Gunnison_BRT_Mtg_2_Summary

• Basin: Gunnison
• Title: Meeting Summary 2
• Date: 2/17/2004
• SWSI - Doc Type: Summaries

Gunnison Basin Roundtable Technical Meeting #2
Meeting Summary

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 website (www.cwcb.state.co.us).

Feedback from the BRT members follows.

. What are growth rates based on? What assumptions are made for this growth? A BRT
member questioned the projections, but did not offer any suggestions.
Answer: State demographers projections that include many factors (i.e., age distribution,
economics of basin, amenities of basin, etc.)
. How do you look at Mesa County, Grand Junction?
. Do calculations take water use efficiency into account?
Answer: Yes.
. Does demographer data cover unincorporated areas?
Answer: Yes.
. Estimate of future demand in Gunnison Basin for snowmaking is not a certainty at present.
. Need to consider future augmentation needs throughout the entire basin.
. Water is needed to meet augmentation needs in Crested Butte and Upper Basin generally.
. A 2000 estimate of irrigated acres is available for use.
. May be underestimating total agriculture consumptive use in Gunnison Basin by up to
100,000 AFY. Issues:
Consumptive use value.
Return flows from water diverted through Gunnison Tunnel.
. The Upper Gunnison District mentioned a study indicating crop consumptive use values of
up to 2 AF / acre of irrigation water.
. How was groundwater contribution to irrigation water quantified?
. Instream flow rights represent minimum requirements. They do not represent optimal flows
for recreation uses.
. Are the needs of the Endangered Species Act and National Park Service in the baseline
demands?
Answer: No, they will be considered under Alternatives.
. How are irrigation return flows being addressed?
. Colorado Water Trust information regarding stream segments considered "water short." Why
not included in base demands?
Answer: This information is qualitative and the "metadata" does not appear to be readily
accessible.
. Contract deliveries should be considered in developing baseline demands.
. Flat water recreation in Blue Mesa Reservoir is important. A goal for Blue Mesa might be to
ensure a fill by the end of July and should be part of the "baseline."
Preliminary List of Project Options and Tiering

There is a significant amount of information and studies available on water projects and
potential water management options in each basin. The SWSI team is seeking to identify and
document specific information and projects where available, with input from the BRT members
and the Basin Advisors. Since one of SWSI's overarching principles is to not interfere with local
water planning initiatives, we are especially interested in learning about existing water supply

CDIVI

4

Gunnison BRT Mtg #2 Summary.doc 4/16/2004