Laserfiche WebLink
<br />PART THREE: WATER TRANSFER CASE STUDIES <br />The application of public interest criteria is presented in the case studies that follow, <br />The actual impacts of water transfers on areas of origin, and the ways in which public <br />interest criteria are incorporated into decisionmaking processes surrounding transfer <br />applications, are reviewed. Four case studies have been selected: <br />(1) Arkansas River Valley, Colorado; <br />(2) La Paz County, Arizona; <br />(3) Northern New Mexico; and <br />(4) Eagle County, Colorado. <br /> <br />Arkansas RIver Valley, Colorado <br />The Arkansas River supports irrigated agriculture from the city of Pueblo on <br />Colorado's Front Range east to the Kansas border. Farming has formed the basis of the <br />valley's economy, especially in Crowley and Otero counties. Agriculture suffered economic <br />losses during the 1930s' drought; water transfers out of the valley began in the 19505. The <br />general economic decline culminated in the permanent closure of Crowley County's sugar <br />beet factory in 1967; water transfer activity subsequently escalated as farmers saw viable <br />futures in farming diminish. It is important to stress at the outset that water transfers were <br />not responsible for the initial economic malaise; the economy created the opportunities for <br />the transfers to occur (I.e., willing sellers of water rights). <br /> <br />After the collapse of the sugar beet factory at Sugar City, the Crowley Land and <br />Development Company (CLADCO) was formed to acquire local farms and the associated <br />water rights, The majority of Crowley County farmers sold their land and water rights, <br />which were held by the Twin Lakes Reservoir and Canal Company and the Colorado Canal <br />Company. CLADCO subsequently sold its Twin Lakes shares to the city of Colorado <br />Springs, The Board of Water Works of Pueblo, Pueblo West Metropolitan District, and <br /> <br />17 <br />