Laserfiche WebLink
Section 3 <br />Alternative Agricultural Water Transfer Methods to Traditional Purchase and Transfer <br />historical CU and that return flows are <br />maintained during the temporary interruption. <br />Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) 37 92-309 and <br />37 92-308(4) allow the State Engineer to approve <br />and administer temporary transfers under certain <br />terms and conditions. Otherwise a change of <br />water rights will be required. <br />~ Soil, weed, labor, and equipment management <br />issues must be considered during those periods <br />when the interruptible or temporary transfer is <br />exercised and irrigation water is removed from <br />the farm(s). <br />~ In some instances the establishment of a cover <br />crop may require anearly-season irrigation, <br />which further complicates administration. Such <br />an agricultural demand would reduce the amount <br />of water available to the buyer unless it was <br />completed in the preceding season or from <br />identified carry-over water or winter water in <br />some systems. <br />~ Some perennial agricultural crops, such as <br />orchards and vineyards, may not be appropriate <br />for an ISA. The impacts to perennial forages as a <br />result of random fallowing are uncertain. <br />~ The annual "triggering" of an ISA should ideally be <br />done prior to field preparation and planting dates <br />to eliminate unnecessary costs associated with <br />tilling and planting activities. Timing could be <br />problematic for water suppliers, because planting <br />decisions are often made before the water <br />supplier knows the anticipated yields of their <br />base supply. <br />It should be noted that many of the issues discussed <br />above relating to water court and infrastructure <br />needs would be similar to those faced with an <br />agricultural transfer involving the permanent dry-up <br />of irrigated lands. <br />3.5.2 Long-term Rotational <br />Fallowing Program <br />This concept, generally called rotational fallowing, <br />consists of a type of interruptible agricultural <br />transfer arrangement involving several agricultural <br />parties and one or more M~eI, environmental, or <br />recreational users. For example, as a means to <br />provide additional water to meet new demands or to <br />replace the existing yield ofnon-renewable <br />groundwater supplies (a potential future need <br />identified but not quantified in SW SI), each <br />agricultural participant would agree not to irrigate <br />for certain years out of a set period of years that <br />could relate to the number of agricultural users or <br />the irrigated area participating in the rotational <br />fallowing program. On a broader scale, one could <br />also envision such an agreement incorporating <br />several ditch and/or canal companies. Rotational <br />fallowing arrangements could be utilized to firm <br />existing M~eI supplies or provide "base" water for <br />new/replacement demand. Most likely, if the yield <br />from a rotational fallowing arrangement was used to <br />provide water to a new and growing demand, a long- <br />term or even a perpetual agreement would be <br />essential. <br />The benefits of this alternative rotational fallowing <br />agricultural transfer approach include: <br />~ M~eI reliability is improved since there is a more <br />predictable supplemental supply of water each <br />and every year. This could be used to "top-off" <br />storage levels and/or provide for new/replacement <br />water demands. <br />FINAL DRAFT 3-13 <br />