Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Dolores/San Juan/San Miguel Basin Roundtable Technical Meeting #2 <br />Meeting Summary <br /> <br />. One member noted that there is some potential for increases in irrigated acreage in the basin, <br />though the net change in irrigated agriculture may be around zero. <br />. Another BRT member noted that the state's anticipated population growth will in part be in <br />this basin due to its recreational amenities. As such, it may be reasonable to anticipate an <br />expanded demand for recreational flows. Roundtable members noted that they also <br />recognize benefits of agriculture to the basin. <br />. It was noted by a participant that the demands for water related to the Endangered Species <br />Act should also be accounted for in all estimates. <br />. A BRT member encouraged the group to consider native species' needs, in order to prevent <br />future listing of additional species to threatened and endangered. <br />. One BRT member asked the group to consider agricultural water releases for recreational use <br />as an option, noting that this approach could provide income to agricultural interests. <br />. It was also pointed out that the group should consider secondary impacts of all actions taken <br />in the basin, e.g., reducing groundwater recharge by increasing delivery or use efficiencies <br />can affect the viability of groundwater wells in the area. <br />. Another BRT member noted that keeping agriculture economically viable through the use of <br />operational flexibility can have tangential benefits. <br />. It was noted that the Montezuma/Dolores area may not have a gap between supply and <br />demand; there are sufficient water rights and project water. However, it is unknown whether <br />supplies for Mancos are adequate. <br /> <br />Preliminary List of Project Options and Tiering <br /> <br />There is a significant amount of information and studies available on water projects and <br />potential water management options in each basin. The SWSI team is seeking to identify and <br />document specific information and projects where available, with input from the BRT members <br />and the Basin Advisors. Since one of SWSI's overarching principles is to not interfere with local <br />water planning initiatives, we are especially interested in learning about existing water supply <br />options/projects and existing planning efforts, and documenting how these will be applied to <br />future water needs (i.e., applied to any "gap" between projected demands and supplies). SWSI <br />also anticipates that "gaps" may exist even after existing efforts are implemented, and that <br />additional water supply options may need to be developed. <br /> <br />John Rehring presented a preliminary draft list of water management options, as identified by <br />BRT members and project proponents, for meeting water needs in the basin. These options will <br />be cataloged, then "packaged together" into alternatives for meeting the basin's needs. The <br />project "tiering" definitions presented at the last BRT meeting were reviewed. Based on <br />feedback obtained from roundtable participants in this and other basins, the tiering definitions <br />will likely be modified from the previous Tier 1/2/3 definitions toward solutions that will be <br />implemented in the near-, mid-, and long-term. Near-term solutions (previously Tier 1) are <br />those that are identified by the project sponsor as a solution that is moving forward. This type <br />of a solution could be a specific project, or the anticipated outcome of an ongoing planning <br />process. <br /> <br />Near-term options will be documented as meeting a particular need in the basin. For purposes <br />of SWSI, it will be assumed that these options will be in place some time prior to 2030, and the <br /> <br />CDIVI <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />SJD BRT Mtg #2 Summary.doc 4/16/2004 <br />