basin, the vast majority of which is irrigated from surface
water sources. Figure II-1 illustrates the irrigated lands, by sub-basin.
Table II-1 Irrigated Land Totals by Sub-Basin
| BASIN |
1999 Irrigated Lands |
1999 Sub-Irrigated Lands |
1999 TOTAL |
| (acres) |
| Green River Above Fontenelle | 119,302 |
14,068 | 133,370 |
| New Fork River | 50,447 |
2,259 | 52,707 |
| Big Sandy - Eden Farson | 21,318 |
1,188 | 22,506 |
| Henrys Fork | 15,806 |
1,604 | 16,690 |
| Blacks Fork River | 61,337 |
13,836 | 75,173 |
| Hams Fork River | 9.942 |
345 | 10,287 |
| Green River Below Fontenelle Res. | 2,042 |
- | 2,042 |
| Little Snake River | 15,483 |
1,477 | 16,959 |
| Vermilion, Red, Salt Wells Creeks | 674 |
- | 674 |
| BASIN TOTALS | 295,631 |
34,777 | 330,408 |
Figure II-1 Irrigated Lands by Sub-Basin

click to enlarge
The points of diversion coverage represents actual locations
where permits divert from their source. The water well permits
coverage represents the approximate location to the nearest
quarter-quarter section. Table II-2 provides a summary of
permitted irrigated acreage from ground water supplies.
Table II-2 Ground Water Irrigated Lands by Sub-Basin
| BASIN |
1999 Original Supply
Active Permitted Acres |
1999 Additional Supply Active Permitted Acres |
| (acres) |
| Green River Above Fontenelle | - |
23 (2 wells) |
| Big Sandy - Eden Farson | 122(1 well) |
237 (5 wells) |
| Henrys Fork | - |
198 (9 wells) |
| Blacks Fork River | - |
110 (2 wells) |
| TOTALS | 122 (1 well) |
568 (18 wells) |
Agricultural Uses Typical Crops
The Green River Basin of Wyoming is primarily a producer of
forage for livestock. By far the most common use of irrigation
is in the growth of grass hay for harvest and pasture. Alfalfa
is grown in areas where the growing season and water supplies
allow. Small grains and cash crops are very limited in extent
and in no sub-basin do they comprise more than three percent of
the irrigated acres.
Water supply and growing season are the factors most often given
for the predominance of grasses under irrigation. In this sense,
irrigated agriculture is tied very closely to the livestock
industry because the only viable use for the hay is as forage.
Typically the forage is used by the producers' herds although
some is disposed through local sale or export from the Basin.
Consumptive Use
The depletion of water by irrigation is estimated, in general
terms, using available water supply, the consumptive demand of
the crops irrigated and the number of irrigated acres in the
Basin.
To determine the amount of water consumed via irrigation, the
concepts of consumptive use (CU) and consumptive irrigation
demand (CIR) must be described. In essence, CU describes the
total water uptake of a crop, and varies due to several
climatologic factors as well as plant stage. CIR is that
amount of the total CU needed to be applied by irrigation for
a full harvest.
CIR data have been published by month for various crops at
seven sites within the Green River Basin proper and at several
other sites that lie adjacent to the Basin. Mean values were
used for "normal" year CIR values. For those years identified
as "dry" or "wet" in the "Study Period Selection" memorandum,
the corresponding yearly CIR values were ascribed as applicable
for calculating "wet" or "dry" year CIR totals. The resulting
CIR values were then applied to the number of irrigation days
for each scenario to compute the agricultural depletion
associated with that scenario.
In the Green River Basin most irrigators get one cutting of
grass hay. As seasonal water supplies and growing conditions
allow, irrigators will get a second cutting of grass. Where
alfalfa is grown, two cuttings are desirable. Even if a second
cutting is not obtained, diversion will usually continue (if
water is available) in late summer and fall to fill soil profiles
and provide stock water. Late season water is also applied to
pasture and fields that livestock will be turned into in the fall,
in effect allowing for a "second cutting" achieved not by
mechanical harvest but by actual animal feeding. Because of the
variation in precipitation, temperature and frost-free days even
in normal years, whether or not more than one cutting is obtained
is a matter of speculation.
Irrigation Days
To estimate the effects of "supply limited" conditions, diversion
and streamflow records in the various sub-basins within Wyoming's
Green River Basin were reviewed. The goal of this work was to
estimate the number of days water is diverted. For the normal
year case, irrigation days describe the number of days water
typically is diverted based on diversion records and interviews.
These values are not intended to apply to individual headgates,
but rather to a sub-basin or tributary as a whole.
In some cases, diversion records indicate sufficient water for
irrigation throughout a normal year. However, State Engineer
field personnel are almost unanimous in their opinions that many
ditches are turned off at traditional times not only for harvest
but for consistent operational scheduling. Actual irrigation days
were generally reduced to account for this operational reduction,
even if occasional diversion records indicate water use.
Agricultural Depletion Estimate
Irrigation depletions are defined herein as the consumption of
water applied by man to irrigated crops and include consumption
by incidentally irrigated areas. Incidentally irrigated areas
may be subirrigated or irrigated by surface return flows from
managed fields. While some incidentally irrigated areas may
contain willows, small trees or other vegetation, all are
treated as crops (grass, in most cases) for consumptive
estimates.
Current normal-year irrigation depletion estimates are 401,000
acre-feet per year, with dry-year and wet-year depletions
estimated at 375,000 and 432,000 acre-feet, respectively.
Table II-3 shows the agricultural depletion estimate by
sub-basin and water supply scenario. These estimates are
shown graphically in Figure II-2.
Table II-3 Agrigultural Depletion Estimate by Sub-Basin and
Water Supply Scenario
| River Basin/Sub-basin |
Irrigated Acres |
Normal Year Total, AF |
Wet Year Total, AF |
Dry Year Total, AF |
Upper & Mainstem Green River
includes Beaver Creek
Dry Piney Creek
Piney Creeks
Green River above Fontenelle
Horse Creek
Cottonwood Creek
Beaver Creek |
121,938 |
139,419 |
170,620 |
129,157 |
Muddy Creek
LaBarge Creek
Slate Creek
Fontenelle Creek |
11,432 |
12,963 |
15,859 |
12,019 |
New Fork River
includes Boulder Creeks
East Fork
Muddy Creek, trib. East Fork
New Fork and Willow Creek
Pine and Pole Creeks
Silver Creek |
52,707 |
60,910 |
64,364 |
58,996 |
Big/Little Sandy Rivers
includes Farson/Eden
Upper Basin |
22,506 |
36,164 |
30,543 |
34,472 |
Green River Below Fontenelle
|
2,042 |
3,281 |
2,771 |
3,128 |
Blacks Fork
includes Blacks Fork
Smiths Fork and Muddy Creek |
75,173 |
93,608 |
90,007 |
87,866 |
| Hams Fork |
10,287 |
12,772 |
12,276 |
11,990 |
| Henrys Fork |
16,690 |
20,659 |
19,851 |
19,397 |
Little Snake
above Baggs |
11,941 |
13,969 |
18,405 |
12,269 |
below Baggs
| 5,018 |
6,547 |
6,759 |
5,471 |
| Vermilion/Salt Wells Creeks |
674 |
741 |
810 |
612 |
| Total |
330,408 |
401,034 |
432,266 |
375,377 |
Figure II-2 Agricultural Depletion by Sub-Basin and Water Supply Scenario

click to enlarge
-
- C. Municipal and Domestic Use
Municipal and domestic uses are a relatively small but important part of the overall
water use in Wyoming's Green River Basin. Municipal and domestic needs are
served by both surface and ground water.
Municipal Use
The purpose of this section is to provide water use information for the following
15 cities, towns, and joint power boards (JPB) that supply water to their citizens
or customers:
Entities that obtain their primary water supply from surface water, and the sources,
are:
- Town of Baggs - Little Snake River
- Bridger Valley Joint Powers Board - Smiths Fork and Blacks Fork
- City of Cheyenne - Tributaries to the Little Snake River
- Dixon - Little Snake River
- Town of Granger - Green River
- Kemmerer-Diamondville Joint Powers Board (KD JPB) - Hams Fork River
- Town of LaBarge - Green River
- Pinedale - Fremont Lake
- Rock Springs/Green River/Sweetwater County Joint Powers Board
(RS/GR/SC JPB) - Green River
Entities with primary water supplies from ground water (and the source aquifer) are:
- Town of Bairoil (Battle Springs Formation)
- Town of Big Piney (Green River Formation)
- Town of Marbleton(Wasatch Formation)
- Town of Opal (Green River Formation)
- Town of Superior (Ericson Sandstone/Rock Springs Formation)
- Town of Wamsutter (Green River Formation)
Methodology
Primarily, information was obtained from the various municipalities through
direct communication or from the municipalities' responses to the Wyoming
Water Development Commission's (WWDC) 2000 Water Supply Survey.
If neither of these sources were available, data from the WWDC's "1998
Water System Survey Report" were used.
