The state of Colorado spent $6 million to develop the 540-page Colorado Water Plan — but now, this massive tome seemingly just sits ignored on a shelf since its unveiling on Nov. 19, 2015. After 2 1/2 years of study for the plan, Coloradans are concerned about the lack of action.
So I’m calling upon the governor’s office, the state Legislature (which virtually ignored the issue during the 2016 session) and others that understand the urgency of ensuring the state’s water supply to bring the Colorado Water Plan to life and begin its implementation.
Don’t let the momentum die because of partisanship and gridlock in the statehouse. Action must come from the top down on this issue, starting with the governor, who has shown little inclination to move the plan. So it’s up to legislators to activate the plan.
The Legislature allocated a mere $5 million to the Colorado Water Conservation Board to begin implementation of the Colorado Water Plan. But it was not enough, and lawmakers weren’t specific enough about how the money was to be used. The experts say Colorado will have to spend $100 million to solve the state’s water problems.
Local communities can continue to promote conservation practices, but the only solution is for the overall program to come from state-level leadership.
This is urgent because the state’s population is expected to zoom from 5.5 million now to 10.3 million by 2050, and the Colorado Water Plan predicted there will be a statewide water shortage of 1 million acre-feet per year.
One acre-foot is equal to about 323,000 gallons — enough to cover Mile High Stadium between the end zones with one foot of water or to supply four families for a year.
The Colorado Water plan developed eight implementation scenarios; one combined the Denver and South Platte plans, and six regions each created similar plans around Colorado.
Perhaps the governor should appoint a water czar, someone with the gravitas to both move the Legislature into action and the sweeping authority to implement the changes called for in the Colorado Water Plan.
People are thinking more about the quality of water rather than if there’ll be enough for all Coloradans, according to a recent report from pollster Floyd Ciruli.
Why has concern risen about water quality? Among the reasons are the Gold King Mine spill on the Animas River outside of Durango and contamination of the water supply of Flint, Mich. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency has warned about the suspect quality of drinking water in other U.S. cities, with high lead content among the culprits.
Fears about the safety of drinking water have helped drive up sales of bottled water, which rose from 4.7 billion gallons in 2000 to a record 11.7 billion gallons in 2015.
Concerned Coloradans have included water conservation in their lifestyles. And there are some water projects in play, such as expanding the Gross Reservoir in Boulder County in order to triple its current capacity of 41,000 acre-feet; and the Northern Integrated Supply Project, designed to capture 40,000 acre-feet of water that currently heads downstream to Nebraska.
Let’s give the 30,000-foot overview: Rapid growth in Colorado already is straining resources and raising the amount of money needed for such items as Medicaid, the homeless, K-12 education and higher education.
I believe that to preserve and grow Colorado’s water supply, we must strictly control growth, at least in some parts of the state.
Growth in Colorado should depend upon water supplies, not upon the whims of out-of-control developers. Or haven’t you noticed Denver’s parking shortage, rampant real estate development in both residential and commercial buildings, the misery of trying to get anywhere on I-70, and the overused open space and mountain hiking trails? That’s what uncontrolled growth can bring. We’re living with the results right now.
I’ve advocated before for these ideas: End all economic incentives for bringing business to Colorado. Use impact fees to better control growth. Build only where the infrastructure (roads and other means of transportation) already are in place. And the state should create disincentives aimed at governments and municipalities that allow uncontrolled growth.
Solving the water issue is going to be a Herculean task and will require a lot of cooperation from many quarters. The danger is that eventually, time will run out, which would collapse Colorado’s economy.
And unlike some of the respondents in the Ciruli study, let’s focus on both quantity and quality.
