My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RGBRT Minutes of 10-9-06
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
Backfile
>
RGBRT Minutes of 10-9-06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 4:17:14 PM
Creation date
7/16/2007 12:54:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Basin Roundtables
Basin Roundtable
Rio Grande
Title
Minutes
Date
10/9/2006
Basin Roundtables - Doc Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
to agree on it — Basis is the assessment process - landowner that benefits t he most, <br />pays the most — in this case, he who brings the most surface water in, pays the least, he <br />who brings in the least, pays the most. One tool i s C onservation R eserve E nhancement <br />Program ( CREP — through NRCS) — pays an irrigated rental rate to people to fallow their <br />ground — takes 20% non - federal cost share — Colorado doesn’t have the budget for <br />that — sub districts are one way to raise the $ to provide thi s – perhaps farmers can cut <br />back and be paid for fallowing — market based decisions — If not, pay the bills to raise <br />necessary $ to achieve necessary reductions in GW use. <br /> <br />Alternative — years, $millions, spent on lawyers will = no more water in aquifer. <br /> <br />Doug — S B 222 HAS TO <br />1) RECOVER AQUIFER & <br />2) PROTECT SENIOR WATER RIGHTS <br />- does allow possi b i lity to recompense seniors <br />- Sub districts = butcher knife vs . reg ulations =broad ax <br />- if all wells shut off tomorrow, aquifer will not recover in one year — it will take a lot of <br />time in any case <br /> <br />Steve — re people fighting on their own, each individual well owner could develop their <br />own aug mentation plan with their owned surface rights — but that is onerous and <br />expensive, and there is really no ditch in SLV with adequate water for all the wells in <br />that system — in any case will result in cut back of irrigated acreage <br /> <br />Doug - told story of person with a Senior water right on S outh P latte , had already spent <br />$200,000 of own money, has no more water today! Also, a lawyer from the area <br />re ported a total $24 million spent on lawyers so far! <br /> <br />Ed - re Section I Par3 — lists bench mark water levels — alludes to water pressure but no <br />static level of aquifer — so how much do we need to recharge to get to that level? <br /> <br />Doug — each area will have to address that within its area <br /> <br />Ray — answer isn’t out there yet — one task that RT might consider is to address this? <br />Each area needs to be able to answer this — currently best tool is the R io G rande <br />D ecision Support System and the ground water model , to give areas the info rmation <br />needed <br /> <br />Mike G - where are the current SD’s in their process, how much time do they have to <br />make progress? <br /> <br />Ray — first one will be able to put first assessments at earliest in 2008 — draft working <br />plan will require intense review by SE — unanswerable at this time — how to make it <br />pai n ful enough to make the plan work? <br /> <br /> Page 9 of 13 RGBRT <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> October 9 , 2006 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.