Laserfiche WebLink
<br />SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS AND ISSUES <br /> <br />1534 <br /> <br />. Impacts of Increasing Exchange Potential <br /> <br />The potential for encouraging more exchanges has long been a major concern among <br />different user and stakeholder groups. Opening the door to future exchanges was a <br />significant negative impact gleaned from stakeholder focus groups conducted along the <br />upper Arkansas in 1994 as part of the CSU Water Resources Plan. Encouraging future <br />exchanges is being seen as both a positive and a negative impact, depending upon the <br />interest groups involved, as evidenced by the apparently contradictory issues grouped into <br />this category. <br /> <br />Exchanoe Potential: Issues Score <br />Can handle more west slope water 5 <br />Better opportunities to sell water due to increased storaqe 6 <br />Greater pressures to sell aqriculturalland 8 <br />Drv UP more land in southeastern Colorado 4 <br />Increase in user conflicts due to demand 3 <br />Potential for upsettinq oriority svstem on aqricultural water 1 <br />Mean Score for Cateqorv 4.5 <br /> <br />For example, increased storage capacity might provide better opportunities to sell water <br />rights while, on the other hand, it would "create greater pressures" to sell farmland and dry <br />up more agricultural land in the lower valley. The potential to bring over more west slope <br />water can increase the flows in the upper river, benefiting some potentially affected interests <br />but also exacerbate conflicts between user groups (Le., rafters v. anglers) and between the <br />west and east slopes over water issues. While the current storage study is being conducted <br />as a basin-wide effort with the interests of all stakeholders in the mix, perhaps the salient <br />sociological impact of this set of issues is, in fact, the potential for increasing conflicts among <br />different interests. <br /> <br />. Impacts on Urban Population Growth <br /> <br />The troublesome question of whether increasing water storage capacity, and water supply in <br />general, is merely accommodating the rapid population growth along the Front Range or <br />actually "encouraging" such growth, cannot be escaped when gathering data from <br />stakeholder groups. Two issues that scored highly with the test group fall into this category <br />of socioeconomic impacts. <br /> <br /> <br />water <br /> <br />Score <br />6 <br />12 <br />9 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Page B of 10 <br />