Laserfiche WebLink
<br />John Wien,er, Comments to SWSI, September 2004 <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />2. TurnIng back to less philosophical issues, to the extent that the SWSI data can be <br />characterized by sources o't uncertaintYr that will be valuabre policy information. If the <br />suspected small-budg,et problem exists, where Jimiied staff and capacity inhibits planning and <br />acquisition of future-needed water supplYi there may be guidance for legislative choices. If the <br />uncertainties are greatest in certain areas, there, may be grounds for regionaJ discussions, as in <br />the regional councils of government cooperation on other problBms. Why uncertainty exists is <br />important, in terms of policy-relevant choices within existinig authority and funding. <br /> <br />3. The eWeB or SWSI team's distincUon of .'environmental enhancementJl from l1mitigatfonll is <br />valuablet and should be elaborated. Proactive enhancement or restoration could be far tess <br />expensive and far more effective than reactive efforts to undo adverse effects. In many of' the <br />references on biological issues, the point was strongly made concerning the importance of <br />retajning adequate intact wetlands of all kinds (see Wisner, comments to SWSI on biological <br />issues in water transfers, August 2004)~ Restoration or recovery may in fact be impossibl,e in <br />some cases. As the Platte River Recovery Program has shown, reaction can be difficult and <br />enormously expensive where many parU,ss are involved. <br /> <br />It may be very productive to apply the kind of IIscopingn that was orIginally intended in some <br />regulatory ideas: the critical questions are not only about whether to do a proposed actiont but <br />whether the action is optimally scaled - right-siz8'dt and for whose interests? - and optimally <br />designed - are the additional costs or benefits that should be understood? Opening the water <br />project process in some cases could be critical to ensurin!g that aU potentiaHy benefited or casted <br />parties can participate in project design. This is not a mushy-fuzzy id,ea - joint marketing and <br />joint design processes are common in business. Office buildings, for example, are typically <br />designed with preferred clients in mind, and also to retain flexiibility for other legally-allowed usesJ <br />such that retail potential is seldom foreclosed bym-echan ical design choices even if offices are <br />the primary expectation. Right-sizing may caB for larger proj,ects than the originating party could <br />use alone. but there is a public interest in the Colorado Constitutional mandate to maximize <br />beneficial use of water. The joint benefits from projects with environmental enhancements might <br />well support tax adjustments) or elicit supporting contributions or fInancing participation from <br />others in the private sector or local or regional governments~ Creative contributions such as use <br />of easements to reduce safety needs are also discoverable in full seoping discussions. <br /> <br />People are willing to pay. It is important to observe that public contributions are not as rare as <br />some imply in comments about ~put up or shut Up14. ReG,ent controversy over purchase of grazing <br />allotments on public landsr for conservation purposes, arose from pnivate willingness to pay for <br />the allotments, and ideologtcal opposition seeking to disallow using the market for those <br />purposes. In Colorado. the new instream-flow donations law. allowing contribution beyond the <br />Dminimum reasonable" standard for the ewes's program, was a demonstration of public demand <br />to be allowed to contribute to environm,ental enhancement Every public op'en-space program <br />reflects public will to be taxed to buy amenity and environmental va!lues. The increased value of <br />lake~side or stream-si'de property shows private value in amenitYJ and increases public revenues <br />from increased tax base~ <br /> <br />4. Because the Basin Round Table and SWSJ/CWCB staff people have been very busy. an oral <br />comment was made to pOInt out that the literature review O'f biological issues (Wiener. August <br />2004 comments) sug,gests that there may be considerably greater threat of crossing <br />environmental thresholds than has been suspected, due to the problem of unknown conditjons~ <br />Very roughlYr one might say that the drainage and conversion of almost all natural wetlands on <br />the Eastern Plains and foothills was accompanied by creation of two unintended substitutes. <br />First. there was florescence of cottonwood and big wHlow woody vegetation along the newly- <br />stabilized channels, with much longer periods and usuaHy much higher volumes of flow. These <br />large trees have not bHen able to reproduce much. and are in some places senescent, and being <br />replaced by under-story vegetation and by invasives which are prominent in the Arkansas and <br />