Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Metropolitan Water Supply Investigation <br /> <br />Introduction <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />These investigations are described in Section 3.2.4.3, Systems Integration Study Results <br />of this report and in Appendix 7. <br /> <br />The information provided in this report should be useful to local, state and federal <br />officials and the general public in understanding the possibilities and limitations <br />associated with cooperative water supply planning for the metro Denver region. The <br />authors believe that the information provided in this report and the Executive Summary <br />will be useful in the following ways: <br /> <br />. As a background and educational document for state and local officials that may <br />not be directly involved in water supply planning and development; <br /> <br />. As a preliminary investigation for use by water providers in their evaluation of <br />water supply opportunities; <br /> <br />. As a reference document and point of departure for future investigations; and <br /> <br />. As a reference document for other interested parties that could be involved in or <br />impacted by the implementation ofthe subject water supply options (e.g. <br />environmental organizations, western slope interests, federal and state permitting <br />agencies). <br /> <br />1.2. BACKGROUND <br /> <br />In January of 1993, Governor Roy Romer and the Colorado Department of Natural <br />Resources convened the first Colorado Water Convention. The Convention focused on <br />issues related to Front Range water supply planning and interbasin transfers of water. <br /> <br />The Governor voiced deep concerns about the heavy economic and social costs of "water <br />supply planning through litigation." He cited the fact that over $80 million had been <br />spent in unsuccessful litigation and permitting efforts by various water interests in the <br />previous decade," including Two Forks, Union Park, A WDI and others. <br /> <br />The Governor also spoke about concerns and controversy associated with transmountain <br />diversions. Others emphasized the potential adverse effects of exports on local <br />communities and their water supplies, water quality, water-based recreation and <br />environmental values. Some participants spoke of the need for new legislative protection <br />for basins of origin against further exports of water. <br /> <br />Discussion at the Convention suggested that a cooperative approach to water supply <br />planning, focusing on better use of already-developed water supply systems, may be <br />needed; that only by being sensitive to multiple perspectives could workable ideas <br />emerge; that further sacrifice on the part of West Slope, agricultural and environmental <br />interests could not reasonably be expected until the metro Denver area had first "put its <br />own house in order" through more reliance on water conservation, reuse, conjunctive use, <br />and other means of full and efficient utilization of existing systems. <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />D'''nored for the Colorado Water Conservation Board, Colorado Department of Natural Resources by <br />. "'-M..It~nts. 1002 Walnut Street, Suite 200, Boulder, CO 80302 <br />