Laserfiche WebLink
<br />A. I'm going to talk a broad concept here. Usable flows to me would be water that is available in quantity to be useful <br />for irrigation purposes in Kansas. In other words, if a flash flood is coming through and the ditches could not pick it <br />up it may not be usable to Kansas. If it comes at a time of)'ear that it's not needed for irrigation. it may not be <br />useable to Kansas, so there is a bit of flexibility with this issue. It is difficult to define, since they didn't clearly <br />define what it was. The Special Master has ruled. and I believe that David Robbins will expand on it later. Further <br />review in the litigation may well be needed to determine the level. We have stipulated presently to past depletions <br />· that have 0CCW1'ed. and I believe it is approximately 325,000 acre-feet over a 31-35 )'ear period. This comes from <br />my reading of the case and what they said in the case. At the time when they were negotiating the Compact there <br />was a reservoir up above Colorado Springs that had some leakage in it. it was about 6 second feet. and they were <br />worried about how could they fix the leak and still use the water. At that time the Compact Commissioners said. <br />"Look. we are not going to argue about what they said was a teaspoonful of water in comparison to the entire river." <br />In other words, it wasn't a major change so they tried to say, "Let's don't get down to that small detail... Significant <br />changes would be a matter of degree that would later arise as we go through it. so we have to be careful. This case <br />is showing us that we have to look at some lessons we've learned as a result of this case - if)'Oll start changing uses <br />and changing technology)'Oll may significantly change what the historic regime of the river system has been. One <br />of the things we have fOWld as a result of this case is that there are not a lot of good records. There were nOt a lot of <br />records kept in the 40's, there haven't been a lot of good well pumping data. and while there have been records on <br />surface diversions, the pumping data is not there. So, it's difficult to accoWlt for what goes on in the river system. <br />and as a result of what has occurred on the Arkansas River and knowing we have a similar compact on the Colorado <br />River, the state has gone forward with a little more aggressive methodology. We're doing what we call the Colorado <br />River Decision Support System -- developing computer information -- developing better technology and data of <br />what our historic use has been. We have to quantify those things as we go to protect ourselves in the future. It is <br />really important for Colorado to have good data and traditionally we have not collected good data on many of our <br />historic uses. <br /> <br />Q. Inaudible (Arkansas question) <br /> <br />A. For the Colorado River, yes it is, and we've done a lot of work since the case. We have developed similar <br />information on the Arkansas. As a result of the case, groundwater pumping data is part of the rules and regulations <br />of the State Engineer's Office. We now require reporting of that data so we can get a better handle on that <br />information. Yes, we're striving to get that data now for the Arkansas in more detail. and rather than waiting and <br />going down the road 20 more )'ears on the Colorado River we're trying to get ahead of the power curve. As it would <br />appear, we have not used all our apportionment on the Colorado River side and we've now developed data to <br />support thaL <br /> <br />Q. Inaudible (Question concerning pumping of wells in the future.) <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />A I think with augmentation we can continue to use our wells. We should be able to use our wells. It's a real juggling <br />act in the basin. On the one hand, we're going to have to replace our depletion to Kansas from well pumping. and <br />on the other hand we have the farm economy of the basin that is quite importanL One of the things we tried to do <br />with the coordinating committee was to look for solutions to that very problem. One of the recommendations that <br />came out of the committee was to look at commtmities such as Colorado Springs, Pueblo and others that have <br />developed water resources with both in-basin and trans-mOlmtain imports. They've used a planning approach for <br />future)'ears so that they could have a supply as their commtmities grow. That's a good public policy in terms of the <br />cities. So, at the present time there is some water available, in my opinion, that can be utilized. that in the future <br />will be used by the cities. The issue, in my opinion, is going to be how we allow the well users to utilize some of <br />the water that we can find today to augment and then look for long-term solutions, so that when the cities need that <br />water for their purposes and take their water back, how it can be replaced. I think that is one of the big problems <br />we're faced with so that we can continue to use the wells. I do see a decrease in pumping; I see a cost to people <br />that's going to impact thaL We're going to have to augment. and the wells that don't augment are going' to be shut <br />off. We have no choice in that matter. I see changes in the future of the wells. If we have time, perhaps we can <br />look for solutions. We have to get cracking on the issues. <br /> <br />Arkarisas River Basin Water Forum <br /> <br />13 <br /> <br />itA River of Dreams and Realities" . <br /> <br />