Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.... , ' .. -{ <br /> <br />efforts, to identify water supply solutions~ We are concerned, however, that the Statewide Water <br />Sllpply Investigation has ap impossibly short time frame and inadequate funding to accomplish <br />its mission. The South Metropolitan Water Sllpply Stlldy, on the other hand, is narrowly focused <br />on problems facing one geographic area of the state, , and many-of the draft components have far~ <br />reaching impacts. For example, the conjuJlctive llse components that you 'identify in your letter <br />will have impacts to the Upper Colorado River ~asin that must be more-fully understood. As <br />you noted, Denver and the Colorado River Water Conservation' District have not yet decided to <br />support these components bec~use the South Metropolitan Water Supply Study is still in the' <br />preliminary dr~ft stages. It would be ill-advised for anyone to tal(e a position until the study is <br />refine'd and finalized~ The cooperative efforts between east and west slo.pe participants in the. <br />South Metropolitan Water Supply Study could be derailed if people become invested in any <br />alternative at ~is stage of the process. <br /> <br />With regard to basin of origin protection., we have very mixed feeling~. On the one hand', <br />we are glad that p~ople' recognize that trans-basin water use has impacts and that the impacts <br />should be tak.en into consideration. Not so long ago", the major players in..the water development <br />community believed that water rights could be exercised with complete disregard for impacts to <br />thf? basin of origin. There have been a number of bills over the past ten years that attempt to <br />address this issue in one form or another~ Unfortunately, many o'fthe legislative proposals did <br />not recognize that impacts may vary widely from basin to basin, and more importantly, . <br />individual jurisdictions evaluate- impacts differently. For example, in some basins, impacts <br />might be mitigated by comp~nsatory stor~ge;' in 'other basins, storage is not feasible, or would not <br />address local concerns. Some areas of the state may be most concerned about i:rnpacts to water <br />quality, while other areas may be concerned about econo~ic losses.- Lost l.opportunities for - <br />growth may be important in eastern Colorado or the Sail Luis Valley, while impacts to fisheries, <br />rafting flows and wastewater treatment plants may be most critical in mountain areas~ Few <br />legislative proposals underst~nd these distinctions or adequately protect local decision-maI<ing. <br />Ironically, Northwest Colorado Council of Goverrunents has found itself in opposition to many. <br />basin of origin protection bills for these reasons. If your office is crafting legal language, we <br />would be eager to lend some of oUf'legal staff to !hat effort, alth_ough experien,ce leads u~ to <br />believe that legislation is not the solution to the state's water issues. - <br /> <br />Once again, we appreciate your willingness to step forward as' a leader in this very <br />important issue~ I have the pleasure of being chairman of the Northwest Colorado Council of <br />Goverrunents Water Quality and Quantity Committee ('~QQ") which comprises Summi~ Grand, <br />Pitlcin, Eagle Counties and lTIOst of their mllnicipalities and water/wastewater districts; also, Parl{ <br />and Gurmisol1 COlluties, and the towns of Yampa and Crested Butte. QQ is dedicated to <br />protecting tile 11eadwaters of the Colorado and Gunnison Rivers, and we advocate cooperative, <br />integrated water planl1ing in Colorado. We welcome efforts by the Attorney General to- further <br />these goals. <br /> <br />~p~ . <br />[aN-+-tC .. <br /> <br />~ames ewberry, omm\Ssloner <br />Board of County Commissioners of Grand Co~nty <br />