January 17, 2023 |
Government agencies asked for public input on the proposed land swap associated with the West Fork Reservoir at a public meeting in Saratoga on Thursday.
The January 12th meeting was one of three hosted by the U.S. Forest Service on both sides of the Wyoming-Colorado state line last week. Along with the Forest Service, the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Army Corp of Engineers discussed the West Fork Battle Creek Land Exchange Proposal. Public comments were also taken. Held at the Platte Valley Community Center, the meeting was a final chance for people to question in a public forum how and why the Wyoming is seeking to trade eight parcels of state-owned land for a single parcel of USFS controlled acreage.
According to the Forest Service, the Wyoming Office of State Lands and Investments submitted the land swap proposal last November. The swap will facilitate the construction of a 10,000-acre feet reservoir intended to provide late season irrigation to ranches in the Little Snake River Valley on both sides of the state line.
Brush Creek District Ranger Jason Armbruster said the Forest Service is conducting a feasibility study and asked for public input on the project.
The exchange would allow the state to build a dam on the West Fork Battle Creek in the Sierra Madre’s. The State is is offering eight, unconnected parcels of land, totaling around 4,400 acres in exchange for 1,762-acres of federal land along Wyoming Highway 70.
Jason Crowder, deputy director for the Office of State Lands and Investments said the specific parcels were chosen because they weren’t making enough money for the state.
Crowder also said the state-owned parcels are difficult to get to, while the federally controlled land can be accessed from Highway 70.
The proposal to build the reservoir, the unintended consequences and questions about who will pay for it have been the subject of political controversy in the legislature for a decade.
William “Jeb” Steward, a former state representative from Encampment, asked who is responsible for signing off on the land exchange. Armbruster said the forest supervisor, Russ Bacon, had the final say.
Armbruster added that his role is to gather information and make recommendations to Bacon.
The Little Snake River Conservation District along with ranchers in northern Colorado have been the driving force behind developing the reservoir. The irrigators claim that during last 50 years irrigators that they have been short between 2,800-to-20,000 acre-feet of irrigation water 40 percent of the time.
Eamon O’Toole runs the Ladder Ranch in Savery and is a member of the Little Snake River Conservation District. O’Toole said his ranch doesn’t receive enough water late in the season during dry years when the Little Snake River runs low.
Using Lake Mead as an example, O’Toole said droughts have affected the entire southwest portion of the country. The rancher said the West Fork reservoir would give his region more available water.
Since the project would benefit both Wyoming and Colorado ranchers, the question about who will pay for the reservoir has dogged discussions from the beginning. With Wyoming dedicating the bulk of the money, Riverside resident LeAnne Stevenson asked when Colorado would begin to contribute.
Jason Mead, the Interim Director of the Wyoming Water Development Office, said, of the 19,000 acres the West Fork Reservoir could provide with irrigation water, roughly 27 percent of that service area is in Colorado. He said Wyoming expects Colorado to pay its fair share.
Officials in Colorado have never made a commitment of putting up any money for the project.
Mead added the federal government will look at the NRCS funding available for the project and determine how much each state should provide.
Carbon County Emergency Management Coordinator Lenny Layman asked, if the dam fails, would it pose a significant danger to people downstream. The Wyoming Water Development Office director said the West Fork Battle Creek dam would be built to high safety standards.
Questions on some of the specifics of the proposed land exchange, such as how the value of the parcels are determined, were not answered at the meeting. U.S. Forest Service Ranger, Armbruster, said the process is very early in development, and more information would be provided later. When asked if public comments have the potential to sway the project, Shawn Follum, the NRCS safety engineer for the project, said yes, to an extent.
January 12th’s invitation for public comment was the last meeting in the feasibility analysis portion of the project. The comment period extends until February 13th of this year. The next step in the process is a National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, analysis to determine any potential harm the construction of the reservoir may have on the local ecology. When the survey is completed, another series of public meetings will be held. The entire process is expected to take until May of 2024.