Typically, municipalities provide water to customers outside their corporate
limits. Therefore, the populations of the service areas are more pertinent than
the census information. Further, some of the municipalities or joint powers
boards sell water to surrounding water districts. For purposes of this analysis,
water sales outside the corporate limits for domestic use are considered
municipal water use and are included in the statistics for the various entities.
In addition, municipalities may sell water to industrial water users. For example,
the Kemmerer-Diamondville Joint Powers Water Board and the
Rock Springs/Green River/ Sweetwater County Joint Powers Water Board sell
water to industries outside the corporate limits of their member municipalities.
These water sales are not considered municipal water use in this analysis and are
addressed as industrial water use.
Conclusions
Table II-4 provides a comparison of reported existing peak day demand with
the reported system capacity and the capacity of the direct flow and storage water
rights for the 14 suppliers in the Green River Basin (Cheyenne is not considered in
this analysis):
Table II-4 Comparison of Existing Use and System Capacity
|
(AFD = acre-feet per day) |
| Supplier |
Peak Day Demand (AFD) |
System Capacity (AFD) |
Water Right Capacity (AFD)
(Direct Flow or GW) |
Storage Rights (AF) |
| Baggs | 0.61 | 0.88 |
1.24 | None |
| Bairoil | 0.77 | 0.92 |
0.92 | None |
| Big Piney | 0.41 | 2.30 |
3.30 | None |
| Bridger Valley JPB | 6.60 | 12.10 |
15.10 | 800 |
| Dixon | 0.08 | 0.97 |
0.97 | None |
| Granger | 0.31 | 3.09 |
13.01 | None |
| KD JPB | 6.14 | 12.82 |
17.07 | 1,770 |
| LaBarge | 1.54 | 1.77 |
2.64 | None |
| Marbleton | 2.15 | 2.20 |
3.60 | None |
| Opal | 0.07 | 0.24 |
0.46 | None |
| Pinedale | 7.67 | 44.20 |
11.48 | 17,4439 |
| RS/GR/SC JPB | 47.20 | 65.00 |
79.30 | None |
| Superior | 0.28 | 1.60 |
5.57 | None |
| Wamsutter | 0.61 | 3.09 |
1.51 | None |
Table II-4 is offered as an indication that the water suppliers have sufficient
system and water right capacity to meet their existing demands, as well as
the opportunity to meet the demands of some future growth.
Table II-5 describes the monthly and annual depletions by municipal use in the Basin.
Table II-5 Current Level Municipal Surface Water Depletions
(Using 1997-1999 Data, AF/Year)
| City/Town |
Pop. |
GPCPD |
River |
Jan. |
Feb. |
Mar. |
Apr. |
May |
June |
July |
Aug. |
Sept. |
Oct. |
Nov. |
Dec. |
Total (AF) |
| Baggs | 300 |
157 | Little Snake |
5.07 | 4.76 |
4.41 | 0.62 |
-0.65 | 2.25 |
9.51 | 7.60 |
5.84 | 4.22 |
3.98 | 5.14 |
53 |
| BV JPB | 4,500 |
86 | Smiths/Blacks Fk |
19.12 | 16.41 |
18.83 | 21.30 |
28.73 | 38.82 |
104.49 | 65.16 |
51.71 | 25.51 |
25.19 | 15.89 |
431 |
| Cheyenne | N.A |
N.A. | Little Snake trib. |
21.67 | 7.67 |
6.33 | 145.00 |
4132.33 | 9683.00 |
372.00 | 12.33 |
3.67 | 2.33 |
1.00 | 1.00 |
14,388 |
| Dixon | 75 |
274 | Little Snake |
1.40 | 1.38 |
1.38 | 1.29 |
1.72 | 2.69 |
3.74 | 2.72 |
2.30 | 1.55 |
1.55 | 1.31 |
23 |
| Granger | 170 |
294 | Green |
0.62 | 0.47 |
0.58 | 0.94 |
12.67 | 28.24 |
4.68 | 3.12 |
1.94 | 1.01 |
0.78 | 0.93 |
56 |
| KD JPB | 3,950 |
80 | Hams Fork |
14.35 | 12.89 |
13.68 | 10.84 |
23.55 | 43.02 |
87.91 | 68.13 |
32.96 | 14.71 |
14.73 | 17.64 |
354 |
| LaBarge | 490 |
251 | Green |
6.73 | 6.07 |
6.12 | 6.09 |
11.04 | 17.20 |
27.75 | 21.26 |
12.22 | 7.37 |
5.97 | 9.92 |
138 |
| Pinedale | 1,480 |
474 | Fremont Lake |
30.69 | 6.14 |
15.34 | 42.96 |
61.38 | 30.69 |
153.45 | 162.65 |
110.48 | 95.14 |
27.62 | 49.10 |
786 |
| RS/GR/SC JPB | 36,500 |
115 | Green |
133.63 | 121.24 |
149.03 | 122.85 |
464.89 | 707.93 |
984.99 | 823.48 |
505.56 | 225.27 |
212.48 | 246.71 |
4,698 |
| Total | 47,465 |
113 |
|
233 | 177 |
216 | 352 |
4,736 | 10,554 |
1,749 | 1,166 |
727 | 377 |
293 | 348 |
20,927 |
Figure II-3 shows graphically the apportionment of use by municipality.
In most cases, water use is based on 1997-1999 data to present the
current-day situation. However, water users may have a situation that
cannot be described with present information. The Rock
Springs/Green River/Sweetwater County Joint Powers Water Board
depletes more water than the other thirteen in-basin water suppliers
combined. Recently, the Joint Powers Water Board completed a
comprehensive expansion of its water treatment and supply facilities,
which removed "bottlenecks" in the previous water supply system.
Area water officials believe that water use, particularly in the Rock
Springs area, may increase 15 percent or more as the water supply
system can now meet the true demands of the water users.
Figure II-3 Consumption by Municipality

click to enlarge
It is interesting to note that the largest municipal water user in the Green
River Basin is not located in the Basin. The City of Cheyenne presently
diverts an average of approximately 14,400 acre-feet of water per year
from the Little Snake River Basin to North Platte River Basin, where the
water is ultimately exchanged to meet Cheyenne's needs in the South Platte
River Basin. The 14 water suppliers located in the Green River Basin
deplete approximately 7,350 acre-feet of water per year (including ground
water) on an annual basis.
Domestic Use
Domestic water is defined as the water supply for rural homes, subdivisions,
commercial establishments, parks, campgrounds, and other smaller water uses,
and is typically provided by ground water. Subdivisions or public water
supplies that obtain water from municipalities or joint powers boards are not
included in this category, as their water use is considered municipal water use.
Most of the remote industries in the Basin use a portion of their supplies for
domestic use. However, as this water use was included in the estimated
industrial water use for the Basin, it is not considered domestic water use.
Existing county populations within the Green River Basin are used as the basis
for estimating domestic water use. Because county populations, as provided
by the Wyoming Department of Administration and Information, include the
service areas of the municipal water suppliers, it is necessary to subtract the
populations of the municipal service areas to obtain the rural populations or
domestic water users.
The total estimated current population of the Green River Basin in Wyoming
is approximately 61,100, of which about 49,600 reside in municipal service
areas. The estimated existing population of the areas outside of the service
areas of municipal water suppliers is therefore approximately 11,500. For
purposes of this estimate, it is assumed that this is the population that is served
by domestic groundwater wells or independent public water supply systems.
If it is assumed that this population consumes between 150 and 300 gallons per
capita per day, the resulting estimated total domestic water use would range
between 1,940 and 3,880 acre-feet per year in the Green River Basin.
-
- D. Industrial Use
The purpose of this section is to describe water uses by the major industries
in the Green River Basin. Industries that obtain their primary water supply
from surface water are electric power generation, soda ash production, and
other miscellaneous smaller users. The industries that obtain their primary
water supply from ground water are coal mining, uranium mining, and the
oil and gas industries.
Methodology
Existing Industrial Surface Water Use
Information was obtained from the various industries through direct
communication. However, many of the soda ash industries did not
have records of their water use. Therefore, some estimates had to be
gleaned from anecdotal information. For example, apparently there is a
"rule of thumb" that it takes 200 gallons of water to produce one ton of
soda ash. All of the soda ash facilities in the Green River area, with the
exception of Solvay Minerals, Inc., have on-site power plants. It was
estimated that the on-site power plants used an additional 250 gallons
of water to generate the power necessary to produce one ton of soda
ash.
All of the industries, with the exception of the Naughton Power Plant,
have zero discharge facilities. Therefore, the depletions or impacts to
surface water are equal to the amount of water diverted. Depletions for
the Naughton Power Plant were calculated by deducting the estimated
return flow from the estimated diversions. Soda ash producers typically
reported water demands to be relatively constant throughout the year.
Existing Industrial Groundwater Use
There is very limited available information regarding industrial groundwater
use. Industrial use of ground water is typically short-term and intermittent
in nature. The best available information relating to industrial groundwater
use is water rights issued by the Wyoming State Engineer's Office. Therefore,
tabulations of water rights in each of the water districts in the Green River
Basin were used as the basis for estimates of existing industrial groundwater
use.
