Front Range Water Council Response

Home Browse Search

• Administrative/judicial proceedings designed to prevent the export of available water from a basin. • Administrative/judicial proceedings associated with challenges to the adequacy of environmental reviews/mitigation. • Regulatory adoptions that foreclose or significantly increase in cost water diversion activities. • Use of federal review processes to forestall infrastructure development. • Use of local land use authorities to preclude infrastructure development. • Individual pursuit of infrastructure without regional coordination. • Individual pursuit of water rights without regional coordination. • Duplicative or uncoordinated modeling on climate change impacts, return flow patterns, instream flow needs, impacts on groundwater, etc. In addition, how the Front Range decides to fill its gap has obvious implications for rural areas/irrigated agriculture (mainly in the Platte and Arkansas basins) and, assuming that it becomes a source of supply, for the West slope communities (Colorado River basin). This is not to say, however, that such consequences cannot be adequately addressed. It was undoubtly the intent of the sponsors of the House Bill 1177 Roundtable process that many of these issues would be resolved in the context of Roundtable discussions and IBCC deliberations. This has not, in general, proven to be the case to date, though some positive initiatives, e.g. ag to urban water transfer workgroup in the Arkansas basin, SB 122 study in the Colorado River basin, etc., have commenced. SB 179 monies have mainly been utilized, however, to support projects that meet individual "gap" water supply needs. Little has been done to fund projects that would meet statewide objectives, such as for multi-purpose projects or projects designed to remove historical barriers to project completion. Viewing the "what would you like to see" question has an open invitation to a wish list, the following come to mind: • A plan for Colorado which recognizes that water is a commodity that needs to be utilized in the context of meeting a greater vision encompassing available and affordable housing, well-paying primary jobs, a quality education system, sustainable irrigated agriculture and diverse recreational/tourism opportunities, rather than an end in and of itself. • The creation, where warranted, of regional water supply entities which would share infrastructure and resources so as to maximize flexibility and yield while minimizing cost and spreading rate impacts, (e.g. Las Vegas, Tampa, Los Angeles, etc.) • The evaluation of existing project re-operation or excess capacity opportunities based solely on engineering feasibility (with an avoidance or adequate mitigation of environmental impacts). • The exercise of local land use control solely to ensure an absence of local harm to recognized rights in land, including avoidance of undue environmental degradation, together with the wise coordination of infrastructure designed to meet local water and wastewater demands. 6