Skip to main content
Members of the Southwest Basin Water Roundtable are taking comments and offer information on the Colorado Statewide Water Plan. Although the Colorado Water Conservation Board approved the draft State Water Plan to present to the Governor, comments will be accepted late into 2015 before it is finalized.

Each of the State’s water basins sent drafts of their Basin Implementation Plans (BIPs) to the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) earlier this fall after more than a year of work. In addition, the Joint Legislative Committee on Water Issues conducted listening sessions across to the State to gather public opinion on the State Water Plan with the intent of developing legislation on water issues.

Now, the CWCB is drafting the State Plan around the BIPs previously submitted so it make it to the Governor’s desk by December 10, 2014. It is expected the Governor will review the draft, make comments and return it to the CWCB for redistribution to the various roundtables for further work.

At every step of this process the public has been invited to participate in developing the Colorado Statewide Water Plan. This latest effort involves local public meetings to both provide information and take comments. Here in the southwest basin, there will be four (4) separate oppounties to comment at public meetings. The first is here in Pagosa Springs with others to follow in Bayfield (11/19), Mancos (12/1), and Placerville (12/9).

Of particular concern to west slope residents are issues that touch our quality of life, economic sustainability, and hopes for the future. Colorado River Basin Roundtables have made an effort include west slope solutions in their BIPs, but nothing can approach the influence a chorus of voices from the west slope will have on the final plan. Consider the following:

  • Identification of Conflicts:  Is Colorado’s Water Plan a place to identify, enunciate and resolve conflict?

  • Transmountain Diversions:  Should Colorado endorse and seek to find ways for additional transmountain diversions?

  • Basin Projects and Processes:  Although the BIPs set out updated sets of projects important to both consumptive and non-consumptive water uses; is it appropriate for the State’s Water Plan to find methods at the state level to assist the basins with implementation?

  • Cooperative Processes: What protections need to be put in place to protect agriculture, while still providing instream flows for recreation, habitat, and other water uses on the west slope?

  • Implementation:  What needs to be done to expedite implementation – specifically, the funding and permitting processes?

  • Environmental & Recreational Attributes:  What does the State’s Water Plan need to include to assure enhanced environmental and recreationaal values and attributes?

  • Conservation:  The Southwest Basin’s BIP, more than any other, stresses conservation and seeks to put in place standards, goals and solutions to enhance conservation as a statewide value. Governorr Hicklooper has said that every conversation on water needs to start with conservation. What innovative steps need to be included in the State’s Water Plan to assure conservation is made a priority?

  • Watershed Management & Protection:  Do you agree Colorado’s Water Plan needs to identify ongoing efforts statewise, and establish actions to involve statkeholders at all levels regarding watershed health, natural disaster mnagement, and water quaity issues?

  • Public Engagement and Outreach:  What else can be done to provide technical and financial assistance for high quality, balanced and grassroots water education and outreach efforts that inform Coloradans about the issues so they engage in determining Colorado’s water future?


Your opinion matters!  Even if you cannot make tonight’s meeting, please take the time to review the draft plan at http://coloradowaterplan.com/ There is a general comment form on the website as well.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sychohants

“All organizations are merely conceptual embodiments of a very old, very basic idea – the idea of community. They can be no more or less than the sum of the beliefs of the people drawn to them; of their character, judgments, acts and effort.” Dee Hock from The New Transitional HR Model About twenty-five days out from the 2008 national elections I wrote an article for the Daily Post endorsing Ron Chacey. I lamented over concerns I had for the direction the County might take under a majority consisting of John Ranson and Bob Moomaw. After the election, and as a result of the ambush and assault on the County’s planning commission, I wrote another article lamenting concerns that Archuleta County continued to disregard good process, policies and predictability. Since then, I have pelted Bill Hudson and Glenn Walsh with information, but refrained and even refused to write anything myself. A couple of weeks ago, I re-introduced myself to Terri House at a Rot...
Post a Comment
Read more
Rodney B. Proffitt announces he will seek the nomination of the Archuleta Democratic Party for County Commissioner.   Rod has a Bachelor of Arts and Master of Science degrees from Kansas State Teachers College (now Emporia State University), and holds a Juris Doctor from the University of Kansas School of Law.   He studied for a Ph.D in public administration at the University of Colorado – Denver, completing coursework and all but the dissertation. Rod sits on several boards, including Rotary District 5470 (Membership Chair), San Juan Water Conservancy District (President), Pagosa Lakes Property Owners Association (Treasurer), Pagosa Springs Community Development Corporation (Advisory), the coordinating committee for Relay for Life, and the Archuleta County Democratic Party (Secretary). In addition, Rod has previously been active locally by holding several offices in the Pagosa Moutain Morning Rotary Club, appointed to a seat on the Governor’s Southwest Regional Wat...
Post a Comment
Read more
Editorial to the Pagosa Daily Post Re: You don’t get to Have Your Own Facts The San Juan River Headwaters Project (“the Project”) is the official name given what was the Dry Gulch Project. San Juan Water Conservancy District (‘the District”) has made no secret of the reason for the name change so why Mike Church think it is disingenuous is odd. First, “Dry Gulch” was never an official name of the Project, but rather simply referenced what the project area was referred to on topographical maps. Second, Dry Gulch referenced a project led by Pagosa Area Water & Sanitation District (“PAWSD”), which is no longer the case so it has no say in the project name, the name of the road into the project area, the reservoir, the islands in the reservoir, the ridge above the reservoir, or anything else. PAWSD gave up whatever rights it had as part of the 3 Way Agreement that PAWSD and the District entered into with Colorado Water Conservation Board (“the CWCB”). Finally, the Project ...
Post a Comment
Read more