Conclusions
Existing Industrial Surface Water Use
Power plants are the largest industrial water users in the Green River Basin.
The Jim Bridger and Naughton Power Plants, both owned and operated
by Pacificorp, use or deplete approximately 47,800 acre-feet of water per
year. Both power plants enjoy the security of storage water. Pacificorp
maintains a contract for storage water from Fontenelle Reservoir for use at
the Jim Bridger Power Plant during times of severe drought. Pacificorp owns
and operates Viva Naughton Reservoir, which serves as the primary supply
for the Naughton Power Plant. In both plants, water is used to produce steam
for power production and is used in the cooling processes. The majority of
the water is discharged through the cooling towers or lost through evaporation
ponds. Some water is used for dust abatement and domestic use.
There are five (5) major producers of soda ash in the Green River Basin.
FMC Granger, FMC Westvaco, General Chemical, OCI Wyoming, and
Solvay Minerals, Inc. produced approximately 11.7 million tons of soda ash
in 1999, which represents approximately 37 per cent of the world's demand.
At current levels of production, these five producers deplete approximately
17,900 acre-feet of water from the Green River and, collectively, are the
second highest industrial water users in the Green River Basin. Water is used
in processing trona, and is also used for dust abatement and domestic supplies
as well as power cogeneration discussed previously. All of the water at the
facilities is discharged through cooling towers and evaporated from holding
ponds.
Other industrial facilities in the Basin, including Church & Dwight, Exxon's
Shute Creek plant, and FS Industries (which produce baking soda, natural gas,
and chemical fertilizer, respectively) combine to deplete an additional 800
acre-feet per year.
Table II-6 lists the estimated monthly and annual water use (depletions)
for the ten largest users. The existing estimated industrial surface use for the
ten major users is approximately 66,500 acre-feet per year.
Flows of the Green River are stored in and regulated through Fontenelle and
Flaming Gorge Reservoirs. Both of these dams have hydroelectric generating
facilities. The production of hydropower is basically considered a
non-consumptive use of water other than the associated evaporation losses
which are considered in other sections of this report.
Fontenelle Reservoir as an Industrial Water Supply
The water right for Fontenelle Reservoir indicates its primary purposes are
irrigation, domestic, industrial, municipal, stockwatering, fish and wildlife and
recreation; and when not required for the primary purposes, storage water
can be used for power generation, the secondary purpose. However, the
major existing benefits of Fontenelle Reservoir relate to industry.
The construction of Fontenelle Dam was completed in December, 1967,
under water right Permit No. 6629 Res. In 1962, the State of Wyoming
contracted with the Bureau of Reclamation for 60,000 acre-feet of the active
capacity. In 1974, the State of Wyoming again contracted with the Bureau
of Reclamation for 60,000 additional acre-feet of active capacity, thereby
increasing its total interest in Fontenelle Reservoir to 120,000 acre-feet.
In the 1974 contract, 5,000 acre-feet was designated for the Seedskadee
Wildlife Refuge. The United States reserved 65,000 acre-feet of capacity
for its uses, subject to provisions that the Bureau of Reclamation would not
compete with the State of Wyoming in the water market. This contract also
required the United States and State of Wyoming to ensure operations that
would provide for the maintenance of 50 cubic feet per second (cfs)
downstream in the Green River at the USGS streamgage near Green River,
Wyoming.
Table II-6 Average Monthly Industrial Water Use
| Acre-feet |
| Facility |
Jan. |
Feb. |
Mar. |
Apr. |
May |
June |
July |
Aug. |
Sept. |
Oct. |
Nov. |
Dec. |
Total |
| Jim Bridger Power Plant | 1,900 |
1,900 | 2,850 |
2,850 | 3,600 |
3,750 | 3,860 |
3,860 | 3,100 |
2,850 | 1,900 |
1,900 | 34,320 |
| Naughton Power Plant | 1,100 |
1,000 | 1,100 |
1,100 | 1,200 |
1,200 | 1,200 |
1,200 | 1,100 |
1,100 | 1,100 |
1,100 | 13,500 |
| FMC Granger | 250 |
250 | 250 |
250 | 250 |
250 | 250 |
250 | 250 |
250 | 250 |
250 | 3,000 |
| FMC Westvaco | 500 |
500 | 500 |
500 | 500 |
500 | 500 |
500 | 500 |
500 | 500 |
500 | 6,000 |
| General Chemical | 300 |
300 | 300 |
300 | 300 |
300 | 300 |
300 | 300 |
300 | 300 |
300 | 3,600 |
| OCI Wyoming | 250 |
250 | 250 |
250 | 250 |
250 | 250 |
250 | 250 |
250 | 250 |
250 | 3,000 |
| Solvay | 190 |
190 | 190 |
190 | 190 |
190 | 190 |
190 | 190 |
190 | 190 |
190 | 2,280 |
| Church & Dwight | 15 |
15 | 15 |
15 | 20 |
20 | 25 |
20 | 20 |
20 | 15 |
15 | 215 |
| Exxon Shute Creek | 1 |
1 | 1 |
1 | 2 |
2 | 2 |
2 | 1 |
1 | 1 |
1 | 16 |
| FS Industries | 110 |
70 | 60 |
100 | 50 |
10 | 10 |
10 | 20 |
40 | 50 |
30 | 560 |
| Total Average Monthly Use | 4,616 |
4,476 | 5,516 |
5,556 | 6,362 |
6,472 | 6,587 |
6,582 | 5,731 |
5,501 | 4,556 |
4,536 | 66,491 |
Presently, the State of Wyoming, through the Wyoming Water Development
Commission, has allocated 46,550 acre-feet of its entitlements to Fontenelle
water through the following water supply or readiness to serve contracts: Jim
Bridger Power Plant (35,000 acre-feet per year), FS Industries (10,000
acre-feet per year), Church and Dwight (1,250 acre-feet per year), and
Exxon, USA (300 acre-feet per year).
Existing Industrial Groundwater Use
Overall groundwater use by industry in the Basin is estimated at 1,575 acre-feet
annually. Coal mines primarily use water for dust abatement. Black Butte
Coal Company and Bridger Coal Company provide coal to the Jim Bridger
Power Plant. Kemmerer Coal Company provides coal to the Naughton
Power Plant. These companies have several permits for groundwater use.
The water generally comes from wells or as a by-product of the mining
operations. The Bridger Coal Company obtains water from the Jim Bridger
Power Plant for domestic and fire protection use. The Kemmerer Coal
Company obtains domestic and fire protection water from the
Kemmerer/Diamondville Joint Powers Board.
The uranium industry is presently idle in the Green River Basin. Kennecott
Uranium Company holds water rights for several groundwater wells at its
inactive mine and processing facility in the Great Divide Basin. The water
was used in the process that extracted the uranium from the ore.
Oil and gas companies often secure water rights to use water for on-site
purposes, such as producing drilling mud and dust abatement. The actual
water use at the wells during the drilling process is typically short term.
-
- E. Recreational Use
Recreational uses of water are important and generally non-consumptive.
Uses include boating, fishing, swimming and waterfowl hunting, among
others. While consumption of water is usually not involved, the existence
of a sufficient water supply for a quality experience is important. This
section describes current water-based recreational opportunities in the
Basin, whether current use rates exceed capacities for use, and provides
quantitative information wherever possible.
Boating
Many of the Basin's rivers and lakes are destinations for recreationists
desiring to boat, water-ski or float (either whitewater, scenic or fishing)
using watercraft. Areas heavily used by watercraft include the large
lakes and reservoirs with boat ramps, and the larger rivers (e.g. the
Green River Proper and the New Fork River). Smaller craft such as
rafts and canoes do not require boat ramps and have access to more
bodies of water and reaches of river. Boating is considered a
non-consumptive use of water in that it occurs at lake levels and river
flows determined by other uses.
Little quantitative data exist on the numbers of watercraft using these
facilities and whether numbers approach or exceed the carrying capacity
of the water body used. The Bureau of Reclamation has indicated that,
while not the rule on Wyoming waters, a ceiling capacity of one boat per
ten surface acres of water is used elsewhere to measure use versus capacity.
Unfortunately, current actual boating numbers on Green River Basin waters
are generally not available from any of the land management agencies
contacted.
One area where boating capacity is of concern relates to current use of the
Green and New Fork Rivers. Recently receiving heavy pressure, these
rivers are currently under study in areas where the managing agency maintains
developed recreation sites and/or boating access. The Green River at Warren
Bridge and also below Fontenelle Dam are examples of locations where heavy
use is being evaluated.
A quality boating experience requires a water level (in lakes) or flow rate
(in rivers) sufficient to support the reason for boating, whether it be fishing,
water-skiing or some other sport. In this context, future water development
projects must be evaluated for their effect on such levels, and due to state
and federal regulations will to some extent be designed and operated based
upon recreational considerations.
Fishing
Fishing is a major water-based recreational activity pursued in the Basin.
