WSP11541 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- Board adopts inte -m base water supplv policv A base water supply policy could help maintain water for agricultural uses. "We're trying to protect he base water supply for this re . n." General Manager Eric Wilkinson co dn'r put months of cHc)J"t any morc succinct . In mid-February, the Board of Directors of the Northern Colorado Water Conser- vancy District adorned an Interim Base Water Supply Policy. The action came five months after the formation of the Board's Base Water Supply Ad Hoc Committee. Base water supply protection is crucial because the Denver metro area is forever searching for future sup- plies, casting covetous eyes in northern Col- orado's dirccdon. The comlllittee's m<1111 purpose IS to review and examine the District's current policy. Within that, Wilkinson says, tbe aim is to assure the supplemental nature of Colorado-Big Thompson water, pro- tect the region's base water supply and main- tain agricultural water supplies within the Dis- trict boundaries. During its October meeting, the committee discllssed the adoption oLl policy to "preserve the agricultural component of the C-RT Project in the face of increasing amounts of C- BT water being transferred from agricultural to municipal and industrial use." District policy precludes the delivery of water to lands outside the District's boundaries or lands with no history of irri- gation. Although the ad hoc committee formed in early faU, Wilkinson said the base water supply policy had been scrutinized "as much as a year before." The interim policy will be in place until the Board adopts a final policy. The final policy, Wilkinson said, will "have more definition, be more struc- tured." He said it Olay take another six to nine months to complete the work. "Right now, we're trying to formulate a d t," Wilkinson said. In he meantime, the Board, according to the J licy, "will not approve an applica- tion to c nge or modifY an existing C- BT water allorn ent cotHract, or to issue a new C-BT water allotment contract" except under onditions specified in t c interim policy. e key point of the polic 's six provisions states at allottecs may transfer on-C-BT water out of Dis rict bound- aries, but c not expect to receive C- T water to replace it. The rovision is an effort to pI tect against transfers base water supplies to t . rsty, affluent metro subur s and to prevent allottee from replacing the trans fers with C-BT water. The examination of the base water supply policy and the ad hoc committee's work follows an informal Inspector General sur- vey of the C-BT Project. The survey pointed to the consequences of the changes in water use in the region, which could in turn change the way the C-BT Project is viewed by the IG. The District's legal counsel Bennett Raley voiced concern that if the C- BT water is used principally by municipalities and industry, then the status of the C-BT Project as primarily an irrigation project could be in jeopardy. The United States may assert a claim for additional payments beyond the current Repayment Contract. Essentially, that means the U.S. govern- ment could try to change the District's repayment obligation because of transfers of C- BT Project water to non-irrigation uses. The language is straightforward, but the reality on the Front Range is "a trend in allotment contract applications toward municipal and industrial use. tI Almost half of the C- B' r Project is owned byallottees who hold allotment contracts for munici- pal and industrial use, Wilkinson told the committee in September, although "about 75 percent of the C- BT Project water deliveries are for irrigation purposes." In 1957, of the 310,000 CBT units, 85 percent or 264,870 units, were devoted to agriculture. The percentage has declined steadily, a point or slightly less each year. Between 1968 and 1969 it dropped 6 per- centage points. In 1995, the percentage of agriculture versus municipal and industrial owners was 53 to 47. Municipal and industrial inter- ests own more water than they use in any year, and most years they rent the water back to agriculture. Ownership of C-BT water is a contrac- tual right, Wilkinson reminds. Base water supplies usually are equivalent to real prop- erty rights. Wilkinson recognizes the Board has a re onsibiliry to provide a supplemental wa r supply to lands within the District's bou darics. For armel'S, the policy has an impact on their a 'lity to acquire water and may affect th ir ability to get and/or retain con- tracts. 0 municipal and industrial users, Wilkinson said, there is no impact unless contracts are being bought or sold. And the future? Replied Wilkinson: "We should be con- cerned about base water." b WATERNEWS SPRING 199i II