Glenwood Springs WWP update:2

[Benguska]

o, the city is going forward with the wwp, but seem to be that the pool will file a law suit against the city if they do any construction, or TESTS!

This to me is fishy, I would hate, and would totally not support any construction that would effect the pools water supply. However, all there accuzations of busting a aquifer are still not quite backed with proof, they even quoted in the paper a few weeks ago, that they (the Pool) don't know exactly where the aquifer is. As for me, I would feel that the next step is to find the truth, and the bottom line is, if there is an aquifer 10ft under the river bed, then no construction should happen, and we will just have to find a new location. But the pool seems to be against any engineering, and or tests that could possible meet a mutual agreement. I feel that we need to find out where the aquifer is. In my opinion, the city must know something we don't, because they are siding on our side to move forward with it, as apposed to the main income in tourism dollars which is a TON of money that the pool brings in to the community. So if anyone has education, or knows of ways to figure out where the aquifer is, or any usable input, being against the park construction, or for it, please email me @ Guskasb14@comcast.net. Again, I would love to see a park in GWS, however, I would hate to see the pool lose all there water.

My Two Cents
Ben Guska

Guskasb14@comcast.net

[MarkInCJ]

Ben,
As a Hydrogeologist I can say without even knowing the exact area that modifications to a riverbed will not affect the aquifer. Assuming the pool actually gets thier water from a spring and not from heated river water. This is unless you plan on making a dam with a large lake behind it.
Why is that you ask? If it is an unconfined aquifer just below ground, then precipitation becomes groundwater and the groundwater will naturally flow into the river. This is why streams carry water long after it rains. Rivers are natural low points where all the water from the surrounding topography eventually ends up. That is unless you are dealing with a more complicated confined aquifer system where you basically have two or more aquifers separated by some sort of geologic boundary layer like clay. In this case the confined aquifer is usually supplied by groundwater from other areas in the watershed that are not directly connected to the unconfined aquifer, which feeds the river.
Now I am not sure where this pool gets thier water from, but it seems to me that they should be more worried about poor snowpack and droughts, which affect the amount of water in the aquifer rather than the river which is essentially caryring water that has already left the aquifer. This sounds like another case of small town politics to me. I hope that clears things up a little.
-Mark

[MarkInCJ]

I did a little research on this scenario and ended up stumbling across a discussion on mountainbuzz by some other geo-geeks. It sounds like this is a pretty complicated system that creates the Springs. Not only that, but the geologic conditions that cause the springs to flow out of the ground could possibly be affected by contruction or intrusive drilling to investigate the site. This is rough for the park, but you gotta admit that the springs are the big cash cow in this neck of the woods.

[Benguska]

Yes
It seems as though there are a few sides to the story. One, there are actually records onlines, of tests already done which indicate depth of the riverbed, and locations of aquifers. Another email I recieved also indicated that that if what the pool is saying was true, then the grand avenue bridge wouldnt of been built because the pilons go into the river bed just upstream from the parks location, which is actually closer to the aquifers.

Thanks for all your input tho.

feel free to email
me.

Guskasb14@comcast.net
Ben Guska