Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ternatives Evaluated <br /> <br />A range of alternatives were considered on how to gain control of <br />Riverside water not owned by RID including 1) don't actively <br />pursue any water, 2) pursue trade agreements with any new owners <br />of the GASP water, 3) purchase water at the GASP liquidation <br />sale. <br /> <br />An evaluation of the alternatives follows: <br /> <br />1. Don't actively pursue any water: <br /> <br />This alternative would mean that the GASP water would sell <br />to other entities and would no longer be under the control <br />of RID. There is no direct cost with this alternative but <br />losing control of the GASP water may led to reduced water <br />supply to RID farms and cause dry-up of productively <br />irrigable land. This alternative is unacceptable to RID. <br /> <br />2. Pursue trade agreements with any new owners of the GASP <br />water: <br /> <br />This alternative would give control of the GASP water to RID <br />in the same fashion by which they have used the water for <br />the past twenty years. There is also no direct cost with <br />this alternative. This alternative has great uncertainty not <br />knowing who the new owners of the GASP water might be and if <br />they would even be willing to make a trade agreement. This <br />alternative is unacceptable to RID. <br /> <br />3. Purchase water at the GASP liquidation sale: <br /> <br />This alternative would give RID control of the GASP water <br />through direct ownership. 46 private rights of Riverside <br />Reservoir would be purchased at the GASP liquidation sale. <br />There would be no third party uncertainty with this <br />alternative. The cost of this alternative would be <br />$1,638,000. <br /> <br />Feasibility Study <br />RID Water Rights Project <br />February 2006 <br /> <br />3 <br />