My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09732
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09732
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:55:30 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:53:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8149.911
Description
Miscellaneous Small Projects and Project Studies - SE Needs Assessment and PSOP
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
11/10/1999
Author
Charles F Cortese
Title
Draft Socioeconomic Study Results Storage Alternatives Study Presentation to Storage Study Committee SECWCD
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />1530 <br /> <br />SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS AND ISSUES <br /> <br />. Agriculture <br />. Reoperation <br />Respondents to interviews express that farmers "always feel at a disadvantage" in <br />negotiations of this nature. Also, there is considerable concern that increased storage <br />capacity would "open the door" to more exchanges in the near future, further drying up <br />and decreasing the water quality in the lower valley. A major concern voiced by those <br />interviewed is that reoperation could change reallocation principles and has the potential <br />for upsetting the priority system on agricultural water. There is also significant concern <br />about the overall level of effort required, in time, energy and funds, by farmers (as well <br />as resource agency personnel) defending water rights and allocation principles. Farmers <br />see themselves at an economic disadvantage in another way. by not being financially <br />able to participate in the financing and benefits of such projects. However, it was stated <br />that without the water reuse aspect, the overall project would be a benefit to farmers in <br />the lower valley. <br />. Pueblo Reservoir Enlargement <br />One concern about this alternative was that if construction happens in a very wet year <br />when capture is done, followed by dry years; it would have a big adverse impact on the <br />agricultural water supply. The Kansas lawsuit was listed as an issue. as well as the <br />impact on alluvial wells that changes in stream flows would affect. A major concern is the <br />impact on crops that deterioration of water quality and increased salinity would cause. <br />Other concerns for farmers are the trend for large municipalities becoming "water <br />merchants" and "Colorado Springs controlling the river from Otero to Lake Meredith." As <br />to be expected, a major issue for agricultural interests is that winter water storage needs <br />to be firm. <br />. Turquoise Reservoir Enlargement <br />No agricultural issues related to this specific alternative were voiced in the interviews. <br />. Lake Meredith Enlargement <br />A positive impact on agriculture pertaining to this alternative was that there would be <br />more water flowing downriver. A concern about greater storage resulting in more <br />evaporation, leading to lower water quality for municipalities as well as agriculture <br />applies to several alternatives although it was listed as particularly salient for an <br />enlargement of Lake Meredith. <br />. Gravel Lakes Storage <br />One factor mentioned in relation to the agricultural impacts of gravel lakes was the <br />evaporation issue. Another was that if gravel lake storage was created along Fountain <br />Creek it could benefit agriculture. <br />. Williams Creek Reservoir <br />The major concern of agricultural interests about a Williams Creek Reservoir it that it <br />would increase the already enormous erosion problem on Fountain Creek. This would <br />result in more loss of agricultural land along the Fountain as well as even more siltation <br />of the Arkansas in the lower valley. A new reservoir at the Williams Creek site touches <br />the sensitivity of farmers to more agricultural land being dried up or inundated to create <br />more space for water exchanges. Another major concern for the lower valley was the <br />issue of exchanging pristine water for effluent from Colorado Springs. <br /> <br />Page 4 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.