Halligan-Seaman: Will ag be harmed or helped?

Editor's note: In last month's North Forty News, concerns of environmental groups related to the Halligan-Seaman project were aired. This month, we take a look at possible effects on agriculture if the project is built.

By Cherry Sokoloski
North Forty News

As Fort Collins, Greeley and other water users move forward with the Halligan-Seaman reservoir expansion project, effects on agriculture are an important part of the study process.

This question has been raised: Will more ag land be taken from production as a result of the project? Water users are saying that, while more land will inevitably be removed from agriculture as the Front Range grows, expanding the reservoirs could actually provide some protection for farmers.

In the case of Fort Collins, which wants to expand Halligan Reservoir, the city already owns enough ag water to fill the reservoir. "We just need a place to store it," said Cliff Hoelscher, project manager for Fort Collins. Most of the water to fill Halligan would come from ditch rights on the south side of the Poudre, water that served the Fort Collins area when it had more farmland and fewer homes.

Some of the ag water owned by Fort Collins is currently rented back to farmers. Donnie Dustin, an engineer with Fort Collins Utilities, said that except in the driest years, there should be significant rental water available to farmers even while Halligan Reservoir is filling.

Having additional storage will cut down on the number of water rights the city has to buy, Dustin noted. If the reservoir isn't enlarged, the most likely scenario for drought protection would be to purchase additional ag rights.

In the long run, Dustin said, as the city grows it will be using more of its ag rights and renting fewer of them back to farmers.

Hoelscher said that both Fort Collins and the Tri-Districts, another partner in the project, currently obtain additional water rights as new developments go in. Thus, ag land is lost to development, but not as the result of a water storage project.

Greeley, which wants to expand Seaman Reservoir, is in a different situation. According to John Scott, a consultant with Scott Water Engineers of Fort Collins, Greeley will have to buy more water rights to fill an expanded reservoir. Some ag land could be dried up as a result.

North Poudre Irrigation Co. also has a stake in the project and a viewpoint on the ag issue. NPIC owned Halligan Reservoir until just a few years ago, when the company sold it to Fort Collins. If the reservoir is expanded, NPIC has requested an additional 5,000 acre-feet of storage.

NPIC sees the reservoir project as one way to help preserve agriculture, according to manager Steve Smith. NPIC needs extra water two to three years out of every 10 for agricultural use, and additional storage would help meet that demand. Having extra storage would benefit all NPIC shareholders in dry years, Smith noted, including those on the north end who are most difficult to reach.

Smith said the concept of a project "drying up" ag land can be misleading. "It's an economic thing, driven by price, supply and demand," he said. Water in northern Colorado is very valuable, so some farmers sell most of their water and then count on renting it back. "It's a gamble," Smith noted.

The environmental community has suggested that more efficient use of water could preclude the need for reservoir expansions. Mark Easter, spokesperson for the Sierra Club Poudre Canyon Group, suggested several options to consider for making agricultural water go further. He said he would like to see cities and ag users cooperate more, with cities investing in efficiency measures in exchange for part of the water now used for agriculture. These efficiency measures could include lining ditches and using pipelines where possible, to minimize losses caused by evaporation and absorption.