My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SouthPlatteComments06
CWCB
>
SWSI
>
DayForward
>
SouthPlatteComments06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2009 10:33:57 AM
Creation date
1/4/2008 2:44:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
SWSI
Basin
South Platte
Title
Comments 6
Date
11/3/2003
SWSI - Doc Type
Comments
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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
<br />Comments to SWSI, November 3, 2003, by John Wiener <br /> <br />20 <br /> <br />take place quite soon, perhaps to provide guidance to the legislature as well as possiblet and <br />inform the rule-making which the State Engineer may be caned upon to provide. <br /> <br />Desired outcomes include: (1) A statement of which circumstances, if any, allow adequate <br />estimations in a transparent fashion, to support short-term transfers of water from agriculture to <br />municipalities. (2) A statement of research gaps and needs for the different categories of <br />participants, including the possibilities for creation of a prototype expert system for making <br />estimations~ and a plan for local involvement and social acceptance. (3) A longer-term agenda <br />for research and support in combining the expert system for return frow adjustments and water <br />transfers with other systems such as those for irrigation scheduling and water valuation. for <br />integrated regional water modeling and management. <br /> <br />The workshop assessing the state of knowledge should bring together key participants in water <br />administrationt research, and irrigation and conveyance technology providers. <br /> <br />What should we do? How can we best do it? <br /> <br />So far, inquiry with researchers and private sectDr people indivjdually has shown strong concern <br />for the problem, but also concern for the relationship such an effort would have to other long-term <br />research ageJ1das~ inter-institutional contexts, and concern that a lItop-downf. approach might be <br />seen as efforts to promote the interests of municipal transferees at the expense of agricultural <br />transferors. One question is, "who should ask for this?1I And then, how does this relate to the <br />agenda and issues raised in the Statewide Water Supply fnitiative in Colorado, and Interior.s <br />Water 2025 Initiative? <br /> <br />In 1996t the Colorado Water Resources Researoh Institute convened a panel which reported on <br />Irrjaation Water Conservation: OODortunities and Limitations in Colorado. A report of the <br />Agricultural Water Conservation Task Force, by D. H" Smith. K.. Klein, R. Bartholomay, I. Broner, <br />G.E. Cardon, and W"M. Frasier, with contributions from D.F. Champion, R. Curtist R~ Kuharicht <br />D,C. Lilet M. Orosst D. Parkert H. Simpsont and E. Wilkinson (CWRRJ Comp1etion Report No. <br />190.) The results are clearly presented, and in shortt they are that there is no avoiding sufficient <br />place-specifjc information and engineering to support findings. When can we get that? <br /> <br />Further details and context for the problem <br /> <br />What.s new? Why undertake a fast response? <br /> <br />From the many news stories on the 2003 Colorado General Assemblyls expected flood of <br />water and drought-related bills, a quotation from a highly-respected legislator, Senator Jim Dyer, <br />crearly reflects a sense of urgency. .. We don'! care what the project is, U Dyer said. II We just want <br />to show leadership that we're responding to the drought.u (Denver Post, 25 Dec. 02, p. 48). <br />Senator Dyer represents a constituency hit very hard in 2002; expecting perhaps an even more <br />financially damaging year in 2003. Many bHls wiH address "conservationU, interests in acquiring <br />or defending agricultural water, and encouraging leasing to municipal uses. The pressure to <br />move water away from irrigation has buUt dramatically in the last decades of enormous growth in <br />urban populations (Nichols at al. 2001, Western Water Policy Review Commission, 1998)t aU over <br />the West, and arready Colorado has enacted a Water Bank PHot Program on the Arkansas River. <br />Nowt in response to the severe 2002 drought, the sense of urgency may be stronger than ever. <br />.-It is frequently argued that a reallocation of just 10 percent of agricultural water to municipal uses <br />could augment municipal supplies West..wide by 50 percent. II (Nichols et al. 2001: xii-xiii). Over <br />90 percent of consumptrve use of Coforado water is in agrjculture, in a normal year. <br /> <br />II/rrigaUon agriculture continues to be the focal point of discussion on sources of water <br />to meet growing demands~ Calls for conservation have come from several sources, <br />apparently prompted by assumptions that the magnitude of agricultural water use is <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.