Laserfiche WebLink
Response to Comments on the Colorado River Water Supply Availability Scope of Work - October 19, 2007 <br />Individual and/or Date of Comment Response <br />Organization Comment <br />Reed Dils 9/17/07 It seems this study is a little heavy on the demand side instead of In order to determine water availability, demands need to be <br />d etermining a “firm” availability of water. If that is not the case, <br />modeled. Phase I looks at water availability based on existing <br />the language does not make it very clear. <br />demands. Phase II i s an opportunity to look at water <br />availability based on future demands. <br />Glenwood Springs 9/24/07 Why is Groundwater excluded? Small groundwater sources are Groundwater raises important issues at the local level, but in <br />Meeting 9/24/07 replenished by agriculture - understand groundwater issues in <br />the overall Colorado River system, groundwater use is minimal <br />Western Colorado . Gro undwater could be significant. <br />compared to surface water. Most of the wells are small <br />domestic wells that do not significantly imp act overall supply <br />availability . Other studies/processes are looking at these <br />issues (for example, the Colorado Roundtable approved a <br />Missouri Heights Groundwater Monitoring Study) <br />Glenwood Springs 9/24/07 Cumulative impacts need to be addressed . The scope is really a This study is a hydrology study at the direction of the General <br />Meeting hydrology study with no economic or social issues. From the <br />Assembly. Socio - economic issues are important and will be <br /> western slop e we need to address the issues of economic and <br />brought into the discussions through the basin - wide water <br />social implications. <br />needs assessments. <br /> <br />Glenwood Springs 9/24/07 Can’t deal with water quantity without talking about water quality Water quality is certainly important, but i s outside the scope of <br />Meeting <br />this study. Roundtables are considering water quality in the <br />needs assessment. Specifically, several of the non - <br />consumptive attributes we have mapped for the roundtables <br />are water quality attributes. <br /> <br />Glenwood Springs 9/24/07 Climate change could impact priority system Climate change is being considered in the study. See Task 7a - <br />Meeting 9/24/ 07 <br />g . <br /> <br />Glenwood Springs 9/24/07 What do “ risks ” mean ? What are the economic benefits to low The Colorado River Water Availability Study is, in itself, a risk <br />Meeting 9/24/07 risk? The whole Colorado Basin “A nalysis in Risk” scenario; <br />assessment of water availability. The study will pr ovide <br />physical limitations of not being able to move back to West Slope. <br />information for decision makers regarding the “risk” of <br />What are the pros and cons of risk items? <br />developing water in the Basin relative to its future availability <br />and need. The true “risk” won’t be fully known until the model <br />is implemented in Phase 2. In the meantime, “risk” as <br />articulat ed by IBC members, is being factored into the model’s <br />development by the inclusion of data and information <br />pertaining to climate change. <br /> <br />Glenwood Springs 9/24/07 Consider critical periods Critical periods are included in CDSS and will be described in <br />Meeting 9/24/07 <br />Task 4. <br />1 of 10 <br /> Page <br />