BOARD01453 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Section 11 Implementation ,-~~, 11.3 Key Recommendations Following from SWSI's major findings, and based primarily on feedback obtained from the CWCB Board, Basin Roundtables, and public input, the recommendations outlined below provide guidance on how Colorado should proceed in addressing its future water needs. The reader is encouraged to look at the Key Recommendations section of the Executive Summary, which expands on these key recommendations. 1. Ongoing Dialogue Among all Water Interests is Needed 2. Track and Support the Identified Projects and Processes 3. Develop a Program to Evaluate, Quantify, and Prioritize Environmental and Recreational Water Enhancement Goals 4. Work Toward Consensus Recommendations on Funding Mechanisms for Environmental and Recreational Enhancements 5. Create a Common Understanding of Future Water Supplies 6. Develop Implementation Plans Toward Meeting Future Needs 7. Assess Potential New State Roles in Implementing Solutions 8. Develop Requirements for Standardized Annual M&I Water Use Data Reporting The precise timing and method in which these recommendations can be implemented is flexible, and more discussion of ideas and suggestions is welcome. The remainder of this section outlines some of the implementation issues, and a framework for moving forward to address Colorado's water needs. 11.4 Implementation Issues Implementation of solutions that will help meet Colorado's future water needs is not easy. Many of the issues faced by water users in meeting their needs were highlighted throughout the SWSI Basin Roundtable and public input processes. Perhaps the most prominent COM 11-4 < issue raised in SWSI was funding to implement the desired solutions. Funding opportunities, along with other implementation issues, are discussed in the sections below. . 11.4.1 Project Hurdles The key findings and recommendations abbreviated in this section and expanded on in the Executive Summary outline a plan for moving forward to ensure Coiorado's water future. Colorado has enjoyed a rich and colorful history. Throughout time Coloradans have been characterized as courageous, innovative, industrious, and ruggedly individualist. Many of these characteristics were apparent in the personalities of the Basin Roundtable members. It is therefore not surprising that as SWSI was iaunched, it was met with support and the expressed need to work together in defining our water future from some interests, but also with significant skepticism that local needs and interests would not be respected. Many water providers did not support state involvement in water suppiy planning, believing that planning is best conducted by individual water providers. Smaller communities and iess populated portions of the state were concerned that their economic, social, and cuitural future would be "sacrificed" for the needs of urban areas. Environmental and recreational interests expressed concern that the process was intended to push for the development of new water supply storage projects at the expense of the environment or recreation. The West Siope was fearful that there was a pre- ordained outcome of SWSI to justify new large transbasin diversions. . The SWSI Basin Roundtabie process was the first step in developing open communication across a wide range of interests in each basin. It was intended to facilitate communication and diaiogue and the first step towards identifying a common understanding of future water needs and potential options and the trade-oils of each option to meet future water needs. The time constraints and direction from the Legislature limited the ability to completely explore the issues, but the SWSI process was an important first step in having a basinwide and statewide dialogue on how to best provide for future water needs. It is helpful to address some of the fears and myths of SWSI. . ~5WSI ~-.....- C:IDOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\ROWANNCIDESKTOPlS 11_ 1 1.23-04.DOC