NonBasicSpecificComments13

• Title: Comments 13
• Date: 5/21/2004
• SWSI - Doc Type: Comments

May 21, 2004

12cc 'CD e ~ &b .A'\Tl1
S-. zf. tJ l' ~ ~; tJ (eM. v /J'-

Rick Brown
Colorado Water Conservation Board
1313 Sherman Street, Suite 721
Denver, CO 80203
Fax: [phone]

RE: SWSI Meetings

Dear Mr. Brown,

We write as representatives of conservation organizations and environmental and recreational
roundtable participants who have been working diligently to provide meaningful input to the
CWCB staff and consultants for the Statewide Water Supply lnitiative.(SWSI). Colorado's
conservation community has historically supported statewide water plamring and we are hopeful
that SWSI will provide an inclusive process bringing all local water interests together and
building consensus on future water planning, while providing a forum for the public to
participate at all levels of the process. We are writing today in the spirit of cooperation to
comment on the work product ofSWSI thus far, highlight key areas of concern with the process,
emphasize areas to include in the November final SWSI report and make recommendations on
the outcome of SWSI.

I. SWSI's initial work product through the 3rd roundtable meetings
We believe that SWSI has provided some useful information thus far in the process, even though
we also have concerns about how the SWSI team has gathered and aggregated data. Several of
what we believe are the most important conclusions ofSWSI to date are that the "gap" between
estimated 2030 water demands and available supplies (including so called "short-term" projects)
is relatively small (ranging from less than 100 to 52,000 acre-feet) in all basins except the
Arkansas. Second, SWSI has highlighted some of the good work that local water providers are
doing in terms of their own planning for future water demand. For example, the Upper Colorado
River Basin Study (UPCO) results reflect partnerships, planning for both municipal and
environmental/recreational demands and creative solutions to difficult problems. This work is
also reflected in the fact that the short-term projects and processes will meet the majority of the
projected municipal and industrial demands for 2030,. even though these demands may
themselves be somewhat over-estimated. Thus, for example, in the Gunnison River, the projects
of the Upper Gunnison Water Conservancy District and other local providers will meet all but 94
acre...feet of projected demand. Finally t the SWSI process demonstrates the importance of
engaging diverse interests to discuss water planning at the local and regional levels.

SWSI findings to date thus demonstrate that Colorado's water supply development, planning and
management infras~cture is quite mature and functioning effectively. It therefore appears that
the best role for the eweB may be to support and . encourage local and regional-water supply
planning efforts particularly in areas where there are opportunities for water providers to work
together on cooperative solutions. Such solutions could involve improvements in the