From brook trout in tiny creeks in the Wind River and Wyoming Ranges to
lake trout in Flaming Gorge Reservoir, fishing brings many visitors and
residents to the region. As in boating, fishing is a non-consumptive use of
water.
The State of Wyoming classifies trout streams under five designations:
- Class 1 Premium trout waters fisheries of national importance
- Class 2 Very good trout waters fisheries of statewide importance
- Class 3 Important trout waters fisheries of regional importance
- Class 4 Low production trout waters fisheries frequently of local importance,
but generally incapable of sustaining substantial fishing pressure.
- Class 5 Very low production waters often incapable of sustaining a trout fishery
Figure II-4 shows classifications of streams under this system within the Green River Basin.
Interestingly, there exist no waters currently classified as Class 1 in the Basin. The only
Class 2 streams in the Basin are certain segments of the main stem of the Green River
above Flaming Gorge, and a segment of the New Fork River in the vicinity of Boulder.
Nonetheless, the Green River Basin is considered by many to provide excellent fishing
opportunities in its lakes, streams, rivers and backcountry areas.
Figure II-4 Trout Stream Classification

click to enlarge
The Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGF) maintains the most complete
database on fisheries and fisherman use in the State. In response to a request for
fishing activity in the Green River Basin, the WGF provided the most recent estimate
of annual standing water angling pressure. The breakdown by type of standing water
is given below.
|
Recent Fishing Activity, Green River Basin: Angler Days by Standing Water Type
|
| Pinedale Region |
Green River Region |
Total |
| Unsuitable | 27 |
0 | 27 |
| Natural Alpine Lake | 59,286 |
2,974 | 62,260 |
| Alpine Reservoir | 7,875 |
1,029 | 8,904 |
| Natural Lowland Lake | 16,875 |
0 | 16,875 |
| Lowland Reservoir | 547 |
392,626 | 393,173 |
| Trout Farm Pond | 487 |
3,164 | 3,651 |
| Mixed Farm Pond | 0 |
680 | 680 |
| Non-Trout Farm Pond | 0 |
1 | 1 |
| Source: Mark Fowden,
WGF, April 2000 |
From angler surveys in 1979, 1985 and 1991, stream angling data were provided for
Region 4, which included the Bear River Basin. Upon review of the responses for 1985,
it was determined that approximately 91 percent of the total is attributable to stream
fishing in the Green River and its tributaries, leaving about nine percent occurring in the
Bear River Basin. Absent other data, this factor was applied to subsequent totals which
also included Bear River data as a correction factor to more properly represent the
Green River Basin only. Stream angler days are described as follows:
|
Fishing Activity, Green River Basin: Stream Angler Days |
| Region 4 | As Corrected for Green River Basin Only |
| 1979 |
359,145 | 326,800* |
| 1985 |
238,153 | 217,142 (actual) |
| 1991 |
281,691 | 256,300* |
| * Stream
Angler numbers have been reduced by 9% to remove Bear River Basin effects. |
The WGF also has published a document entitled: A Strategic
Plan for the Comprehensive Management of Wildlife in Wyoming,
1984-1989. This document gives total stream and lake sport
fishing data in fisherman-days for the entire state as divided
into five regions. Region 4 includes the Green, Bear and
Little Snake River drainages. While the Bear River Basin
numbers are included, this basin is relatively quite small in
comparison to the Green and Little Snake basins, both in
geographic extent and in availability of fishable waters.
Therefore, numbers provided for Region 4 have been reduced
by nine percent as described above.
Not only are utilization (demand) data given, but this
Strategic Plan document also estimates "supply" or
"biological supply" of fishing opportunity available to the
angler. As defined in the Strategic Plan, "Supply is based
on present regulations, present stocking practices and the
standards for success and size of fish which are present
under 'Management Framework.'" For 1988, the most recent
year for which data are given in the report, supply and
demand numbers are as follows:
|
Fishing Activity, Supply vs Demand, 1988 |
| Fisherman-Days or % |
Supply on Public Lands or with
Public Access |
% on Public Lands or with Public Access | Total Supply |
| Streams | 212,700* |
51.75% | 411,000* |
| Lakes and Reservoirs | 1,122,817 |
94.73% | 1,185,235 |
| Total | 1,335,517 |
82.87% | 1,596,235 |
| Fisherman-Days |
Resident Demand |
Nonresident Demand |
Total Demand |
| Streams | 302,000* |
73,100* | 375,100* |
| Lakes and Reservoirs | 274,509 |
146,968 | 421,477 |
| Total | 576,509 |
220,068 | 796,577 |
Source: A Strategic
Plan for the Comprehensive Management of Wildlife in Wyoming,
1984-1989.
*Stream Angler numbers have been reduced by 9% to remove Bear
River Basin effects; Lake Angler numbers were not. |
The primary limiting factor for stream fishing is the availability
of public access. Other areas of potential use limitations are
currently under evaluation by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
and Seedskadee National Wildlife Refuge. Both of these agencies
have experienced significant increases in commercial use by
outfitters. The BLM, in concert with other agencies, has been
involved in a study entitled "Green River Corridor Interagency
Management Plan," which is intended to address use of the Green
River in Wyoming from its headwaters to Flaming Gorge. In the
Green River Basin above Fontenelle Reservoir, public access
points are few and provide virtually the only access to the
rivers which otherwise are bordered largely by private lands.
The resulting analysis of fishing use data indicates that overall
utilization remains below the capacity of the resource, although
stream fishing experiences some limitations due to access. Recent
WGF planning documents have moved away from publishing "supply
versus demand" analyses, so current utilization numbers are
unavailable. Indications are, however, that the Green River
Basin maintains a sufficient fishery resource for current and
near future high-quality fishing experiences.
Waterfowl Hunting
The harvest of migratory waterfowl is a recreational pursuit
affected by the presence or absence of water. Wetlands and
open water are needed for breeding, nesting, rearing, feeding
and isolation from land-based predators. In the Green River
Basin of Wyoming, waterfowl hunting is pursued where sufficient
local or migratory populations are available. The two most
heavily hunted areas are the Seedskadee National Wildlife Refuge
and the Farson-Eden-Big Sandy area. The Green and Little Snake
River Basins are located in the Pacific Flyway.
Harvest objectives are not currently used (post-1993), because
harvest is taken into account in the setting of season length
and bag limits by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
In effect, the desired harvest is a prospective number using past
hunter success, population effects, and regulations in concert
with current-year populations. With current duck populations and
hunting pressure, it appears there is a sufficient resource to
provide a quality duck hunting experience now and in the near
future, with the existing water resources of the Basin.
In like fashion, goose hunting seasons and bag limits are set
under guidelines from the USFWS, although states have more
flexibility in setting bag and possession limits. And like
duck populations, goose populations are strong and increasing.
Again, because of the recent upward trends in populations, it
appears there is a sufficient resource to provide a quality
goose hunting experience now and in the near future, with the
existing water resources of the Basin. However, because the
Rocky Mountain Population nests and breeds locally, it is
possible for local water development projects to adversely
affect local goose populations (and hunter success) if
breeding and nesting sites suffer net loss, even as
continental populations continue to rise.
Wild and Scenic River Candidates
The 1996 Green River Resource Area Resource Management Plan,
administered by the BLM, studied a number of river segments
in the Green River Basin for possible designation under the
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Initially, 183 waterways or
waterway segments were reviewed for eligibility. Of these,
175 were found "
not to have any outstandingly remarkable
values and were dropped from further consideration."
The remaining eight waterways under consideration included
the Red Creek Unit, Currant Creek Unit, Pacific Creek, North
Fork of Bear Creek, Canyon Creek, and the Green and Big Sandy
Rivers. These were reviewed for suitability for classification
under the system. However, no segments in the Green River
Basin were ultimately determined suitable for inclusion. The
primary reasons given for the "Not Suitable" determination
included landowner conflicts, inability to manage the segment,
lack of interest for designation, and potential use conflicts.
The 1999 Upper Green Landscape Assessment (published by the
Bridger-Teton National Forest) lists the entire segment of the
Upper Green River, from its source to the Forest Boundary, as
a Study River for Wild and Scenic designation. The river is
considered as eligible for designation as a Wild River above
Green River Lakes, and as a Scenic River from Lower Green River
Lake to the Forest Boundary. Two tributaries are also eligible
as Wild Rivers: Tosi Creek and Roaring Fork Creek. Suitability
determination information was unavailable, and formal designation
has not yet been made.
No rivers on the Medicine Bow Routt National Forest (Hayden
District, east of Baggs/Dixon in the Little Snake River drainage)
were determined eligible in the 1985 Forest Plan. However,
segments of local importance are still under study and may be
identified for eligibility in the near future. If any stream
segments are determined eligible for designation, the Forest
does not plan to immediately pursue suitability evaluation.
Wyoming State Parks and Historic Sites
There are no State Parks in the Green River Basin or the Great
Divide Basin. The only State Historic Site (SHS) in either basin
is at Fort Bridger, just west of the Town of Lyman. Data
collected by the former Division of State Parks & Historic Sites
(under the former Department of Commerce), however, does provide
insight into travel habits and desires of recreationists visiting
state sites, which is of value if extrapolated to tourist
destinations in general.
