My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
IBCCAnnualReport103106
CWCB
>
Interbasin Compact Committee
>
Backfile
>
IBCCAnnualReport103106
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/4/2019 9:05:12 AM
Creation date
6/11/2007 3:13:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Interbasin Compact Committee
Title
Interbasin Compact Committee Annual Report
Date
10/31/2006
Author
CDM
Interbasin CC - Doc Type
Annual Legislative Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
115
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 />Section 2 <br />Reports From Basin Roundtables <br />II11 <br /> <br />. Growth in the headwaters region will present <br />challenges in obtaining augmentation water for new <br />demands. <br /> <br />. Concerns over agricultural transfers and its impact on <br />rural economies are significant in the lower portion of <br />the basin downstream of Pueblo Reservoir. <br /> <br />. Concern over water quality and suitable drinking <br />water are key concerns in the lower basin. <br /> <br />. The success of two major projects is key to meeting <br />future water needs. <br /> <br />. The urban landscape is very important to the <br />economy and an important component to quality of <br />life. <br /> <br />As part of SWSI Phase I and II, a gap analysis was <br />conducted for the Arkansas Basin. The greatest gap in <br />the Arkansas Basin is in northern EI Paso County, where <br />8,000 acre feet (an of gap was identified as shown in <br />Figure 2-1, below. The SWSI report, in Executive <br />Summary Finding # 5, acknowledged that possible gaps <br />related to dependence on non-renewable groundwater <br />sources were not addressed in the SWSI1 report. <br />Rather, renewable sources of water are needed to <br />replace the current 100 percent reliance on non-tributary <br /> <br />and designated basin groundwater, which substantially <br />increases the potential gap, perhaps as high as 20,000 <br />af/yr by 2030. <br /> <br />The Arkansas River Basin offers abundant opportunities <br />for water-based recreation; on the river and its tributaries <br />as well as on numerous reservoirs. Fishing, boating, <br />kayaking, rafting, water skiing, jet skiing, swimming, <br />sailing, sail boarding, and gold panning are all available, <br />as well as hiking, picnicking, camping, hunting, and <br />biking. <br /> <br />There are no CWCB decreed instream flow rights on the <br />mainstem of the Arkansas River. Via the Fry-Ark <br />Project's operating plan, a minimum flow of 66.0 cubic <br />feet per second (cfs) was established for the Arkansas <br />River at Granite, which is the only legal minimum flow <br />requirement on the mainstem of the Arkansas. Water <br />exchanges are used as a management tool for municipal <br />water supplies in the Arkansas Basin. A water exchange <br />is made by diverting water at one location in the river <br />system and replacing it with a like quantity of water at <br />another location. During an exchange, stream flow in the <br />reach between the two exchange locations is decreased <br />by the amount of the exchange. <br /> <br /> <br />2-2 <br /> <br />Figure 2-1 Summary of Gap Analysis for Arkansas Basin. <br /> <br />S:\IBC Support\Report to Legislature\Section 2 finaLdoc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.