My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PUB00101
CWCB
>
Publications
>
Backfile
>
PUB00101
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2010 3:55:22 PM
Creation date
9/30/2006 10:17:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Publications
Year
1994
Title
Fort Lyon Canal Company Water Transfer Alternatives Study - Final Report
CWCB Section
Finance
Author
Gronning Engineering
Description
Analysis of the alternative approaches to, and the results of the transfer of agricultural water supplies from the Ft. Lyon Canal Company to alternative uses
Publications - Doc Type
Brochure
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
204
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
<br />2.6 Factors Contributjnl! to Water Sales <br /> <br />The gradual movement of water from ruraVagricultural areas to urban/municipal and industrial areas <br />results from several general factors, most of which are not unique to southeastern Colorado. <br /> <br />1. Water is a property right and is severable from the land. <br /> <br />2. Farming is always hard work, fraught with high risk of financial failure or small <br />return on investment. <br /> <br />3. Farming income is sometimes less than the return on investment of water sale <br /> <br />proceeds. <br /> <br />4. Agricultural incomes are not growing, especially among family farmers. (Keene- <br />Osborn 1992) <br /> <br />5. Some farmers are failing and need or want to sell. <br /> <br />6. Agricultural capital availability is limited. <br /> <br />7. Urban populations are growing while rural, agricultural communities are not growing <br />or are declining in population. <br /> <br />8. Municipal and industrial users wish to obtain firm water supplies for drought years. <br /> <br />9. Farming accounts for most of the water consumption in the state, but accounts for <br />only a part of the population, political base and economy of the whole state. <br /> <br />10. <br /> <br />There are insufficient young farmers interested in taking over farms; and, the major <br />capital investment required disqualifies many potential entrants. <br /> <br />11. <br /> <br />Rural communities and farmers may be ambivalent or undecided on the position to <br />take on a possible water transfer. This may be a result of a desire to retain the <br />option for sale of their water as security for the future. <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />12. If a transfer occurs, farmers may not want to be "left behind", fearing greater <br />operating problems, higher expenses, and the loss of neighbors and traditional <br />community lifestyle. <br /> <br />13. There are accepted legal processes for the transfer of water and resolution of at least <br />some of the issues arising from a proposed transfer. <br /> <br />14. Cost of protecting water rights and protesting water transfers is relatively high for <br />rural communities and farmers. <br /> <br />2-14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.