Ark BRT Water Transfers Committee Work Summary

Home Browse Search

The discussion about growth and the need for urban communities to be responsible lead to several comments regarding the conflict between water as a private property right and water for the public good (Exhibit G.) Convinced that the committee was unlikely to have any direct means to influence the issue of urban growth, the group turned to the issue of pushing for an "impact analysis study." As one member stated it, "Until we know exactly what the positive and negative impacts or consequences of a water relocation are, how is it possible to proceed with discussion of how such transfers can be done in a way that protects and/or enhances rural economies?" Consensus Statement At its May 9 meeting, the committee came to consensus on the need to: · Support sustainable, smart growth · Support the sustainability of rural communities · Maximize utilization of water to enhance the vitality of the environment and the economy of the basin, especially rural communities, while protecting private property rights (this was taken from a statement earlier adopted by the Arkansas Basin Roundtable's Needs Assessment Committee.) In addition, the committee agreed that subsequent work should consider: · "How should water be relocated/reallocated from agriculture uses in a way that supports the economy and environment of rural communities while recognizing ongoing processes and utilizing information from ongoing studies?" Note: By "recognizing ongoing processes" the committee was referring to the reality that a number of important processes are currently underway, such as (but not limited to) a 9 Party Intergovernmental Agreement, the Bureau of Reclamation's recent granting of a 40 year storage agreement with Aurora, and the Fountain Creek Task Force deliberations, and the reality that water transfer contracts are not public until the parties want to or have to disclose them. By "utilizing information from ongoing studies" the committee was referring to work such as (but not limited to) that currently being done by CSU researchers on irrigation efficiencies/water quality, and Lower Arkansas River Water Conservancy District's efforts to establish a "Super Ditch" cooperative group to rotationally fallow a portion of lands to make water available to be sold at competitive prices for urban uses. Chairman Lawrence Sena submitted a letter to roundtable members summing up the committee's consensus as a means of informing the roundtable of progress being made by the committee (Exhibit H.) Homework was assigned to gather a list of studies and processes related to the question (Exhibit~. Some committee members submitted their take on an answer to the question itse If . Turnina to Action At its June 13 meeting, committee members were asked to narrow in on action to encourage serious consideration of the question they had adopted. Much of the discussion centered on the action of pushing for an impact analysis study. The group wanted to push for an impact analysis study focusing on the future instead of the past. Specifically, the group wanted to push for a compilation of completed and current studies that increase the understanding of water transfers' issues and impacts. AND they wanted to push for the establishment of a unique sort of "think tank" to both review those studies (and determine whether further study is needed) and to explore water transfer Arkansas Basin Roundtable Water Transfers Committee-Work Summary Page 2 of 4