North_Platte_BRT_Mtg_2_Summary - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

North Platte Basin Roundtable Technical Meeting #2 Meeting Summary Sue Morea presented an overview of how the objectives will be weighted by individual BRT members and then used in the evaluation of alternatives in later phases of SWSI. An example weighting form for the objectives and subobjectives was reviewed. It was stressed that the "numeric" alternative evaluation process in SWSI is intended to provide information on individual preferences, but that the numeric results serve as a starting point for BRT discussion, rather than determining the final disposition of an alternative. Later BRT meetings will focus on discussion of the alternatives based on these results. The process is not one of "majority rules" or a "vote," rather it is a facilitated discussion that seeks common ground between diverse interests. Demand Proj ections The preliminary results of demand projections, both statewide and specific to the North Platte River Basin and its counties, were presented by Kelly DiNatale. Kelly also briefly reviewed the methodology used to develop municipal and industrial (M&I), agricultural, and environmental and recreational water demands for the 2030 planning year. Demand projection information developed under SWSI will be posted to the SWSI web site (www.cwcb.state.co.us). Feedback from the BRT members follows in a question and answer format. . Process - good process, DOW uses this same process. . Would the process be altered if the objectives were ordered differently? Answer: No. . It is difficult to choose between M&I and Agriculture. Answer: Try to choose. If you cannot, then give them SO percent each. . In South Platte, irrigation of lawns is a significant water use. . Why is the per capita use in Rio Grande so high? . What year was used for M&I? Answer: 2000. . Why does efficiency vary by basin so much; i.e., Arkansas. . Is CU consistent with three state agreement? Answer: SWSI will be plugging in numbers from three state agreement. CU numbers for North Platte will be refined during the development of the DSS. . Why is the Gunnison so different than North Platte? . Irrigated acreage coverage, where did it come from? Answer: Aerial surveys . 2001 SEO reported 106,460 irrigated acreage. Long-term average is 114,000 as reported under the North Platte Decree with a 134,000 acre historical maximum. . Gross agricultural diversions - what is the data source? . Do numbers include Laramie River? . Is irrigation based on decrees or diversion records? . Will SWSI look at the actual yield in each basin? Answer: Yes. . Irrigation efficiency would not benefit the North Platte system because flood irrigation and return flows maintain water rights. . SWSI will look at reallocation of resources in each basin and statewide. CDIVI 3 N Platte BRT Mtg #2 Summary.doc 4/16/2004