My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Drought & Water Management
CWCB
>
Drought Mitigation
>
DayForward
>
Drought & Water Management
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/29/2010 3:24:05 PM
Creation date
4/29/2010 2:43:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Drought Mitigation
Title
What the Current Drought Means for the Future of Water Management in Colorado
Date
1/1/2003
Description
2002 Drought Impact Report
Basin
Statewide
Drought Mitigation - Doc Type
Reports
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
69
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
The sod industry estimates that at least half of its business was lost for this year due to the <br />restrictions. Some of the loss will be made up after the drought is over. Similar <br />problems affected the whole landscaping industry, although to a somewhat lesser extent. <br />The landscape industry estimates its impact on the Colorado economy at $2.2 billion per <br />year, although that seems high. If business were down in this larger industry by 25 %, <br />then the loss would be $500 million. As some of this will be made up after the end of the <br />drought and more business will be generated if people convert to more drought tolerant <br />landscaping, the net loss may be more like $200 million. <br />Adding the municipal water and landscape costs together suggests a cost in this sector of <br />$330 million. The two main components of this loss are the value of water not used by <br />consumers and the loss of landscaping sales in the landscape industry. These may <br />overlap and are both very uncertain numbers. <br />F. Total Cost and Avoidable Cost <br />Some of the estimates for some sectors are only educated guesses. Adding the costs for <br />each of the above sectors: $500 -$600 million in agriculture, $250 million in tourism, <br />$100 -$150 million in forest fires, and $330 million in municipal and landscaping; gives a <br />total of $1.2 -$1.3 billion cost for the drought of 2002. That, of course, assumes that there <br />is no con inua ion in o 2003. That amount is roughly 0.7 percent of our state's income. <br />While this estimate is actually higher than the published estimate of $1.1 billion, the <br />increase stems from a more complete inventory of the damage and is still a very small <br />fraction of state income. <br />Table 111.1. Economic Impact Total Costs and Avoidable Costs of Drought, <br />by Sector <br />In the West, drought is inevitable and some of its costs are too. However, some could be <br />avoided. As one looks through the costs of this drought, it is apparent that most of the <br />costs incurred would be difficult to avoid. <br />In agriculture, nearly all of the effects come not from lack of water, but from lack of very <br />cheap or free water. Dry land farmers are not going to irrigate their crops unless the <br />water can be delivered to the crop more cheaply than the loss of product. The big <br />agricultural loss is from loss of pasture and that would be almost impossible to irrigate <br />M <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.