ArkansasComments11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Comments to SWSI, November 3, 2003, by John Wiener 5 when I last inquired, had not decided on charges. USGS data can be used to create some maps, but their coverage of ditches is not known. Watershed groups may have additional information available, and there are efforts to provide basic GIS information for such groups; the CDM firm may have substantial resources in this areas, and I am noting that because it may be important for the Roundtable groups to be able to see such maps. The ditches are an important cultural value in themselves. OBJECTIVE 9 -- Provide for healthy Colorado economy -- Yeah! OBJECTIVE 10- Provide for operational flexibility For the record, why not add a subhead recognizing that water rights are private property for which most (not all) owners have paid, and that an important part of this objective is "Create infrastructure and institutions needed to enable sufficient marketing and transfers to provide equitable outcomes in water transfer markets"? Or just, "Enable fair water markets?" COMMENTS ON RELEVANT ISSUES Small acreages as a factor in hay, feed and water demand The popularity of "horse properties" and demand for quality feed for recreational animals is apparently a high-growth opportunity and rapidly-increasing land use in Colorado, all over. Anecdotal evidence is that there was a substantial boost to local farming from very high prices paid for hay for pets during the 2002 drought. In the long term, it may be important that a large number of properties have been sold to horse-lovers who cannot feed their animals on the acreage they own, and are not seeking to engage in serious or commercial agriculture. These small-acreage holders should be considered as a different category from the rather large group that owns small or moderate sized farms and supports them with off-farm employment (see annual reports on family farm, from USDA Economic Research Service, or numerous discussions available through the USDA ERS website or government documents librarians). This farm- supporter group seems to be maintaining commercial-like farms, as distinct from "recreational" or "hobby" farms such as the horse-supporters maintain. As the horse group grows in Colorado, the demand for feed may grow, perhaps in the way it grew in 2002. (Partial coverage of this is provided in USDA ERS FDS-2003, April 2003, Feed Situation and Outlook Yearbook; it may be covered in various updates as well; and see also Henderson and Novack 2003, cited below). The increasing density of wells and septic systems may also influence the interests of these people in water from other sources. Groundwater availability cannot be presumed on the basis of ownership of a buildable lot, even if the counties and state wish that were so. This may result in increased competition for wells and the right to pump groundwater, or increased use of other water supplies. Small town supplies are now often important for ex-urban users. Another consideration is that many small properties are subdivisions or parcels from irrigated acreage, and these new pieces may have or may want to have jrrigation rights or shares in the irrigation company. The interests in amenities and environmental benefits of those ditches appear to increase attractiveness for real estate development probability (work by John Wilkins- Wells, Colorado State University Sociology Water Lab, partly in progress; see <http://waterlab.colostate.edu>). Proximity to water features, even with increased flood risk, has been shown to increase real estate values (Wiener 1997, and see on-line bibliography on socioeconomics of flooding, Wiener, available through Natural Hazards Research Applications and Information Center, University of Colorado). This creates the chance for both increased financial support for ditches, and the chance for decreased interest in modernizing irrigation,