My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10 Notes
CWCB
>
IBCC Process Program Material
>
Backfile
>
10 Notes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/15/2009 6:00:35 PM
Creation date
7/26/2007 1:49:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
IBCC Process Program Material
Title
Colorado’s Interbasin Compact Negotiations: Development of an Institutional Framework - Notes
Date
12/17/2004
Author
Russell George, Frank McNulty, Peter Nichols, Eric Hecox
IBCC - Doc Type
Program Planning, Budget & Contracts
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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
Revised: 7/26/2007 <br /> <br />Mis - trust <br />o <br /> <br />People know the current system (Conditional water rights; 1041 <br />o <br />Provisio n) <br /> <br />Parochial interests <br />o <br /> <br />A belief that an entity is better off on its own rather than part of the <br />o <br />process <br /> <br />? Get over this through Russ’s leadership <br />? <br /> <br />Models <br /> <br />Nebraska Water Policy Taskforce – mentioned by Kowalski <br />o <br /> <br />? Ann Bleed (402 - 471 - 2363) <br /> <br />? Legislation authorized t ask forces <br /> <br />? Task force developed agreement by consensus <br /> <br />Volkot Reservoir – mentioned by Kowalski <br />o <br />? <br /> <br />Opposition to the overall idea <br /> <br />Will come from not including people who feel they should be included <br />o <br /> <br />Most will come from farm and ranch community <br />o <br /> <br />? Basin of origi n and environmental interests will like the idea <br /> <br />? Municipalities will be mixed <br />? <br /> <br />Think of carrots for participation <br /> <br />SWSI <br />? <br /> <br />Draft report next week <br />? <br /> <br />Has been a basin up process <br />? <br /> <br />Executive summary out first to help with public involvement <br />? <br /> <br />Challenges for SWSI <br /> <br />Get o ver ref. A <br />o <br /> <br />People thought it was about mega projects <br />o <br /> <br />Wanted basins to focus on their own issues <br />o <br /> <br />? Challenged each basin to look at in - basin solutions <br />? <br /> <br />Now have base of information <br />? <br /> <br />SWSI(B) will focus on transbasin issues and political issues <br /> <br />This will feed int o the compact idea <br />o <br /> <br />Must make sure the processes overlap <br />o <br />? <br /> <br />From CWCB meeting <br /> <br />Schedule too accelerated – timeframe was constrictive <br />o <br /> <br />Need to continue with internal basin meetings <br />o <br /> <br />Hope to use SWSI(II) to work towards a collective vision <br />o <br /> <br />SWSI was good at brining new interests to the table; opening up dialogue; <br />o <br />developing trust <br /> <br />Need an on - going discussion on what recreational water use is (grass for <br />o <br />soccer); don’t have good data and understanding of recreational use <br /> <br />SWSI can be viewed as a scoping exercise – data g aps exist <br />o <br /> <br />Cooperative solutions where everyone wins are better than litigated <br />o <br />solutions where one party wins and one loses <br /> <br />There are already collaborative efforts at a grassroots level within basins – <br />o <br />better to provide funding for local basin planning and projects <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.