PUB00017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Introduction By Buford Rice, Executive Vice President The purpose of this study is to begin a process of assessing where we are in Colorado in terms of developing our water resources and to determine what decisions, if any, should be made about how we deal with future water demands. It is not an effort to set up some kind of grandiose state planning hierarchy that will decide the future of each individual water entity. Many local water entities are, to their credit, already involved in future planning efforts. The idea is to really do two things. First, there is an informational function. That function would be to bring together all the information about our water resources in the state. Much has occurred over the last two decades concerning water use and supply in accommodating growth. In developing this study we found that we are relying on some information that goes back 10 to 20 years. There is an obvious need to update and to bring that information base together. The second function of this study is that of planning. That is not to suggest the prior appropriation system needs a fix. Far from it. Planning in this case, for lack of a better term, is intended to mean facilitating what is happening and to bring into focus the long term demands for water. The question is whether that entity should be the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB), an independent non- governmental consortium of water interests or a combination of both. Our tirst bias is to suggest the CWCB should be the entity to facilitate such an effort on behalf of the state. Again, it would be a facilitating role and not a policy setting role. One question stimulated by the study is whether the focus on long term water planning is a public policy matter that deserves debate and consideration by the legislature, or is it a matter better left to others? We believe the issue needs to be addressed one way or the other. Should the legislature determine that this initiative does not warrant public policy consideration, or that it should be the function of the CWCB, or that it is better left to local water groups as currently managed, then we have our answer. In any event, we are convinced the study is evidence that there is a need to begin the process now in order to better plan for the future. But how that all comes about, if at all, is the question that deserves an answer.