WSP01923

• File Number: 8054
• Description: Water Salvage
• State: CO
• Basin: Statewide
• Date: 1/22/1992
• Author: CWCB
• Title: Analysis of Water Salvage Issues in Colorado and Appendix-Irrigation Salvage - An Analysis of Water Salvage Issues in Colorado
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

.

--

.

M2~31')

VI.

PoIi<;y Issues

A number of policy issues must be addressed and resolved before salvaged or saved
water can be fully incorporated into the water rights system in Colorado.

A Role of the State

Should Colorado take an active role in promoting and encouraging better water use
efficiency? It has always been state policy that water should be used wisely and beneficially,
and that waste is not tolerated. However, the state has primarily relied on private efforts
in a free market to accomplish this goal. Water users have resisted suggestions that the
state develop a comprehensive water management plan. Rather, the creation of a
specifically defined and transferable property right to the use of water, has permitted
economic forces to move water to its highest valued use. Is this a sufficient role for the
future? Public perceptions about waste, inefficiency, and conservation may demand a more
proactive approach. The equitable apportionment doctrine which invites federal judicial
scrutiny of wise resource use, as well as Colorado's current efforts to maintain compact
entitlements, may dictate a' stronger state role.

If the state decides salvaged or saved water should be a component of a strategy to better
use its water supply it must then determine what types of efficiency measures should be
promoted. Salvage water, defined as changes in historical consumptive use, is least likely
to interfere with return flows relied on by others, but also has limited potential to add
significant supplies of water. Saved water, defined as changes in historical diversions can
yield larger volumes of water for new uses, but will require close analysis of return flow
patterns. Litigation over that analysis and the extent of the "no injury" rule can be expected.
Requiring review of salvage or saved water applications by the State Engineer may simplify
the fact finding process, and give other water users some protection without the expense of
objecting in water court.

If the state wants to take a more active role in promoting efficiency it can do so using
either a "carrot or stick" approach, with incentives or regulations. Examples of actions wl:\ich
might encourage more efficient operations are: removing current market. barriers and
reducing transaction costs, funding programs designed to improve efficiency, and creating
new entitlements to water made available through conservation measures. Examples of
actions which could force more efficient water use include: more specific and tighter
definition of beneficial use, giving the State Engineer increased authority and resources to
curtail wasteful or inefficient practices, and regulation of agricultural return flows as a
nonpoint pollution source.

B. Resource Tradeoffs

Should wetlands, albeit artificial, be impaired to provide new water supplies? Does water
consumed by vegetation along ditches and farm fields provide a valuable aesthetic and

23

,
"

~,

!.{

,,;

i;
;;.

:~
i
'j
'j
,1

'.

,1
'1
"
:~