Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />Memorandum <br />Appointed Legislator and Water Conservation Board <br />October 18. 1988 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />On the other hand, techniques for improving the efficiency <br />of use on individual farms are being pursued. Examples include <br />programs of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District <br />and a pump efficiency demonstration program by the state Soil <br />Conservation Board. Information on the latter is attached. <br /> <br />Industrial water conservation: Because water use costs are <br />already an important factor in productivity costs. and because <br />industrial water use in Colorado is so small. it is unlikely. <br />that significantly greater savings can be effected in this <br />sector. Therefore. this is a matter of minor consideration for <br />state pOlicy at this time. <br /> <br />Municipal water conservation: Research and analysis have shown <br />that increasing the efficiency of water use in municipal <br />systems can result in lower per capita water consumption. <br />However, because of the variety of techniques available and <br />because of the changes in attitudes by users which reduced <br />consumption (deliveries) requires. the actual savings which may <br />be realized are not fully accepted or documented. Experts have <br />reasonable differences of opinion. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />In Colorado the issue is to what extent metropolitan Front <br />Range areas can and should look to the management of demand to <br />reduce the need for expansion of system capacity. If expansion <br />of storage and transmission facilities can be effectively <br />complemented by improvements in the efficiency of use. then a <br />variety of benefits may accrue. For example. the controversy <br />over the adverse effects of west slope diversions could be <br />reduced. Also. the expense of major capital investments could <br />be deferred or reduced. <br /> <br />OTHER STATES PROGRAMS <br /> <br />Most states. including Colorado. have some water <br />conservation pOlicies and activities. The attached chart <br />describes the range of programs identified in.a recent <br />nationwide survey. <br /> <br />California is generally acknowledged to be a leader because <br />of the size and comprehensiveness of the programs which it <br />created following a serious drought in 1975. Texas established <br />a broad new program in 1985. Descriptions of both state's <br />programs. taken from materials provided by each state. are <br />attached. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />-2- <br />