Gary Barber, Chair Arkansas Basin Rountable February, 2010 Interbasin Compact Committee and Basin Roundtables

Topics for Presentation  Western Water Law is Counter Intuitive  The Prior Appropriation Doctrine  Compacts between the States  Roundtables and the Future “Gap”  Where are we now  Where to next?

The Prior Appropriation Doctrine  Mining requires all the water  First in time, first in right

The Prior Appropriation Doctrine  The Bureau of Reclamation  Founded 1902  Conservation defined by the image of Hoover Dam

The Prior Appropriation Doctrine  Colorado’s Family Feud  85% of the usage is East  87% of the water is West

The Prior Appropriation Doctrine  Denver: 375,000 acre- feet/year  Colorado Springs: 85,000 acre- feet/year

Compacts Between the States  Equal Apportionment between the States  The Colorado River Compact of 1922  Seven State  Upper and Lower Basins

Compacts Between the States  Compact allowed for development of the resource  The antithesis of Prior Approriation  Reserved water for the future

Drought of 2002 Dillon Reservoir

A Challenging Era for Colorado Water Thirty years ago: u Colorado’s population was ~ 2 million u Three of Colorado’s four basins were underappropriated. u It was an era of water abundance Today: u Colorado’s population is ~ 5 million u Three of our four basins are overappropriated. u We are now in an era of water scarcity -- and tradeoffs. Briefing by Colorado’s Director of Natural Resources, Harris Sherman, Jan, 2009

Yampa/White/Green North Platte South Platte Colorado Gunnison Dolores/ San Juan/ San Miguel Rio Grande Arkansas 107,600 AF 10,300 AF Identified Projects 404,300 AF Gap 107,800 AF 2030 M&I Water Demands and Gaps Briefing by Colorado’s Director of Natural Resources, Harris Sherman, Jan, 2009

The Roundtables  Legislatively formed in 2005  Basin by Basin  Standing for non-water users:  Land use  Enviro/Rec

Interbasin Compact Committee  AKA the “Uber” Group  Two reps from each of the Nine (9) Roundtables  Six (6) from the Governor  Two (2) from the General Assembly  The Director of Interbasin Compact Negotiations

What is the Arkansas Basin Roundtable?  Two (2) representatives from each County  Plus conservancy & conservation districts  Plus ten (10) at large members  Agriculture  Recreation & Environment  Industry and small municipal water providers

Membership

Non- Voting Members and Interested Parties

Salting the Mine  House Bill  $40 Million for Grants  $10 million per year  Severance Tax

START Request that meets basic criteria MEMBER? Yes No Contact Member Sponsored to Needs Assessment Needs Committee (Recv’d 10 days prior) Presentation (optional) Tally of members: a. Recommend/not recommend b. Basin Only or Statewide funds Returned Vote Need more info, duplication, other funding sources Forward to Exec. Comm. to set agenda Roundtable Meeting (Electronic distribution 10 days prior w/ Tally of Needs Comm.) 1.Presentation 2.Discussion ____________ Consensus? Yes No Vote to Vote? No Yes Applicant: Prepares final submission to CWCB w/ Chairman’s Letter (Includes dissenting opinion, if any) 2 nd Roundtable 75% Supermajority? Yes No STOP SB 179 CWCB BOARD MEETING Statewide: March/Sept. In-Basin: Above + Jan, May July, Nov 60 days prior

As of: March 31, 2009

Conclusions: Could we work together? My answer is YES!

The Basin Roundtables  Non- Consumptive Needs Assessment  Ag to Urban Water Transfers

KEY FINDINGS  Total Gross Gap: 31,700 – 31,900 AF  Counties with largest gap:  El Paso (unincorporated): 22,600 AF Increased demand: 9,250 AF Loss of existing groundwater supplies: 13,350 AF  Lake: 5,000 AF Increased demand- Climax Mine, unincorporated areas, etc Arkansas Basin Consumptive Use Water Needs Assessment Arkansas Basin Roundtable

Additional Challenges to Meeting Demand in 2030 (i.e. need for major IP&Ps) I. Technological, Operational, Regulatory Needs  Need for structures (e.g. SDS, Arkansas Valley Conduit)  Water quality issues  Drinking water standards (affects wells w/ radionuclides)  Surface water quality standards (affects RO brine disposal)  Need for additional water rights Total Need: Approximately 45,200 AF

Non-Consumptive Needs Assessment  Configured on Hydraulic Unit Codes (HUC’s) and their attributes  Adopted at the April, 2008 Roundtable Meeting

WATERSHED ATTRIBUTES HUC 1 HUC 3 HUC 2 Non-Consumptive Needs Assessment: HUC Methodology

The “Water for the 21 st Century” Act  “Basin Roundtables shall actively seek input and advice in establishing its needs assessment, and shall propose projects or methods for meeting those needs.”

A Resource Document  Sustainability Values  Bearable  Viable  Equitable  Projects and Methods Matrix  Executive Summary  The Colorado River is important

Sustainability Values Economic EnvironmentalSocial Sustainability Is it equitable? Is it bearable? Is it viable?

 Where do we go from here?  Huge infrastructure costs ahead  Small projects  The Gap is not going away