The Visitor Use Program for 1993-1997 contains useful information
concerning site visitation. Interestingly, for the 1993-1997
period, Fort Bridger SHS averaged 87,708 visitors per year, more
than any other SHS. This value is also more than the attendance
at 9 of 14 (64 percent) of the State Parks. The bulk of the visits
occur in the June through September period.
The 1997 Wyoming State Parks and Historic Sites Visitor Survey,
compiled by the University of Wyoming, Survey Research Center,
provides additional information. About 86 percent of all visitation
(to all parks and historic sites) occurs in the months of June,
July and August, with attendance in each of those months almost
equal. Slightly over half the visitors are first-time visitors.
Approximately one in four visitors is traveling with a boat or
canoe, indicating some water-based recreation is intended, either
at that location or elsewhere on that particular trip. Approximately
58 percent of the visitors are from out of state.
-
- F. Environmental Use
Previous studies have estimated the amount of water designated for or consumed
by various environmental uses. These include but are not necessarily limited to
instream flow water rights permitted by the Wyoming State Engineer, minimum
reservoir pools, instream bypasses designated to enhance fisheries and wildlife
habitat, wetlands, direct wildlife consumption, evaporation from conservation
pools and maintenance of riparian areas. Environmental uses downstream on
the Green and Colorado Rivers must also be considered.
Instream Flows
In 1986, the State of Wyoming enacted legislation defining "instream flow"
as a beneficial use of water, and stipulated how instream flow water rights
would be filed, evaluated, granted or denied, and ultimately regulated. The
legislation is codified within Wyoming Statutes at Section 41-3-1001 to 1014.
Instream flow rights are filed with the Wyoming State Engineer's Office, held
by the Wyoming Water Development Commission, and managed by
Wyoming Game and Fish.
The law allows for instream flow water rights to be filed and granted on
unappropriated water originating as natural flow or from storage in existing or
new reservoirs. For natural flow sources, the flow amount is defined as the
minimum needed to "maintain or improve existing fisheries." The language
relating to stored water is slightly different, defining the minimum needed to
"establish or maintain new or existing fisheries." Generally speaking,
instream flow is considered a non-consumptive beneficial use.
In the Green River Basin (including the Little Snake River Basin), there are
currently 34 instream flow applications on file. Two of these filings have
been granted permits as of the date of publication of this report. All 34 of
these filings are tied to natural flow, although two are influenced by
reservoirs above the segments. Instream flow segments are shown on
Figure II-5.
Figure II-5 Instream Flow Segments

click to enlarge
The two pending applications influenced by reservoirs include one on the
Hams Fork (TF No. 26 3/332), where water is delivered from Viva
Naughton Reservoir, and one on the East Fork Smith Fork (TF No. 28 2/84)
below Stateline Dam (which is in Utah). Both of these applications are filed
for water that enters the stream by virtue of the reservoir above them, and
not on storage water in the reservoir.
The two permits that have been issued are No. 6IF on the Green River near
Warren Bridge and No. 7IF on the West Fork of the New Fork River.
Many of the remaining yet-to-be-granted filings are on streams containing
Colorado River cutthroat trout, and are intended to help protect that species,
which is being considered for listing as an endangered species under the federal
Endangered Species Act.
Cutthroat Trout Management
The Wyoming Game and Fish Department has instituted a management program
designed to protect and enhance the natural populations of Wyoming's native
cutthroat trout. In the Green River Basin of Wyoming, this includes the native
Colorado River cutthroat trout. Management of the trout is intended to prevent
the species from becoming listed as threatened or endangered. An early strategic
plan included the following:
- Identification and protection of waters containing pure cutthroat populations;
- Increase the distribution of cutthroat trout within their ancestral range through
habitat protection and rehabilitation;
- Develop brood stock from pure populations; and
- Reintroduce cutthroat trout to native waters.
To achieve these strategic goals, a management plan with seven activities are
being implemented:
- Fish sampling to locate and evaluate populations;
- Habitat surveys;
- Implementation of special fishing regulations;
- Instream flow water right filings;
- Fish culture activities;
- Non-native trout removal; and
- Information and education efforts.
These activities have been undertaken and show promise for protecting the native
trout. According to Game and Fish personnel, Colorado River cutthroat trout
occupy 23 percent of the streams in the Green River Basin in reaches totaling
19 percent of the stream miles in the Basin. Work involved in protecting these
native fish is considered non-consumptive (of water), although the use of
instream flow water rights and habitat improvement will affect future water
development activities in the immediate vicinity of such work. Protection of
important native fish populations is an example of water-related work that can
be accomplished without depletion, and shows that water resources can exhibit
strong economic value (e.g. recreation) without consumptive use.
Reservoir Minimum Pools
Several reservoirs in the Basin have storage permitted for a variety of
environmental uses. These uses, as they appear on the water rights, include
fish, and fish and wildlife. Recreational uses defined on permits can be
considered environmental to the extent that water in storage for recreational
purposes, and not released for other consumptive or nonconsumptive uses,
can be beneficial, in an environmental sense, for fish habitat and wildlife
consumption. Reservoirs with permitted capacity for stock water similarly
serve a dual environmental function. The reservoirs with fish or fish and
wildlife uses or pools listed in their permitting documents include Boulder
(1,621 acre-feet), High Savery (4,955 acre-feet), as well as three other
reservoirs with an unsegregated portion of their total storage devoted to
fish and wildlife (or similar use): Big Sandy, Flaming Gorge, and
Fontenelle.
The Wyoming Game and Fish Department has provided data describing
recommended lake or reservoir levels (given as surface acreage) for fish
population purposes. These data are presented in Figure II-6 for water
bodies of 100 surface acres and larger.
Figure II-6 WGF Recommended Water Levels

click to enlarge
Maintenance Flows
The Wyoming Game and Fish Department has also provided data on
recommended maintenance flows for moving water. These flows are what
the Department views as necessary to support game fish populations in the
late season, low flow months. Figure II-7 shows these flows for streams
and rivers in the Basin where such flows are 10 cfs or greater.
Figure II-7 WGF Recommended Maintenance Flows

click to enlarge
Instream Bypasses
Only three reservoirs in the Green River Basin have minimum flow bypasses
included in their permitting documents. These include Fontenelle (50 cfs at
the town of Green River), Meeks Cabin (10 cfs) and Stateline (7 cfs)
Reservoirs.
Wetlands Mapping
Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where
the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow
water. For purposes of classification, wetlands must have one or more of the
following three attributes:
- at least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes;
- the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil; and
- the substrate is non-soil and is saturated with water or covered
by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year.
The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) coverage for the Green River Basin is
used to describe wetlands for this report. The wetlands mapping was overlaid on
the GIS Irrigated Acreage coverage used in the Green River Basin plan. More than
half of the defined irrigated acreage is classified in the wetlands mapping as "Emergent."
This may be due to the scale of the wetlands mapping, which varied between 1:20,000
and 1:132,000. It may be due also to the fact that the Emergent wetlands classification
includes meadows, among others, and that almost all of the irrigated acreage in the Green
River Basin is meadow composed of emergent plant types. Figure II-8 shows NWI
mapping for the Basin.
Figure II-8 National Wetlands Inventory Mapping

click to enlarge
Wetlands in the Green River Basin provide significant nesting and breeding habitat
for local populations of ducks and geese. In fact, the Green River Basin is an
important contributor to Wyoming's status as one of the largest waterfowl resident
states in the western U.S., with total duck breeding pairs more than double the totals
in Nebraska and Colorado combined for 1999. These local birds are the primary
target of waterfowl hunters, and as such their reproductive success is important to
future environmental and recreational pursuits. An area of future environmental
concern, or cause for mitigation, is therefore the potential of destruction of breeding
and nesting habitat for waterfowl. In the Green River Basin, areas near Farson and
Eden and the Seedskadee National Wildlife Refuge are the most heavily hunted for
waterfowl.
Seedskadee National Wildlife Refuge
Created initially as environmental mitigation following construction of Flaming Gorge
and Fontenelle Reservoirs by the Bureau of Reclamation, Seedskadee National
Wildlife Refuge (NWR) has become a popular destination for fishermen, hunters,
sightseers, and birdwatchers. The Refuge contains 26,037 acres of land and
covers over 36 miles of the main stem of the Green River from the upper
boundary (approximately 2.5 miles below the CCC Bridge) to just below the
"Big Island," approximately 20 miles northwest of Green River. While originally
planned for protection and production of waterfowl, the Refuge has seen more
intensive management of big game, fisheries, and other fauna and flora in recent
years.
