Middle Rio Grande Regional Water Plan

• Priority for Continued Implementation: 1 = low priority 5 high priority
A summary of that ranking information is shown in Tables 8-1a and 8-1b, and a complete copy
of this ranking is included in Appendix 8-A. Table 8-1a shows the ten projects that were ranked
as having been implemented the most effectively (have made the most progress). Reduction of
water use in the region was a great success over this planning period. Albuquerque-Metro area
water users have consistently been lowering their per capita water usage, despite population
growth. The MRGCD has also reduced water use. Some of these projects were so effective that
the goals have been attained and new water savings are not likely (thus these projects ranked as a
lower priority for continued implementation).
8.2 Water Conservation
In the Middle Rio Grande Water Planning Region, many water efficiency programs and practices
are already in place, having been implemented as recommended in the 2004 RWP (Section 8.1).
However, water providers in the region will continue to implement their existing water
conservation programs and drought contingency plans as well as continue implementation of best
management practices in the agricultural sector.
8.3 Proposed Strategies (Water Programs, Projects, or Policies)
In addition to continuing with strategies from the 2004 RWP, the steering committee discussed
and compiled new project, program, and policy (PPP) information, identified key collaborative
projects, and provided recommendations for the state water plan. The recommendations
included in this section were prepared by the steering committee and other stakeholders and
reflect their interest and intent. The recommendations made by the steering committee and other
stakeholders have not been evaluated or approved by NMISC. Regardless of the NMISC’s
acceptance of this RWP, inclusion of these recommendations in the plan shall not be deemed to
indicate NMISC support for, acceptance of, or approval of any of the recommendations, PPP
information, and collaborative strategies included by the regional steering committee and other
stakeholders.
As described in Section 8.1, the steering committee revisited the 2004 strategies and ranked them
on (1) progress since 2004 and (2) priority for future implementation. The steering committee
typically ranked projects that support watershed and riverine habitat preservation as a high
priority. Similarly, the tools needed for accurate planning, such as increased data collection,
water modeling, and water resource databases were also a high priority. While Table 8-1b shows
the strategies that rated a “5” for priority, it should be noted that the strategies in Table 8-1a
typically rated a “4” or “5” for priority as well. These two tables combined contain the best
paths for implementation of water saving measures.
Middle Rio Grande Regional Water Plan 2017 185