Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> <br />Lessons Learned from Water Administration in Colorado <br />by <br />Dick Wolfe, P.E. <br />State Engineer <br />AWRA Colorado <br />2012 Annual Symposium <br />Beyond our Borders: Water Lessons Learned from Outside Colorado <br /> <br />1) When we talk about lessons learned it is often hard to distinguish between the hard knocks <br />in life and those of opportunity. I have tried to look at every challenge as an opportunity. I <br />would like to share with you some thoughts on lessons learned, whether from successes or <br />from failures. <br />2) Probably foremost is that litigation is not a substitute for sound science and facts <br />a) We need to develop laws based on sound science <br />(1) oftentimes complex scientific models developed after laws passed <br />(2) Did not always anticipate modern developments (e.g., extensive well <br />development between 1950-1980)—took some time for both science and law to <br />catch up <br />(3) Did not envision issues with ESA <br />b) For example, we spent 24 years in litigation and spent over $50M including <br />approximately $34M in damages to settle the Kansas v. Colorado lawsuit (first job <br />out of college-thought everything was done through litigation) <br />c) Another example is the current litigation and compact compliance efforts for the <br />Republican River basin. Since the settlement of the 1998 lawsuit in 2002, Colorado <br />has not been in compliance. We have been attempting to get approval from Kansas <br />and Nebraska on our Compact compliance plan involving the constructions of a <br />Compact compliance pipeline. These efforts rely heavily on the ground water model <br />that was developed as part of the 2002 settlement. <br />3) Cooperation and restraint from litigation should provide greater certainty and a more <br />secure water supply for the entire state. Users want regulatory certainty and transparency <br />of process. This leads to greater chance of successful agreements like: