Laserfiche WebLink
Compact Development <br /> <br />Policy Issues f or Discussion -The Arkansas, South Platte, and Rio Grande Basins regularly <br />curtail in-basin diversions to meet required compact deliveries. There maybe water lef t f or <br />development on the Colorado River system, but there are risks in additional development of <br />this water. There is general agreement that these risks exist, but there is need to examine <br />associated risks. <br />Technical Approach <br />¦ Issues and benefits of no additional development of Colorado River water. <br />¦ Evaluate issues and benefits of the development of 100,000 acre-feet and 250,000 acre-feet for <br />in-basin consumptive use and use on the Front Range. <br />¦ Evaluate the use of infrastructure and/ or interruptible agricultural options to deal with a <br />potential compact call. <br />¦ Identify the opportunities and challenges for managing compact obligations in a way that <br />benef its river corridors. <br />Transbasin Diversions <br />Policy Issues f or Discussion - In general, 80 percent of Colorado's population on the East Slope <br />of the Continental Divide and 80 percent of the water is on the West Slope. This has historically <br />resulted in major water providers developing transbasin diversion projects to meet a portion of <br />their water needs. There is general agreement that additional transbasin diversions will be <br />proposed, but there is need for discussion on whether or under what circumstances additional <br />transbasin diversions should move forward. <br />Technical Approach <br />¦ Examine the risks associated with additional Colorado River Compact development (see <br />Compact Development above). <br />¦ Evaluate alternatives for the protection and compensation to the basin-of-origin. <br />Action I tem <br />At their August 2008 meeting, the IBCC had a preliminary discussion on compact <br />development and transbasin diversions. These strategies will be further evaluated at <br />the October meeting. <br />11