CSIReportColoradoBasinRoundtable

Home Browse Search

Mapping the Colorado Basin Rou ndtable’s Water Policy Networks Executive Summary In the summer of 2007, a survey was conducted with the Colorado Basin Roundtable and over a hundred water stakeholders identified by the Colorado Basin Roundtable members. The stakeholders in the study are diverse, with many different affiliations, interests, and roles within the water community. Most respondents are involved in the HB05-1177 process, participating on one or more roundtables. They were asked questions designed to help understand how the people involved in and on the periphery of the roundtable process are connected to one another, and where and how stronger connections can be built. The findings represent a snapshot of a single point in time, when the roundtable process was 18 months old and in the process of establishing direction based on a new administration and emerging technical work. The roundtable process has many goals to undertake , from the activities discussed in this report, to the work underway this year, to the ultimate goal of developing a structure to guide transbasin diversions without harming individual basins. When HB05-1177 created the roundtable process, it explicitly included stakehol ders who have had less of a voice in the past. The question now is whether the more inclusive structure has the potential for more inclusive decisions to meet the goals of the roundtables. The analysis of the stakeholders within the Colorado Basin Roundtable and their network of contacts suggests that in this roundtable, not all interests have the same level of investment in the water roundtable process . It also suggests that the different interests are about more than just consumptive and non-consumptive or east and west. Challenges to Address . Some stakeholders on the Colorado Basin Roundtable who prioritize protecting consumptive needs are the least likely to see the roundtables as successful at meeting their individual goals or their goals for the roundtables. They do not see members of the Colorado Basin Roundtable as being influential in statewide water policy and management issues, but rather look to others in their networks who are outside the roundtable. They are disconnected, in terms of frequency of informat ion exchange and trust, from many members of the Colorado Basin Roundtable. This combination of findings suggests that these stakeholders who prioritize consumptive needs continue to look outside the roundtable process for the decision-making power and venues. Historically, their needs have been met by the current system, with the legal structure of prior appr opriation and market driven aspects of water management being effective tools for achieving their desired outcomes. Not all stakeholders on the Colorado Basin Roundtable with a focus on consumptive needs fall into this group. For some, including small municipal providers, the current system is broken , and even the roundtable process is not going to fix it. These stakeholders do not see the process as meeting their desired outcomes. They too are disconnected from the roundtable process, but unlike the previous group, it is not because their needs are being met elsewhere; it is because their needs are not being met anywhere. Not all of these stakeholders are focused on consumptive needs, but they are all focused on the failure of their needs to be met by the current system. Strengths to Build Upon : In contrast to the previous two groups, some of the stakeholders on the Colorado Basin Roundtable whose consumptive needs are primarily focused on agricultural needs are positively engaged in the roundtable process. They may not be sharing information as actively with roundtable members as other stakeholders tend to, but they do trust the stakeholders at the table and see some successes in the process. Colorado Institute of Public Policy 4 of 64