Seedskadee NWR provides significant water-related environmental benefits in
an otherwise arid region. Habitats available on the refuge include riverine and
backwater aquatic areas, wetland and riparian areas, and drier grassland/shrubland
communities. The source of water for these uses is the Green River proper with
contributions from the Big Sandy River. In a 1974 contract between the State of
Wyoming and the Bureau of Reclamation, 5,000 acre-feet of reservoir water was
designated for the Refuge. In addition, Seedskadee uses older pre-refuge irrigation
works to distribute water for wetland development and maintenance, and benefits
from 115 cfs of direct flow rights held by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
With little use between Fontenelle Reservoir and the Refuge, the Green River
provides a relatively reliable water supply to Seedskadee. Although minimum flows
are to remain above 50 cfs (at the town of Green River) below Fontenelle, actual
flows are historically much larger. According to the Bureau of Reclamation, August
to April releases are typically 1,200 to 1,400 cfs with higher flows passed in the spring
flooding season.
Consumption of water on the Refuge is limited to evapotranspiration from the wetland
and riparian areas. Currently, the Refuge has no plans to create significant new
wetlands, although maintenance of existing wetlands and reestablishment of
pre-existing wetlands will continue. Currently there are approximately 335 acres of
wetland habitat and 1,394 acres of riverine habitat on the Refuge.
Direct Wildlife Consumption
It was previously estimated that 100 acre-feet per year of water originating as
ground water is consumed by wildlife. This estimate was revisited during the
current study and it was concluded that this amount is not unreasonable. An
earlier estimate of wildlife use of surface water of 400 acre-feet per year
was revisited with WGF personnel for the current plan. No change to this
value resulted.
Evaporation
Under the Bureau of Reclamation's "Consumptive Uses and Losses Report,"
a document prepared every five years as required by the Colorado River Basin
Project Act of 1968, man-made losses such as evaporation from constructed or
enlarged reservoirs are charged against the State's Compact allocation. Some
authorities consider that part of calculated evaporation losses are "charged" to
environmental uses, especially if a water body exists for the primary purpose of
serving environmental needs. However, administratively, these amounts are
calculated without regard to type of use. A more detailed discussion of
evaporation losses is provided in Section G of this chapter.
Maintenance of Riparian Areas
In recent years the value and maintenance of riparian zones along stream
corridors has been the subject of considerable study. Several interrelated
topics emerge from this work, including the value of riparian zones for both
aquatic and terrestrial wildlife, the ability of riparian zones to assist in
maintaining base flows in streams, and the value of riparian areas in controlling
erosion.
The United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) has published several documents relating to riparian area management.
These guides, however, are qualitative and do not provide quantitative estimates
of, for example, potential storage capacity increase due to improved riparian
condition. Case study histories exist of several projects where riparian
improvement has resulted in improved base flow conditions in the subject
streams.
Other recent studies provide a more quantitative assessment of the
hydrogeologic response of an alluvial stream system to riparian
improvements. Studies of Muddy Creek, which is tributary to the Little
Snake River, reported phreatic surfaces 15 to 20 feet below ground in
degraded riparian areas while the water surface was only a few feet
below the surface in improved riparian zones. Instream structures
reportedly added approximately 0.4 acre-feet of bank storage per
thousand feet of channel in the improving riparian areas.
Another report used a groundwater model to assess the storage capacity
of degraded, improving and improved riparian zones. This study also
noted that while ground water levels are within a few feet of the ground
surface in improved riparian areas, they may be tens of feet deeper in
degraded reaches.
Other work did not look at riparian areasper se, but rather at the
water budget associated with flood irrigation along the New Fork River
in Sublette County, Wyoming. These findings reflect less the intentional
management of water for riparian improvement, and more the actual result
of flood irrigation in a typical setting. The study stated: "A large percentage
of the diverted water returns to the stream system so there is no loss of
beneficial surface flow to the downstream users and the release of stored
water during the low flow winter months will help maintain a constant supply
of water to the channel system. The saturated aquifer acts as a 24,000
acre-feet underground reservoir that releases most of this volume to the
downstream users during the same irrigation season, without excessive
evaporation losses."
Recovery Implementation Program for Endangered
Fish Species
Section 2(c) (2) of the Endangered Species Act states: "the policy of
Congress is that Federal agencies shall cooperate with State and local
agencies to resolve water resource issues in concert with conservation of
endangered species." In 1988, the States of Wyoming, Colorado and
Utah, the Secretary of the Interior and the Administrator of the Western
Area Power Administration entered into a cooperative agreement to
recover four endangered fish species in the Upper Colorado River Basin
while allowing for continued and future water development. The species
are the Colorado pikeminnow, razorback sucker, humpback chub and
bonytail chub.
Parties to the agreement agreed to participate in and implement a
recovery program with the following five principal elements:
- Habitat management through the provision of instream flows;
- Nonflow habitat development and maintenance;
- Native fish stocking;
- Management of nonnative species and sportfishing; and
- Research, data management and monitoring.
The program applies to the upper basin above Glen Canyon Dam, exclusive
of the San Juan River Basin. Since adoption of the original agreement, a
separate Recovery Implementation Program for the San Juan River Basin
was instituted in 1992.
The intent of the Recovery Implementation Program (RIP) is to provide for
the recovery and management of the identified species while continuing to
allow for needed water development. It streamlines compliance with ESA
requirements by making such compliance a function and responsibility of all
the signatory parties. In Wyoming, the practical effect of the RIP is that it
institutes a one-time charge for new depletions which is paid by the project
proponent and is used, along with other funding sources, to implement the
Program's projects. Originally established at ten dollars ($10) per acre-foot
of new depletion, this charge is tied to consumer price indices, such that the
fiscal year 2000 fee totals $14.36 per acre-foot.
Conservation Programs
Requests were made of the local USDA Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) offices for a listing of lands currently enrolled in the various
conservation programs under their direction. From these requests (not all
counties responded) the current enrollments are provided.
Conservation Reserve Program
The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) is administered by the USDA
Farm Service Agency (FSA). This program offers rental payments, incentive
payments, and cost-share assistance for certain conservation practices. This
is a voluntary program for private land owners. The objective of the program
is to improve wildlife habitat, water quality, and reduce wind and water erosion.
Wetlands Reserve Program
The Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) is administered by the NRCS. This
program offers technical and financial assistance for restoring wetlands. This
is a voluntary program for private land owners. The objective of the program
in the Green River Basin is to diversify the types of wetlands and wildlife habitat
in an area. Responding counties indicate that there exist 44 acres of land currently
enrolled in this program in the Green River Basin.
Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program
The Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP) is administered by the NRCS.
This program offers technical and financial assistance for projects which improve
wildlife habitat. This is a voluntary program. Responding counties indicate there
exist 240 acres of land currently enrolled in this program in the Green River Basin.
Among the various quantifiable uses, water consumed for environmental purposes
in the Basin is estimated at about 2,000 acre-feet annually.
-
- G. Evaporation Losses
The Green River Basin contains many large reservoirs used for various purposes including storage
for irrigation, municipal, industrial, recreation, fish propagation and flood control uses, among
others. These reservoirs help sustain what is otherwise arid to semi-arid land. The reservoirs
are owned by various state, federal, industrial and private interests. For purposes of this plan,
reservoirs larger than 1,000 acre-feet are focused upon although some that are smaller are also
discussed. Figure II-9 shows the locations of the major reservoirs in the Basin (not including all
natural alpine or lowland lakes). The following lists reservoirs discussed in the Framework
Water Plan (Wyoming Water Planning Program, 1970) and others that have been constructed,
funded, or elevated in importance since.
Figure II-9 Major Reservoirs in the Greater Green River Basin

click to enlarge
| Reservoir Name |
Water Course | Maximum
Storage, AF |
| Big Sandy | Big Sandy River | 39,700 |
| Black Joe Lake | Black Joe Creek | 1,102 |
| Boulder Lake | Boulder Creek | 22,280 |
| Bush Creek | Bush Creek | 17,267 |
| Bush Lake | Bush Creek | 1,686 |
| Divide Lake | Divide Creek | 1,027 |
| Eden | Big & Little Sandy Rivers | 18,490* |
| Elkhorn | Little Sandy River | 1,450 |
| Flaming Gorge | Green River | 3,789,000 |
| Fontenelle | Green River | 345,397 |
| Fremont Lake | Pine Creek | 30,899 |
| Hay Reservoir | Red Creek | 8,327 |
| High Savery** | Savery Creek | 22,400 |
| Kemmerer No. 1 | Hams Fork | 1,058 |
| McNinch No. 1 | North Piney Creek | 1,086 |
| McNinch No. 2 | North Piney Creek | 198 |
| Meeks Cabin | Blacks Fork | 33,571 |
| Middle Piney | Middle Piney Creek | 4,201 |
| New Fork Lake | West Fork New Fork River | 20,340 |
| Patterson Lake | Blacks Fork | 1,237 |
| Pacific No. 1 | Pacific Creek | 107 |
| Pacific No. 2 | Pacific Creek | 1,394 |
| Silver Lake | Silver Creek | 933 |
| Sixty-Seven | North Piney Creek | 5,211 |
| Stateline | East Fork Smiths Fork | 14,000 |
| Viva Naughton | Hams Fork | 42,393 |
| Willow Lake | Lake Creek | 18,816 |
* currently reduced to 12,190 acre-feet because of stability concerns at higher water
levels (Source: USBR DataWeb).
