A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Local water providers stress watershed protection, redundancy and scenario planning for climate uncertainty

March 20, 2024 | Water Resources and Agriculture Review Committee, INTERIM COMMITTEES, Committees, Legislative, Colorado


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Local water providers stress watershed protection, redundancy and scenario planning for climate uncertainty
A panel of water utility planners and managers told the Water Resources and Agriculture Review Committee that protecting source waters, building redundancy and using scenario planning are essential to maintain reliable supply amid climate uncertainty.

Dave Payne of Ute Water said recent wildfires have underscored the need for proactive watershed and forest management. "Watershed management and forest health has become critical in protecting our source waters," he said, noting work with state and national forest services to develop watershed protection plans.

Greg Fisher of Denver Water added that utilities do not plan for a single future. "We try to prepare for as many futures as we can," Fisher said, describing scenario planning that accounts for uncertain precipitation, changing runoff and water quality impacts. He said watershed investment reduces the need for costly treatment upgrades and can bolster both water quality and quantity.

Panelists discussed long‑term demand trends, conservation and the role of density in reducing outdoor landscape demand. They noted that per‑capita demand rose through the mid‑20th century but has flattened or declined in recent decades after conservation programs such as xeriscape and limits on lawn size. Payne highlighted operational changes: primary, secondary and redundant supplies, with redundancy serving as insurance if a reservoir or treatment plant is compromised by wildfire‑related ash or water‑quality events.

Speakers also emphasized the long lead time and fiscal risk of developing new supplies and infrastructure. Expanding supplies can require decades and significant capital; mistimed projects can be costly for ratepayers, while falling behind risks supply shortfalls. Panelists recommended carefully timed trigger points for new projects and noted wide variation among systems in Colorado — from dual irrigation/domestic systems on the West Slope to dense urban systems on the Front Range.

Why it matters: Utilities must balance reliability, affordability and environmental protection as they adapt to climate change and population growth. Strategies discussed — watershed protection, reuse, conservation and well‑timed redundancy — shape both near‑term resilience and long‑term capital needs.

What’s next: Panelists said they are available for further briefings and recommended deeper workshops or webinars to explore technical planning tools and local case studies.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee