9377

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 9377
• Author: Colorado Water Workshop.
• Title: 16th Annual Colorado Water Workshop.
• USFW Year: 1991.
• USFW - Doc Type: Western State College.
• Copyright Material: NO

..

page :)

Consequently they are unable to individually assert any impairment to their
interests. .
New users and uses want a place at the table and consideration - and
to participate in the market. If a water market is to be efficient and .
effective in reallocation to higher valued applications, then access to the
rn~rket should be open to all wanting to participate. This may bring needed
change by breaking the control held over the resource by traditional
established interests.

2. Who Defines the Public Interest? ---- Generally the public's
interests have been defined by legislators, administrators and sometimes
courts. Given the context, all participants should be allowed to define
their interests and values for themselves and in their own way. The ten
categories of public lnterests given on the list from Idaho's Department of
Water Resources appears comprehensive - but why be restrictive and disallow
new interpretations? A market can allow reflection of a diversity of
interpretations of interest - let it. Individual interpretation of
interests also allows timely reflection of new information such as changes
in technology, and in supply and demand. Of course some interests require
public or governmental expression but most can be handled and clearly
defined by individual expression.

3. How to Identify Impacts ---- Larry's examples show some community
ambivalence about a transfer of water out of the local area. Individual
and social values in rural communities are no longer as homogeneous as they
once were. With much greater diversity within and from community to
community, each community should be allowed to identify and interpret the
significance of perceived impacts for itself. It should not be done by
someone else, somewhere elso.
We need to consider that communities do have life cycles and are not
immortal. Risks and structural changes are inherent - whether or not they
are attributable to a market. An open market can reflect diversity,
facilitate adjustments to structural changes, and perhaps even be used to
reduce risk.

4.Coping ---- Most concerns over water transfers have been for mitigation
of "bad's". Should "good's" also be enhanced in a transfer? Should the
burden and responsibility for both be placed upon the water market or
should this be accomplished in some other way? One observer commented on
this noting that there are few instances outside irrigated agriculture and
the associated communities where secondary impactees are a formal policy
concern.
There is often apprehension about any change - particularly when there
is not, for the lack of a better phrase, a general aura of optimism. The
possible "bad's" get emphasized - the community will "blow away" when the
water leaves. Conversely, with an aura of optimism, people have eagerly
left behind both community and possessions to do new things and go to new
places - for example the gold'rushes. At other times they have discovered
and developed new economic activities. Also, individuals and communities
might be cautious about becoming living museums for a life style or culture
- something suggested in the initial decision of the Sleeper case from New
Mexico.
Both communities and individuals have difficulty responding to the
question, "So what do you really want to do?" Discovery and assessment of
implications of a major proposal such as a water transfer can be both an