** not yet built; construction scheduled to be completed by 2003.
Evaporation
Evaporation from reservoirs constructed by man is a consumptive use associated
with the beneficial use of water for other purposes and is counted as part of
Wyoming's allocation under the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact. Traditionally,
evaporation estimates are calculated by the Bureau of Reclamation and published in
the "Consumptive Uses and Losses Report," (CULR) which is prepared every five
years. In this report, the larger Bureau reservoirs in the Green and Colorado River
Basins are classified as "main stem" reservoirs, the evaporation from which is
tabulated separately from evaporation calculated for in-state reservoirs. Upper
Colorado River Basin main stem reservoirs include Flaming Gorge, Blue Mesa,
Morrow Point, Navajo, and Lake Powell.
For these main stem reservoirs, the aggregate evaporation counts against the various
states' apportionments in the percentage allowed for each state by the Upper
Colorado River Basin Compact, under full development (full use of
allowed depletions). By this Compact Wyoming is allowed 14 percent of the total
depletions allowed the States of the Upper Division (the Upper Basin States minus
Arizona) by the Colorado River Compact; therefore at full development 14 percent
of the Upper Basin mainstem evaporation is charged to Wyoming. Until then, Article
V of the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact states that Wyoming's share will be
calculated as the same fraction of main stem evaporation as Wyoming's consumptive
use bears to the total consumptive use by states of the Upper Division.
For the years 1986-1990, Wyoming's fraction of the total consumptive use of the
Upper Division states was 13.55 percent. In these same years, the average main
stem evaporation was 653,000 acre-feet. Therefore, Wyoming's charge for main
stem evaporation would be calculated as 88,500 acre-feet. This value, however,
overstates the amount of Wyoming's main stem evaporation portion when the Basin
sees full development. Under full development of all states' full Compact allotments,
reservoir levels will average lower than they do now, due to increased drawdowns.
Under this scenario the Bureau estimates a full development main stem evaporation
of 520,000 acre-feet annually, from which Wyoming's 14 percent charge can be
estimated to be 72,800 acre-feet annually.
Reservoirs not included in the main stem calculations are handled separately and the
evaporation therefrom is charged totally to the state within which they reside. In
Wyoming, the Bureau has identified 76 individual reservoirs in the Green River Basin
for which evaporation is explicitly estimated. The net annual evaporation at each for
the years 1986-1990, which is the last full five year period for which a final CULR is
available, totals 26,500 acre-feet. The Bureau charges evaporation without regard to
the uses for which a reservoir is permitted. That is, no separate accounting is kept for
evaporation from irrigation, recreation, fish and wildlife or other pools. When
evaporation losses for Muddy Creek wetlands and the future High Savery Reservoir
are included, the total in-state evaporation estimate will total 27,700 acre-feet.
In the above numbers, Bureau evaporation values have been altered for New Fork,
Boulder, Willow and Fremont Lakes. In the CULR supporting documentation for
these lakes, all of which originally were natural lakes raised by dams added at their
outlets, the evaporation calculated uses the full high water line areas in the computation.
Because only that depletion caused by the actions of man should be counted against the
Compact allocation, these estimates have been revised to reflect only the incremental
evaporation loss due to the incremental surface area increase caused by raising the lakes.
These changes result in a net reduction in evaporation loss of approximately 4,082
acre-feet, as described below:
| HWL = High Water Level |
| Reservoir |
Natural HWL Surface Area, acres |
Enlarged HWL Surface Area, acres |
Differences, acres |
Net Evaporation, from CULR, in. |
Actual Evaporation due to Man, AF |
CULR Evap, as reported, AF |
Difference, AF (savings) |
| Boulder | 1540 | 1676 |
136 | 22.3 | 253 |
1872 | 1619 |
| Fremont | 4888 | 5122 |
234 | 20 | 390 |
0 | -390 |
| New Fork | 1296 | 1416 |
120 | 19 | 190 |
1345 | 1155 |
| Willow | 1800 | 1958 |
158 | 20 | 263 |
1961 | 1698 |
| Total |
|
|
|
|
1096 | 5178 |
4082 |
Two sources of data exist for estimating evaporative losses from reservoirs in Wyoming.
These include the NOAA Technical Report NWS 33 and "Development of An
Evaporation Map for The State Of Wyoming for Purposes of Estimating Evaporation
And Evapotranspiration" by Larry E. Lewis (University of Wyoming M.S. Thesis, 1978).
Because it is newer, of national scope, and used by the Bureau of Reclamation in its
Consumptive Uses and Losses Report calculations, the NWS document is used for
annual gross (free water surface) evaporation values herein. However, the NWS
document does not give a monthly distribution of evaporation rates. For this, the
distribution pattern for Pathfinder Dam in Lewis is used.
The CULR also estimates that approximately 5,100 acre-feet of evaporation may be
apportioned to stock pond and livestock use. With this, the sum total of estimated
current evaporation losses in the Basin total 121,300 acre-feet.
-
- H. Water Quality Profile
The quality of water refers to its physical, chemical, radiological, biological and
bacteriological properties. The concentration levels of various constituents within
the water dictates the uses and potential uses of a water body. Quality of a water
body can be impacted from the natural processes on the environment or from
manmade actions. The success of a water development project is dependent upon
the ability of the source to meet the water quality needs of the proposed use(s), as
well as the propensity of the water development project to maintain the water
quality.
Water Quality Standards
Surface Water
Pursuant to the Environmental Quality Act, the Water Quality Division (WQD) of the
Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality developed and implemented surface
water quality standards contained in Chapter 1, Wyoming Water Quality Rules and
Regulations in 1974. Chapter 1 contains numerical and narrative standards to establish
effluent limitations for those discharges requiring control via permits to discharge in the
case of point sources and best management practices in the case of nonpoint sources.
Interstate Water Quality Standards
The Green River Basin and Little Snake River Basin are part of the Colorado River
Basin. The Colorado River Basin Salinity Forum is an organization composed of water
quality and water resource representatives of the states of Arizona, California, Colorado,
Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming with the responsibility for developing
salinity standards and criteria for the waters of the Colorado River Basin. The
basin-wide water quality standards for salinity consists of numeric water quality criteria
at three lower Colorado River stations and a Plan of Implementation that describes the
overall program. Under the federal Clean Water Act, the water quality standards for
salinity are reviewed every three years and the Plan of Implementation is jointly revised
and adjusted by the states and involved federal agencies.
Groundwater
In 1980, the WQD developed and implemented groundwater quality standards,
contained in Chapter 8 of the Wyoming Water Quality Rules and Regulations, to
protect existing and future groundwater uses. These regulations contain narrative
and numerical standards used to classify ground waters of the State and provide
criteria to determine acceptable concentration of discharges to ground water.
These standards are also used to determine the degree of groundwater cleanup
necessary to restore polluted ground water to pre-contamination use.
The WQD uses a two-tiered classification system. The first tier requires protection
of existing uses regardless of water quality considerations. The second tier
requires protection of all potential uses based on ambient groundwater quality.
The highest standard of groundwater quality maintenance, given existing or
potential uses, determines the governing tier. Maps showing groundwater
classification are not available because the availability of well data and the
diverse geology of the State prohibit accurate regional delineation of groundwater
classification. Unlike surface water standards, groundwater classification is
invoked only when a discharge to ground water has occurred or is proposed.
Basin Surface Water Quality
The Department of Environmental Quality has completed a stream classification
for all surface water bodies in the project study area. The classification indicates
whether a stream is currently supporting or has the potential to support the uses
of that classification.
The streams in or near the mountains contain water quality rated as good. The
water quality of these mountain streams deteriorates as it flows across the plains.
The degradation of water quality is caused by both natural and manmade sources.
The water quality of many streams originating in the plains is rated as fair to poor.
The water quality of surface water bodies is obtained from U.S. Geological Survey
reports of sampling accomplished from surface water stations. The systematic
water quality sampling stations are shown in Figure II-10.
Figure II-10 Water Quality Sampling Stations

click to enlarge
The total dissolved solids concentrations at surface water stations in the project
area are shown in Figure II-11. All of the Green River Drainage above Fontenelle
Reservoir and the Green River itself above Flaming Gorge Reservoir contain median
dissolved solids concentrations of less than 500 mg/L. Flaming Gorge Reservoir has
a median at or slightly above 500 mg/L. The Little Sandy River has a median less than
500 mg/L at the Sublette County line while monitoring stations downstream on the
Big Sandy River show concentrations increasing up to about 3,000 mg/L before the
confluence with the Green River. The Blacks Fork River Drainage and the Henrys
Fork have median dissolved solids concentrations from 500 to 1,200 mg/L except
for the Blacks Fork River near the Utah State line and the Hams Fork near Kemmerer
which has medians below 500 mg/L. The Bitter Creek drainage has median dissolved
solids concentrations ranging from approximately 750 to 2,900 mg/L with the exception
of Killpecker Creek which has a median above 4,000mg/L. The Vermilion Creek
Drainage has a median of approximately 1,000 mg/L.
