Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Comments to SWSI, November 3,2003, by John Wiener <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />from the Farm Bill were not as much help as hoped because they stayed low, being indexed to <br />national price levels. This article may be a picture of future conditions under the present <br />approach. The rural picture in Colorado is not driven by local decisions and not directly driven by <br />the fortunes of farming as it used to be. But, the indirect importance of agricultural activity is <br />clearly shown by the strong public preferences and willingness to invest noted above. The <br />vulnerability of farming, thus, can adversely affect what is loved, but the rural economies will have <br />to maintain those benefits from farming and water distribution in order to maintain the qualities <br />that attracted others to these areas. <br /> <br />What about the climate? Practical Considerations raised by drought history, claims of <br />Increased climate variability and change: background relevant to issues raised. <br /> <br />I want to emphasize an important point: the implications of drought history and <br />studies of the potential impacts of climate change are important for the SWSnn a <br />way that might not be immediately obvious. Regardless of whether one believes <br />or disbelieves in the general claims of global environmental change, or in the <br />global circulation models which are a central research tool in some of that work, <br />the practical implications may be useful support for taking steps which are <br />potentially very important to small agriculture, rural communities, and urban <br />quality of life, no matter what else happens. <br /> <br />What practical advice, if any, can be drawn from the climate variability literature? <br /> <br />The Universities Council on Water Resources Water Resources Update (issue 124) recently <br />addressed the usefulness of that work for application in water system planning, in an issue edited <br />by Dr. Robert Ward (May 2003). The Colorado State Climatologist, Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. <br />provided new evidence concerning the limitations of the global modeling and its inability to <br />convincingly focus on areas of operational size. Dr. Pielke and colleagues have compiled <br />important arguments about the underestimation of the importance of local water and land use as <br />well as terrain and conditions not treated in the big-area or global models. In essence, if the big <br />picture can't be resolved well-enough down to working-unit sizes, is it useful? And if the working- <br />unit sizes (water sheds at scales for which one can make some useful pOlicy) can't be aggregated <br />so as to get the results like the big models, there are serious limits on usefulness. So] what can <br />one do with this? Maybe not much, as far as applying it to engineering facilities. <br /> <br />Some of the most advanced engineering at the terrain-hydrology-climate intersection is work <br />within this problem area, on how to optimize decisions about reservoir management and <br />operations rules within such uncertainties, and it demonstrates the remarkable difficulty of the <br />area (see the work of Georgakakos, Carpenter et ai, Hydrologic Research Center; <br /><http://www.hrc-web.org/>).This level of effort is very intensive and includes a great deal of work <br />on compensating for uncertainty and developing methods for optimizing management under <br />those conditions. The SWSI can hardly undertake this kind of research for every alternative, and <br />following Dr. Pielke Sr. and Dr. Ward, the only sensible course is to take all this rather carefully. <br /> <br />Normally, given a threat and uncertainty about it, one seeks insurance. In this case, there is not <br />likely to be scientific certainty for a long time, so the next question Oust as in buying car insurance <br />or home-owner's coverage) is, "what is the likely range of troubles?" One of the articles in that <br />issue of Water Resources Update concluded that, "Ignoring the potential impacts of climate <br />change because of the limitations in current modeling methods is an option that may result in <br />significant unplanned economic and social costs in the future." (Van Rheenen et aL 2003, p 124). <br />Another author in the same issue, Lawford, (p.16) found that the climate modeling work is <br />"intelligence that should be part of contingency planning even if it is not considered in mainstream <br />