Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Discussion : <br /> <br />The application seeks to build additional information to address agricultural transfer issues. This is a key <br />issue for many urbanizing areas of the state and additional infor mation to help more clearly identify and <br />address implementation issues associated with the agricultural transfers will be very valuable . The applicant <br />did a nice job outlining how the issues ha ve been identified and documented (SWSI 1 and 2 and the previo us <br />work of the Arkansas Transfers Committee). However, the applicant does not put these issues in the context <br />of the basins overall needs, and the important water supply gap areas and future water development needs of <br />t he basin as a whole. <br />The Arkansas ba sin has very little to no new water development opportunities and agricultural transfers are <br />and will continue to be an important source of new supply. As currently conceived/written the funds for this <br />project are to complete facilitation. The Water Supp ly Reserve Account (WSRA) is not intended to fund <br />facilitation. Facilitation is a means or method to achieve and specific outcome. It is the specific <br />outcome/product that needs to be more clearly defined in the application by “Task” with a budget associa ted <br />with that task. The level of effort via facilitation can then be tied to producing the outcome of the task s . In <br />addition, the outcome/products to the extent possible should be tied to the purposes of the WSRA (i.e., to <br />identify projects or methods to address consumptive or non - consumptive needs or help complete a needs <br />assessment ) and should go beyond the abstract/conceptual level . <br /> <br />Staff appreciates the challenge of addressing this difficult issue and that it is important not to presume the <br />specific outcome of the committee process. Further , staff appreciates that there will need to be significant <br />flexibility in the approach taken but the current scope will need to be more detailed in terms of tasks and <br />deliverables based upon the above discussion. A t a minimum it appears plausible to identify and discuss <br />how the “model(s)” apply or are relevant to the water supply and management issues of the basin and the <br />state , and what solutions can be implemented given the needs of the basin/state and how the pro ducts from <br />this effort will/might advance these solutions . <br /> <br />Finally, a review of the “S ummary to Date of the Work of the Arkansas Basin Roundtable’s Water Transfers <br />Committee ” , provided as and Appendix to the application , indicates that the group has explo red a very wide <br />range of topics and issues. It should be noted that staff does not agree with or support some of the <br />“principles and/or positions” expressed in this document and that our funding decision does not reflect any <br />endorsement of these work effo rts. <br /> 3 <br />