PIM.Greeley.FINAL_11.10 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the foundation also targets adults because they are the current water users. There is a significant portion of the Colorado population that is from out-of-state, and they may not recognize the value of water in Colorado. ± Conservation has worked. One municipality?s goal was to save 5,000 acre-feet of water through conservation, as compared to last year?s use. That municipality will meet their goal. Compared with the year 2000, Greeley has used 22% less water from April 1 through the end of August. ± Once lawns turned brown because of the drought, some people seemed to lose pride in the appearance of their property and stopped upkeep and maintenance. Once the nice appearance was lost, people seemed to lose interest in generating it again. ± The SWSI name should be changed to include a D for demand since the supply is fixed. This project can impact both supply and demand. Legal restrictions on water to protect endangered species limits solutions: ± Under the Endangered Species Act, the habitats of endangered bird species in Nebraska are protected by controls placed on how much water must flow to Nebraska from Colorado. This poses a significant challenge to water users in the South Platte Basin as it limits the amount of water we have available to use in the basin. ± The utilization of flood flows and the ability to store flood flows has been legally challenged. The Fish and Wildlife Service is pushing very hard to use flood flows to protect the endangered birds in Nebraska. Negotiations need to occur on this issue among Colorado, Wyoming and Nebraska. Consider agriculture to municipal transfers ± How much of a free market does the agricultural community want to have in future water transfers? And how much does that impact future water projects? Should we build smaller projects based on agricultural water rights that a few people want to sell, or should we build bigger dam projects based on appropriated water? ± There are those for whom water rights are their ?401(k)? and they need to have the ability to sell. There are others who feel that transferring the agricultural water rights to municipal use will destroy a way of life and harm those who don?t sell. ± The last thing a farmer wants is the government to come in and say it wants to help by restricting the farmer?s private-property right. Instead, the farmer will want government to say that a farmer has the right to sell the water right at the highest price possible. ± There needs to be protection within a ditch system so if water is sold from that system, no one is caught as the last person on the ditch and left holding the bag. This is also true of agricultural-to-agricultural transfers. ± Intra-basin transfers should be considered differently than inter-basin transfers. Water rights provide an economic building block for a community, and intra-basin transfers of water removes the economic benefit from the locality from which it is transferred. Loveland suffers if water rights are transferred to Aurora because that economic building block is gone and the economic benefit of that water transfers to Aurora. Basin of origin legislation may protect intra-basin transfers such as protecting La Junta when its water is transferred to Aurora, but it may not