Laserfiche WebLink
<br />certainly should have said something about that. It is a potential <br />additional source of supply. Let me say one thing regarding the <br />treating of metro effluent to a point of being potable; a less costly <br />option may be the upgrading of treatment of that water to a degree <br />where some of the Barr Lake plan water exchange concepts could be <br />implemented. That is something I think bears examination. <br /> <br />Q: You said that some perceive <br />there are other means available <br />is the environmental community. <br />help to create solutions? <br /> <br />water projects are not needed; that <br />to develop water. I think this "some" <br />How does the environmental community <br /> <br />A: Is there anyone here from the environmental community who would <br />care to answer that? I once worked for the environmental community as <br />a consultant and now people assume that I know what they are doing. <br />Let me try and guess an answer for that from them. I think they, in <br />general, would be supportive of a lot of the nonstructural projects <br />that would be involved. I think they would probably be, if not openly <br />supportive, then not getting in the way of building some of the <br />structural projects that will help increase system integration that <br />will allow water to flow from where it might be in excess to where it <br />might be more needed. I think they have always held the philosophy <br />that the larger development projects that have extensive environmental <br />impacts, while they may have merit someday, shouldn't be done until <br />some of these more easily attainable, less impacting projects are <br />first examined. <br /> <br />I think the environmental community has been working actively in <br />the area of promoting water conservation. They have remained active <br />in discussions with Denver regarding water conservation elements that <br />Denver has been pursuing. I can't say too much beyond that. I don't <br />see anyone I can single out and embarrass and ask them to answer that <br />question. The environmental community remains active. I think they <br />would have a role in helping to identify and maybe resolve a lot of <br />the political and institutional problems that might be associated with <br />some of these ideas. <br /> <br />Q: What is the definition of the Colorado Front Range? Is it only <br />the South Platte basin or does it include south of the Palmer Divide? <br /> <br />A: It certainly should include south of the Palmer Divide. In the <br />interests of getting something done and not being at this forever and <br />going broke and running out of money, we inadvertently snubbed those <br />south of the Palmer Divide by not addressing them in this study, <br />except to the degree that we did look at some of the options involving <br />municipal and agricultural transfers that involve the Arkansas. All <br />these concepts are not meant to be location-specific. These are <br />concepts and ideas that could be applied to the Arkansas basin as well <br />the South Platte basin. We just didn't have the resources -- and <br />frankly, the familiarity, at least within our firm, to be able to <br />apply these examples. This paper is meant to be a discussion piece, a <br />catalyst, and we welcome any ideas that people may have that may <br />incorporate the Arkansas basin. <br /> <br />34 <br />