Colorado’s Grant Program to Explore Alternative Water Transfer Methods
Todd DohertyColorado Water Conservation Board
Colorado Water WorkshopJuly 21, 2010
Introduction
Colorado’s Conundrum:
Increasing Water Demands
Static or Decreasing Water Supplies
Limited New Water Development
M&I Gap – Low Scenario
2008 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 -
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000 Ac
re-F
eet/
Year
Existing Supplies and Systems
IPPs if 100% Successful
2050 Gap - Low Scenario(150,000 AFY)
M&I Gap – Medium Scenario
2008 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 -
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000 Ac
re-F
eet/
Year
Existing Supplies and Systems
IPPs based on IBCC Input
2050 Gap - Medium Scenario360,000 AFY
M&I Gap – High Scenario
2008 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 -
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000 Ac
re-F
eet/
Year
Existing Supplies and Systems
Status Quo IPPs
2050 Gap - High Scenario580,000 AFY
35,000 to73,000 acres
51,000 acres77,000 acres
21,000 to28,000 acres
180,000 to267,000 acres
7,000 to13,000 acres
83,000 to84,000 acres
18,000acres66,000 acres
2050 Changes in Irrigated Acres
Statewide Total:504,000 to 718,00 acres15 to 20 percent
ATM Grant Program
$1.5 Million Authorized by CO State Legislature in 2007
Focused on South Platte River and Arkansas River
Goals – Protect property rights yet provide alternatives to buy and dry
Promote relationships between irrigators and cities
Additional $1.5 million Authorized this year.
Areas of Investigation
Administrative/Legal/Verification Issues
Institutional Issues Technical/Engineering analysis
Economics Social Issues Water Quality Issues
Considerations/Findings
High transaction costs may be a barrier to healthy leasing market (i.e. bulletin board).
Streamline/equalize water court transaction costs (potential legislative changes).
Certainty remains an issue (WISE Concept).
Cost vs. supply certainty for municipalities purchasing water via alternative agricultural transfers (need incentives)
Management costs can be high.
Alternative Transfer Methods Products
WISE Water Market Concept Lower South Platte Co-op FRICO Water Sharing Super Ditch Parker/CSU Deficit Irrigation
Considerations
Tipping points/thresholds to maintain viable agricultural economics/communities
Incentives necessary? Legislative changes necessary? Water Court test case necessary?
Alternative Transfer Methods Next Steps
Potential Legislative Concepts: Presumptive historical crop
consumptive use procedures Canal or ditch systemwide historical
consumptive use analysis Transfer of a portion of consumptive
use
Findings incorporated into update of Statewide Water Needs Assessment (November 2010).
CWCB may consider new grants in January 2010