Based on oral comments presented by oppenents of the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP) and the Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) at the July hearing, this water conservation project should be in the construction phase sooner than later.
Conservation and resource stewardship proponents presented factual, pragmatic comments in support of NISP. Contrary to NISP opponents, project supporters agreed with the need for more water storage and conservation practices necessary for the future of a growing population, maintaining agricultural production, and the protection of the Poudre River ecology.
Oral comments by NISP opponents made the false assumption that the project would dam and dryup the Poudre. Their argument against this water conservation project was repeatedly discredited with their false allegations the project only favored rich developers and encouraged population growth. Their argument was weakened further with the standard nonsensical, uneducated claim that the project would further global warming and climate change.
My comments of support for NISP and SDEIS were based on future needs so as to prevent eventual depletion of agricultural water, loss of Northern Colorado’s productive, agricultural industry and the growing water consuming brewery industry during future droughts. California’s long prohibition on water storage construction and resulting catastrophic drying up thousands of agricultural acres during the present drought is a prime example.
Further contruction delays only invites the same disaster California has created for itself.