Section6_Implementation - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Section 6 Implementation and Recommendations for Colorado's Water Supply Future divisive issue in Colorado and this campaign is banks, etc.) available to match the irrigator's and away to bring Coloradoans together to achieve users' needs. In addition, these alternatives must be common ground on the value of water and the flexible enough to allow variations to meet specific importance of wise stewardship of our precious source and user situations. One size will not fit all. resources. 6.2.2 Alternative Agricultural Water Transfer Methods to Traditional Purchase and Transfer TRT Population Growth, Urbanization, and Issues Associated with Reliable Water Supply Population growth, urbanization, and issues associated with reliable water supply availability are key factors that are leading to a reduction in irrigated farmland in Colorado. In addition there are significant financial, economic, and demographic factors (i.e., increasing average age of farmers and ranchers and fewer "young" people choosing it as a career) that are influencing the trend toward reduced farming and ranching in Colorado. Commodity prices, access to markets, fuel, equipment, and labor costs are a few examples of these factors. This report did not address these factors. It is essential to acknowledge that while one can examine and explore alternate methodologies to purchase and permanent transfer of water from agriculture and this may in turn assist in maintaining viable agricultural and ranching, unless these other factors are addressed the attractiveness and viability of farming and ranching overall will continue to be a challenge. Future MEtI Water The M~eI providers and users who need additional M~eI water in the future have diverse needs including potential growth (rate and pattern), raw water infrastructure, and existing portfolio of water rights (i.e., water for base demand, water to replace non- renewable groundwater supplies, water for drought years, water for drought recovery, and water to replace interstate compact calls). For example, by 2030, water demand in Douglas and El Paso counties that are currently onnon-renewable groundwater is projected to be near 100,000 AFY. Thus, there needs to be a number of alternative permanent agricultural transfer methods (interruptible supplies, fallowing, Property Rights and/or Local Issues Many subcommittee members expressed concern over how this process and involvement of the state might negatively affect the price of water, property rights, and/or local issues associated with water transfers. There are strong opinions on every side of the issue of water transfers; there are those that wish to retain their ability to sell water to the markets that provide the greatest returns; there are those that may not be part of the transfer and may wish to participate and share in the economic benefit; there are those that may not be part of the transfer that benefit (open space, views, wildlife habitat etc.) from the presence of the agricultural water user; and there are those that simply do not wish to see transfers. In addition to these opinions, the other key driver that influences how transfers are perceived and implemented relates to who retains ownership of the water (the agricultural user or the new end user) and what type of organizational/ institutional structure is "best" to ensure equity for those involved in the transfer and those affected by the transfer. Economic and Social Impacts Generally, in areas of the state where urbanization and transfer of water is occurring there is less concern over economic and social impacts as other industries and benefits accrue to the local community. In these areas the loss of open space and diverse landscapes can be a factor. In more rural areas with no significant development potential, when water is or may be transferred there is a deeper concern over the impact to the local economy and the long-term viability of the community. This can result in a division between the benefits that can accrue to the water rights holder versus potential impacts to the overall community. Third-Party Impacts The cost ofthird-party impacts from traditional agricultural transfers have not been, but should be, quantified so that the alternatives can be accurately compared. PRELIMINARY DRAFT 6-15