Knowledge & Relationships

The concerns compiled below are: 1) those that were commonly brought up in interviews, either by a group of stakeholders (i.e. all ag) or by many stakeholders within a specific geographic area, or 2) data that members of the IWMP stakeholder team found notable. They do not include all concerns that were mentioned, but rather reflect themes that we heard.

When asked to self-report their knowledge on a range of water-rights related topics, generally >80% of ag stakeholders felt their knowledge was adequate, however the Lower Yampa segment had notably lower scores, and the lowest scores generally were on understanding historical consumptive use. More than half of respondents (not shown below) do not know how to access their diversion records on the DWR website.

• Of the 16 MI respondents, most felt comfortable with the concept of prior appropriations and calls on the river. The smaller municipal water providers (Yampa, Oak Creek and Phippsburg) reported that they did not have a good grasp of these concepts.

• Env/Rec Respondents reported being well educated about water’s legal side: When asked “How would rank your understanding of the Prior Appropriation water rights system? (1(low)-10(high))?” 2/3 of respondents gave themselves a 6 or higher. When asked “How would you rank your understanding of floating access and rights? (1 (low)-10 (high))?” slightly less than three-quarters gave themselves a 6 or higher.

Interactions between rec users and agriculture are happening regularly across the basin, primarily with fishing and rafting. Seems to be a steady mix of pos/neg/neutral interactions, with more positive/neutral/mixed than solely negative.

• Most positive interactions take place on the Elk and Upper Segments.

• Negative interactions are spread through the basin. No specific “hot spots”

The following opportunities were identified by either stakeholders themselves, or by a member of the IWMP team that conducted stakeholder outreach. This is not an exhaustive list, and there is a space for your ideas on the Opportunities Summary page.

19 Ag water rights and administration concerns

Education on how to protect ag water rights as an asset and on alternative uses, including leasing.

20 Ag reporting and administration needs

Assist water users with measuring and reporting their data, while seeking to better understand what aspects of administration are the most challenging (i.e., communication/relationship with DWR, lack of understanding about water rights, concerns about change, etc).

21 Support smaller water providers’ understanding of drought planning & administration

Investigate more thoroughly the knowledge, priorities and challenges of small M&I providers and special districts.

22 Facilitate mutual education between Ag and E&R users

Facilitate mutual education/awareness and positive interactions between rec users and ag water users (especially considering many rec users are not locals). Address any ‘hot spots’ of conflict including remediable hazards such as barbed wire.