My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RGBRT Minutes 8-14-07 Final
CWCB
>
Basin Roundtables
>
DayForward
>
RGBRT Minutes 8-14-07 Final
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 4:58:12 PM
Creation date
12/13/2007 2:21:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Basin Roundtables
Basin Roundtable
Rio Grande
Title
August Minutes
Date
8/14/2007
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.
/
10
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
cost-share, incentives, etc. Current agreement offers contracts only for permanent water <br />retirement, dryland farming or grazing - pernutted after 15 years. <br />Discussion of national dry land rental rates and irrigated land rental rates. RR elected to <br />retire water in perpetuity - RR CREP proposed cost analysis. Distance of water rights <br />from river related to compensation; R.G. Subdistrict #1 boundary -only place in the <br />Valley where CREP will pertain. North of the R.G. (showed map) <br />Rio -other subdistricts could do this once they get orgaiuzed. <br />(discussion of total acres, crops, effects upon alfalfa farmers, resource concerns) <br />Tim -Remember, this is a voluntary program -each producer has to decide if it works <br />for them or not. Subdistrict has to retire about 40,000 acres of irrigated cropland to have <br />a sustainable aquifer (and a continuing AG economy in the region). <br />Eligible producers -- incentives over 15 year contracts <br />Charlie - 111 that area (N. or the RG) if you retired just alfalfa you would reduce water <br />use by 15% <br />(animated discussion) <br />Tim -What we're trying to do is ease producers voluntarily into a program that works. <br />Those 15 years give people a chance to look at the effects, come up with other possible <br />solutions. Nobody is happy with having to quit doing what they've done historically. <br />60,000 acres on RR (needs to be?) retired to accommodate Kansas and Nebraska. <br />Nobody else has come up with a better alternative than this one -The point is we're <br />using too much water. This is a mechanism that won't make it painless, but attempts to <br />ease the blow. <br />Charlie -What we're talking about is the need to change farming practices -Maybe <br />plant different crops -sources of ethanol etc. <br />MG -We're up against a timeline. Subdistricts have to be up and running by end of this <br />year. We don't have ten years to figure it out. We've only got 18 months to figure it out. <br />It's been on the table for a long time, but now we're mm~ing out of time. <br />Charlie -What happens if other alternatives -crops, uses - come along, with a CREP <br />are we locked in forever? <br />Tim - Nq only for 15 years. Some acres in perpetuity -others can be percentages. <br />Landowners make their own decisions. <br />Minutes, August 14, 2007 4 Rio Grande Basin Roundtable <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.