Laserfiche WebLink
<br />i' - .r--:-Io, <br /> <br />01 ". <br /> <br />--o~ - "Y.._ <br /> <br />et <br /> <br />Gilbert, Hanna <br /> <br />~ '[r~~~~~~'1" ~ ~ ~.<<""Ij'o:~:!""'I....,~.; . ~ ...... :1>--4'_ ~A~""~ <br /> <br />..- '~1:.L_ , J ~:o..~:r""~~:---::II <br /> <br />David"Graf @ state.co. US <br /> <br />FridaYi November 07,20034:27 PM <br /> <br />Morea~ Susan; MostelJer, Doug'as; rjck4brown@state~co.us <br /> <br />Steve"Puttmann @ state4co.us; Sherman. Hebein @ state.co.us; Joh n ~T onko @ state .co. us; <br />Doug. Krieger @ state .co. us; Bruce. McCloskey @ state. co. us; Mike. Grode @ state.co" us; <br />Grady.McNeill @state.co.us <br /> <br />Subject: SWSI Review - Objectives and Bibliography <br /> <br />From; <br />Sent: <br />To: <br />Cc: <br /> <br />Rick. Sue, and Doug- <br /> <br />Thank you for including the Division of Wildfife in these important water-related discussions, arJd for providing an <br />opportunity for our feedback to this process.. Obviously we have interests both as stewards for wildlife resources <br />of the StateJ and as a holder of numerous water rights within every major river basin. To this endJ I am including <br />a few comments on both the Objectives and the Bjbliography sections I have reviewed. I also have included a <br />few general observations related to the participants' difficulties grappling with the headers within the Objectives <br />section. Although I did not attend any but the west slope meetings, I would surmise other basins had similar <br />difficulties wrestling through the ambiguities, redundancies, and interpretations within the headers and sub- <br />headers. Also, if there is any additional information available at this point regarding the demand methodology for <br />environmental needs, I would like an opportunity to review this material before the next meetings~ Finally) I <br />apologIze for the delay in providing you this review. <br /> <br />Comments on SWSI Objectives <br /> <br />General Comments: <br />The Yampa04White(-Green-Little Snake) obviously produced something of a 'new paradigmt for the objectives <br />discussion w.r. to the structure of the discussion and any subsequent evaluation of these objectives. I think this <br />particular discussion highlighted the basic difficulty with the concept of articulating 'values' that will serve as <br />quantifiable Indexes for the evaluation phase of SWSI, especially when it is perceived that aU interests are not <br />represented equafly by the objective headers. Also as notedt many words or phrases are 'charged~ with a <br />percefved bias (e.g.. "recreational in-channel uses"; lthlghest beneficial use}; to the extent possible, these should <br />be avoided in the final word-smithing of the objectives~ <br /> <br />I believe there were 3-5 broad themes that emerged consistently throughout the meetings I attended: (1) Market <br />and economic efficIency should be accounted for; (2) water infrastructure should also reflect an efficiency of use <br />and be able to capitalize on opportunities; (3) "institutional flexibUityft should be enhanced. both in terms of real- <br />time water administrative and within the broader legal framework, such as permjtting and compliance wI <br />envlronmental Jaws; (4) the both the environment and recreational opportunities should be at least} preserved, <br />and better yett enhanced; (5) cultural and social values need to be recognized and preserved. Though these are <br />simply obselVatfons from four meetjngs, their consistency from meeting to meeting is worth mentioning. To the <br />extent that your Hst of headers and sub...headers can be condensed and simplified, I would encourage it. <br /> <br />Specific Comments: <br />Nos. 1~4, No.7 - I will leave to the word-smithers. I would take a close look at incorporating the objectives re: <br />cost effectiveness (#7) into these objectives, or re..framing one of them to specifically incfude the words "Cost <br />Effectiveness" in the header4 General sense was that the implications of 'reliability' (#1), .efficiencyt (#2)t <br />'optimizing use' (#3). and 'implementability' (#4) necessarily entaif cost efficiencies. I wourdt however, include a <br />sub-header incorporating the need to acknowledge the less tangibJe cost externalities (e~g.f opportunity costs and <br />trade..offst cumulative effects. etc...) within this section. <br /> <br />No.5.... Recreation <br /> <br />· the phrase 'in-channel recreation' is one of the aforementioned 'Joadedt terms. The point is a good one <br />("..provide for ...n) but perhaps different wording may make the same point without the guttural response <br />invoked by RICDs. <br /> <br />1/?~/'J(\nA <br />