Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CDIVI <br /> <br />SWSI Phase 2 Technical Roundtable <br />Agricultural Transfer Alternatives to Permanent Dry-up <br /> <br />a firm annual yield than from new in-basin water supply development projects <br />with junior water rights. <br /> <br />. Permitting may be simpler for such transfers than for the development of a new <br />water supply project, since the agricultural water to be acquired has already been <br />diverted from the stream system and a portion consumed. This can result in a <br />higher level of certainty than construction of a new reservoir storing junior water <br />rights, where environmental issues and the effects of new depletions will be <br />evaluated. <br /> <br />. Return flows from the transferred water (permanent and temporary) that are <br />attributable to the historic CD are consumable and can be reused. For example, a <br />transferred agricultural water right may have a historic CD of 65 percent while the <br />M&I CD may be 45 percent. That portion of the effluent and lawn irrigation return <br />flows from the M&I use that are attributable to the historic agricultural CD are thus <br />reusable. <br /> <br />Agricultural water transfers resulting in permanent dry-up, though widely practiced <br />in certain areas of the state as a water supply option for M&I users, have several <br />potential issues and conflicts: <br /> <br />. Localized socio-economic impacts may result from the permanent dry-up of <br />agricultural lands unless the irrigated lands are converted to other uses such as <br />residential, commercial, industrial, or recreation. Irrigation of agricultural lands has <br />historically resulted in the development of a local economy. In addition to <br />supporting the farmer or rancher, associated economic benefits of the irrigated <br />agriculture may form the basis of the entire economy of the local community. <br />Permanent dry-up of lands may have a significant negative effect on the local <br />community unless the irrigated lands are converted to other uses that support the <br />local economy. <br /> <br />. Dry land has a substantially lower assessed value than irrigated agricultural land. <br />In Colorado, unless the farm or ranch has development or recreation potential, <br />much of the value of a farm or ranch may be derived from the water rights. Once <br />the water rights are transferred and the land no longer irrigated, the assessed value <br />is reduced significantly. This results in a significant loss of tax base to the local <br />governments and school districts unless the land is used for other purposes. <br /> <br />. A water court procedure is required to change the use of agricultural water rights. <br />This procedure can be a very lengthy and expensive process, and is not without <br />risk. <br /> <br />. Revegetation of formerly irrigated lands is required by law under certain <br />circumstances. Colorado statue, in some instances, requires that an entity <br />transferring and permanently drying up irrigated lands ensure that the land is <br />revegetated with plants not requiring supplemental irrigation. This can be a <br />difficult and costly process. <br /> <br />DRAFT <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />S:\MEETINGS\TECHNICAL ROUNDTABLE\TRT MEETING - SPECIFIC\AL TERNATIVE AG TRANSFERS\SWSI TRT ALTERNATIVES TO PERMANENT DRY-UP BRIEFING 9-6-05_CJEDOC <br />