May 13 08 South Platte Basin Roundtable Meetin (2)

Home Browse Search

Tom: This is one way to proceed; Three options: subcommittee would bring back study summary; or roundtable would be involved in each step; or three, anyone else interested in joining us. Bert Weaver: Suggestion for criteria for establishing priority: look at pressure or threats for non-consumptive water ways -from permanent population, visiting population, over-fishing, what can we project between now and 2050, attempt to identify what areas will be most threatened over the next 30 years-also by industrial development, such as oil development or in-situ uranium development. Bill Jerke: Fundamental questions that need to be asked re: non-consumptive: has never sought water right for non-consumptive; does this not butt up against water law, when this group is designed around developing a water right for beneficial use; asks if anon-consumptive use would ever be a dominate use; or whether it should be a beneficial by-product; if look at our applications approved, they all have a beneficial secondary use for non- consumptive; this beneficial use needs to be put first. Difficult to look at stretch of water and suggest that anon-consumptive use would in a primary position; Bob Streeter: We have many examples of our projects where we satisfy consumptive needs and non-consumptive needs; not really an either/or; CO Law is evolving as well; our focus on the committee looks at identifying where the highest rec/envionrmental needs are; looking where we can bring needs together; we look, in the spirit of The Colorado Water for 21`t Century Act, of honoring both. Joe Franlc: Think that should be one of the criteria; that this should not trump other water needs in consumptive needs; so that this is tn~ly a win-win Larry Howard: water supplier on this committee; would like to echo that on this committee there is a real sensitivity for both consumptive and non- consumptive; not looking to impose something on the river; Mike Slummin: Bill's comment will have different impact in different basins; focusing on these needs, will actually be increasing our need in this basin; this will show that we need more water; in other basins, this assessment, will be looked at as proof that there is no water for consumptive needs; therefore, there are many layers in this question re: non-consumptive needs... mean different things to different basins. Sasha Charney: Per the Act, "Our charge is to find water for consumptive needs"; Our charge does include non-consumptive needs; this is not how state has managed this for the last 140 years but our charge does include non- consumptive needs per the Act; given an over-appropriated basin, we have to look at win-win options; Charney cannot be officially part of the subcommittee, but she has information that she can share; non-consumptive will not trump... but if we don't do something, things will happen over us; we need to be involved in the direction that this is going. John Metli: Non-consumptive needs to be co-mingled with consumptive use; private property rights are in focus; non-consumptive can be dangerous; threatened species challenges; 7