My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Arkansas_BRT_Mtg_2_Summary
CWCB
>
SWSI
>
DayForward
>
Arkansas_BRT_Mtg_2_Summary
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2009 10:31:42 AM
Creation date
1/8/2008 10:45:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
SWSI
Basin
Arkansas
Title
Meeting Summary 2
Date
1/7/2004
SWSI - Doc Type
Summaries
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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 />Arkansas Basin Roundtable Technical Meeting #2 <br />Meeting Summary <br /> <br />. Water quality requirements might affect availability of supply, which in turn will affect the <br />supply "gap" <br />. Concern by agriculture that Front Range population growth could create enough political <br />pressure to "force" ag-to-M&I transfers <br />. One member suggested that both those with needs for additional water, and those holding <br />water rights, will need to "give" a little <br />. Farm Bureau Report: a BRT member noted that by the year2100 the state's agricultural <br />demands will go down slightly, but M&I demand will go up <br />. Consider the implications on supply of others' reduction in Colorado River use (outside <br />Colorado, e.g., compliance by downstream states with Colorado River Compact <br />requirements) andprojects such as the "Big Straw" being used to capture that water for use in <br />Colorado <br />. Consider funding projects with a new sales tax <br />. Add the Colorado River Return Project to options list <br />. Federal reserved water rights are not applicable in Arkansas Basin <br />. Effects on stream flows should be considered in alternatives analysis <br />. Look at Western Resource Advocates' "smart water" study for conservation suggestions <br />. One BRT member asked how SWSI will look at conservation. As part of the "base" demand, <br />SWSI will look at "generally accepted" or what could be considered modest conservation <br />measures, and this will help bracket the high and low demand estimates. More elaborate or <br />"extreme" conservation (e.g., no turf-grass lawns) could be part of an alternative if proposed <br />by BRT members.A participant indicated a need for better (earlier) public notification of BRT <br />meetings <br /> <br />Supply Methodology <br /> <br />Kelly DiNatale presented a brief overview of the methodology to be employed in SWSI for <br />estimating water supplies. The preliminary results of these analyses will be presented at BRT <br />meeting #3. <br /> <br />Preparation for Basin Roundtable Meeting #3 <br /> <br />. BRT members were reminded of the following deadlines: <br />- Completed objectives weighting forms due back by January 21, 2004 (two weeks) <br />- Additional input on preliminary options list due by January 21, 2004 (two weeks) <br />- Comments on preliminary demand results due by January 21, 2004 (two weeks) <br />- Supply Methodology memo to be distributed by January 30, 2004 <br />- Comments on Supply Methodology due by February 13, 2004 <br />. Next BRT meeting will be held Wednesday, April 14, 2004 from 2 - 8 p.m. in Pueblo at the <br />same location (Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District offices) <br />. Rick Brown reminded BRT members that they are invited and encouraged to attend other <br />basins' BRTs as may be of interest where there are inter-basin issues <br /> <br />CDIVI <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />Arkansas BRT Mtg #2 Summary.doc 4/7/2004 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.