One Colorado Landowner's Epic Battle With . . . Tamarisk - Pueblo Chieftan

[hatrack]

GRANADA - Racing on a groaning golf cart from one end to the other of a sprawling 800-acre farm, Rick Enstrom turned to his guest and smiled. “I’m a madman,” Enstrom said, pointing out areas that will be seeded with corn for deer and sunflowers for the birds. Along the way, they pass landmarks familiar to all who know the farm: Mud Lake, Sherwood Forest and Mrs. Enstrom’s (Linda’s) Beach. “My farmer thinks I’m nuts.”

The farmer, Chris Henderson, was a little miffed by a comment Enstrom made in jest during a presentation on tamarisk removal. Enstrom mentioned that the neighbors think, “We’re not very good farmers.” For the record, Henderson is a very good farmer who has an impressive knowledge about the way irrigation water moves in the Lower Arkansas Valley. He’s the main reason Enstrom, a novice, has been able to turn idle land productive again. Enstrom, a confectioner and former member of the Colorado Wildlife Commission who lives in Lakewood, chooses to farm a little differently however. Enstrom bought the farm north of Granada in 2001, after searching high and low for some land with river areas to support his duck-hunting habit. He looked in Nebraska and eastern Colorado before he chanced upon the Granada farm.

EDIT

So far, he has paid nearly $40,000 of his own money and received an equal match from the Natural Resources Conservation Service for tamarisk removal. Tri-State Generation and Transmission, which bought the farm’s water rights for its proposed power plant at Holly, has also provided some assistance. The state Division of Wildlife also is helping. “I don’t carpet bomb it,” Enstrom said. “The tedious part is the after-spraying.”

There are nearly immediate results in water gains. One spring - probably a groundwater seep - was clogged with cattails and tamarisk. When cleared, it produced a free-flowing stream, which was then claimed by Enstrom, beavers and the Buffalo Canal, which operates its headgate on the Arkansas River at the lower end of Enstrom’s farm. A Supreme Court case has already established that landowners who clear tamarisk are not entitled to the water savings. Still, Enstrom finds it ironic that the state has spent millions fighting Kansas for a few thousand acre-feet of water annually that both states could easily gain by getting serious about tamarisk removal.

Ed. - emphasis added


http://www.chieftain.com/articles/2009/05/26/news/local/doc4a1b7eed738b1570467440.txt