Estimated Withdrawals and Use of Water in Colorado, 2005

Abstract

the SWSI forecasted water demand and USGS compilation estimates may be due to increased conservation efforts, which were not included in the water-demand forecasts, and the differing methodology in deriving the forecasted and estimated values. A generalized comparison of the published 1985 estimates to water withdrawal estimates 20 years later in 2005 can provide some indication of State water-use trends. Estimates of total water withdrawals were compared for the categories of total irrigation (crop and golf course) public supply (including population), self-supplied domestic (including population), self-supplied industrial, livestock, mining, and thermoelectric. Commercial water use was estimated in 1985 but was not compiled in 2005. Total withdrawals for the seven categories compiled in 1985 and 2005 did not differ greatly and indicated an increase of less than 1 percent. A number of water-use categories indicated an increase in water withdrawals in the 20 years from 1985 to 2005, which included public supply, self-supplied domestic, self-supplied industrial, and thermoelectric uses. These water-use categories can be directly linked to population increases and reflect the overall State population growth from 3.2 million in 1985 to 4.7 million in 2005. As a consequence of increased population and the need for more electricity and manufactured and processed goods, water withdrawals for thermoelectric generation increased 12.2 percent and self-supplied industrial increased 18.4 percent between 1985 and 2005. A number of water-use categories decreased between 1985 and 2005, including irrigation, livestock, and mining. Irrigation estimates decreased the least during these 20 years, less than 1 percent; however, irrigated acres decreased by approximately 10 percent. Livestock withdrawals decreased 45.6 percent and mining decreased 76.5 percent. The decrease in mining withdrawals reflects the decrease in the number of active coal and hard-rock mines in Colorado from 150 in 1985, to 20 in 2005. Water Withdrawals by Category Water withdrawal information for 2005 was compiled for seven categories: irrigation (crop and golf course), public supply, self-supplied domestic, self-supplied industrial, livestock, mining, and thermoelectric. For each category, surfacewater and groundwater withdrawal volumes were compiled and are shown as totals for the State by county (table 2, fig. 4) and by four-digit HUC (table 3). Water withdrawals by category are presented for the hydrologic subregions (hydrologic unit code) in tables 1-1 to 1-9 in the appendix. A summary of instream water use for hydroelectric power generation also was compiled. Public supply Water withdrawn by public and private water suppliers and delivered to users. Public suppliers provide water for a variety of uses, such as domestic, commercial, industrial, thermoelectric power (domestic and cooling purposes), and public-water use. Also see domestic water use, commercial water use, industrial water use, public-water use, and other water use. Public supply deliveries ...

Documentation of methods and inventory of irrigation data collected for the 2000 and 2005 U.S. Geological Survey Estimated use of water in the United States, comparison of USGS-compiled irrigation data to other sources, and recommendations for future compilations

“…After compiling the data, documenting the methods used to estimate the data, and entering required data into AWUDS, the WSC sends the information to its regional water-use specialist for review. others, 2009), Arkansas (Holland, 2007), Colorado (Ivahnenko, 2009;Ivahnenko and Flynn, 2010), Florida (Marella, 2009), Georgia (Fanning and Trent, 2009), Louisiana (Sargent, 2007), Oklahoma (Tortorelli, 2009), Puerto Rico (Molina-Rivera andGomez-Gomez, 2008), South Dakota (Carter and Neitzert, 2008), Washington (Lane, 2009) Virginia (Atkins, 2007), and Wisconsin (Buchwald, 2009 Agriculture, 1999aAgriculture, , 2004aAgriculture, , and 2009a1998FRIS reports (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1999b, 2004b, and 2009b (Johnson and Mueller, 2010). The satellite imagery was cross-referenced with a sample of field-verified data from the Farm Service Agency's (FSA) "Common Land Unit" across the country.…”

“…Twelve WSCs published reports covering the data and methods used for the 2005 USGS water-use compilation on irrigation as well as the other categories. The WSCs that published reports include Alabama (Hutson and others, 2009), Arkansas (Holland, 2007), Colorado (Ivahnenko, 2009 andIvahnenko andFlynn, 2010), Florida (Marella, 2009), Georgia (Fanning and Trent, 2009), Louisiana (Sargent, 2007), Oklahoma (Tortorelli, 2009), Puerto Rico (Molina-Rivera and Gomez-Gomez, 2008), South Dakota (Carter and Neitzert, 2008), Washington (Lane, 2009), West Virginia (Atkins, 2007), and Wisconsin (Buchwald, 2009). If available, information on type of irrigation system, source of irrigation water withdrawals, and any changes in estimation methodology between the 2000 and 2005 WSC documentation also is presented.…”

Like Oil and Water in the American West: Water Market Access amid Unconventional Oil Production in Colorado

“…This system still operates today as a hierarchical method for deciding who gets what when drought occurs or water is scarce. Since agriculture was one of the first users, senior rights to surface water flows are still predominantly held by agricultural actors, ahead of municipal, industrial, environmental, and recreational uses (Jones and Cech )—and irrigated agriculture accounts for about 80 percent of water use in the South Platte basin and in Colorado in general (Ivahnenko and Flynn ). In many cases in Colorado, institutions such as mutual ditch companies function as incorporated businesses that oversee distribution of water to shareholders within the prior appropriation system through managing conveyance, operational, and fiscal activities.…”

Mapping water availability, projected use and cost in the western United States

“…As traditional freshwater supplies become stressed (e.g., Averyt et al 2013, US Bureau of Reclamation 2013, 2010, Roy et al 2012, Reilly et al 2008 a more comprehensive view of water availability is required. Current metrics are limited to unappropriated surface and groundwater; however, other sources of water exist for which comparable metrics need to be developed.…”