Figure II-11 Dissolved Solids Concentrations

click to enlarge
All water bodies in the drainage system are within the acceptable water quality pH
range of 6.5 to 9.0. However, pH readings for the Green River Basin indicate the
water as being slightly alkaline. The temperature of water in the Green River Basin
varies from 0 degrees Celsius in the winter to 25 degree Celsius in the summer.
The concentrations of total phosphorous in some streams frequently exceed the limits
recommended to protect reservoirs and streams from nuisance growth of algae and
other aquatic plants. Many of the reservoirs and lakes experience phytoplankton
blooms in late summer and early fall.
The Department of Environmental Quality has recently increased surface water
monitoring to address 1999 amendments to the Environmental Quality Act under
W.S. 35-11-103 (c) & 302 (b) directed at "credible data." Part of this monitoring
program will be directed at monitoring invertebrate communities in the Green River
Basin. The invertebrate population surveys by USGS show water quality in the
plains is not as good as water quality in mountain streams although overall basin
invertebrate populations indicate good water quality. Invertebrates are important
as a source of fish food for the high-quality fisheries in the Green River Basin.
Total Maximum Daily Loads/303 (D) List
All water bodies within the Green River Basin meet the existing classification uses
with the exception of those water bodies contained in the 1998 303(d) list. Section
303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires the State of Wyoming to identify
water bodies that do not meet designated uses and are not expected to meet water
quality standards after application of technology-based controls. It also requires the
State to identify a priority ranking for each water quality limited segment and develop
total maximum daily loads (TMDL) to restore each water body segment to
pre-designated uses. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires each
state to submit their lists of impaired or threatened water bodies every two years and
is required to accomplish the work if a state fails to perform the required activities.
A simple explanation of TMDL is the ability of a water body to assimilate pollution and
continue to meet its designated uses. A TMDL must be established for each pollutant
which is a source of stream impairment. The TMDL process provides a way to
document how water quality standards are being implemented. The process also
provides the framework for thorough watershed planning for multiple sources or causes
of impairment, provides states an opportunity to identify priorities based on risk and
target TMDLs for completion, and promotes cost-effective solutions to pollution.
Salinity Control Projects in the Green River Basin
Water in the Colorado River and its tributaries has experienced an increase in levels
of dissolved solids (or salts, hence the term salinity) almost since man's first use.
The Basin largely lays on sediments derived from prehistoric seas, so that the soils
naturally contain salts derived from that environment. Naturally occurring salinity
comes from erosion of saline soils, saline springs and normal runoff.
The EPA promulgated a regulation in December 1974 which set forth a basinwide
salinity control policy for the Colorado River Basin. The regulation specifically stated
that salinity control was to be implemented while the Basin states continue to develop
their Compact-apportioned water. This regulation also established a standards
procedure, and required the Colorado River Basin states to adopt and submit for
approval to the EPA water quality standards for salinity, including numeric criteria
and a plan of implementation, consistent with the policy stated in the regulation.
The Basin states established the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum in 1973.
The Forum is composed of representatives from each of the seven Basin states
appointed by the governors of the respective states. The Forum was created for interstate
cooperation and to provide the states with the information necessary to comply with
Section 303(a) and (b) of the Clean Water Act. The Salinity Control Act (Public
Law 93-320), as amended by Public Laws 98-569, 104-20 and 104-127, authorizes
the Secretaries of the U.S. Departments of Interior and Agriculture to enhance and
protect the quality of water available in the Colorado River for use in the United States
and the Republic of Mexico. Title II of the Act authorizes specific salinity control units
and under this title was born the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program
(CRBSCP) and the various components and successors thereof.
All salinity control projects have as their ultimate goal the maintenance of water quality
so that numeric criteria (referred to as the 1972 levels) are not exceeded in the lower
basin. These criteria are 723 mg/l below Hoover Dam, 747 mg/l below Parker Dam,
and 879 mg/l at Imperial Dam. Title I of the Act authorizes construction of features to
enable the United States to deliver water to Mexico having an average salinity no
greater than 115 ppm (parts per million or mg/l) +/- 30 ppm over the annual average
salinity of water at Imperial Dam. The Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Department
of Agriculture and the Bureau of Land Management are undertaking ongoing salinity
control programs.
The 1999 Review, Water Quality Standards for Salinity, Colorado River System
outlines policies that affect existing and future development of water resources in
Wyoming's Green River Basin.
Big Sandy Unit
In Wyoming, the only existing component of the Department of Agriculture's CRBSCP
is the Big Sandy Unit. This unit, headquartered out of Farson, is reducing salinity
derived from irrigation in the Farson and Eden areas. The USDA Big Sandy River
Unit Plan was published in 1988 and implementation of the program at this unit began
in 1989. The total salt load reduction for the Big Sandy Project, as outlined in the
1986 EIS and Definite Plan Report, is 52,900 tons of salt per year. Annual progress
reports are prepared by the Farson Field Office of the USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service. A map of the Big Sandy Unit project area is given as Figure II-12.
Currently there are 18,370 acres in the project with water rights.
Figure II-12 Big Sandy Unit, Colorado River Salinity Control Program

click to enlarge
Briefly, salinity increases at the Big Sandy Unit are due to the deep percolation of
irrigation water historically applied via flood irrigation. The Eden Valley Irrigation and
Drainage District provides irrigation water to members from the Big Sandy and Eden
Reservoirs. Excess flood irrigation results in excess soil moisture, movement of water
vertically downward to a shale layer, and horizontal movement of water downgradient
to various discharge points. Seepage points are evident near the confluence of Bone
Draw and the Big Sandy River some 8.5 miles southwest of Farson. The mechanism
for reducing salt loading at this project therefore is to reduce deep percolation by the
application of more efficient on-farm water application techniques.
Improvements in irrigation practices on the unit include primarily the replacement of
traditional uncontrolled flood irrigation methods with other practices that reduce deep
percolation. Such practices include the installation of center pivot sprinkler systems,
replacement of open conveyance ditches with gated pipe, and application of surge
valves which alter the infiltration rate. Participation in all aspects of salinity control is
voluntary on the part of private irrigators. Those who participate receive a cost share
from the program such that their contribution is typically limited to approximately 30
percent of the cost of construction of the improvements.
As of February 2000, the following data describe implementation of salinity control
measures at the Big Sandy Unit:
| Project
Goals and Achievements |
|
Goal | Achieved To Date |
| Total Land in Contracts or Treated (acres) |
15,700 | 10,293 (in contracts) 8,680 (treated) |
| Percent of Producers Benefiting (130 total producers in District) |
85% (110) | 58% (76) |
| Salt Reduction (tons/year) |
52,900 | 32,534 |
West Green River Basin Watershed and Salinity Study Area
The NRCS is in the planning stages for a potential salinity reduction project for
the "West Green River Basin Watershed and Salinity Study Area." This project
will evaluate salinity reduction measures along the Hams Fork, Blacks Fork, Smith
Fork and Henrys Fork drainages in southwest Wyoming and northeast Utah.
Originally applied for in 1990, this project has been recognized as having high
potential for salinity reductions through the use of on-farm irrigation improvements.
The project also has local support, evidenced at public meetings held at the time of
the original application and reiterated at meetings held in the summer of 1999. The
project has not been initiated to date due to changes in funding mechanisms over
time and to the presence of other salinity control projects of higher priority. A
monograph describing the history of this project has been prepared by the
Wyoming State Engineer's Office.
Renewed need for an additional salinity control unit, in part due to the maturation
of the Big Sandy Unit, resulted in the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum
recommending to the USDA in 1999 that it initiate planning for the West Green
River project. Public meetings were held and considerable interest in the project
was still in evidence. The NRCS has initiated a study which may lead to the
preparation of a planning report and preparation of NEPA compliance documents.
The completion of the Green River Basin Water Planning Study will provide data
and information necessary for initiating this proposed salinity control project.
-
- I. Basin Water Use Summary
Table II-7 lists a summary of the existing water uses (depletions) in the Basin, along
with a comparison to the current estimate of water consumption allocated under
Compacts.
Table II-7 Summary of Current Water Uses
|
Normal |
Wet |
Dry |
| (AF/Year) |
Municipal Use (includes City of Cheyenne at 14,400 AF/Yr.) |
20,900 | 20,900 |
20,900 |
| Industrial Use | 66,500 |
66,500 | 66,500 |
| Agricultural Use | 401,000 |
432,300 | 375,400 |
| Evaporation - Main Stem | 88,500 |
88,500 | 88,500 |
| Evaporation - In State | 32,800 |
32,800 | 32,800 |
| Recreation Use | Non-consumptive |
| Environmental Use | 2,000 +/- |
2,000 +/- | 2,000 +/- |
| TOTAL | 611,700 |
643,000 | 586,100 |
| Compact Allocation | 833,000 |
833,000 | 833,000 |
| Remaining Unused Compact Water | 221,300 |
190,000 | 246,900 |
|