Laserfiche WebLink
Water Conservation and Efficiency Technical Roundtable Meeting #1 <br />Meeting Summary <br />^ Identify (quality of life) impacts with and without expanded levels of conservation <br />^ Evaluate efforts of conservation on the urban landscape <br />To create a better understanding of the f ollowing issues as they related to Agricultural water <br />supplies - <br />^ Identify irrigation practices that are not beneficial <br />^ Identify geographical locations where increase agricultural efficiencies can be implemented <br />^ The role agricultural efficiencies play in addressing the water supply gap <br />^ The role agricultural efficiencies play in return flows and creating water for the environment <br />^ Explore where irrigation eff iciencies may help improve water quality <br />The following comments were made by TRT members on the draft mission and objectives <br />^ Local providers (both for agriculture and M&I) are the ultimate decision makers on water <br />supply needs - SWSI can suggest or recommend measures that these groups can consider but <br />it is not the ultimate decision making authority. <br />^ During this TRT the consequences and benefits of using conservation alternatives needs to be <br />identified. <br />^ Deeper understanding of the issues can lead to greater insight. <br />^ How is SWSI interacting with other statewide planning efforts such as population and land <br />use issues? <br />- Answer: SWSI is not formally linked to demographic projections, land use decisions, open <br />space issues, etc. It was recognized during the f irst phase of SWSI that the water planning <br />agencies represented on the roundtables were reactive entities and do not set policy on <br />growth issues. Information developed during SWSI could be source of information to local <br />and county planning agencies. <br />^ A question that should be considered by the group is whether conserved water can be used <br />to address the SWSI gap versus use of conserved water in areas without gaps. <br />^ The benefits and impacts of agricultural ef ficiencies on the environment needs to be <br />addressed. <br />^ ACTION ITEM - send out testimony (Steve Miller to obtain) regarding the Agricultural <br />Conservation Measures bill that was introduced in the late 80's or early 90's. <br />Presentation of White Paper Key Issues <br />Kelly DiNatale presented an overview of the White Paper's Key Issues which included a list of <br />potential M&I conservation measures, discussion of MB~I water use and return flows, estimated <br />conservation savings based on 5 levels of varying conservation measures, discussion of <br />agricultural water use and return flows, list of potential agricultural conservation measures, and <br />list of potential questions to be addressed by the TRT. Comments and questions on the <br />overview of the white paper included: <br />^ The set of questions presented in the white paper do not seem to capture the benef its and <br />consequences of conservation. <br />^ Will the slides presented be posted to CWCB's website? <br />r« ~ <br />C:1Documents and SettingslrowannclMy Documentsl1-desktoplWater Cons Eff TRT #1 Summary.doc <br />